A Diamond Ad That Isn't A Diamond Ad

I'm getting into the comic business on my site this September, but I'm in the process of making a few teaser ads for the titles I'm going to put at The X Bridge. I'm working on four myself, and I got a great team working on another title. At The X Bridge, I posted a teaser for my Doctor Diamond title, but instead of showing the lead character, I'm showcasing a villian (probably because I've got the main villian designs finalized, and the main hero's eventual costume needs to be tweaked up a bit). Is that strange? Probably. What's stranger is that in the ad, I spend most of the time explaining what kind of story I'm going to tell and why I'm telling it. You'll have to see the ad to see what I mean.

Part of the reasoning for telling why I'm telling the story is due to a strange situation I read about in the independent comic community. You see, a particular term that many felt was a generic term is jointly owned by a pair of notorious rival publishers. When one popular indy title decided to use the term in title of a book, the two publishers that own the term got riled up and threatened to do something for using this word that usually describe a particular genre of comic title (you know, the genre that has spawned several supermen, avengers, titans, invaders, and leagues that fight for justice). So, the creator of the indy book dropped the term from the book. That kind of action infuriated me, and it's what led me to write a minicommentary in an ad.

Just check out the ad, and tell me what you think.