Quote Originally Posted by griffin View Post
I don't see how it is a ridiculous term. If anything, it was more "tongue in cheek" at the contradictory nature of canon, which itself, is supposed to be as reliable/enforceable as laws.
Concepts like, the Transformers coming from Cybertron, or crashing on Earth in the Ark, or even Megatron being the leader of the Decepticons instead of the Autobots - these are "set in stone", undeniable "laws" of the TFs Gen1 Universe... it may sound like a lame term, but it's technically an accurate description of what Canon (even re-worked or retroactive canon) *should be*.
Otherwise, how can we rely on or agree on certain fundamentals if there was no canon to fall back on?

The less important elements though are more of a frustration, but can also be a way for more fans to enjoy Transformers, or their collections... by having an alternative canon they prefer or like better than a new or old version.

Like, for me, I hate the way they keep changing the "canonical" colours of Rumble/Frenzy (IDW just changed it again last year). I might support one version (Frenzy being blue), but many others who grew up on the cartoon instead of the toys, would be happy to have the new/current canon of Frenzy being red. Both are technically correct... which means fans of both can enjoy what they prefer.
Problem there is that you're equating two different terms, to be one.

'Retcon' and 'canon' are two very different terms.