Forgive the repost in case the other note doesn't get through....

So there's a response on filmforce.ign.com from Jerry to the discussion t=
hat
took place here about his statements on that system that he was putting
together a follow-up to B5 as a series. I thought I'd repost what I just=
sent
to the folks who posted his reply, as well as Jerry's comments, unaltered=
.. =20

My comments are prefaced by the > character.


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

To quote from the note from Jerry, and respond, with my responses in ital=
ics:
=20
I'm not one for chat rooms or newsgroups, but this was brought to my atte=
ntion
by numerous people, and here's my response=E2=80=A6

F*** Joe and his typical controlling bull****.
=20
>Well, at least we've defined the terms of the discussion.

I guess Doug Netter hasn't been talking to me or the "radio guy" or whoev=
er.=20
=20
>Doug returned Jerry's call, yes. We do that when our cast members call.=
But
to my knowledge there have been no talks between Doug and the "radaio guy=
.."=20
Which is exactly what I'd said.
=20
I guess Doug didn't send demographics and related data to the "radio guy".
=20
>Jerry asked us to send information, information was sent. That doesn't =
have
anything to do with anything that I said in my notes on the newsgroup.
=20
I guess Doug is lying when he told me he's had conversations with the "ra=
dio
guy" and that Joe already has some ideas on paper.=20
=20
>It's clear that someone has their wires crossed, yes. But to go back to=
what
I'd said: if someone has the clout to make a deal, I'm here to talk to th=
em,
whilch again is what I'd said. But no one has yet come to either Doug or
myself with anything close to that. I've never done any work based on so=
me guy
in Chicago who thinks he can make something happen with Jerry. =20
=20
I guess I didn't fly out to Chicago to meet with the "radio guy" in the m=
iddle
of August.=20
=20
>I never said he didn't. What Jerry does or doesn't do on his own time, =
with
his own dime, is Jerry's business. This is a case of Jerry defending him=
self
from an accusation that I never made. All I've ever said is that nobody =
has
yet come to us with anything resembling a deal, or shown the potential to=
make
a deal happen.
=20
Oh by the way, the "radio guy", he's the NUMBER ONE syndicator in the cou=
ntry
and has strong ties to the head of Fox. I guess that's something else I m=
ade
up.
=20
>Again, this has nothing to do with what was said. I didn't say this guy
wasn't a syndicator of any level, and never said he didn't have ties to F=
ox.=20
So once more Jerry is setting up a straw man argument to defend something=
that
was simply never implied or stated. =20

Joe can say what he wants. He can spout his crap about how "he's the man"
around which all things B5 spin.=20
=20
>Well, yeah, I did create the series, executive produce it, write 91 out =
of 110
episodes, and I do control many of the rights. And no deal can go forwar=
d
without my involvement. By contract, if it doesn't happen with me, it do=
esn't
happen. I still don't see what that has to do with anything, however. =20
=20
At least I'm still trying to bring back what should never have been taken=
off
the air. The fans deserve the show.=20
=20
>I've never said anything to the contrary. I've said, and I'll say it ag=
ain
here, that I'll listen to anybody who has the wherewithal to put a deal
together. So far that hasn't happened, despite Jerry's pronouncements. =
I
pointed that fact out. That is the only fact that Jerry hasn't dealt wit=
h
here, apparently finding it easier to respond to things I didn't say than=
to
things I did say, which is odd, but there you go.
=20
Joe's ego deserves a much bigger person.
=20
>Some things deserve a response, some things don't. This is one of the l=
atter.
He hasn't refuted anything I said, which was that Jerry has talked a lot=
about
a lot of prospects, but to date none of them have materialized. If I wer=
e
wrong, then something would have been put forward. That's simply a state=
ment
of fact, ego has nothing to do with it. =20

Feel free to post this from where it came. I'm tired of all the bull****.
=20
>I'm glad that Jerry has taken this opportunity to vent. Clearly, he mis=
ses
the show and wants it to come back. We all miss the show. But at the sa=
me
time, it's not fair to the fans that Jerry mentions to get people excited=
about
something that doesn't exist. I'm glad that he is trying to get things g=
oing,
for himself and with others, but talking about things doesn't make them s=
o, and
pointing this out is not inappropriate when, based on those statements, I=
find
my email box filled with inquiries about things that simply aren't happen=
ing.=20
I've worked with the online community for ten years now, talking about B5=
and
being painfully honest about what's going on. =20
=20
>If there were something going on involving a return of the series that w=
as
real, I'd be the first person to talk about it and let people know. But =
there
isn't. I have to be honest with people, because I have ten years worth o=
f
reputation and credibility with the fans to protect. I see that Jerry do=
esn't
like that, but I can't change that now because he's offended. And again,=
at
the end of the day, it comes down to this: Jerry says he's got something =
going
that's real. If he does, and makes it happen, then I look like a fool, w=
hich
I'm okay with, it wouldn't be the first time. Then he's right to be offe=
nded.=20
If he doesn't, and he can't...then on what possible basis can one be offe=
nded?
=20
>Just a thought or two for anyone looking on.
=20
>Joe Straczynski
jms

(jmsatb5@aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd.,=20
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine=20
and don't send me story ideas)