Q in FF Annual #14
Posted by Mithrandir on September 02, 2001 at 12:13:46:

In Fantastic Four (Vol 1) Annual #14 someone appears wearing a 
quantum band in a panel featuring a bunch of Avengers and a few 
others.  I'm not entirely sure when Marvel Boy (Dick Grayson) died 
but I believe he had already done so by now, so would it be 
reasonable to assume that this character (whom we can only see the 
arm of) is Wendall Vaughn/Quasar?

--Mithrandir

			*	*	*

Re: Q in FF Annual #14
Posted by SKleefeld on September 08, 2001 at 19:51:08:
In Reply to: Q in FF Annual #14
posted by Mithrandir on September 02, 2001 at 12:13:46:

Sorry for the delay; it took me a little while to dig out my books.

It is (most likely) Quasar. The FF Annual is the 1979 issue. While 
I don't know the date of his Captain America appearance, he did 
appear in Marvel Two-in-One #53, cover dated July 1979. And, 
according to Quasar #1, he spent six months training with SHIELD 
before heading over to Project Pegasus.

So, yeah, Quasar was around at the time of FF Annual #14 and it 
seems most likely that that braclet was his.

Sean

			*	*	*
Addendum
Posted by Mithrandir on September 02, 2001 at 12:29:46:

Hehe,

Looking over my last post, I realise I should have said BOB Grayson, 
not Dick.  Must be getting my silly boys in primary color outfits 
mixed up.

--Mithrandir 

			*	*	*

Marvel Treasury Editions?
Posted by Randy Tischler on September 04, 2001 at 10:24:35:

Were all of these oversized comics just reprints?  I have a couple, 
and have seen others posted on E-Bay, which seem to indicate they 
are just reprints.  Did any of them include new stories?

Randy

			*	*	*

Re: Marvel Treasury Editions?
Posted by Jeph! on September 04, 2001 at 13:07:20:
In Reply to: Marvel Treasury Editions?
posted by Randy Tischler on September 04, 2001 at 10:24:35:

I know at least some did.  I have issues #13 and 27 -- they do all 
have reprints in them, but 13 contains an all-new Christmas story, 
and 27 has an all-new Angel story.  And either #24 or #26 has a 
Wolverine/Hercules bar brawl story that was reprinted in "The 
Incredible Hulk vs. Wolverine".

I also believe there was one more all-new story, in another Christmas 
book, but I don't have that.

	-Jeph!

			*	*	*

Re: Marvel Treasury Editions?
Posted by Johnnypt on September 04, 2001 at 21:07:32:
In Reply to: Re: Marvel Treasury Editions?
posted by Jeph! on September 04, 2001 at 13:07:20:

There's also the Howard the Duck/Defenders story in #12.

			*	*	*

Re: Marvel Treasury Editions?
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 05, 2001 at 12:47:13:
In Reply to: Re: Marvel Treasury Editions?
posted by Johnnypt on September 04, 2001 at 21:07:32:

I believe Captain America Bicentennial Treasury was entirely new.

			*	*	*

Flashback appearance in Amazing Spider-Man #38?
Posted by Scott McElroy on September 06, 2001 at 02:51:05:

As listed in the Spider-Man chronology, supposedly a flashback 
appearance takes place in ASM 38.  As listed, it occurs not only 
between AAF 17 and AAF 18, but also between XF 139-FB and ST@2.  

I've read and reread ASM 38 and cannot find this flashback.  Can 
someone help me?

			*	*	*

Marvel Age? 
Posted by MO on September 07, 2001 at 21:24:35:

I posted this a while back, but it seems to have been lost along 
the road... So, I'm asking again: 

In Marvel Age Annual #4 there is a 5 page Speedball story that is 
not re-printed or told elsewhere. This story's publication date 
precedes Amazing Spider-Man Annual #22 and Speedball #1. The story 
itself takes place somewhere during the Speedball series, I'm sure. 

Is this a canonical story? If so, isn't this then, the true first 
appearance of Speedball? Is there a hard rule for actual appearances 
in Marvel Age and the Marvel Age annuals? 

			*	*	*

She-Hulk
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 11, 2001 at 14:58:51:

I have been unable to find a listing for She-Hulk: Ceremony (which 
is listed in the key) under either She-Hulk or Wyatt Wingfoot.

Also, what's you're reasoning for placing Avengers #278-285 before 
Mephisto vs. the Fantastic Four?  Not only does this have She-Hulk 
playing musical teams, because she's an Avenger again in Mephisto 
vs. the Avengers and Avengers #286, but it's impossible with Thor 
and Iceman timelines.  Thor and Iceman leave for Asgard after Mephisto 
vs. X-Men and don't return until X-Factor #17 and Thor #379.  Thor 
#379 in split by Avengers #278-285.

			*	*	*

Re: She-Hulk
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 11, 2001 at 15:13:06:
In Reply to: She-Hulk
posted by Andy Holcombe on September 11, 2001 at 14:58:51:

I'm also curious about the placement of Silver Surfer (vol 3) #1 
after She-Hulk has joined the Avengers.

			*	*	*

Re: She-Hulk
Posted by Dr Bruce Banner on October 22, 2001 at 23:26:59:
In Reply to: She-Hulk
posted by Andy Holcombe on September 11, 2001 at 14:58:51:

> I have been unable to find a listing for She-Hulk: Ceremony (which 
is listed in the key) under either She-Hulk or Wyatt Wingfoot.

I think this one is a little hard to handle because of that friend 
of continuity John Byrne. Byrne decided that he didn't like how the 
Wingfoot issue was handled and in an issue of Sensational She-Hulk, 
She-Hulk floats it out there that Ceremony didn't really take place.

Is it any wonder Hulk fans were worried when Byrne said he could 
bring Betty back to life in one panel?

			*	*	*

The X-Men Versus the Avengers
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 11, 2001 at 15:32:59:

I have been able to find The X-Men Versus the Avengers listed for 
Thor or Captain America.  Also, shouldn't the listing for the Gremlin 
be under Titanium Man 2.  For those Avengers with a listing for this 
series and the key this series is listed as XVSA.  For the X-Men and 
the Soviet Super Soldiers, the series is listed is XV.A.

			*	*	*
New Group Devoted to Chronologies/Timelines of All Things Fictional
Posted by Jimmy Flowers on September 11, 2001 at 17:20:49:

Hi, everyone!

I just created a group at Yahoo devoted to timelines/chronologies 
for all things fictional (and even some historical). It includes a 
bookmark to the MCP.

Here's a link to the group. Hope to see you all there!

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SequelsAndSeries

			*	*	*

Qs about FAQ
Posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 10:43:55:

Russ,

Good show on explaining your view on how pre-1962 comics fit in 
(the new question at the end).  That's how I've always understood 
it too (I probably read those same Invaders letter columns, but 
forgot exactly where the info came from).

May I suggest Marvel UK comics be treated exactly the same way as 
pre-1961 comics?  That's the vibe I've always gotten from them . . .

Also, when you say post-1961 western & war comics are excluded 
because you don't own any, does that mean you would add them if 
someone provided you with the information?  Does that also apply 
to the post-1961 "girl's humor" comics (Millie the Model, Patsy 
Walker, etc)?

ShadZ

			*	*	*

Re: Qs about FAQ
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 12, 2001 at 22:38:27:
In Reply to: Qs about FAQ 
posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 10:43:55:

> Also, when you say post-1961 western & war comics are excluded 
because you don't own any, does that mean you would add them if 
someone provided you with the information?  

That's what it means. I believe we had a discussion with someone 
in an earlier thread about Sgt. Fury, but nothing's really developed 
from that so far.

> Does that also apply to the post-1961 "girl's humor" comics (Millie 
the Model, Patsy Walker, etc)?

I don't believe so. As I understand it, these titles were retconned 
into being made up comic book stories about the girls, written by 
one of the mothers (maybe Patsy's?).

			*	*	*

Re: Sgt. Fury continuity
Posted by Ron F. on September 12, 2001 at 23:28:05:
In Reply to: Re: Qs about FAQ
posted by Russ Chappell on September 12, 2001 at 22:38:27:

I have been purchasing many of the past Sgt. Fury issues and 
will be submitting a detailed chronology in the near future. 

By the way, I agree and concur with the comments concerning the 
Golden Age stories.  I see this chronology as more than just a 
documentation of characters that have appeared in  unanimously 
agreed-upon canonical stories.  I believe it should encompass all 
past issues and stories that have been alluded to, referenced, 
and even marginally accepted into the modern Marvel canon.

In that way it serves as even a more useful tool in trying to 
straighten out a seemingly confusing mess.

			*	*	*

Re: Qs about FAQ
Posted by ShadZ on September 14, 2001 at 13:01:22:
In Reply to: Re: Qs about FAQ
posted by Russ Chappell on September 12, 2001 at 22:38:27:

> > Does that also apply to the post-1961 "girl's humor" comics 
(Millie the Model, Patsy Walker, etc)?

> I don't believe so. As I understand it, these titles were retconned 
into being made up comic book stories about the girls, written by one 
of the mothers (maybe Patsy's?).

1.  That retcon only applies to Patsy Walker.  It does not apply to 
Millie the Model (Patsy & Millie were completely seperate)

2. I believe that retcon was only supposed to apply to the humorous 
Patsy Walker stories (the ones that read like Archie Comics).  
Throughout the 1960's, Stan Lee made the Patsy Walker comics less 
humorous and more romance-comic-like.  Finally, in late 1964, Patsy 
graduated high school, the cover titles of the two Patsy comics 
changed (from "Patsy Walker" and "Patsy & Heady" to "The New Patsy 
Walker" and Patsy & Heady: Career Girls"), and the stories became 
pure soap opera (including continuing from issue to issue).  I 
believe the retcon does not apply to these soap opera stories  -- we 
are supposed to believe Patsy's mom wrote a soap opera about her 
daughter's romantic life?

ShadZ

			*	*	*

More about Patsy Walker
Posted by ShadZ on September 17, 2001 at 12:49:28:
In Reply to: Re: Qs about FAQ
posted by ShadZ on September 14, 2001 at 13:01:22:

After reading the latest isue of Defenders this weekend, I am 
reconsidering my position.  In the Defenders issue, Patsy mentions 
how her mom's comic books made her a celebrety, and how Patsy Walker 
is still much better known than Hellcat.  This takes the "soap opera 
Patsy" stories out of current continunity, because they don't work 
if Patsy is a celebrety.  They are stories about a normal girl trying 
to make it on her own.  So I guess they are just stories (written by 
Patsy's mom) too.

But a decision still needs to be made about Millie the Model!

ShadZ

			*	*	*

More about Millie the Model
Posted by Nathanael Nerode on June 20, 2002 at 18:31:46:
In Reply to: More about Patsy Walker
posted by ShadZ on September 17, 2001 at 12:49:28:

Well, if you accept Sensational She-Hulk continuity... she was a 
model, and became the head of a modelling agency.  And tried to 
hire Shulkie to model. :-)  I don't think there's been anything 
subsequent which invalidates this, amazingly enough...

			*	*	*

KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
Posted by David Smith on September 12, 2001 at 11:26:56:

I noticed you added the Ka-zar Graphic Novel to the continuity of 
the characters involved. One problem, I don't think it is an 
incontinuity story for the following reasons:

1) Every book to feature Ka-zar et al since it was published have 
ignored the major events that took place in the book.

2) The book revealed a "new" savageland under the new mexico 
dessert, which has NEVER seen the light of day since.

3) Ka-zar and Shanna split up at the end, leaving ka-zar a savage 
in the "new" savage land, subsequent stories have shown ka-zar to 
be much more civilized and shanna is still by his side

4) The characterizations of the two main characters were reveresed. 
Shanna was the one wanting to get back to civilization, and Ka-zar 
the one to get back to the "savage" life. Every book since the 80's 
Ka-zar series has show Ka-zar as the one pinning for the wonders of 
the modern world and Shanna the one who wants to get away from it 
all.

Also, I have not seen any update to the chronologies for Shanna 
based on the "shanna continuity" post I made several months back 
(see further down the board) was it over looked or overruled?

			*	*	*

Re: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
Posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 14:58:44:
In Reply to: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
posted by David Smith on September 12, 2001 at 11:26:56:

> I noticed you added the Ka-zar Graphic Novel to the continuity 
of the characters involved. One problem, I don't think it is an 
incontinuity story for the following reasons:

> 1) Every book to feature Ka-zar et al since it was published have 
ignored the major events that took place in the book.

> 2) The book revealed a "new" savageland under the new mexico 
dessert, which has NEVER seen the light of day since.

> 3) Ka-zar and Shanna split up at the end, leaving ka-zar a savage 
in the "new" savage land, subsequent stories have shown ka-zar to 
be much more civilized and shanna is still by his side

Those facts have two, equally valid conclusions:

1. Marvel has indeed declared it "out of continunity" and told 
writers to ignore it

or

2. Marvel writers have been ignoring it out of ignorance or 
dislike, implying there is an "untold story' that can explain why 
Ka-Zar returns to his old status quo between KZGN and N 14 (this 
story may never be told)

Russ can correct me, but I believe it is the policy of this site 
to assume 'Case 2' unless someone at Marvel actually confirms 
'Case 1'

> 4) The characterizations of the two main characters were reveresed. 
Shanna was the one wanting to get back to civilization, and Ka-zar 
the one to get back to the "savage" life. Every book since the 80's 
Ka-zar series has show Ka-zar as the one pinning for the wonders of 
the modern world and Shanna the one who wants to get away from it 
all.

That just sounds like bad writing . . .

ShadZ

			*	*	*

Re: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 12, 2001 at 22:48:40:
In Reply to: Re: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 14:58:44:

David's points # 1 and 3 above are basically the same point, and to 
my mind irrelevant. It seems the untold story would be placed right 
after the graphic novel.

Regarding point #2, I must admit that revelation slipped past my 
reading, and this one poses a thornier problem. I believe it may be 
intended as a clue by Marvel editorial that the story is not canon, 
and if we ignore the story, it solves several problems that we're 
otherwise forced to overlook. I'm tempted to remove it from the 
Project.

			*	*	*

Re: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
Posted by David Smith on September 14, 2001 at 08:30:08:
In Reply to: Re: KZGN = guns of the savageland GN?
posted by Russ Chappell on September 12, 2001 at 22:48:40:

> > > 2) The book revealed a "new" savageland under the new mexico 
dessert, which has NEVER seen the light of day since.

Slight correction, the "new" Savage Land was underneath Nevada, not 
New Mexico as I erroneously stated.

> David's points # 1 and 3 above are basically the same point, and 
to my mind irrelevant. It seems the untold story would be placed 
right after the graphic novel.

Actually points 2 and 3 were examples of the "major events" I was 
refering to in point 1

> Regarding point #2, I must admit that revelation slipped past my 
reading, and this one poses a thornier problem. I believe it may be 
intended as a clue by Marvel editorial that the story is not canon, 
and if we ignore the story, it solves several problems that we're 
otherwise forced to overlook. I'm tempted to remove it from the 
Project.

I've long since considered it non-cannone (for the reasons above 
and others which I'd forgotten as It's been a decade since I read 
Guns of the SavageLand).

Other points to consider, in the GN Ka-zar's son, Kyle, is old 
enough to walk and talk (approximately age 3 years old, 4 at the 
upmost) while in all subsequent appearances, Ka-zar's son Matt is 
still a babe in arms, unable to talk (approximate age 1 year old)

In the Graphic Novel, Shanna leaves beacuse Ka-zar is mentally 
unstable. No mention of Ka-zar being mentally unstable, atleast 
no moreso than any other Marvel Hero :) 

Couple of additional questions:
1) Baby boy Plunder's name, I'm not sure what your rule is on names. 
Currently you have him listed as Plunder, Adam Kyle Matthew. Adam 
comes from his first appearance in the X-men annual that restored 
the savage land, Kyle fom the GN, and Matthew is the definitive 
name since the Mark Waid series. If you remove the GN (which, if 
you haven't guessed is what I'm rooting for, something I don't do 
lightly with appearances of my favorite Marvel Hero, though I wish 
I could strike the Priest/Martinez run from the books :-) ) from 
the project, will the name Kyle also be removed?

2) Is there a list (or will there be a list) in the project of books 
that are NOT considered cannon so that in future when someone asks "
why isn't X in the project" then can see why?

			*	*	*

Millie the Model?
Posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 14:49:07:

Where's COLLINS, MILLIE (aka Millie the Model) in the MCP?  I know 
you don't currently include her own series from the 1960s and 1970s, 
but what about her appearences in the mainstream (super-hero) Marvel
Comics?  She has appeared (just to my knowledge, there may be more) 
in an issue of DEF (issue number unknown, probably her first 
mainstream Marvel appearence unless she cameoed in FF@ 3), DAZZ 34 
and MV/S 1 (her own story!), all as a former model who now runs a 
modeling agency . . .

ShadZ

			*	*	*

Re: Millie the Model?
Posted by Nathanael Nerode on June 20, 2002 at 18:26:52:
In Reply to: Millie the Model?
posted by ShadZ on September 12, 2001 at 14:49:07:

Quite right.  She also appears in the last few issues of Sensational 
She-Hulk (which are in the gap).  She belongs in the chronology.

			*	*	*

Punisher #64-71
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 14, 2001 at 09:53:41:

The Eurohit (64-71) storyline has to take place before the Final 
Days and Cage storylines (53-62) because the Kingpin is portrayed 
as a respectable American businessman.  There is a break in issue 
71 during which the Punisher takes "some time" to take care of old 
business before getting back to the rest of the issue.  

			*	*	*

Re: Punisher #64-71
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 14, 2001 at 11:27:39:
In Reply to: Punisher #64-71
posted by Andy Holcombe on September 14, 2001 at 09:53:41:

I forgot to mention that the conclusion of issue 71 should lead 
into issues 72-75.

			*	*	*

Pre-Punisher Frank Castle
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 14, 2001 at 14:17:56:

In Punisher: Intruder (page 36, panels 2-6) there's a flashback that 
shows Frank Castle leaving the semminary.  I believe that this should 
go before all of the Vietnam or married appearances.

			*	*	*

Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 14:07:50:

I got a couple of Marvel continuity-related questions thats been 
gnawing on my mind, and since the knowledge in this area some of you 
guys possess is absolutely astonishing, I thought this was the right 
place to ask them.

1.In Fantastic Four #267 a clearly mentally unstable Doctor Octopus 
shows up, and he seems to have been insitutionalized for some time. 
Problem is, he had just been away at the Secret Wars planet and when 
he was there he was completely sane. None of the medical staff 
comments about this absence whatsoever. How does this make sense?

2.Many years ago I read some Hulk stories Ive since been unable to 
track down (late seventies or early eighties I presume). They had 
much better coloring than what was usual at the time. One story was 
about a bitter circus guy called Bruno in an exoskeleton, one was 
about a plane hijacked by terrorists and yet another one was about 
a military guy trapped in a big robot. What kind of series was this?

I hope someone can answer these questions. Meanwhile, keep up the 
good work.

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by comico on September 17, 2001 at 19:32:20:
In Reply to: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 14:07:50:

> 1.In Fantastic Four #267 a clearly mentally unstable Doctor 
Octopus shows up, and he seems to have been insitutionalized for 
some time. Problem is, he had just been away at the Secret Wars 
planet and when he was there he was completely sane. None of the 
medical staff comments about this absence whatsoever. How does 
this make sense?

my guess is that the story in ff #267 takes place after web of 
spider-man #4 & 5.because in peter parker,the spectacular spider-
man #79 spidey pretty much threatens doc ock,which caused this fear 
of spider-man,until it was cured in amazing spider-man #297,as for 
the secret wars adventure,my guess is that it would only make sense 
to occur before spectcular #79 or 73-75

what do the rest of yiu think?

jesse

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 22:14:05:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by comico on September 17, 2001 at 19:32:20:

> my guess is that the story in ff #267 takes place after web of 
spider-man #4 & 5.because in peter parker,the spectacular spider-
man #79 spidey pretty much threatens doc ock,which caused this fear 
of spider-man,until it was cured in amazing spider-man #297,as for 
the secret wars adventure,my guess is that it would only make sense 
to occur before spectcular #79 or 73-75

This doesnt work because Spider-Man returned from Secret Wars in 
Amazing #252, which was a tie-in with Spectacular #90. The whole 
thing occurred between Amazing 251 and 252, I think. And the problem 
persists: FF returned to Earth in FF 267. Because Earth time went a 
lot slower than the time on the Secret Wars planet, Ock must have 
returned virtually at the same time. There aint time enough for 
him to go insane and end up in an asylum.

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 17, 2001 at 23:32:21:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 22:14:05:

Maybe the Secret War is what drove the good Doctor into a temporary 
bout of insanity?  Dr. Octopus is little more than a thug.  A smart 
thug, but a thug nontheless.  Plus he's always seemed to have a 
fragile grasp on sanity to begin with.  I don't have the issues in 
question, but I beleive that Dr. OCtopus could have had several 
stays in mental institutions so the staff could have just reopened 
his old room and picked up from where they left off.

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus
Posted by Saudade on September 18, 2001 at 07:03:48:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus
posted by Andy Holcombe on September 17, 2001 at 23:32:21:

Hmm...Ill have to check back on the issue, but I believe its 
stated somewhere that hes been there for a longer period of time.

			*	*	*	

Re: Dr Octopus
Posted by Rod Brady on September 18, 2001 at 13:56:16:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus
posted by Andy Holcombe on September 17, 2001 at 23:32:21:

He was, in fact, extremely freaked by something that happened on 
the trip home (being transported by the Molecule Man on a chunk of 
a Denver suburb through space).  When the Molecule Man restored 
all the stars that the Beyonder had wiped out, Doc Ock went a 
little crazy and had to be restrained.<p>It's still cutting it 
close, but remember that the villians may have gotten back to earth 
first as they were travelling under the Molecule Man's power and 
they had left earlier. 

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 17, 2001 at 21:52:54:
In Reply to: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 14:07:50:

> 2.Many years ago I read some Hulk stories Ive since been unable 
to track down (late seventies or early eighties I presume). They 
had much better coloring than what was usual at the time. One story 
was about a bitter circus guy called Bruno in an exoskeleton, one 
was about a plane hijacked by terrorists and yet another one was 
about a military guy trapped in a big robot. What kind of series 
was this?

Perhaps The Hulk! color magazine?

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 22:03:14:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by Russ Chappell on September 17, 2001 at 21:52:54:

What kind of magazine was that? Is it in the MCP?

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by OnionMan on September 18, 2001 at 03:26:57:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by Saudade on September 17, 2001 at 22:03:14:

Thhis magazine-format series was released between Jan 1977 to 
Jul 1981 (cover dates).

Issues 1-9 are in b/w and has the title 'The Rampaging Hulk'. The 
hulk-stories in those are not canon. The issues also include some 
stories with Bloodstone, Man-Thing & Shanna the She-Devil.

Issues 10-27 are in color and has the title 'The Hulk'. They are 
canon and can be found in the listings under the key HMAG. The 
issues also included some stories with Moon Knight.

Also take a look at an older thread on this board discussing this 
series. Just click on the link below.

http://www.chronologyproject.com/wwwboard/archive/mcparc2.zip

/OnionMan

			*	*	*

Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
Posted by Saudade on September 18, 2001 at 07:10:45:
In Reply to: Re: Dr Octopus/Hulk questions
posted by OnionMan on September 18, 2001 at 03:26:57:

Yeah, seems like what Im looking for...tack s mycket :).

			*	*	*

Man-Thing
Posted by Scott Hutchins on September 17, 2001 at 17:18:21:

I am reading the issues in order of the listed chronology and I 
believe I have found an error.  The Avengers #118 is listed as 
occurring after Fear #17, but it almost certainly is concurrent 
or just after Fear #15.  Both involve a story about demon invasion 
(must have been the Inferno of its day, probably sans the X-Men), 
and it appears to end in Fear #15, and ends conclusively at the end 
of The Avengers #118, when Dormammu is sucked into the Evil Eye.  
IT seems out of place in the current position.

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 17, 2001 at 22:02:39:
In Reply to: Man-Thing
posted by Scott Hutchins on September 17, 2001 at 17:18:21:

The two stories are unrelated. The demon invasion of AIF #15 is 
turned back when Jennifer Kale touches a sacred book.

			*	*	*

DC
Posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:33:29:

Is there another site that has a similar thing for DC?  I imagine 
that would be harder.

			*	*	*

Re: DC
Posted by David Smith on September 18, 2001 at 06:34:39:
In Reply to: DC
posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:33:29:

Yes, there is the NEW DCU Chronology project at

http://members.nbci.com/Tenzel/DCP/index.htm

			*	*	*

Actually...
Posted by Quas on September 19, 2001 at 17:59:54:
In Reply to: Re: DC
posted by David Smith on September 18, 2001 at 06:34:39:

The DC (C)P has moved.  It's current URL:

http://www.comicboards.com/dcguide

It would be great if this could be reflected in the link on the 
front page of the MCP as well.

			*	*	*

Hmm...  I just noticed
Posted by Quas on September 19, 2001 at 18:11:07:
In Reply to: Actually...
posted by Quas on September 19, 2001 at 17:59:54:

The link to the DCP was outright removed.  That may have been since 
it was incorrectly entered in.   Hopefully once Russ tries out the 
correct URL, he'll prop it back up there.

			*	*	*

Re: Hmm...  I just noticed
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 19, 2001 at 21:32:03:
In Reply to: Hmm...  I just noticed
posted by Quas on September 19, 2001 at 18:11:07:

It wasn't that it was incorrectly entered in. The link correctly 
pointed to the original DCP, modeled after the MCP, and administered 
by Jimmy Flowers, but it has since been abandoned, and that's why we 
took down the link.

			*	*	*

Umm...  yeah, but
Posted by Quas on September 20, 2001 at 10:24:43:
In Reply to: Re: Hmm...  I just noticed
posted by Russ Chappell on September 19, 2001 at 21:32:03:

for a while at least (about 2 months time -- I'd been checking every 
so often), you'd replaced it with the link to the new site (this was 
back at the nbci hosted site), only you added an extra "C" in there 
and so it only pulled up an error message.  It's only recently you 
took that one down.  

But now that you know the link to the new site, I don't see why you 
haven't put the link back up, directed to Tenz's current location.  
Is there some reason you're hesitant to do so?

			*	*	*

Man-Thing
Posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:42:48:

Potential revison:   

   Savage Tales, Volume 1, 1
   Astonishing Tales 12, 13 ~ 15, 18 FBs
   Monsters Unleashed 5
   Fear 10-15
   The Avengers, Volume 1, 118
   Fear 16, 17
   Marvel Two-in One 1
   Fear 18, 19 ~ HTD32 FB
   The Man-Thing, Volume 1, 1-8
   Giant Size Man-Thing 1
   Master of Kung Fu 19
   Daredevil Volume 1, 113-115 ~ 140-FB
   Giant Size Man-Thing 2 ~ Iron Man, Volume 1, 73-FB
   The Man-Thing, Volume 1, 9, 10
   Monsters Unleashed! 8, 9
   The Man-Thing, Volume 1, 11-14
   Giant Size Man-Thing 3
   The Man Thing, Volume 1, 15
   Giant-Size Man-Thing 4
   The Man Thing, Vol. 1, 16-18
   Giant-Size Man-Thing 5
   Giant-Size Spider-Man 5 (don't have--not sure if before or 
after GSMT 5)
   The Man-Thing, Volume 1, 19-22
   Marvel Premiere 28
   Iron Man Annual 3
   Shadows & Light 2
   The Incredible Hulk 197, 198
   Howard the Duck 16 (not sure of continuity)
   The Rampaging Hulk, Volume 1, #7
   Howard the Duck 22-24
   Marvel Team-Up, Volume 1 68 ~    Spider-Man: The Parker Years 1-FB
   Shadows & Light 2
   Marvel Two-In-One 43
   Micronauts 7
   The Man-Thing Volume 2 1-4
   Doctor Strange, Volume 2 41
   The Man-Thing Volume 2 5
   Howard the Duck Magazine 6, 7
   The Savage She-Hulk 7 (this is a fb to MT1 2-13 or so), 8
   The Man-Thing Volume 2 6-10
   The Uncanny X-Men 144
   The Man Thing Volume 2 11
   Marvel Two-in-One 77
   The Defenders 98 ~ 99-FB
   The Mighty Thor 316, 317
   Marvel Team-Up, Volume 1 122
   Fantastic Four Roast 1 (don't think this is in continuity)
   Marvel Fanfare 9
   Marvel Fanfare #36
   Marvel Comics Presents 1-12
   Web of Spider-Man Annual 4
   Marvel Comics Presents 29
   Shadows & Light 2
   Iron Man Volume 1, 275
   The Incredible Hulk 389
   Quasar 31, 50
   Nomad, Volume 2 21
   Blaze 2
   Marvel Comics Presents 164-167 (this seems to restart the 
continuity and why Ellen's face, healed in MU 5 is now scarred)
   Midnight Sons Unlimited 8
   The Incredible Hulk 427, 428
   The Adventures of the X-Men 11, 12 (not sure of continuity)
   Generation X 25
   Daydreamers 1-3
   Heroes Reborn: The Return 1
   Marvel Team-Up, Volume 2 4
   Man-Thing, Volume 3, 1-8
   Strange Tales Volume 5 1, 2
   Peter Parker Spider Man Annual '99
   The Incredible Hulk 478 (Hulk 4), 480 (Hulk 6), 481 (Hulk 7)
   X Force 100

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:44:16:
In Reply to: Man-Thing
posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:42:48:

This actually removes some flashbacks by mistake.  Sorry.

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Prime Eternal on September 22, 2001 at 16:15:12:
In Reply to: Man-Thing
posted by Scott on September 17, 2001 at 20:42:48:

>    Marvel Comics Presents 164-167 (this seems to restart the 
continuity and why Ellen's face, healed in MU 5 is now scarred)

But as a re-telling of the Man-Thing's origin, shouldn't it be 
inserted between pages of Savage Tales#1?

>    The Adventures of the X-Men 11, 12 (not sure of continuity)

It's not in-continuity.

MH

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Scott on October 02, 2001 at 11:40:04:
In Reply to: Re: Man-Thing
posted by Prime Eternal on September 22, 2001 at 16:15:12:

> >    Marvel Comics Presents 164-167 (this seems to restart the 
continuity and why Ellen's face, healed in MU 5 is now scarred)

> But as a re-telling of the Man-Thing's origin, shouldn't it be 
inserted between pages of Savage Tales#1?

The problem with that is that Ted is using a PC, which he would 
not have had in 1971.  Giant-Size Man-Thing #5, set before the 
events of Savage Tales #1, is given the date of May 1, 1971.  The 
stories told by the fortune teller must be in continuity, though, 
since each is dated 1975, when the issue was published.  These are 
dates given as part of the story's narration, so I guess we are to 
assume that the fortune teller's predictions are true.

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Scott on October 02, 2001 at 11:56:02:
In Reply to: Re: Man-Thing
posted by Scott on October 02, 2001 at 11:40:04:

It seems to be Marvel trying to do the equivalent of post-Crisis 
here, so Ellen can come back with a scarred face, the one that was 
cured in Monsters Unleashed! #5 but back in M-T3 #1.

			*	*	*

Re: Man-Thing
Posted by Russ Chappell on October 02, 2001 at 22:34:23:
In Reply to: Re: Man-Thing
posted by Scott on October 02, 2001 at 11:40:04:

The problem with that is that Ted is using a PC, which he would not 
have had in 1971.  Giant-Size Man-Thing #5, set before the events 
of Savage Tales #1, is given the date of May 1, 1971.  The stories 
told by the fortune teller must be in continuity, though, since each 
is dated 1975, when the issue was published.  These are dates given 
as part of the story's narration, so I guess we are to assume that 
the fortune teller's predictions are true.

These are topical references. If we are to truly believe that 
Giant-Size Man-Thing occurs in 1971, then Ellen must by now be 
approaching 60 years old, and it's only a short hop from there 
to saying that Franklin Richards is actually 35.

			*	*	*

Killraven
Posted by Scott on September 18, 2001 at 14:32:01:

Is his a[[earance in Marvel Team-Up considered non-continuity?  
How about Kull's in #112?

			*	*	*

Re: Killraven
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on September 18, 2001 at 20:50:23:
In Reply to: Killraven
posted by Scott on September 18, 2001 at 14:32:01:

It is in continuity but has yet to be incorporated into KR's 
listing.  The Killraven Mythos section is still a relatively new 
section that will develop in time.

- StAkAr Karnak

			*	*	*

Photographic value
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on September 18, 2001 at 20:57:15:

At present, the MCP does not catalogue photographs as appearances.  
I submit that they are a unique type of flashback that is worth 
including.

While an example does not occur to me at the moment, there must 
be stories that feature images of characters that are not depicted 
anywhere else.  If someone used a camcorder in a story, the videotape 
(assuming its contents were displayed on-panel) would be considered a 
flashback.  Surely a story or two has hinged on photographic evidence.

Perhaps listings could be done thusly:

MISC 47-PH

For Miscellaneous Man #47, photograph.

- StAkAr Karnak

			*	*	*

Re: Photographic value
Posted by SKleefeld on September 24, 2001 at 11:04:25:
In Reply to: Photographic value
posted by StAkAr Karnak on September 18, 2001 at 20:57:15:

I like the idea. Sentry was in fact heavily reliant upon a 
videotape Reed had made years earlier, and it would be helpful 
to document this type of thing.

To play Devil's Advocate, though, where is the line drawn? How 
many stories (especially Spider-Man stories) were reliant upon 
a newspaper displaying a photograph? Would every newspaper and 
magazine appearance need to be documented as well? The photo 
session Tony Stark had as man of the year? The candid interview 
shots of the FF after they defeated Galactus? The untold hundreds 
of photos the Bugle runs of Spider-Man, taken by Spider-Man 
himself?

It's a good idea, but I wouldn't want to ask Russ to bite off 
more than he can chew! (He's still working on the first gap, for 
crying out loud!)

- Sean

			*	*	*

Re: Photographic value
Posted by StAkAr Karnak on October 01, 2001 at 14:17:29:
In Reply to: Re: Photographic value
posted by SKleefeld on September 24, 2001 at 11:04:25:

Sean says regarding incorporating photographs into the MCP:

> I like the idea. Sentry was in fact heavily reliant upon a 
videotape Reed had made years earlier, and it would be helpful 
to document this type of thing.

I think I made a distinction between videotape and photography.  
AFAIK, home videos are already included in the Project (there is 
no distinction between a video and a newscast, and the latter is 
unquestionably an appearance).

> To play Devil's Advocate, though, where is the line drawn?  How 
many stories (especially Spider-Man stories) were reliant upon a 
newspaper displaying a photograph?

Not a whole lot, I'd guess.

> Would every newspaper and magazine appearance need to be 
documented as well?

No.

> The photo session Tony Stark had as man of the year?

Dunno.

> The candid interview shots of the FF after they defeated 
Galactus?

Possibly.

> The untold hundreds of photos the Bugle runs of Spider-Man, 
taken by Spider-Man himself?

Probably not, since they'd be redundant.

> It's a good idea, but I wouldn't want to ask Russ to bite off 
more than he can chew! (He's still working on the first gap, for 
crying out loud!)

Point taken, but still photos (unless they are forged) are still 
appearances at the end of the day.  I'm not saying that every 
photo that ever appeared in a Marvel mag needs a listing.  For 
example, I think a bunch of photos in Marvels were based on panels 
from old comics.  If we were to do this, we could take it on a 
case-by-case basis.  We don't need to go wild with photos that 
don't matter in the big picture (say a family portrait on a wall), 
but there've got to be pix of value out there that record events 
shown nowhere else.

- StAkAr

			*	*	*

did the angel II actually 1st appear in Hul vol.2-432?
Posted by jimcomics on September 19, 2001 at 03:14:43:

did angel II actually 1st appear in Hul vol.2-432?

How many others were there?

			*	*	*

Re: did the angel II actually 1st appear in Hul vol.2-432?
Posted by Prime Eternal on September 22, 2001 at 16:12:14:
In Reply to: did the angel II actually 1st appear in Hul vol.2-432?
posted by jimcomics on September 19, 2001 at 03:14:43:

> did angel II actually 1st appear in Hul vol.2-432?

No. He previously appeared in Marvel Super-Heroes#7, which must be 
in the gap.

> How many others were there?

Angels? Or appearances? Since this is the Golden Age Angel we're 
talking about, he's got hundreds of appearances from books like 
All-Winners Comics, Marvel Mystery Comics and Sub-Mariner Comics 
that have yet to be added...

Cap#442, this particular Angel's final appearance, established 
that the Golden Age Angel was actually two brothers. This was done 
to explain how the Angel could be a bum in Peter David's stories, 
and the founder of Scourge Inc. in the US Agent mini-series.

MH

			*	*	*

Spider-Man: Revelations TPB, Mendel Stromm, Spider-Man Unlimited, 
Osborn Journals
Posted by Gary M. Miller on September 19, 2001 at 23:32:37:

Russ & co.,

I noticed going through the key and the chronology lists that 
Spider-Man: Revelations (the TPB) is not listed among the chronology.  
Before you go telling me that it's made up of reprints and does not 
belong in the chronology because of that fact, that's not quite 
correct.  In the section that reprints S-M 75, there are 14 new pages 
interspersed between the reprinted pages.  These should likely be 
added, as follows:

The first section of new material in SM: REVELATIONS (or simply 
SM: REVEL if you prefer) appears in between pages 19 and 20 of the 
story in S-M 75.  It is where Ben recalls his battle against Norman 
Osborn after ASM 418 but before his other appearances this issue.  
This flashback takes place at the same location as ASM 418 as well 
as on a nearby rooftop.  By virtue of the same location, although 
not seen, Robot-Master (Mendel Stromm) should be listed as BTS here.  
Norman, Ben and Peter appear fully in this section.  Including the 
flashbacks, Ben's and GG1's appearances throughout this timeframe 
are as follows:

The next section of new material in SM: REVELATIONS follows page 
40 (the end) of S-M 75 in the form of two epilogues featuring, 
respectively, the funeral/wake of Ben and baby May, and the 
resurrection of Norman Osborn from the ashes of the explosion of 
his own pumpkin bombs in S-M 75.

The characters involved in the wake are as follows (with their 
previous appearances in parenthesis for placement): Spider-Man, 
Mary Jane Watson-Parker, Anna Watson, Betty Brant, Eugene "Flash" 
Thompson, Franklin "Foggy" Nelson, Liz Allan Osborn, J. Jonah 
Jameson, Joe "Robbie" Robertson, Ben Urich (all of whom appear 
after S-M 75); Marla Madison Jameson (after X 58), Martha 
Robertson (after ASM 400), John Jameson(after ASM 417), Ashley 
Kafka (after PPTSS 233), Giacomo "Jimmy Six" Fortunato (after 
S-M 74), and Shirley, Devon and Buzz (last names anyone?  I 
forgot...) from the Daily Grind (all of whom appeared last in 
S-M 75).

Green Goblin I/Norman Osborn appears in epilogue two after his 
appearance in the latter half of S-M 75.  He pulls himself from 
the wreckage in front of two workers (one named Dave and the other 
unnamed).  He kills both men.

The main changes made throughout this timeframe are for Scarlet 
Spider, Green Goblin I, Robot-Master, and Spider-Man, and are as 
follows:

SCARLET SPIDER/BEN REILLY
...
ASM 418
SM:REVELATIONS-FB
S-M 75
SM:REVELATIONS
S-M 75
SM:REVELATIONS (his ashes dispersed, if you really count that as 
an appearance)

and for GREEN GOBLIN I/NORMAN OSBORN:

...
ASM 418 (up to battle with Ben)
SM:REVELATIONS-FB
ASM 418 (with Alison Mongrain on last page)
S-M 75
SM:REVELATIONS
S-M 75
SM:REVELATIONS
ASM 422-BTS
...

and SPIDER-MAN/PETER PARKER:

...
ASM 418
S-M 75 (pgs 1-19)
SM:REVELATIONS
S-M 75 (pgs 20-40)
SM:REVELATIONS (first epilogue)
PPTSS 241
...

Here also is the updated entry for Mendel Stromm, whom I would 
suggest should not be listed as "Gaunt" but rather as his former 
and current nom du guerre, "Robot-Master," as since rejuvenated 
in PPTSS 240 he has gone by that title (in both SMU 17 and 
PP:SM 27-28).  Listings for "Stromm, Mendel" and "Gaunt/Mendel 
Stromm" should then be referred to "Robot-Master/Mendel Stromm" 
which should be appended as follows:

ROBOT-MASTER/MENDEL STROMM

...
ASM 418
SM:REVELATIONS-FB-BTS
ASMU 17-FB
...

The mention of Spider-Man Unlimited brings up another point.  The 
title of the comic is SPIDER-MAN UNLIMITED and not AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 
UNLIMITED.  I assume that the reason you use this form and the 
abbreviation ASMU is because you want to distinguish from the 
cartoon-based SPIDER-MAN UNLIMITED book, which really cannot be 
placed in continuity anyway and will likely never be referenced 
on this site.  I would strongly suggest you follow the format of 
the title from the cover and from the indicia and reassign title 
(SPIDER-MAN UNLIMITED) and abbreviation (SMU instead of ASMU).  
Anyone looking in the back issue bins for "Amazing Spider-Man 
Unlimited" is going to be confused.  If anything, if the other 
series must be added, then that series could easily be referred 
to as SMU2.

Back to Revelations...

The rest of the entries for the characters in the wake may be 
appended as recommended way above.  (I get the feeling a few more 
people, i.e. Desiree Winthrop, Ken Ellis, some others may have 
been at the wake, but those I have listed were all who were 
actually pictured and positively identified.)

Also, is anyone reviewing SPIDER-MAN: THE OSBORN JOURNALS?  I 
practically have it already dissected six ways to Sunday...

Any questions, I'm here!

Thanks for your attention,

-Gary M. Miller

			*	*	*

Strange Tales
Posted by Scott on September 20, 2001 at 21:37:40:

What are the five volumes of Strange Tales? The only way I count 
five is if 1 is Strange Tales of the Uncanny.  Then Volume 2 would 
be the one that changed to Dr. Stange, Volume 3 would be the '80s 
Dr. Strange/Cloak and Dagger series, voulme 4 would be the one-
shot, and volume 5 would be the Man-Thing/Werewolf/Zombie anthology 
that was supposed to be four issues but the last two were never 
published...

			*	*	*

Re: Strange Tales
Posted by Prime Eternal on September 22, 2001 at 16:00:13:
In Reply to: Strange Tales
posted by Scott on September 20, 2001 at 21:37:40:

Volume 1: Ran 168 issues, then became Dr. Strange.

Volume 2: Picked up Vol.1's numbering with #169, and ran till #188.

Volume 3: '80s split-book.

Volume 4: One-shot.

Volume 5: The two-issue series.

MH

			*	*	*

Schist, Franklin Armstrong
Posted by Scott on September 20, 2001 at 21:48:31:

He is unlisted.  He appears in Fear #16, M-T 2, 3, 4, 7, and 
possibly others; his crews appear in those issues, plus Fear 19 
and M-T #1.  Not in any way intended to be a complete list, though.

			*	*	*

Re: Schist, Franklin Armstrong
Posted by Scott on September 21, 2001 at 12:48:57:
In Reply to: Schist, Franklin Armstrong
posted by Scott on September 20, 2001 at 21:48:31:

He is incinerated in M-T 8, after drinking the waters of the 
Fountain of Youth.

			*	*	*
Victorius
Posted by Scott on September 20, 2001 at 21:50:14:

I think I may have mentioned this, but he appears in GSMT #1 and 
MTIO 42 & 43.

			*	*	*

Molecule Man
Posted by Scott on September 21, 2001 at 13:05:50:

The first Molecule Man died in MTIO #1.  The second Molecule Man, 
his son, died in the same issue, yet you have every Molecule Man 
appearance as the same guy.

			*	*	*

Re: Molecule Man
Posted by Prime Eternal on September 22, 2001 at 16:08:13:
In Reply to: Molecule Man
posted by Scott on September 21, 2001 at 13:05:50:

According to the OHOTMU, Molecule Man II was a construct created 
by Molecule Man I, and hence, not technically his son (though it 
was made to think it was).

MM#1 possessed other people in Iron Man Annual#3 and Fantastic 
Four#187-188, before re-creating his original body in Avengers#215-216.

So...every appearance listed under Molecule Man really is the Owen 
Reece Molecule Man. I guess.

MH

			*	*	*

Recent Attack on the Message Board (aka Ping: iNiT)
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 29, 2001 at 22:44:51:

I want to say something first to the people who notified me 
literally within minutes of the problems we were having with 
the board (the first alert came within four minutes).

Thank you. Your quick reactions saved me from some real trouble 
with the folks who host the Project.

Next I want to address the visitors to our site who read and 
participate in the Board, giving it life and making it enjoyable 
and informative.

On Monday evening, we were attacked by someone attempting to shut 
us down. And frankly, they succeeded, if only temporarily. They 
exploited a security leak in the perl program which runs the board.

Using a method called message clobbering, the index file, or table 
of contents for the board, swelled from its normal 100k to over 24 
megabytes. For miles, all you could see was a thread called rofl@you, 
posted by iNiT. I don't want to go into about how iNiT diDiT, but 
suffice to say the loophole has been closed.

By an incredible (and almost divine) stroke of luck, I had 
downloaded the index page about two weeks previously, in order 
to make a minor cosmetic change, and so only had to spend a few 
hours patching the table of contents, rather than days, or weeks. 
I've purchased a zip drive, and will be saving everything on a 
weekly basis now.

And so I offer my apologies to those of you who have come to enjoy 
the Board, and for any short period of time, found it unavailable. 
I hope and trust you'll tell your friends we're back.

And finally, I want to talk to iNiT.

What were you trying to accomplish? What was your mission?

Is your hatred of comic books so deep and abiding that you would 
go to any effort to bring us to our knees? Or is your anger directed 
at Marvel comics? Perhaps it's scholarly work that draws your wrath, 
or an overriding urge to short-circuit social gatherings of social 
people, wherever they may occur. I can understand that.

Well, you should know that your efforts have failed. The Board is 
back, and it's stronger than it was. I'll admit that you've bloodied 
our noses, but you haven't driven us to our knees. Perhaps you 
thought that if the board was disabled for a while, people would 
stop coming, and it would die. But you don't know the fans of Marvel 
comics.

I suppose it's possible that you're one fine citizen, who saw a 
security flaw in our board. Maybe you thought to alert us to the 
problem we had, before someone who really wanted to do some damage 
exploited it. Maybe that's supported by the contents of your actual 
posting, where you offered a rather sardonic apology. Maybe that's 
what you were telling us. I can understand that.

Maybe you could have just...told us.

I know there are people who do this kind of thing just because they 
can. Are you one of those? I hope not. I understand that type, too.

That's the type of person who ends up in prison, if they're lucky. 
Some of them end up getting their thirty seconds of fame when Tom 
Brokaw reports on a shooting spree in a suburban restaurant.

Let's see. I hope it's the second one, the middle one; I really do. 
That means you could be basically a pretty decent person, although 
a little foolish.

So I put it to you again, iNit: What were you trying to accomplish? 
What message were you sending? Was it simply what you said, that 
you were laughing at us? Was it as transparent as that?

Well, consider your message delivered.

Now I have a message for you.

I direct your attention to a recent posting in the newsgroup 
alt.2600.hackerz, which read in part:

	Terror Law: Life for Hackers

	Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit

	source - http://www.securityfocus.com/news/257

	Sep 23 2001 11:00PM PT

	Hackers Face Life Imprisonment under 'Anti-Terrorism' 
	Act

	Justice Department proposal classifies most computer 
	crimes as acts of terrorism. 

	By Kevin Poulsen

	Hackers, virus-writers and web site defacers would 
	face life imprisonment without the possibility of 
	parole under legislation proposed by the Bush 
	Administration that would classify most computer 
	crimes as acts of terrorism.

	The Justice Department is urging Congress to quickly 
	approve its Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), a twenty-five 
	page proposal that would expand the government's 
	legal powers to conduct electronic surveillance, 
	access business records, and detain suspected 
	terrorists.

	The proposal defines a list of "Federal terrorism 
	offenses" that are subject to special treatment under 
	law. The offenses include assassination of public 
	officials, violence at international airports, some 
	bombings and homicides, and politically-motivated 
	manslaughter or torture.

	Most of the terrorism offenses are violent crimes, 
	or crimes involving chemical, biological, or nuclear 
	weapons. But the list also includes the provisions 
	of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act that make it 
	illegal to crack a computer for the purpose of 
	obtaining anything of value, or to deliberately cause 
	damage.  Likewise, launching a malicious program 
	that harms a system, like a virus, or making an 
	extortionate threat to damage a computer are 
	included in the definition of terrorism.

	To date no terrorists are known to have violated 
	the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. But several 
	recent hacker cases would have qualified as 
	"Federal terrorism offenses" under the Justice 
	Department proposal, including the conviction of 
	Patrick Gregory, a prolific web site defacer who 
	called himself "MostHateD"; Kevin Mitnick, who 
	plead guilty to penetrating corporate networks 
	and downloading proprietary software; Jonathan 
	"Gatsby" Bosanac, who received 18-months in 
	custody for cracking telephone company computers; 
	and Eric Burns, the Shoreline, Washington hacker 
	who scrawled "Crystal, I love you" on a United 
	States Information Agency web site in 1999. The 
	19-year-old was reportedly trying to impress a 
	classmate with whom he was infatuated.

	The Justice Department submitted the ATA to 
	Congress late last week as a response to the 
	September 11th terrorist attacks in New York, 
	Washington and Pennsylvania that killed some 
	7,000 people.

	As a "Federal terrorism offense," the five year 
	statute of limitations for hacking would be 
	abolished retroactively -- allowing computer 
	crimes committed decades ago to be prosecuted 
	today -- and the maximum prison term for a single 
	conviction would be upped to life imprisonment. 
	There is no parole in the federal justice system

	Those convicted of providing "advice or assistance" 
	to cyber crooks, or harboring or concealing a 
	computer intruder, would face the same legal 
	repercussions as an intruder. Computer intrusion 
	would also become a predicate offense for the RICO 
	statutes.

	DNA samples would be collected from hackers upon 
	conviction, and retroactively from those currently 
	in custody or under federal supervision. The samples 
	would go into the federal database that currently 
	catalogs murderers and kidnappers.

	Civil liberties groups have criticized the ATA for 
	its dramatic expansion of surveillance authority, 
	and other law enforcement powers.

	But Attorney General John Ashcroft urged swift 
	adoption of the measure Monday.

	Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, 
	Ashcroft defended the proposal's definition of 
	terrorism. "I don't believe that our definition of 
	terrorism is so broad," said Ashcroft. "It is broad 
	enough to include things like assaults on computers, 
	and assaults designed to change the purpose of 
	government."

The federal government is poised to consider acts such as yours, no 
matter the motive, as acts of terrorism. I think you should pay 
special attention to the part of the law that deals with retroactivity. 
And yes, I realize that you may not be a U.S. citizen, but you 
should understand that, in the current climate, many nations of 
the civilized world are poised to follow suit.

My message, iNiT, is Repent.

			*	*	*

Yah, you go Russ!
Posted by Quas on September 30, 2001 at 14:17:32:
In Reply to: Recent Attack on the Message Board (aka Ping: iNiT)
posted by Russ Chappell on September 29, 2001 at 22:44:51:

I too have recently come out of a bout of cyber terrorism of a 
different kind.  Cyber stalking by a group of weird teenagers or 
something.  It's aggravating and creepy, but it makes you all the 
more want to fight for freedom.  In fact, I think there's been a 
general onslaught of attacks of all kinds beyond the awful recent 
wave of anti-Arab hate crimes since you-know-what.

It's time, now more than ever before that we show these kinds of 
terrorists that we will not yield to this kind of bullying and 
intimidation.  We may have to shore our defenses first, but after 
we do there's no doubt in our mind that these hackers/stalkers/
criminals will have to change their ways, or pay the ultimate 
price -- the loss of the security and the freedom they seek to take 
away from us.  Let me echo Russ' sentiments -- I'm talking to you 
terrorists out there --

You'll be the ones that are going to lose all of those if you keep 
going like this.

Quas

			*	*	*

Chronology graph
Posted by Jimmy on September 30, 2001 at 14:40:54:

Hello

I've been coding and coding JAVA for a while now, and it resulted 
in an applet that can be found here:

http://medlem.tripodnet.nu/marvels/chronology.htm

(the server where the applet is located is unusually slow right 
now, so some patience is needed)

It is manupilating and utilization of the information you have 
gathered here so I would like to ask for permission from you on 
the MCP to have this on my homepage.

/Jimmy - all the way from Sweden...

			*	*	*

Re: Chronology graph
Posted by Russ Chappell on September 30, 2001 at 17:43:45:
In Reply to: Chronology graph
posted by Jimmy on September 30, 2001 at 14:40:54:

Jimmy,

Since I use Internet Explorer, I'm not able to enjoy your efforts. 
If a member of the Board of Directors can vouch for the graph, we'll 
lend our authority.

Russ

			*	*	*

Re: Chronology graph
Posted by SKleefeld on October 01, 2001 at 13:14:40:
In Reply to: Re: Chronology graph
posted by Russ Chappell on September 30, 2001 at 17:43:45:

Hey, Jimmy --

It's certainy an impressive undertaking. Since Russ can't look at 
it and give his blessing, I'll pass along some of my thoughts.

I couldn't get the online version to work at all. I think that may 
have been a Tripod thing. The downloadable one didn't work on my 
Mac at all, but it did seem to run fine on the Windows machine.

I think the layout and structure work fairly well for the type of 
information, but I didn't understand the checkboxes next to the 
characters names. I wanted to use them to "turn off" certain lines 
to make the flow easier to read, but there was no way to refresh 
the data once I unchecked something. 

It was also a little unclear which line represented whom. The 
different colors were obvious enough, but the individual Avengers 
or core X-Men became difficult to distinguish. Especially after 
scrolling down a ways.

Great concept, and it seems to be working pretty well. (Tripod 
aside.) That looks like a lot of tough work.

For Russ' benefit, Jimmy makes it abundantly clear that the info is 
pulled from the MCP and he links back to it. I don't see any legal 
difference between what he's doing and other webmasters who you've 
allowed to repeat your info.

- Sean

			*	*	*

Re: Chronology graph
Posted by Jimmy on October 01, 2001 at 15:02:44:
In Reply to: Re: Chronology graph
posted by SKleefeld on October 01, 2001 at 13:14:40:

> > Since I use Internet Explorer, I'm not able to enjoy your 
efforts. If a member of the Board of Directors can vouch for the 
graph, we'll lend our authority.

I'm going to try to fix the explorer problem. But it's difficult 
to find the problem when there shouldn't be one...

> I couldn't get the online version to work at all. I think that 
may have been a Tripod thing. The downloadable one didn't work on 
my Mac at all, but it did seem to run fine on the Windows machine.

I got the online version to work, after two minutes. And after 
picking a graph, the browser got stuck... Download and run it 
directly from the HD is recommended.

Not working on Mac? Sigh, and they say that JAVA is platform-
independent...

> I think the layout and structure work fairly well for the type 
of information, but I didn't understand the checkboxes next to 
the characters names. I wanted to use them to "turn off" certain 
lines to make the flow easier to read, but there was no way to 
refresh the data once I unchecked something. 

You've got the right idea about the checkboxes. By rightclicking 
on the upper-left corner of the applet (left to the menu) a 
popup-menu will appear:

Select all
Select none
Invert
Update graph

> It was also a little unclear which line represented whom. The 
different colors were obvious enough, but the individual Avengers 
or core X-Men became difficult to distinguish. Especially after 
scrolling down a ways.

Yeah, the lines lie very close to each other. I want to give room 
to as many figures as possible. The line-number next to the figure-
names give you the line in that color counting from the left, uh, 
did you get it?

> Great concept, and it seems to be working pretty well. (Tripod 
aside.) That looks like a lot of tough work.

Actually the applet just show the end result, namely the graph. If 
you're intrested I could lay out the program that makes it possible 
for you to create your own graphs.

But to be able to run the program you need the java runtime-
environment. It's free to download from:

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/

Observe that we are talking 30 meg here...

And then I feel I have to say that the real work is accomplished 
here.

/Jimmy

			*	*	*

oh uh...hope you didn't missunderstand...
Posted by Jimmy on October 02, 2001 at 17:46:06:
In Reply to: Re: Chronology graph
posted by Jimmy on October 01, 2001 at 15:02:44:

> And then I feel I have to say that the real work is accomplished 
here.

"...at the MCP" should finish that sentence...

/Jimmy - face turning red

			*	*	*

Freedom Force
Posted by Andy Holcombe on September 30, 2001 at 19:42:31:

In your Crimson Commando chronology, you have Incredible Hulk #369 
taking place after "The Killing Stroke" storyline (New Mutants Annual 
#7, Uncanny X-Men Annual #15, and X-Factor Annual #6).  Due to the 
injuries sustained in this storyline, Crimson Commando comes back as 
more machine than man in later issues of X-Factor (around 102).  In 
the other Freedom Force chronologies (Blob, Pyro, Super Sabre, 
Avalanche), this order is reversed.  Also, you have Hulk #369 taking 
place after New Mutants #89.  The dialogue in the flashback seems to 
me that it takes place shortly after Avengers #312/Punisher #29 and 
is the mission in Hulk #369 is their first offical mission since 
Destiny and Stonewall's deaths in Uncanny X-Men #255.  The capture 
of Rusty Collins in New Mutants #86 would have been after Mystique's 
pep talk in the Hulk #369 flashback.  Plus Pyro's wearing a different 
costume in New Mutants #88, 89, and in the Killing Stroke as compared 
to previous appearances including Hulk #369.  Therefore, I believe 
that the chronology needs to be

Avengers #312
Punisher #29
Hulk #369-FB
Hulk #369
New Mutants #86, 87-BTS, 88, 89
New Mutants Annual #7
Uncanny X-Men Annual #15
X-Factor Annual #6

Also, I don't have all of the issues handy, but I believe that the 
Firestar arc in Marvel Comics Presents #82-87 takes place before 
New Mutants #86 based on Pyro's costume.  Also, due to the presence 
of Spiral, this story may be earlier, between New Warriors #1 and 
Thor #411 (Firestar refers to being in the New Warriors in one issue 
I believe).  This of course would be dependant on other evidence.  
I was only able to look at #85 and 86 at my local comic shop.  All 
Freedeom Force appearances should be before New Mutants Annual #7, 
as presented in for Super Sabre because the events in that story 
effectively eliminate Freedom Force as a coehisive unit and leads 
to Blob and Pyro returning to Toad's Brotherhood of Evil Mutants 
in X-Force and Avalanche and Crimson Commando's return in X-Factor.

			*	*	*

Special Collector's Editions
Posted by Mike on September 30, 2001 at 23:08:55:

I've posted questions here before, and have yet to receive an answer 
for any of them... here's hoping someone will/can respond to this 
one...

I recently found a Marvel Special Collector's Edition magazine 
titled "Savage Fists of Kung Fu". Inside were stories of Iron Fist, 
Shang Chi, and the Sons of the Dragon. Stories were written by Doug 
Moench, Chris Claremont, Tony Isabella and Steve Englehart. They 
were drawn by Herb Trimpe, Alan Weiss, John Buscema and Frank 
McLaughlin. All stories dealt with the threat of Fu Manchu, or his 
henchmen. 

The inside of the front and back covers have art with all these 
characters labeled from the "burgeoning line of british weeklies". 
All six pieces of art say "originally presented in the Avengers #48" 
(or #52, #76, etc.) 

Are the stories here reprints of continuity stories printed in 
England, or is "Savage Fists of Kung Fu" all new stories that should 
be added to appearance listings? 

(As a side note, I haven't been able to find mention of this title 
anywhere online, Mile High, Marvel, here, etc...) 

Glad the board is back up. I'm sorry that someone needs to get their 
kicks off of damaging someone else's work. Glad things are okay 
ultimately.

			*	*	*

Re: Special Collector's Editions
Posted by Russ Chappell on October 01, 2001 at 02:41:09:
In Reply to: Special Collector's Editions
posted by Mike on September 30, 2001 at 23:08:55:

> I've posted questions here before, and have yet to receive an 
answer for any of them... here's hoping someone will/can respond to 
this one...

Mike,

I'll do my best to answer, although it won't be of much help.

I'm unfamiliar with a "Marvel Special Collector's Edition" or 
"Savage Fists of Kung Fu." My most recent edition of Overstreet 
(24th) mentions neither. There was a one-shot black and white 
magazine about 25 years ago with a title somewhat like "Fists of 
Kung Fu" (real title escapes me), which I believe was reprints.

> The inside of the front and back covers have art with all these 
characters labeled from the "burgeoning line of british weeklies". 
All six pieces of art say "originally presented in the Avengers #48" 
(or #52, #76, etc.) 

This makes it sound like the magazine in question was British itself. 
Was there a British Avengers title that reprinted Marvel stories? I 
know the original Avengers stories would have had nothing to do with 
martial arts in the specified issues.

> Are the stories here reprints of continuity stories printed in 
England, or is "Savage Fists of Kung Fu" all new stories that should 
be added to appearance listings? 

> (As a side note, I haven't been able to find mention of this title 
anywhere online, Mile High, Marvel, here, etc...) 

You might try posing your question to rec.arts.comics.marvel.universe. 
If no one at the MCP or the newsgroup is familiar with the title, it's 
almost certainly a foreign reprint.

			*	*	*

Re: Special Collector's Editions
Posted by Gary M. Miller on October 01, 2001 at 13:29:59:
In Reply to: Re: Special Collector's Editions
posted by Russ Chappell on October 01, 2001 at 02:41:09:

Hi Mike--

Maybe you've got the title wrong, Mike?  I own many issues of DEADLY 
HANDS OF KUNG-FU which was a Marvel B&W magazine that ran 33 issues 
and had one annual which seems suspiciously like what you describe 
(featuring all those heroes together).  I don't have the 
aforementioned annual, but I think with the exception of the pin-ups 
that it is all-new material.

Let me know if this was any help.

-Gary M. Miller (wondering why nobody's commented yet on my 
questions re: Spider-Man: Revelations)

			*	*	*

Re: Special Collector's Editions
Posted by Mike on October 01, 2001 at 15:27:42:
In Reply to: Re: Special Collector's Editions
posted by Gary M. Miller on October 01, 2001 at 13:29:59:

Thank you both for the responses! 

I have the magazine in front of me, so I know I have the title 
correct: 1975 Special Collector's Edition Savage Fists of Kung Fu. 
It's in color, so I don't think it's the magazine that Russ 
mentioned. I'm leaning more towards thinking it is a British 
reprint from the Deadly Hands of Kung Fu title, possibly that 
annual that Gary mentioned. I know that the Avengers never featured 
Kung Fu fighters, especially in issues 50-70 of the first run. I'm 
thinking that the title "the Avengers" was just used in Europe as a 
way to give the Kung Fu fighters a common label? 

Anyone have the Deadly Hands of Kung Fu annual Gary mentioned and 
is willing to give a plot summary for me? 

Thanks so much, everyone! 

			*	*	*

Re: Special Collector's Editions
Posted by Randy Tischler on October 04, 2001 at 12:42:30:
In Reply to: Re: Special Collector's Editions
posted by Mike on October 01, 2001 at 15:27:42:

According to Comics Values Annual 2000 by Alex G. Malloy (great 
price guide, as it separates the publishers), Master of Kung Fu was 
previously known as Special Marvel Edition.  Special Marvel Edition 
started in 1/71 and looks like it may have been reprints, or perhaps 
a combo.  Here's what it says:

1:  Beginning of Thor, reprints
2:  Absorbing Man
3:  'While a Universe Trembles'
4:  'Hammer and the Holocaust', End of Thor
5:  Beginning of Sgt. Fury
6:  'Death Ray of Dr. Zemo'
7:  vs. Baron Strucker
8:  'On To Okinawa'
9:  Crackdown of Captain Flint'
10: (no specific comments)
11: Captain America & Bucky appearance
12: vs. Baron Strucker
13: 'Too Small to Fight, Too Young To Die'
14: End of Sgt. Fury reprints
15: Introduction of Shang-Chi & Master of Kung Fu, origin of 
Nayland Smith & Dr. Petrie
16: Origin of Midnight
King Size Annual #1:  Appearance of Iron Fist
And then Master of Kung Fu starts in 4/74 with 17.

I suspect that if it was a British reprint, the publishing 
information at the bottom of the first page would indicate 
something about Marvel UK, a British address, price in pounds, etc.

Hope that helps.

Randy

			*	*	*

Re: Special Collector's Editions
Posted by M on October 04, 2001 at 23:07:45:
In Reply to: Re: Special Collector's Editions
posted by Randy Tischler on October 04, 2001 at 12:42:30:

Randy, thanks for the response, but that's not the answer either. 
The Special Collector's Edition of Savage Fist of Kung-Fu I am 
asking about is a magazine, not a comic. The Special Marvel Edition 
you told me about was an actual comic book. 

The magazine I found does have mention of the "burgeoning line of 
British weeklies" and then labels the cover art reproduced as "The 
Avengers". All art depicted is of Shang-Chi, Iron Fist and Sons of 
the Tiger. I'm really feeling that this magazine is just reprints... 
I'll just hang onto it until I find a copy of Master of Kung Fu 
Annual 1, and compare content. I think that's the culprit. 

Thanks again! If you learn more about this, let me know! I hate 
unsolved mysteries! :)
