What about Klyde Morris?

[Ted]

Is Klyde Morris actualy Zoom, or is he another person? and is he in
Zoom's camp, or detached from him?

[Richard Riley]

Well, Klyde is a cartoon ant, and doesn't really exist. But his
creator, Wes Oleszewski, is someone completely different from Zoom
Campbell.

KM runs on ANN becasue, basically, there aren't that many outlets for
aviation comic strips around. KM used to run on AvWeb, but Wes and
AvWeb had a falling out a few years ago. You can read the story of the
blow up on http://www.klydemorris.com/

I poked around and couldn't find a link from klydemorris.com to ANN.
Odd.

[Montblack]

("Ted" wrote)
>>KM runs on ANN becasue, basically, there aren't that many outlets for
>>aviation comic strips around. KM used to run on AvWeb, but Wes and AvWeb
>>had a falling out a few years ago. You can read the story of the blow up
>>on http://www.klydemorris.com/


I would have fired him, too.

There should be some elasticity on both sides. Run the [unedited] strip in a
week or two. Management demonstrated a [repeated] willingness to be flexible
in the face of unusual circumstances - KM did not.

He created an all or nothing situation too early in the process, IMHO. Gone
....nothing.


Montblack-and-white-and-mostly-gray

[Kyle Boatright]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Ted" wrote)
>>>KM runs on ANN becasue, basically, there aren't that many outlets for
>>>aviation comic strips around. KM used to run on AvWeb, but Wes and AvWeb
>>>had a falling out a few years ago. You can read the story of the blow up
>>>on http://www.klydemorris.com/
>
>
> I would have fired him, too.
>
> There should be some elasticity on both sides. Run the [unedited] strip in
> a week or two. Management demonstrated a [repeated] willingness to be
> flexible in the face of unusual circumstances - KM did not.
>
> He created an all or nothing situation too early in the process, IMHO.
> Gone ...nothing.
>
>
> Montblack-and-white-and-mostly-gray

Yep, he escalated the situation faster than pouring 100LL on a campfire.
However, given that AvWeb transitioned from funny, irreverant, and
informative to Informative and not much else, I don't think the cartoon
would have lasted long anyway.

I still read AvWeb, but liked the old version much better...

KB

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:41:50 -0400, "Kyle Boatright" >
wrote:

>Yep, he escalated the situation faster than pouring 100LL on a campfire.
>However, given that AvWeb transitioned from funny, irreverant, and
>informative to Informative and not much else, I don't think the cartoon
>would have lasted long anyway.
>
>I still read AvWeb, but liked the old version much better...

I suspect getting sued made them grow up real quick. Liked their old April
Fools' day editions, too, but some folks just can't take a joke.

Ron Wanttaja

[Kyle Boatright]

"Ron Wanttaja" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:41:50 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
> >
> wrote:
>
>>Yep, he escalated the situation faster than pouring 100LL on a campfire.
>>However, given that AvWeb transitioned from funny, irreverant, and
>>informative to Informative and not much else, I don't think the cartoon
>>would have lasted long anyway.
>>
>>I still read AvWeb, but liked the old version much better...
>
> I suspect getting sued made them grow up real quick. Liked their old
> April
> Fools' day editions, too, but some folks just can't take a joke.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

I remember that there was a suit, but not what it was about... A quick
google search didn't seem to get me anywhere either.

Will someone step in and refresh my memory cells?

KB

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2006 07:16:12 -0400, "Kyle Boatright" >
wrote:

>>>I still read AvWeb, but liked the old version much better...
>>
>> I suspect getting sued made them [AvWab] grow up real quick. Liked their old
>> April Fools' day editions, too, but some folks just can't take a joke.
>
>I remember that there was a suit, but not what it was about... A quick
>google search didn't seem to get me anywhere either.
>
>Will someone step in and refresh my memory cells?

http://www.overlawyered.com/archives/01/sept1.html

Scroll about halfway down. The suit was over some items in the Reader Mail
section.

Ron Wanttaja

[Richard Riley]

Kyle Boatright wrote:
>
>
> I remember that there was a suit, but not what it was about... A quick
> google search didn't seem to get me anywhere either.
>
> Will someone step in and refresh my memory cells?
>
> KB

September 16-17 -- Free speech & web litigation: AVweb capitulates to
defamation suit. Which reminds us of an update we should have posted
earlier: readers will recall the defamation lawsuits filed last year by
aviation plaintiff's attorney Arthur Alan Wolk against two editors and
four subscribers of the aviation-news website AVweb, all of whom had
sharply criticized him after he won a $480 million verdict against
Cessna (Sept. 7 and Oct. 12-14, 2001). On July 19 the website rendered
to Wolk a thoroughly abject capitulation and apology in connection with
his agreement to drop his suit against it. Its statement to readers
(link now dead) includes a number of passages which deserve to be read
with great care by those to whom the Internet still represents some
sort of idealized sanctuary for untrammeled discussion [italicized
comments ours]:
"One of Mr. Wolk's complaints was that we did not supervise our chat
room to prevent libelous comments about him being published by our
subscribers. We have corrected that. Another of Mr. Wolk's complaints
was that our characterizations instigated some of our subscribers to
libel him. We will no longer characterize matters in such a way as to
bring apparent discredit upon anyone." [The consequences of such a
formula for the future of hard-hitting journalism can be imagined. And
the mind reels at what is involved in the task of avoiding all
characterizations which, whether or not libelous themselves, might
instigate others to commit that offense. -- ed.]

"While the defense of Mr. Wolk's lawsuit has been expensive, he
nonetheless has been gracious enough to settle with us for a payment to
charity. In fact, even in settlement negotiations, when there was a
demand for money, it was always to be contributed to charity, none for
Mr. Wolk himself. He steadfastly insisted that his lawsuit was not
about money and we have come to believe him." [Why would it be thought
surprising that the aim of such a lawsuit might be more to silence
certain critics than to obtain cash from them? -- ed.]

As we say, read the whole thing, which lays out at considerable length
Mr. Wolk's reasons for considering himself libeled. AVweb then goes on
to publish a sort of protracted advertisement for Mr. Wolk's services,
in the form of tributes and testimonials from grateful clients he has
represented in litigation, as well as others. Also included is the
painfully self-abasing apology of one of the reader-posters who found
himself individually sued by the powerful lawyer -- outgunned in every
way, and facing who knows what sort of prolonged personal exposure to
the cost of litigation. Among the lessons many observers will draw, we
think, will be the old one: watch what you say about lawyers.
(DURABLE LINK)