losing interest

[k9_kaos]

Dinosnake:
I think you need to chill out. Just because KatEllis chose Skamm to be gay doesn't mean he's homophobic or anything. That's ridiculous.

Besides, arguably the most evil character in the whole comic is Karostropov, who is asexual. I myself am pretty close to being asexual. I am not sexually attracted to man or beast, though I do find some cartoon depictions of animals... interesting, which is a small part of why I like this comic. However, I have no problem with an asexual character being depicted as evil.

Another thing is, I've seen occasionally a television show in which the villain is Australian. This doesn't bother me at all, as a native to the country. I don't think at all that the creators of the shows are xenophobic. And if they are, I really don't give a hoot.

I'm really enjoying this "epic tale" myself. You might find it boring (presumably because there's not enough yiff in it), but that's your opinion, and you have a right to one. And don't forget what Kat said, you don't have to read the comic if you don't like it.

[KatEllis]

I'm an not trying to insult but it is simply an honest question.

And I already answered it. You haven't really been reading the comic, and it isn't meeting your criteria, so you might as well stop. Because it isn't going to.

You didn't get the answer to your question the first time? Here it is again. WHY did you choose to make Skamm gay?

BECAUSE I, THE WRITER, AUTHOR AND CREATOR OF THE KIT AND KAY WEBCOMIC, RICHARD KATELLIS, DID. THAT IS WHY.

I am not operating by yours or anyone else's criteria of how many gay-to-straight characters there are, how many of them must appear on a regular basis, how many of them may or may not be villians and what any individual reader may or may not conclude, in their own minds, from my making any character of any sexual persuasion a villian.

What that individual reader wants to read into my decision is up to that reader. But I have no intention whatsoever of acting as though I am guilty of any wrongdoing by not meeting their criteria. I have no intention whatsoever of "checking myself" on the "positive/negative ratios" that someone else thinks are important and, therefore, thinks I should adhere to as well. The name at the top of the comic says "KatEllis", not "Dinosnake" or anyone else, and it's going to stay that way. Unless your browser has somehow managed to get the comic's URL into it's preference files, the only way a reader can reach the webcomic is by sending their browser there. If what you find there is not to your specifications, STOP SENDING YOUR BROSWER THERE.

You find the story boring? You are perfectly entitled to and should miss the comic even less for that reason. You point out that others on the form are bored as well? If the only comments I get on my comic were from the forum, I would be worried. The majority of those who comment on my work email me, and I can assure you they are delighed with the story. I check my ComicGenesis stats regularly and what I find backs that up 100%. You want me not to "pander" to you and yet you can quote other images you find in other places online, as if that proved anything? Then I won't waste my time any further. Go read something else.

I have no qualms at all telling anyone that. I have indeed been at this webcomic for more than a decade, and I have learned almost from the get-go that the subject matter is going to get reactions like yours. Sexuality has always been and will always be a very, VERY personal thing for everyone, and writing stories that have erotic elements in them are going to push people's buttons. Sometimes the right ones, sometimes the wrong ones. I'm glad when I push the right ones, and I send away those whose wrong buttons I've pushed. There are webcomics that are practically 100% gay (and those that are 100% straight). My agenda, my imagination, my "character ratios" are my own and you'll be waiting a hell of a long time before I apologize, or act as though I ought to apologize, for anything I create.Go read something else.

You're hardly the first person I've told that. I got a metric ton of emails from readers who were pissed off the first time I introduced gay characters, period. They accused me of "selling out to the goddamn furfags" solely to boost my readership. I told them the same thing I just told you. Go read something else.

Another reader accused me of being "insanely blind to the real world" by having so many couples in my comic, period. I was trying to "delude" readers by acting as though two people might actually find a long-lasting relationship something to be desired, and that I'd "better wake up and tell the TRUTH" before readers, blinded by my rose-colored-glasses view of relationships, got mad at me too for deluding them. I told her the same thing: Go read something else.

My last hostile email came a year ago when I was accused of creating a dangerous fantasy with the existence of boinkberries in my comic. I was promoting a "false sense of security" by treating contraceptive functions in such a manner. The person kept saying "and yes, I know it's only a webcomic, but you'd be surprised at how many people believe everything they see on the Internet! How are you going to feel if some poor female eats what she thinks are boinkberries - and gets pregnant anyway? How could you live with yourself??" Same answer to this one: Go read something else.

I, THE WRITER, AUTHOR AND CREATOR OF THE KIT AND KAY WEBCOMIC, RICHARD KATELLIS, AM SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS CONTENT, AND CREATE IT SOLELY FOR THE ENJOYMENT OF THOSE WHO WANT TO ENJOY IT. IT MEETS THE CREATOR'S CRITERIA AND NO ONE ELSE'S. WHATEVER IMPRESSIONS A READER MAY HAVE OF ME BECAUSE OF THAT CRITERIA, POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE, IS THAT READER'S BUSINESS. I WELCOME THOSE WHO WANT TO BE HERE AND POINT TO THE EXIT THOSE WHO DO NOT. THE INTERNET IS A BIG PLACE. I CANNOT PLEASE EVERYONE AND HAVE NO INTENTION OF TRYING TO. IF WHAT I CREATE IS SOMETHING YOU DO NOT LIKE, READ SOMETHING ELSE.

[Catalina Tamiko]

Alright, enough.


You both made points. I'm not the type to jump into arguments that aren't mine, but i have to here. Let it go here. Kat has a set scheme about where he wants the comic to go. People want certain stereotypes to be erased. the points of view for this go on and on. Can we please stop this thread here and now before it becomes a rage problem? It's a decent comic that A LOT of people read. If there is a problem, find new reading material.

Can we agree to meet on common ground Before a Mod or Admin has to step in here?

On a side note, if someone eats something they think will keep them from getting preg based solely upon reading a webcomic....their IQ is either lower than 84 or they sit there and smoke weed all day long.

[Burlington]

Kat, I know you to be a fairly truthful guy, but... did someone actually give you grief for having your characters remain in lasting relationships? Really? That's just... I dunno how to say it... O_O

Did they try to specify a mandatory time limit or something? Such as, characters are allowed to meet in one story, remain together through another, but must break up before a third? >_<

I'm just shaking my head in stunned disbelief. As I told you before, you have more than just the talent to do an online comic, you got the cojones to deal with strangeness like that.

[KatEllis]

Catalina: it's not going to go any further, that is why I put my last message there. i've found you have to do that, so that when you start deleting posts and/or locking topics it's not a surprise. I don't often have to, but when it becomes necessary, i do it. And I haven't encountered any reader who was that slow-witted, but I did get into an exchange with someone who was stubbornly convinced that I would eventually have a reader who was. Burlie: Yes, not only did I get that much grief from that person about relationships, that person considered themself authorized to dictate such terms to me because of the number of failed relationships they had gone through. But (as I said to you offline) I still think you have the moxie to do a webocomic of your own! Heck, you even have some material that you could start with. There's an occasional person who Doesn't Get It, but the overwhelming majority of my responses have been marvelous. I've heard from people in countries I'll probably never get to visit that love what i've created. And once you get started creating on a regular basis you will not only learn about how to reach others, you'll find out things about yourself and your own creative energy as well. I think you should go for it!

[Tlaren]

Kat: Might I add to the countries list, at least by proxy? I've a friend that enjoys your comic, and he's in Singapore. He loves what you do just as much as I do!

Also, well responded. I don't think I could have held my temper as magnificently as you did. Sure, your replies were long, but you were still exercising restraint, from my view. You get two thumbs up from me.

[KatEllis]

Kat: Might I add to the countries list, at least by proxy? I've a friend that enjoys your comic, and he's in Singapore. He loves what you do just as much as I do!

Also, well responded. I don't think I could have held my temper as magnificently as you did. Sure, your replies were long, but you were still exercising restraint, from my view. You get two thumbs up from me.

Singapore? Woah, that's brand new for me! Haven't had any readers from there say Hello to me And I made a rule a long time ago that this comic was going to stay an enjoyable endeavor for me. The minute it starts seeming as though I have an axe to grind with anyone, it's not worth it any more. The overwhelming majority of readers I have are like your friend in Singapore.

[WolfWarriorRunning]

It's not the gay to straight ratio, the amount of couples, or the presence of a gay villian that's got me questioning if I'll keep reading this comic. It's the direction this arc seems to be taking, and whether or not it goes where it looks like it's going to go.

Have a happy, functioning, thriving society of free love, nudity, and public sex, that's one thing.

Using sex as a weapon, that's another.

The story seems to be heading back into "the Queen Serena incident" territory. If it does, Kat's storytelling skills are going to be put to the test. I'm very eager to see how this is all going to pan out.

[Tyciol]

OMG I didn't know KaKB was here, I guess that answers my inquiries about sexual content being allowed =)

[Torkuda]

Someone seems to have a lot of time on their hands to write up such a tenderly written amount of garbage just for the sake of ^complaining about a comic on the internet.

[Robert Calypso]

Honestly I dont' see the problem with the Villain being gay ._.; its not portraying all gays as evil, its using them as people (er..furries?) and People dont stick to set classes, I think it's great that he didn't flinch at the idea of making a gay person be evil, and to me he's evil first, and gay second =/ Not that big of a deal personally.


And to the first post about how he's bored with the lack of Yiff? I am sure there are sites out there that are all yiff all the time, but if the Author of Kit&Kay wants to make his comic more than JUST Yiffing? More power to him really! I got linked here from " the bad comics Wiki" and After being treated terribly rude there, I came here to see if it was as "Bad" as they claimed.. It's not, the story is pretty well written, you can tell the author cares about the characters, and he keeps them in character I like that and am glad to get to read such a labor of love =3

[Marma]

Hi, everyone. I'm new here... in fact, I mainly joined the forum so that I could comment to this discussion. I just realized that this discussion is months old, so I feel a little weird replying, but I guess there's no going back now, hahaha.

It is understandable to be offended by a gay villain. Villainous homosexuals have appeared in media so often that there is an entire page for it on TVTropes.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... Homosexual

That being said, Skamm's character is not offensive. There is a difference between the words "offended" and "offensive," after all, being that the former is subjective and the latter is objective. To look at something objectively, one most only look at the facts, and to do this you can't let your own biases color your understanding of the material. A touch of reading comprehension doesn't hurt, either.

Skamm was not villainous because he's gay. He was villainous because he repressed his sexuality. In other words, he was lying to the world and to his self. Because he repressed himself so badly, he also prevented himself from finding love.

Well, I guess it would be pretty arrogant of me to presume that my interpretation of the comic is objective fact, but I'm pretty sure that's what the author was gunning for. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[johnsonkid]

i love a good story too but this one just seems too long too epic! if you could intertwine some short stories along with this big fuck-opera then i would be happy...