User blog comment:Sockstar1/Creddie fans prepare yourselves for iSeddie/@comment-3092491-20110606012342/@comment-2032682-20110606100255

>It seems that all this editing and pandering and teasing and building he does with everything >he says is something he has to do, not something he does by choice to be a devilish old man.

I don't agree. He doesn't have to do any of it. He could let his show stand alone. He doesn't need to do anything with the fandom. But he does, because he enjoys the popularity, and it helps him hype the show.

He makes the choice to interact, and he makes the choice to do things like pander and fakeout and tell people off (which he has done in the past), and to hype his episodes and patronise people.

>"You know what, go screw yourselves if you don't like it. This is what I want to do with my story >and this is what I'm doing."

There's nothing wrong with that. There's also nothing wrong with ignoring it completely.

But he chooses not to. For the most part. He has done it in the past towards some Seddie fans specifically in the iSYL-Extended blogs that are now deleted. He told them to watch Wizard of Waverly Place instead.

He doesn't have to pander to both sides, play them off against each other, and write episodes about how we're crazy and then blog about how we are 'missing the point' and should watch the show for the comedy when he himself is about to do an entire iSeddie season which last time I checked isn't a very 'comedy first' idea. But he does all those things.

>He has to keep them both watching.

He doesn't have to do anything. He doesn't need to go on twitter. He doesn't have to write a blog. He doesn't need to get involved. He could like many writers leave the promotion of the show up to the network.

>especially if their # 1 reason for creating the show was to make people laugh, they wouldn't >want anyone leaving just because of the side-romance (that is also supposed to largely be >played to make people laugh).

The problem for me is his hypocrisy. He writes iSAFW.

Then an episode later he's writing iOMG.

Now he's doing iSeddie.

It's blatant. There's no way around it. He's pushing the romance plot of the show before his comedy. If he was true to his own word, there would be no iOMG. There would be no iSeddie.

He has the nerve to tell us to 'watch it for the comedy' when he himself no longer writes the show for the comedy. What's worse, is that despite him saying to 'watch it for the comedy' he turns around in his "iOMG what next" blog and specifically added something to it that has absolutely NOTHING to do with comedy, and is only intended to try and pander to Creddie.

That's not writing "for the comedy".

>What I'm seeing now is its kinda like Dan is being seen as the villain from whatever side is >going to lose, and he's kinda forced to be the villain because if he just straight told people >that he was doing this and if they don't like it they could dump spaghetti in his lap

He isn't forced to do anything he doesn't want to. Nick didn't force him to start writing blogs. Nick didn't force him to write iSeddie. No-one forced him to write iSYL or iOMG.

If he thinks it's over the top, why is he still pandering to it? "Maaaybeee" he shouldn't have written anything about the shippings. Why did he keep doing things that made the rivalry worse?

He is being seen as the villain because of his actions. I can tell you right now I have held this opinion of Dan for a long long time and now the proof is coming into place. I don't like it, because it's seemingly being proved by being Anti-Creddie, but it's proof none the less. Either iSeddie becomes canon in which case he's pandering to Creddie, or there's another twist in which case it's Seddie who is been pandered to.

>I think most writers hope that their audience will like whatever they do with their story and >they also think they *should* like whatever they do with their story. So rivalry between two >hypothetical options seems a stupid thing and a stupid thing to stop watching over. The >story is what it is.

I know not everyone will like what someone does with a story. Just look at Twilight or Harry Potter or Star Wars or anything and you can see people disagreeing with the ways storylines have gone.

The problem is Dan being hypocritical. He says to do one thing, and then acts in the opposite way. A rivalry might be stupid, but Dan has encouraged it. He makes it worse. He put it into his own show. To this day he attempts to promote the future of his show by pandering to Creddie shippers because he forgot to do it in his initial blog post. Nick have promoted episodes on the basis of "Seddie vs Creddie".

The story is what it is.

But Dan does way more than letting the story stand on it's own.

He goes far beyond that, and that's where my criticism of him stems from.