MrCleveland wrote:
Now some aren't retro or retro enough...but they shouldn't even be retro after 20, 40, or even 100 years from now! (This is why I have a Warning Sign).
You should maybe lead off your article with your definition of 'retro' instead of just "warning you may disagree". I have no idea what your criteria is and hence definitely disagree. For instance you have said in multiple threads that reality shows are effectively disqualified...not a huge fan of them myself, but early seasons of The Real World are very reflective of the early 90s when you look at social issues and fashion. And being the vanguard of modern American reality shows, it had its own ripple effects on our media and culture. So what makes it "not retro"?
Finally, I have to agree with retrojerk is his comments on your recent article. If they "aren't retro or retro enough," why the heck even bring them up here?