On 2018-02-04 20:06:21 +0000, symm said:
> Thanks again for the Archies. I was missing a bunch of these.
>
> I agree that they're likely from an official source given the condition
> of the books and the lack of C2C. The greedy part of me wishes they had
> included the ad pages even if they had to add ridiculous disclaimers
> that these are old ads. I know I've seen at least one commercial
> digital/scan book that did this.
DC did it for some of their Famous First Editions (because there
weren't really that many ads back then). But think of the potential
mess of running ads (even with disclaimers) for products and companies
that no longer exist. Heck, these days there might even be copyright
problems and legal liability!
Re: Your current posts. I am given to understand that ComicsCastle has
now realized the error of his ways and has switched back to rar4 but
I'm not sure what the cutoff date is. I believe someone has repacked
most of his problem posts, and I think they can be identified by an (f)
in the file name (for "fixed," I guess).
Re: The Archie Comics digitals, I haven't had a chance to compare with
older versions, so I don't know what's new unless I don't have that
issue at all. If you don't get them soon, I'll go ahead and finish when
I have a chance.
Wherever they're coming from, I hope it continues until all of the old
(and expensive) early numbers, annuals, and giants have been done. I
didn't think I'd ever see them and, while they mostly range from
not-terribly-good to downright awful, it's good to have them anyway.
"Call me Chick" indeed!
|
|