How old are they?

[bozonessinc]

Really, considering that I have said that there are some very good network books. I am thinking about writing some reviews of a couple of Network books, I am still of course undecided. I do think that network books are a little bit better then the UBs.
I know that my fellow UB fans will hate me for this, but it is not as if I am a full fledged member of the Network Fans!

[Q]

I like Casefiles and the Network, but I am NOT a NetworkER. Because networkers are members who dislike UBs becuse they compare them to other series. They have to compare one book to all the other books before they can enjoy it.

[bozonessinc]

That I think is a bad thing. There should not be that kind of a comparison. They should be discussing the book in comparison to the same series. Not just comparing to another series.

[Q]

Exactly!!

[Olivia]

That is totally not true and an unfair assumption. In the past, I only read two Super Mysteries. I didn't read anything for years and years until the UBs came out. When I read them, I didn't compare them to anything because I didn't really have anything to compare them to. And I waited until I read a few until I really took a stance. If I only read one and took a stance, I would all-out hate them. But I read more and some weren't that bad.

I might've, and emphasis on might've read a handful of Originals or Digests in the meantime.

And anyways, many people can make a case for why they don't like the UBs without comparing. There are lists. For example, Joe and Frank's personalities, the continuity, etc. Even so, comparing is a sound basis for determining the quality of something as long as it's done right.

BTW, we have talked about UB books in comparison to other UB books.

I see what you two are saying, but you can't lump everything and everyone into one category.

[bozonessinc]

That is totally not true and an unfair assumption. In the past, I only read two Super Mysteries. I didn't read anything for years and years until the UBs came out. When I read them, I didn't compare them to anything because I didn't really have anything to compare them to. And I waited until I read a few until I really took a stance. If I only read one and took a stance, I would all-out hate them. But I read more and some weren't that bad.

I might've, and emphasis on might've read a handful of Originals or Digests in the meantime.

And anyways, many people can make a case for why they don't like the UBs without comparing. There are lists. For example, Joe and Frank's personalities, the continuity, etc. Even so, comparing is a sound basis for determining the quality of something as long as it's done right.

BTW, we have talked about UB books in comparison to other UB books.

I see what you two are saying, but you can't lump everything and everyone into one category.

Just like how you should not compare the Network and ATAC. As they  are different and work way different.

[Olivia]

You can still have a preference, though.

[bozonessinc]

Yes, you can of course!
Right now I am unsure!

[SDLagent]

Um, of course we're going to compare UB book with other Hardy Boys books, consider they claim to be "Hardy Boys" books.

[Q]

Quote author=Goddess
That is totally not true and an unfair assumption. In the past, I only read two Super Mysteries. I didn't read anything for years and years until the UBs came out. When I read them, I didn't compare them to anything because I didn't really have anything to compare them to. And I waited until I read a few until I really took a stance. If I only read one and took a stance, I would all-out hate them. But I read more and some weren't that bad.

Maybe that is because you are too old!

Quote author=Goddess
I might've, and emphasis on might've read a handful of Originals or Digests in the meantime.

And anyways, many people can make a case for why they don't like the UBs without comparing. There are lists. For example, Joe and Frank's personalities, the continuity, etc.

That is still comparing it.

Quote author=Goddess
Even so, comparing is a sound basis for determining the quality of something as long as it's done right.

BTW, we have talked about UB books in comparison to other UB books.

Comparing!

Quote author=Goddess
I see what you two are saying, but you can't lump everything and everyone into one category.
[/quote]

[Olivia]

Quote author=Goddess
That is totally not true and an unfair assumption. In the past, I only read two Super Mysteries. I didn't read anything for years and years until the UBs came out. When I read them, I didn't compare them to anything because I didn't really have anything to compare them to. And I waited until I read a few until I really took a stance. If I only read one and took a stance, I would all-out hate them. But I read more and some weren't that bad.

Maybe that is because you are too old!

Quote author=Goddess
I might've, and emphasis on might've read a handful of Originals or Digests in the meantime.

And anyways, many people can make a case for why they don't like the UBs without comparing. There are lists. For example, Joe and Frank's personalities, the continuity, etc.

That is still comparing it.

Quote author=Goddess
Even so, comparing is a sound basis for determining the quality of something as long as it's done right.

BTW, we have talked about UB books in comparison to other UB books.

Comparing!

Quote author=Goddess
I see what you two are saying, but you can't lump everything and everyone into one category.

Q, you and I seem to have the same conversation over and over "winks as a joke" (notice how I did that? lol)

1. Maybe you like the UBs because you're too young! See? That goes both ways. But come on, we prefer what we prefer and that's that

2. Looking at their personalities and not liking them does not mean we compare them to previous books. Sure, sometimes we do, but like I said, I didn't have much to compare it to myself. I could totally hate Frank because I think he's a really dumb nerd or something just on the basis of UBs alone, as an example. (Sorry, Frank).

3. That part of my answer I am allowed to "compare" because I was talking about "comparing" in that last section. And it's okay to compare HBs books if we want to in certain cases. And the UBs comparison thing was sort of in response to bozonessinc, because he mentioned comparing the books within the same series.

Finally, we can list things we don't like about a series without comparing it to another one. For example, the continuity within the UBs alone isn't that great.

I said I think I know what you're getting at, but there are other circumstances that you have to consider, and readers who are different from one another in their experience.

[bozonessinc]

Um, of course we're going to compare UB book with other Hardy Boys books, consider they claim to be "Hardy Boys" books.

So then we should compare them all to Digests!

[SDLagent]

Go ahead. People have done it lots before anyway, and if the Digests were the current series, we would.

[bozonessinc]

So what do you people think is better? Casefiles, UB's, Digests?

[tomswift2002]

I consider the UB's to be the worst series of all-time.

Best series of all-time? I would probably have to go with the original series.  The Grosset & Dunlap editions that are in print now have been in print since 1959, plus the original texts of the first 16 books reappeared on the market starting in 1991 and continued till 2006, 32-38 years after the texts of the books were discontinued. Plus 8 more books were added to the series in 2005, 26 years after the 58th book was first published by Grosset & Dunlap.

After the Original series, it would have to be the earlier Digests (1979-1985), followed by the Casefiles, Hardy Boys/Tom Swift Ultra Thrillers, Nancy Drew/Hardy boys SuperMystery'88, The Clues Brothers, HBUB Super Mystery,NDHBSuper Mystery'07, UB.