It is currently Sat 25 May, 2013 9:58 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon 24 Jan, 2011 7:50 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
SpoonMaster wrote:
Ivan, your definition of "lore" is atypical.

My examples are still facts, regardless of source (unless they are incorrect, in which case I'm happy to not use them). You've already established that they don't fit your definition of "lore". Whether or not you consider them lore doesn't change their status as facts. I don't know why you assume I haven't read any Falk. I just can't pull every detail of every story out of thin air (hence the wiki comes in handy).

I doubt I'll have any more input, since by your definition of lore you are probably correct that there are no changes. By my understanding of the definition of lore, there are.


Be my guest, have you own definiton of "Lore", but please be sure to tell us before posting! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 10:35 am 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 5:40 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: In front of computer...
Im getting tired by the continual bickering over the lore... I am beginning to think its all hogwash and like Falk not bother with it all.

_________________
Germ
---
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/germ17/ (my collection)
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/germ17/Doubles (my Phantom doubles)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 5:18 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
germ wrote:
Im getting tired by the continual bickering over the lore... I am beginning to think its all hogwash and like Falk not bother with it all.


There you have it Getm. Falk and Egmont have just made good Phantom stories. Seperate these has no point for other things like discussing very certain elements. I did not come up with Falk Lore, and I don't like it. We have Phantom stories and Phantom facts, these facts have been established from stories made by Falk & Egmont. And no one else!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 6:08 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Sep, 2003 9:08 am
Posts: 941
Location: Metro City
Opinion on this varies, and there is no right or wrong when it comes to this. My analogy made with Arthur Conan Doyle is as much "fact" as anything else. It comes down to one's opinion and perspective. That is all.

_________________
Frank Dirscherl
Publisher - Trinity Comics
http://www.the-wraith.com

*Cult of the Damned, the third Wraith novel, is NOW available to buy - http://www.the-wraith.com/cultdamnedpbknovel.html!*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 7:05 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
TheWraith wrote:
Opinion on this varies, and there is no right or wrong when it comes to this. My analogy made with Arthur Conan Doyle is as much "fact" as anything else. It comes down to one's opinion and perspective. That is all.


I don't think ACD did much Phantom! My point is that Phantom stories are made by Falk (KFS) and Egmont(and former names). Everything else produced is just "look a like" and barely that.

But we all know that so no need to discuss that agaian, is there??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 7:28 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Sep, 2003 9:08 am
Posts: 941
Location: Metro City
That's why it's called drawing an analogy :roll:

_________________
Frank Dirscherl
Publisher - Trinity Comics
http://www.the-wraith.com

*Cult of the Damned, the third Wraith novel, is NOW available to buy - http://www.the-wraith.com/cultdamnedpbknovel.html!*


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 7:43 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
TheWraith wrote:
That's why it's called drawing an analogy :roll:


I know! My bad, you are right, and the anaglogy is very good! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 8:05 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 7:34 pm
Posts: 862
Ivan wrote:
Be my guest, have you own definiton of "Lore", but please be sure to tell us before posting! :)


I did tell you though? I quoted some definitions of lore on the first page of this thread. It's not my personal definition, it's my understanding of the dictionary definition.

But like I said, we're using different definitions, and hence have different understandings of what constitutes a change. Ultimately though, both Falk and Egmont have made excellent stories, which we can agree upon :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 8:29 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
SpoonMaster wrote:
Ivan wrote:
Be my guest, have you own definiton of "Lore", but please be sure to tell us before posting! :)


I did tell you though? I quoted some definitions of lore on the first page of this thread. It's not my personal definition, it's my understanding of the dictionary definition.

But like I said, we're using different definitions, and hence have different understandings of what constitutes a change. Ultimately though, both Falk and Egmont have made excellent stories, which we can agree upon :D


Well, that I agree upon. No more bad from.

however, as the dictionary say:
Quote:
1. collective knowledge or wisdom on a particular subject, esp of a traditional nature
2. knowledge or learning


In my opinin you have to selctive about what you put into "Lore" when it comes to Falk. Not every small detail can be called that, it has to be of some importance. IMO, the mention of the ring in one panel, and the same about some wives is not lore as we should understand it.

Ivan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue 25 Jan, 2011 10:39 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Mon 06 Dec, 2004 1:49 am
Posts: 5720
Location: India
From this discussion, I understand that if KFS or Egmont created props in the Phantom's universe, these can be classified as 'lore' by default, i.e. collective knowledge or wisdom, especially of a traditional nature. If Charlton, Fratelli Spada, King, Gold Key, Marvel, DC, Moonstone or Dynamite create(d) something new, they were / are idiots and deserved to be kicked in the pants. Simple.

pcs

_________________
My website: James Hadley Chase - A Tribute


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jan, 2011 1:17 am 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
pcsarkar wrote:
From this discussion, I understand that if KFS or Egmont created props in the Phantom's universe, these can be classified as 'lore' by default, i.e. collective knowledge or wisdom, especially of a traditional nature. If Charlton, Fratelli Spada, King, Gold Key, Marvel, DC, Moonstone or Dynamite create(d) something new, they were / are idiots and deserved to be kicked in the pants. Simple.

pcs


You will of course be badded for the "idiot" accusation, but else you are right. They are not idiots, just not making Phantom.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jan, 2011 8:59 am 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Fri 26 Sep, 2008 7:29 pm
Posts: 190
Location: Adelaide, south Australia
[quote]pcsarkar Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:39 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From this discussion, I understand that if KFS or Egmont created props in the Phantom's universe, these can be classified as 'lore' by default, i.e. collective knowledge or wisdom, especially of a traditional nature. If Charlton, Fratelli Spada, King, Gold Key, Marvel, DC, Moonstone or Dynamite create(d) something new, they were / are idiots and deserved to be kicked in the pants. Simple.


[/quote]
I don't understand.

By this do you mean only KFS and Egmont can create new Phantom lore and that everbody else's version is nothing??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jan, 2011 4:00 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Mon 06 Dec, 2004 1:49 am
Posts: 5720
Location: India
LOL.. I have a habit of making ironical statements. I did not mean that only Egmont or KFS can create lore. I firmly believe that only Falk could create lore, and the rest can either follow or perish. But some Phans feel that only KFS and Emont can create lore. Other publishers can't even create Phantom stories, what to create lore. :lol: :lol: And thats what I pointed out in a sarcastic statement in my earlier post.

pcs

_________________
My website: James Hadley Chase - A Tribute


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jan, 2011 4:24 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sun 14 Sep, 2003 3:03 am
Posts: 5099
Location: Norway
pcsarkar wrote:
LOL.. I have a habit of making ironical statements. I did not mean that only Egmont or KFS can create lore. I firmly believe that only Falk could create lore, and the rest can either follow or perish. But some Phans feel that only KFS and Emont can create lore. Other publishers can't even create Phantom stories, what to create lore. :lol: :lol: And thats what I pointed out in a sarcastic statement in my earlier post.

pcs


Of course we all saw through your sarcasm, but this time it happens to be the right thing. Good spotted PCS.

What is it you don´t understand PW68??


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu 27 Jan, 2011 1:47 pm 
Offline
Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat 13 Sep, 2003 5:40 pm
Posts: 11149
Location: In front of computer...
phantomwalker68 wrote:
Quote:
pcsarkar Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:39 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From this discussion, I understand that if KFS or Egmont created props in the Phantom's universe, these can be classified as 'lore' by default, i.e. collective knowledge or wisdom, especially of a traditional nature. If Charlton, Fratelli Spada, King, Gold Key, Marvel, DC, Moonstone or Dynamite create(d) something new, they were / are idiots and deserved to be kicked in the pants. Simple.



I don't understand.

By this do you mean only KFS and Egmont can create new Phantom lore and that everbody else's version is nothing??


I think there is the ONE lore created by Falk (but never managed by him) and then every other publisher adds to their own lore which is 'based' off the Falk lore which is owned by KFS. However from what I have heard, if you pay a certain amount for the license, you get to disregard the lore and make it up yourself...

_________________
Germ
---
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/germ17/ (my collection)
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/germ17/Doubles (my Phantom doubles)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Theme based on "comicBook" by GamerHaven, with artwork by Brian Jensen and Magnus Eriksson