There's a good possibility people leave BC over the Ellis thing

Vertigo writers during the 90's and early 2000's were rock stars at cons.

The site's muted approach to it all has been very telling. Gossip's fun until it actually means standing up for something, right Rich?

Such bullshit. Petty revenge disguised as white-knighting.

Can anyone post a link with more info?

Are you just new to nerd culture and cons or something?

You have absolutely zero information and already decided he's innocent and the women must be evil?

The've got dozens with some as young as 16

Was there any update on the Ellis thing? All I've seen so far are Ellis emails to women's being flirty and sexual (and the responses no where to be shown). And accusations that he took advantage of them without any actual proof.

So far from what I've seen is just women cherry picking old messages from Ellis leaving out the replies and whole message chain and then saying he's bad.

All I know is Waid is still in a lawsuit. I heard nothing about Gaiman aside from ex-wife problems.

Standing up for what lmao, roasties mad that he pulled younger pussy and dumped them when they hit the wall?

standing up to his beliefs. rich is an annoying holier than thou faggot, so now he can prove it, he actually is. he actively helped attacking people who had different political opinions after all

you know what? fuck ellis, he reaps what he and other white-knight faggots had sown

Someone has claimed as a 16 year old Ellis contacted her back in the old Myspace days and wanted nudes.

The problem is he didn't do anything wrong but they've set a precedent of covering tertiary shit with perlmutters political stuff and other not-really-comics shit. For them to act like it's not worth reporting would seem hypocritical but as it sincerely just seems to be a case(load) of "I had sex with this man and found out I didn't like him" it's not quite newsworthy. Nothing wrong was done and it puts them in a position to be sued by him if they paint it as if he did anything legally dubious.

As it stands most of the random women that make claims don't get reported because papers/outlets know its many times not worth the risk of believing one party enough to do barebones investigation lest they be called rude and still run a story - particularly after things lie Duke lacrosse back in the day or Rolling Stone making printing that bizarre made up shit about some woman being raped on a bed of glass.

If it isn't A-lister to A-Lister (maybe B or C, not bately-millionaire Z-list comics creators) most legal departments would tell you it's not worthwhile enough for the public to know about someone's sexlife, mean and legal as it is.

But again, when you report on perlmutters politics and other non-comics stories in the comics section you've set a precedent.

And she can prove that I'm sure. You can prove this I'm sure.

Is The Leech even still active in 2020? Doesn't anyone still pretend that his BS is relevant?

Sluts being regretful isn't worth covering.

he was correct on just about everything for the last decade lol.

the thing is, it's not for us to decide because it's not our business, but the fact that it's being publicly posted for drama / attention / whatever is disgusting. if something illegal / bad happened, there are institutions that deal with that, but to make someone guilty online without sentence? that's the kind of shit mentality that sjws / leftards / and all of their ungodly kind instilled in these women. and frankly, I am okay with that. they will all devour each other like they deserve

more like he
>bribed unpaid interns to spill the secrets of the corporations

>this means he wasn't correct
I notice you didn't refute what I said you just seem to think the methodology matters.

I agree but they've set themselves up to be called hypocrites by covering other non-pertinent things.

And I should also note, I think "leaks" and "rumors" are what IS pertinent. It's a comics section/site.

Meant:

I didn't I just ridicule your angle you used to defend this scumbag