09:36:22 PM Mar 5th 2017
Wish this guy were real. America needs an army of people like him, and we need them not just yesterday, but last year.
10:15:51 AM Jun 25th 2012
There is no mention here of the 2005 miniseries, which gave Vic supernatural powers and a lifelong crush on Lois Lane. I dont believe these have been mentioned since.
12:06:47 AM Oct 26th 2011
Two of those quotes need to be moved to Quotes.The Question. Pick your favorites guys.
07:34:34 PM Aug 29th 2010
Allow me to direct your attention to the first paragraph. There is something very wrong in the last few sentences, and I don't know what they refer to to the point where I could fix it, so I'm putting out the call for someone who does. Anyway, to illustrate: "Aristotle "Tot" Rodor, who had invented an artificial skin he called "pseudoderm", but which had the unfortunate side-effect of sometimes becoming toxic when exposed to open wounds. Tot decided not to use it, but his partner was not as selfless, so Tot provided a "mask" of pseudoderm for Vic and Vic stopped him. And that was how the Question was born. " So what I get out of the first part is that Tot had invented the pseudoderm for... skin transplants, etc., but it was toxic when exposed to open wounds, so that idea didn't work out. Except... presumably a partner he had in making the pseudoderm just didn't care and wanted to market it anyway, and Vic stepped in to prevent that from happening? The way it's worded, one imagines that Tot's partner refers to Vic, which makes little enough sense to begin with, and the phrase "was not so selfless" is vague enough to just seem very very confusing. Likewise with "and Vic stopped him," the most recent subject was Tot, so again, it's really confusingly worded. This is like, the third time I've been puzzled by this and the first I think I figured out what it means (as stated above), but again, since I haven't read the Question's origin story, I'm gonna need someone who has to tell me if I've got it and can go ahead and look for a change in wording that makes that clearer (or someone else can). Unless I'm the only one who has this problem for whatever reason.
01:15:55 PM Jun 13th 2010
I removed If It's You, It's Okay because, regardless of the sexuality of the characters involved, there was nothing to imply that Renee had any sort of romantic or sexual attraction to Vic. Even if she was straight I still wouldn't list them as more than simply friends, nothing in the book says that she wants to jump his bones (To use the polite phrasing) even a little bit.
07:49:31 AM Jun 16th 2010
As I said, every reader has their own interpretation. I felt that Renee did feel a romantic, if not sexual, attraction to Vic. However, since there's no way for my interpretation to be proved since he's dead, I will admit that heterosexual life partners does have more evidence and that it is the more fitting trope for the page.
09:05:10 AM Jun 16th 2010
Out of curiosity, what do you think hints at romantic/sexual feelings? I supposed my status as a Yuri Fan could have blocked it out, but I really didn't see anything beyond nakama-ness.
10:51:28 AM Jun 27th 2010
The way I saw it, had they been two straight men or two straight women, Ho Yay or Les Yay would have been on the page in a second. So why not Straight Yay?
11:00:49 AM Jun 27th 2010
Hhmmm, I'm not saying I agree with you, but I do see your point. However, that really would fit under Straight Yay instead of If It's You It's Okay (Or even Het Life Partners), since it's all about subtle indications and the projections of readers, as opposed to something established within the series. Should we put it in as Straight Yay?
03:32:36 PM Jun 27th 2010
sounds good to me. I also just want to say that this was probably the most civilized and polite debate I have ever seen on the internet.
08:11:55 AM Jun 28th 2010
Well thank you, I'd probably have to agree, although I don't think we can take all the credit. Considering the comic/character we're discussing, I think anybody who came here would probably wise up a little bit.