HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing

Apparently the Ferfelabat Cindy Cruciger/Meangirls truce is over. I was sent a link yesterday to a site called Snark Underground. Apparently it belongs to Ms Cruciger. I wont bother linking, because I’m sure you guys will find it easy enough.

There were a couple of eye-brow raising posts on there, but this excerpt caught my eye:

“Let’s check in, shall we? Earlier Karen Scott was having dreams about breaking every bone in a baby’s body. Last year we learned that she only has her period once every six months or so and, in addition to making it impossible for her to reproduce (a good thing given that she dreams about abusing babies), when it happens, it is apparently so profound that she requires tent sized undies to contain it.

Not wanting to feel like a freak (I am guessing), she asks her always-willing-to-reveal-material- to-be-used-against-them-later-when-she’s-ragging-it audience if they too switch out the stripper undies for more substantial granny wear when they are in non-reproduction mode.”

Wow…. I’d definitely say the truce was over wouldn’t you?

121 Comments »


  • sallahdog
    October 31
    1:29 pm

    This stuff reeks a bit of the little boy who desperately wants your attention on the schoolyard so he smacks you, because he can’t say he likes you, he really likes you…

    I don’t pretend to know all the ins and outs of these blog wars (I just find them interesting, because they blow up in every field of interest). I will say this, I don’t really get the demonizing of the Dear Author site, and if she stopped for one second, she would realize that Karen rarely starts the fight (ok, maybe she started the Carol Lynne thing by saying her book sucked hairy donkey balls) , Karen mostly just points and laughs at people who implode, all on their own, without any help.

    Maybe whats got her so riled is that Karen didn’t bother to review her book, and say it sucked Hairy donkey balls, because I think Karen gave Carol Lynnes books quite the boost..

    ReplyReply


  • Gwen
    October 31
    1:41 pm

    Sallahdog – hahahahahaha! Very well put!

    So Karen – do you think Ferfe has a girl-crush on you? I think so. I think she wants to get in your granny panties. Otherwise, why would she talk about them?

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    October 31
    1:46 pm

    Oh, well, that’s particularly ugly and foul, isn’t it?

    Let’s hope Snark Underground stays way, way under.

    I wonder how anyone who could put that kind of nastiness in writing could claim review sites are unfair.

    SU definitely wins the Viciously Twisted Award. But maybe that was its point.

    ReplyReply


  • Kat O+
    October 31
    2:00 pm

    Wow. Where did that come from?

    ReplyReply


  • Jane
    October 31
    2:07 pm

    I don’t really understand the point of creating a whole new website when she goes to no lengths at all to disguise who the author/owner of the site actually is.

    And the nastiness on it is just amazing. I’m pretty sure that bringing up your issues of procreation and lack thereof is about as low as a snake’s belly.

    ReplyReply


  • Jade
    October 31
    2:14 pm

    You know there’s a way to be snarky without being nasty and Ferfelabat has succeeded in being nasty.

    How the fuck can you take Karen’s dream and then say basically it’s a good thing she doesn’t reproduce?

    That’s some pretty fucked up shit, Ferfelabat and you’ve definitely overstepped the line to war. You’ve acted like an indecent human being on this, and now watch out. Karma’s going to bite you on your shitty ass.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    October 31
    2:20 pm

    Wow. Where did that come from?

    No idea. Apparently she’s not good at letting things go.

    ReplyReply


  • Dawn
    October 31
    2:28 pm

    Oh my gosh. This woman is NASTY!!

    BTW, Karen, I’m REALLY EXCITED – 8 of us are going to Jamaica in April next year. It’s the 1st time I’ve been back in over 30 years. I’m REALLY EXCITED. Can you tell?

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    October 31
    2:44 pm

    Actually, first she would post the article in her blog and then after many comments, she’d erase it and sort of repost a version of it in the Underground minus the comments. That’s why I told the troll to go back underground at Dear Author.

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    October 31
    2:46 pm

    Oops, forgot to click on the forward comment box.

    P/S She checks her IPs constantly and calls you out by your city and state. ;-)

    ReplyReply


  • Gail
    October 31
    2:53 pm

    What amazes me is this person who goes to great lengths to declare her “American’ness” is actively attempting to control another blog owners right to free speech. Does anyone else notice the flaw in that logic?

    Karen has never reviewed one of my books and I have no idea if she’d enjoy them, but she has a right to say whatever she likes about a published book. I happen to feel very American about that. It is one of the core freedoms we have built our society on. A freedom we are willing to pay for in blood and have done so around the globe to support others right to it.

    Freedom of speech has been bought with British blood as well. Check your history, they were dieing for the right before there was a USA.

    But perhaps I’m reading her agenda all wrong and she just wants in Karen’s panties, because why else is she checking them that carefully?

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    October 31
    3:29 pm

    I am not going to look at her blog. Don’t see the point.

    Although, Karen, I gotta say… I’m glad I never told you about my thong/brief preference. I’d so hate to see you post somewhere down the line that Shiloh doesn’t like to wear granny panties. That would just be so utterly humiliating.

    ReplyReply


  • Sarah McCarty
    October 31
    3:32 pm

    That is a nasty and mean beyond belief personal attack. While I’m sure the intent of the post is to demean Karen, in reality I find the most demeaning reflection it casts is on the author herself.

    Very sad to see someone losing perspective to this extent. Very sad.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    October 31
    3:39 pm

    ~While I’m sure the intent of the post is to demean Karen, in reality I find the most demeaning reflection it casts is on the author herself.~

    It really does mirror back, doesn’t it? You see a lot of ugly stuff fly around in the romanceland blogoramas from time to time, but this one is by far the ugliest I’ve come across.

    ReplyReply


  • Jackie
    October 31
    3:47 pm

    That was hurtful and nasty and horrible. Karen, I’m so sorry.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    October 31
    3:55 pm

    I’m speechless.

    Okay, scratch that–I’m morbidly fascinated.

    Going by her antics in the past few months, F/CC’s compulsion to self destruct is off the scale.

    ReplyReply


  • Sarah McCarty
    October 31
    3:56 pm

    ˜You see a lot of ugly stuff fly around in the romanceland blogoramas from time to time, but this one is by far the ugliest I’ve come across.˜

    It does take the cake.

    ReplyReply


  • Anne
    October 31
    4:09 pm

    Oh my goodness. She’s rather warped, isn’t she? How long ago was it that we talked about that? For cripes sake, the woman really needs to find a hobby.

    And she should be ASHAMED of herself for stooping to that level. Apparently the level before the “truce” wasn’t low enough.

    Unbelievable.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    October 31
    4:10 pm

    Here’s my thought, because the truly staggering viciousness on SU simply astounds me.

    By writing all that, posting that, CC has likely cut far, far back on the number of writers, readers, reviewers and industry professionals who will pay attention to any of her comments, and cut way, way back on anyone who’ll communicate with her on blogs.

    I wonder if the satisfaction and release of disgorging all that bile was worth it to her.

    ReplyReply


  • Desiree Erotique
    October 31
    4:14 pm

    What does this person hope to get off saying such things? Is she hoping someone will have her committed? I’ve read some vindictive stuff in Blogland, but yes, this is the nastiest -and most OUT THERE- I’ve come across so far. Who is this Ferfelabat person anyway?

    ReplyReply


  • Michelle
    October 31
    4:30 pm

    Well I wonder if her syncophants will continue to stand by her and be drawn down in the mud too. I loved it on dear author Eva Gale told Nora that Cindy and Nora were both just two strong women who were just alike. Of course Nora’s denial was truly classy.

    I think Cindy has crossed over from tacky, juvenile and pathetic to the truly disturbed/pathologic. If her “friends” really cared about her they would get her help and not egg her on.

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    October 31
    4:36 pm


    I wonder if the satisfaction and release of disgorging all that bile was worth it to her.

    I think Ferfe sees herself as a vigilante, out to rid the world of all mean girl bloggers and she’ll sink as low as she has to in her self-appointed quest.

    What she said was without a doubt cruel and malicious, although she won’t see it that way.

    She’ll get her satisfaction from her cronies patting her on that back and laughing along with her.

    I think those are the only people she really wants to hear from anyway, those who think just as she does.

    People that disagree with her don’t even register and the fact that it is/could/has hurt her career may not even matter to her.

    ReplyReply


  • ·:*¨¨*:·.Mad.·:*¨¨*:·.
    October 31
    4:47 pm

    That was totally uncalled for….very ugly and mean. {{{{Karen}}}}

    ReplyReply


  • roslynholcomb
    October 31
    5:41 pm

    As someone who struggles with similar issues, and had someone (outside Romancelandia) mock it and make fun of me, I can only say I’m sorry. Obviously the world is inhabited by some truly twisted fucks.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    October 31
    6:11 pm

    Wow. Does CC have a new book coming out and thinks controversy will help sell more copies?

    ReplyReply


  • Heather
    October 31
    6:24 pm

    Well, I’m trying to think of something that hasn’t already been said, but I think y’all covered all the high points. It’s sad really. No excuse for it at all. But I can’t find it in myself to be angry with her…though I do pity her. Must be hell on a person to behave in such a manner and have to live with the consequences of those actions. *shrugs*

    People will be people. Sadly, there is no mute button on life. Of course, by now it’d be faded and broken from overuse if there were such a thing. Just ignore the poor soul. It isn’t worth the time and effort to deal with it. There are plenty of other far more important things to focus on. Just my opinion on it of course.

    Another thing that strikes me (yes, I thought I was done) is that apparently nothing has been learned from all the self destructive behavior that has transpired during the last several months. Yes, this type of behavior gets your name in the spotlight for a short time, but is it really worth it? Is being seen in such a negative light really helpful to anyone in anyway? Sorry, but I’d much rather remain obscure than to go down in internet history as another public figure that opened his/her mouth and stuck his/her foot in it.

    Okay, now I’m really done.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    October 31
    6:26 pm

    on SU, cindy says
    MAYbe it could be damaging, but … I have one book published on Revenge. The next one is about Envy. Following that is Jealousy.

    Maybe she is just working through her own issues in book form…

    What I found fascinating was that she takes comments like the “Is class something your born with, where your at now” and turns it into, ” Karen says America sucks.”

    Just because Americans (me being one of the people who commented on that particular thread) said that yes indeedy, the class system is alive and well in the US, we are pandering… well… ok…

    I guess that Cindy has decided, like Bill OReilly, that simply questioning a policy or a fact of life in the US is tantamount to treason against the US… So much for free speech and all those other pesky doctrines of the Constitution… but then, Cindy isn’t too happy with Freedom of Speech unless it is her doing the speaking…obviously..

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    October 31
    7:25 pm

    I think Ferfe sees herself as a vigilante, out to rid the world of all mean girl bloggers and she’ll sink as low as she has to in her self-appointed quest.

    What she said was without a doubt cruel and malicious, although she won’t see it that way.

    She’ll get her satisfaction from her cronies patting her on that back and laughing along with her.

    My question about such a quest inevitably reduces to this: what is the vigilante contributing to the online community, to the genre, to civility? And if there appears to be no concern for modeling the values one claims are absent elsewhere, or modeling them only when it seems someone of import is paying attention, then is the goal simply self-amusement? Nothing imperils the virtues of a quest more efficaciously than that, IMO. And that has nothing to do with what any other blogger does or doesn’t say. That damage is self-inflicted, IMO.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    October 31
    7:36 pm

    Sorry Karen… I just don’t understand what she is all about. Things have been to quite, she must stir the pot? Is Ferfelabat the little spoiled child who needs attention, any attention?

    Donna

    ReplyReply


  • shiloh walker
    October 31
    8:15 pm

    My question about such a quest inevitably reduces to this: what is the vigilante contributing to the online community, to the genre, to civility?

    Nothing. At least not in the eyes of the majority. In her eyes? Oh, she probably thinks she is adding wit, originality… who knows?

    Somebody said earlier, I think it was Anne… that Ferfe needed to get a hobby. I have a feeling this hate-on for Karen IS her hobby. Seems this is how she amuses herself. Ugly? Yep. But it’s also kind of pathetic.

    And now, I need to cut off my morbid fascination with this mess. I got a couple of little monsters that need to be picked up and dressed up so they can go terrorize the town.

    Karen, I know this mess was ugly, spiteful and nasty~you didn’t do a damn thing to bring on this kind of personal attack. Hurtful as it was, I hope you can put it away where something ugly and nasty like this belongs… in the trash can.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    October 31
    9:53 pm

    ~She’ll get her satisfaction from her cronies patting her on that back and laughing along with her.~

    Yes, this is certainly part of it. But I wonder at the kind of people who could read that vomit and find it amusing or witty or deserved. The difference, I suppose, between cronies and friends. A friend would tell her to stop hurting herself this way.

    As Robin says further down, she contributes nothing, adds nothing, but a morbid kind of fascinated horror in the onlookers. And disregards completely the values or morals she sees as lacking in others as she spews. Until the hate becomes self-canabalistic.

    ReplyReply


  • Teddy Pig
    November 1
    12:13 am

    Dang, I just found that site.
    That’s some messed up hate going on there. Why would Cindy Cruciger say that shit?

    She’ll probably deny it like the trolling she has been doing on Dear Author.

    Hope she finds some other target Karen because she’s a real piece of work. I am glad she is in Florida.

    ReplyReply


  • Emily Veinglory
    November 1
    12:20 am

    So the anti-mean grrl campaign involves being as mean as possible and nasty with it? Impeccable logic, as ever.

    ReplyReply


  • avidbookreader
    November 1
    1:02 am

    I know this comment is just out there (and stands a good chance of being ignored) but what purpose does it serve to send you a link where somebody is disrespecting you? Let’s assume that you don’t really care about her anyway but I guess, I would be somewhat upset at someone sending me a link where someone was being nasty at my benefit. Sometimes, ignorance is bliss in that regard.

    Plus, there are people who enjoy instigating (not talking about whoever sent you the link because I’m sure they had your best interest at heart) and enjoying posts like this where things only seem to escalate. Just an opinion. You know I love reading your blog and I know you can handle your own but sometimes silence is best and speaks louder and more clearly than anything else you or anybody else could have said.

    —Back to my book

    Keishon, all erros in grammar and spelling are mine and mine alone so I apologize ahead of thime. Carry on.

    ReplyReply


  • bloppyhogger
    November 1
    3:03 am

    Is it just me or was that the worst blog ever designed? I found it hard to navigate.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 1
    7:24 am

    Thanks for the support guys, but if she really wrote that piece of crap, it hurts her much worse than it does me.

    BTW, Karen, I’m REALLY EXCITED – 8 of us are going to Jamaica in April next year. It’s the 1st time I’ve been back in over 30 years. I’m REALLY EXCITED. Can you tell?

    Oooh I’m excited for you!!! How great a time will you have with eight of you travelling together! Nice one!!

    Hey Keishon, the link wasn’t sent to cause mischief. I think it was more about marvelling how low she’s willing to go.

    what is the vigilante contributing to the online community, to the genre, to civility?

    Not much by the looks of things Robin. She’d be so much happier if she just moved on, and stopped obsessing about people who are trying to forget that she even exists.

    And Nora, the only thing you and her have in common is a uterus.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 1
    7:38 am

    But I wonder at the kind of people who could read that vomit and find it amusing or witty or deserved. The difference, I suppose, between cronies and friends. A friend would tell her to stop hurting herself this way.

    Ferfe may draw the lion’s share of attention to herself, but she’s not the only one commenting over there or blogging and/or associating in the same circle. IMO she is drawing attention away from some really disturbing stuff on at least one other commenter’s website/blog.

    ReplyReply


  • sun
    November 1
    4:48 pm

    She’ll get her satisfaction from her cronies patting her on that back and laughing along with her.

    Eventually they too will move away from her, as they realize nothing good comes from the association. I was buying a book the other day until I read the author’s blog and found she was a friend of Ferfe’s. Then I removed it from my cart. Maybe it was a good book, but there are enough others out there by people who don’t relish being cruel that I don’t think I’ll miss it.

    ReplyReply


  • Laura
    November 1
    6:07 pm

    sun, I’ve done the same thing. I just can’t enjoy books knowing the authors are hateful people.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    November 1
    6:14 pm

    I was buying a book the other day until I read the author’s blog and found she was a friend of Ferfe’s. Then I removed it from my cart.

    I’m curious about this. Do reviewers affect sales through their reviews? And I’m not talking about the obvious good review = sales.

    I was on a review site a couple of weeks ago and was happily going through the archive to see if I could add to my TBR pile. Then I came across an absolutely glowing review of a book I absolutely detested. I hated this book and the other books by this author with a passion. I wanted to email this author and ask her what she was smoking when she writes because her books offended me so.

    Anyway, I tossed out the buy list I was compiling, left the review site and am never going back because in my mind, if this reviewer adores this particular author, she and I obviously have very different tastes in reading material.

    Anyone else done this? Or is it just me?

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    November 1
    6:16 pm

    she was smoking when she writes

    Crap. It should be: “she smokes when she writes”

    ReplyReply


  • Laura
    November 1
    6:22 pm

    Robin, it took me one guess to find the author you were speaking of. Sweet baby Jesus.
    What really makes me sad is that according to her author profile, she has at least one child. Can you imagine?

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 1
    6:25 pm

    Ann, when I was newer to the internet, I even took a good amazon review(we all know how unbiased those are) and bought books on those reccomendations…

    After getting burned, I turned to review sites, but… I look up the body of the reviewers views on books I either loved or hated and if they don’t match up at all, I tend to not use that reviewer to give me new book ideas..

    For example, I love to read Mrs. Giggles reviews but she and I don’t agree that much on books we either liked, or disliked, so while I enjoy reading her reviews, I don’t buy based on a good review by her..

    I actually don’t NOT buy an author on the basis of internet stupidity. I truly don’t give a crap whether I “like” an authors on line personality or not, just whether or not I like their “voice” in writing… For example, I think Cindy truly shoots herself in the foot, more times than she should, but I do read her blogs and did read her book (ehh, I had problems with it) because I enjoy her “voice” when she isn’t acting the total fucktard (love that word!)..

    Heck, I even read LKHs latest Merry and have to give her props for doing some things right in this book, even if IMO, she has gone off the deep end in her blogs and the Anita books…

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 1
    6:26 pm

    Ann, it’s the same for me–and works for books, tv shows, movies, music, etc.

    When I’ve found reviewers whose grading of a few books/movies/etc. jive with mine, I keep going back there.

    And even then I’m cautious–but that’s mostly because my book buying budget is just pityful.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 1
    6:28 pm

    sallahdog, I gotta say that I find impossible to separate the fucktard person from the writing voice. Props to you for managing to do it.

    ReplyReply


  • Lauren Dane
    November 1
    6:41 pm

    I suppose I’m just puzzled by what motivates people to do this sort of thing. Is it like a tic or something? Some sort of bizarre need to yell out cruel and personal things for no reason?

    I’m at a loss really, it’s staggeringly awful and unprofessional on top of simply being cruel.

    This goes beyond the showing your ass in public type of post. Truly, I don’t get it.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 1
    7:19 pm

    Robin, it took me one guess to find the author you were speaking of. Sweet baby Jesus.

    Who are you talking about?

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 1
    7:35 pm

    feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I think she is talking about Ann Vremont… Her latest blogs are artworks have gotten really strange..

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    November 1
    7:38 pm

    Who are you talking about?

    I got a feeling I know. I had an urge to shower after looking. Talk about nastiness.

    I actually don’t NOT buy an author on the basis of internet stupidity

    Eh, I do. I stopped reading a couple of faves after one in particular displayed some serious nastiness, pettiness and jealousy. I see it as a way to whittle down the TBR or TBB pile. I’ve got so many books I want to read or buy, if there’s a way I can toss a book out without wondering if I’m missing a good story, hey…

    And if the author is a serious ass, I will not be missing that good a story, at least not for me. It could be the most fantastic book ever… and I’m going to keep getting pulled out when I think about the author. That will cut down on my ability to enjoy it, so I don’t bother.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 1
    7:47 pm

    I’m hoping it was the Vremont blog. That one was so bad, I inhaled my lunch and had to give myself the Heimlich maneuver. Good thing I’m in the medical field.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 1
    7:48 pm

    Oh, that was from Jackie L.–forgot to sign it.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 1
    8:38 pm

    This is the friend of CC’s who’s a lawyer?

    Okay then.

    According to her blog, btw, some of you are licking me in inappropriate places.

    Cut that out.

    ReplyReply


  • Rocio R
    November 1
    8:47 pm

    Karen,
    I hate to think that only you have to “pay” for a blog post we all had fun with.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 1
    8:53 pm

    I still don’t know what you guys are talking about, and by the sounds of it, I don’t wanna know.

    Ro, I’m not paying for anything, so don’t you worry. It takes all sorts in this world, and unfortunately many of them have more than a couple of screws loose.

    ReplyReply


  • Teddy Pig
    November 1
    9:25 pm

    I pay for my blog posts.

    Well, actually I pay for web server space and all the eBooks I review and the domain names.

    Dang, I waste some bucks.

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    November 1
    9:44 pm

    Nora said:

    “According to her blog, btw, some of you are licking me in inappropriate places.

    Cut that out.”

    *********
    That made me go look. Arghhh. Crazier and crazier.

    Nora, you’re just somebody pretending to be Nora anyway, asking at DA about people talking about people pretending to be Nora writing Nora books.

    I looked at some of the “zombie/human” artwork tagged “mean girls” but I don’t get them, especially the Dr. Barin’s camo creme. But she sure has a lot of time on her hands!

    As for the licking comment, I’m speechless. I don’t understand why there’s a need for that.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 1
    9:55 pm

    I wonder if being accused of licking someone inappropriately is defamatory? Jane at DA would probably know. Since LaNora is in I think Maryland and I am in Colorado, I must have a pretty long tongue.

    –Jackie L.

    ReplyReply


  • Kristie (J)
    November 1
    10:41 pm

    It’s absolutely mind boggling to me that anyone or a group, could be so vicious.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    November 1
    11:38 pm

    Heck, I even read LKHs latest Merry and have to give her props for doing some things right in this book

    Sallahdog, are you referring to A LICK OF FROST? It’s actually half-decent?

    ReplyReply


  • Shannon Stacey
    November 1
    11:56 pm

    See, once again Nora gets singled out, getting her insults straight up with her name attached, while the rest of us get to guess at ours. Taint fair. *snicker*

    Utter trash. And the content’s pathetic, too.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 2
    12:24 am

    Hey Ann, yes, Lick of Frost was a huge improvement on the last several books..

    For one thing, stuff actually happens and the sex scenes are fairly short… There is still some of the angsting, but it doesn’t go on interminably.

    Merry actually gets preggers in this one (ok, so the daddy situation is a bit deux de machina)and there is movement on the Seelie situation also..

    LKH even thinned the herd somewhat, ok, so she ‘sorta’ thinned the herd.

    LKH still hasn’t regained her sparer snappy style (although to be fair, Merry was never written in that style), but it was a vast improvement and made me want to read the end of the story . Not going to pay hardback prices for it, though.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 2
    12:27 am

    Oh sure, now it’s a Lick Of Frost, when just a few minutes ago it was a Lick Of Nora.

    As Shannon says, taint fair.

    Gennita, I say we’re all imposters, pretending to be people talking about other pretend people.

    ReplyReply


  • Marianne LaCroix
    November 2
    12:34 am

    You know, this post is just completely heartless. As someone who went through infertility issues for years, I know whenever anyone brought it up hurt me to the core. To read a cold post like that makes me angry beyond all measures. Having trouble getting pregnant is not a light issue and it can be extremely painful for those who deal with it.

    I’ll never buy this woman’s books. Never.

    I did, however, buy Sarah McCarty’s SPICE book today! I am so thrilled to see they put out an erotic historical.

    I am so appaulled by CC–talk about authors behaving badly. This is worse as the author is bashing a READER. Geez….

    ReplyReply


  • Michelle
    November 2
    1:14 am

    “Lick of Nora”-LOL
    Now I am having disturbing images of Nora bobbleheads being used in inappropriate ways.

    Come on with all of you writers aren’t you getting the urge to write a nice juicy mystery where an internet troll is done away with and suspects abound. The head detective could have a bobblehead fetish but is cured by a blog moderator who is a lawyer but masquerades as the UPS delivery person. Hmm must think more about this and maybe write it myself.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    November 2
    1:22 am

    Thanks, Sallahdog.

    the sex scenes are fairly short…

    It seems so wrong for me to be happy to read that.

    Okay, I won’t cancel the hold I have at the library for this one. It killed me to stop buying LKH’s books because I hate having in an incomplete collection, but it felt like a weight was lifted when I cancelled all my Amazon pre-orders for LKH. Sometimes I feel like a recovering addict taking baby steps.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    November 2
    1:25 am

    Oh sure, now it’s a Lick Of Frost, when just a few minutes ago it was a Lick Of Nora.

    And, La Nora, as much as I love your books (actually, I think I love the shoes you’re wearing in author photo for HIGH NOON more than the book), you just don’t do it for me in that way.

    ReplyReply


  • Jenns
    November 2
    1:52 am

    Ugh. I looked at the site, and I’m a little mad at myself for giving her the extra hit. Oh well. Maybe knowing that one more person looked at anything she wrote will give her the strength to hang on, until she goes on some much needed medication.
    I really think that ol’ Ferf is willing to do anything for just a little attention. No matter how ugly the comment, she’ll type it. I don’t think she realizes that any interest is bound to wear thin. And sad, but I think most of her so-called ‘friends’ are more or less morbidly fascinated by her downward spiral. I hope someone suggests help. Seriously.
    Anyway, before I forget – Nora, stop impersonating yourself! Taint right.

    ReplyReply


  • Jane
    November 2
    3:07 am

    Ann Vremont’s blog? Scary and potentially defamatory. It sure is shocking and outside the bounds of decent conduct as well as having no literary or creative merit in balance to the vile suggestions the drawings make.

    I think the most pernicious thing is determining whether a commenter on those blogs is tainted by the same brush. I saw that Monica Jackson came out to denounce any supposed link between herself and Ferfe.

    On the one hand, I don’t think just because you comment on a blog that you condone, approve or consent to all the things a blogger does.

    However, when you comment on a specific post which contains items such as SU does or the recent one on Ferfe’s blog, does that mean that you do approve too? Is it fair to connect those lines?

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 2
    4:03 am

    On the one hand, I don’t think just because you comment on a blog that you condone, approve or consent to all the things a blogger does.

    However, when you comment on a specific post which contains items such as SU does or the recent one on Ferfe’s blog, does that mean that you do approve too? Is it fair to connect those lines?

    Yeah, it’s a tough call. I look for patterns in people’s comments and in the posts at their own blogs. At some level, you can probably do a six degrees of separation regression for most of us online, so I don’t think someone who makes a comment on a controversial blog is necessarily endorsing the stuff on that blog. I do think it’s fair to ask someone, though, where they stand on the objectionable content.

    It’s the same with books, at least for me. It would take something pretty extreme in terms of author conduct for me to not read a transcendently brilliant book. The problem, though, is that most of the books published overall aren’t transcendently brilliant.

    Anyway, I try very hard to be able to read and appreciate a book even if I don’t really like the author’s online behavior, but that doesn’t mean I’ll *buy* that author’s book new.

    As we get further into some of these online dynamics I find myself making finer and finer distinctions. Like I can appreciate someone who may offend or frustrate me sometimes if I sense they are well-intentioned. And on the ugly front, I find pure malice much more objectionable than obnoxiousness, for example.

    ReplyReply


  • Emma Petersen
    November 2
    8:53 am

    Le sigh. Why would anyone say something so horrible?

    I just don’t understand. If you’re upset with a person for whatever reason because of their blog or whatever else, that’s fine. You have a right to your feelings, etc but to deliver a blow so incredibly vicious it made my eyes tear is beyond my comprehension. And I thank God it is. I don’t ever want to understand and accept why someone would behave in such a way because who knows if I’ll become compliant and start thinking that such behavior is okay.

    Hugs Karen. I don’t care what you said or did, NO ONE deserves this.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 2
    10:35 am

    When I think of authors I think of professionals, someone we can look up to, but this, this takes the cake. If this is a publicity stunt to garner attention to her books, it is backfiring. I could never buy a book from an author who behaves so ugly, nasty and mean. And since she obviously doesn’t care, so be it…

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 2
    1:16 pm

    ~Like I can appreciate someone who may offend or frustrate me sometimes if I sense they are well-intentioned. And on the ugly front, I find pure malice much more objectionable than obnoxiousness, for example.~

    Yes, there’s a difference between disagreement–even snarkily expressed opinion and heated disagreement–and personal attack. A big difference between being a pain in the ass and being personally vicious.

    (And Jane said taint.)

    For myself, using this last business as an example, I’d have been perfectly fine with simply ignoring CC as I found her comments and behavior obnoxious and malicious by my yardstick. But a line was crossed into such overt, such extremely personal attack my reaction is to include those who connect with her in my opinion. At this point, they’d be measured the same way.

    Doesn’t matter. No one would could do this, agree with this or support this–or the person responsible–cares what I think. Or what anyone, who isn’t of that same measure, thinks.

    ReplyReply


  • Lauren Dane
    November 2
    8:31 pm

    I’d planned on writing a comment joking about how this may spawn Nora fic, but nah, this just isn’t funny. It’s just, well, tacky and cheap. I mean, admittedly I love Nora with a sort of fangirlish glee, but not *that* much, hell, I don’t even love Gerard Butler *that* much.

    I don’t see the point in degrading yourself in public this way. I don’t see what point it makes other than to show the world you’re tacky. I’m sorry to see it, I really am, because it’s inexcusable and makes the rest of us look bad simply by association.

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    November 3
    2:35 am

    Lauren,

    It’s okay…I’ll lick Gerry Butler at all the inappropriate places….ahem.

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    November 3
    2:43 am

    Someone explained to me last night what those Sarin Barin “art”work was all about. I had NO idea the first time looking at them that there was a history of this blogger’s weird artwork of Karen. Now those CGI drawings, with the zombie and make-up references, are even more revolting.

    If those images are really directed at Karen, that’s just wrong and unkind, whatever the difference in opinion. (((Karen!!!)))

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 3
    7:35 am

    Gennita, it all points to a much disturbed psyche, and explains a few things about her friendship with CC. Like attracts like after all.

    I would be amused, but I’ve read about people like her in books.

    It would seem that neither Ann Vremont nor CC really want to be successful writers.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 4
    4:08 pm

    Earlier I got treated *cough* to an excerpt from CC’s blog. Seems some people don’t get why she’s on the side of all that’s good and just and right! Some people are unable to see how fair minded and open and all around wonderful she and her friends are!

    Amazing, huh?

    … The utter lack of self-awareness, that is.

    It made me think of this thread at Making Light (Karen, apologies for the format busting link–I’m pretty techno-handicapped.) http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/009546.html#009546

    If you don’t want to wade through the many comments, here’s an excerpt from one that pretty much summarizes why CC’s “hatred” of anyone for what they put up on their blogs, as well as how they manage said content/comments, is pretty stupid to begin with:

    “If you visited my house, you could play with the letters on my refrigerator door. If you arrange them so they spell “Christopher is a duh-head,” I won’t object, but if you arrange them so they say “there’s too much lemon pickle in this refrigerator; please get rid of it” I will not only not let that stand, I probably won’t let you come back to my house, because you’ve just been extremely rude. I didn’t ask you to EAT the lemon pickle, after all; you just saw it in the refrigerator while you were looking for the mayo (or whatever).
    “I respectfully submit that readers and commenters on a blog are much more like guests in someone’s home than customers in a store, or readers of a magazine.” (Full comment: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/009546.html#223675 )

    In other words: s/he who pays for the server space has every right to do as she pleases. CC and company can keep on stooping to ever lower depths of viciousness, while “meangirls” can keep on doing whatever they want.

    Irony: Complaining about the inability of the “meangirls” to accept criticism or disagreement in their (non-moderated) blogs, while CC and crew keep moderated blogs.

    Oh and the whining? Pretty loud over there.

    As for the “welcome to the life of a real writer” bit of idiocy… I wonder if any of these people actually know the difference between blogging and journalism.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 5
    11:08 am

    Azteclady, CC keeps insisting that what she’s doing is trying to protect all the authors out there from us bullies. She sure has a selective memory.

    I think that most people know that this is more about her advances being spurned by us Mean Girls, than any real need to crusade on behalf of down-trodden authors. We don’t like her, and that eats her up so badly, that she can’t stand it.

    She equates a slap from us as ‘monstrous’, totally forgetting that our blogs referencing her, have been mostly done, using her own words. In contrast she describe the above piece as ‘moderate to mean’ criticism, and even goes as far as to describe her constant harping, as ‘love taps’. Uh huh.

    At some point she also accuses us of constantly crapping on authors and publishing houses. Another case of seeing what she wants to see. The SBs and DA are really great at promoting authors, and various publishers. They are far more useful to the genre, and the Blogosphere as it happens, than her or any of her stooges. Hence their popularity methinks. Something else CC can’t stand.

    And me, I’m all about pointing and laughing at some of the stupid things that people do. Have always done it, will always do it.

    She also says that the reason she hates us is because we whine and bitch when we are criticised and hoisted on our own petard. The irony of that really tickles me. The fact is, she just hates being ignored, no more no less.

    Monica’s got an interesting theory about why she thinks CC and her stooges are so bitter. It really makes for interesting reading.

    By the way, I think we’ve all pretty much worked out that CC is merely the public face of this operation. The real brains is the person who publically comments the least, but seems to be the angriest, if her art is anything to go by. Those creative types sure have some major dark places, don’t they? I’m so glad she’s not my next door neighbour, I’d probably find my cute fishies poisoned if she were. And that’s no joke unfortunately.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 5
    2:31 pm

    well, now you went and done it karen…

    Now we are on to phase 22 of the operation. I checked in, because this shit cracks me up and CC is patting themselves on the back for having “better things to do” while exclaiming over all the web hits and wishing people would… wait for it… GET A LIFE!!

    heheh… this stuff is like picking up a favorite book.. Its always the same, but always entertaining…

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 6
    8:58 pm

    By the way, I think we’ve all pretty much worked out that CC is merely the public face of this operation. The real brains is the person who publically comments the least, but seems to be the angriest, if her art is anything to go by. Those creative types sure have some major dark places, don’t they? I’m so glad she’s not my next door neighbour, I’d probably find my cute fishies poisoned if she were. And that’s no joke unfortunately.

    The stuff on Vremont’s site is just beyond words. Or rather, it brought words to me mind and out of my mouth, but none I’m gonna share here. Besides, you and others have been quite articulate on the subject.

    In any case, this last whatever-it-was helped cure me of the need to understand all the whys of Ferfe, Inc.’s equestrian campaign. It doesn’t work out logically for me as either a defense of the downtrodden or a reasonable rebuttal of blog content, and beyond that it’s anyone’s guess, IMO.

    Some of it I just plain disagree with, like Selah March’s persistent assertion that Jane’s feeling of being betrayed by the latest Slaughter novel is a personal attack on the author. Had Jane called Slaughter a bitter bitch whose had personal problems that made her want to screw her readers, then I could see March’s view. But how is what Jane posted about Slaughter’s book any different than the reader letter that March’s friend Barb Ferrer posted on RtB, which expressed to Ferrer how much her book meant to the reader? In both cases it was a personal reaction to a *book* — and isn’t personally moving a reader part of what an author is striving to do? So I find March’s assertion unpersuasive.

    Beyond any pointed disagreement, though, the free-flowing vitriol over there so far eclipses anything that Ferfe, Inc. claim to be responding to that the ugliness of all that has become a separate entity, IMO. And it’s also helped me understand that even when I’m not in sync with your blogging style, Karen, that your style is a far cry from the personally vicious stuff that emerges from Cruciger and Vremont’s blogs/websites. Not, I suspect, the effect they were going for, but then again, they claim not to care what anyone involved with a certain handful of blogs thinks, so I wouldn’t expect them to care about my opinion. As for everyone else, it’s all out there for people to see and judge for themselves, which is what Ferfe supposedly wanted, right?

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 7
    2:55 am

    Robin said, “Beyond any pointed disagreement, though, the free-flowing vitriol over there so far eclipses anything that Ferfe, Inc. claim to be responding to that the ugliness of all that has become a separate entity, IMO.”

    This bring to mind yet another Making Light comment. Speaking of torture (this thread: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/009542.html#009542 ), a commenter says:

    “Helpful hint: Discarding the rules of civilized society, deciding you’re above the law, disregarding the ugliness of the means used to achieve your noble ends, those things don’t make you a superhero. They make you a monster.”

    Indeed.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 7
    4:25 am

    “Helpful hint: Discarding the rules of civilized society, deciding you’re above the law, disregarding the ugliness of the means used to achieve your noble ends, those things don’t make you a superhero. They make you a monster.”

    And an ineffective one. The most influential and experienced military interrogation experts are adamant in their insistence that torture yields a low rate of reliable information. Instead, respecting prisoners’ humanity and preserving their dignity have been found to be extremely effective in eliciting useful informations and truthful confessions. Here’s a great article on the subject:
    http://tinyurl.com/4dfot

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 7
    3:05 pm

    IMO. And it’s also helped me understand that even when I’m not in sync with your blogging style, Karen, that your style is a far cry from the personally vicious stuff that emerges from Cruciger and Vremont’s blogs/websites.

    Robin, as abrasive as I am, or should as I say can be, (because in real life, I’m an absolute pussycat) I’m not actually a malicious person, thus would never stoop as low as CC and her stooges have managed to.

    Books that I buy and pay for are fair game, as are people who do stupid things, but I would never in a million years post anything as vicious as CC did. That’s not what I’m about.

    I have no problem saying somebody is behaving like a fucktard if they are, but it rarely, if ever, extends to personal abuse.

    I think the whole Jaid Black thing was as personal as I’ve ever gotten, but that was more of a comment on her trying to paint an angelic picture of somebody who was in prison for killing his girlfriend, and attempting to kill the victim’s 14 year old daughter.

    CC has mined my blog trying to find examples of my general meanness to back up her crusade, but since hasn’t been able to find any decent material to use, I can only assume that she didn’t find much.

    She’s a petty minded creature who would be better off trying to get on with her own life, rather than fixating on crap that doesn’t matter. I would suggest that it is she who perhaps needs to grow up and get a life.

    As for Selah March and Eva Gale, well, they see themselves as standing up for their friend, so although I think they would have been better keeping stum for the good of their career, they have every right to defend her if they believe that she is in the right.
    How they can’t see that she’s just being petty I’ll never know though.
    My mother is fond of saying that 1000 flies around shit can’t be wrong, but apparently some people are blinkered enough to not see things as they really are.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 7
    5:35 pm

    Robin, as abrasive as I am, or should as I say can be, (because in real life, I’m an absolute pussycat) I’m not actually a malicious person, thus would never stoop as low as CC and her stooges have managed to.

    And ironically, Ferfe Inc.’s words and conduct have thrown this into sharp relief, Karen. You may be intentionally provocative and harsh in your online presentation sometimes, but IMO you have never shown the malice and personal meanness of Cruciger and Vremont.

    re. the Engler stuff, didn’t she make that public first, on Jaynie R.’s blog, and present it as a public crusade? IIRC there were a lot of questionable “facts” and assertions in her presentation, too.

    As for Selah March and Eva Gale, well, they see themselves as standing up for their friend, so although I think they would have been better keeping stum for the good of their career, they have every right to defend her if they believe that she is in the right.
    How they can’t see that she’s just being petty I’ll never know though.

    My inclination to admire strong loyalty to friends competes strongly with my frustration that they, IMO, continue to condone all the personal malice. The post-RWA blogger free for all really crystallized that for me, when I confronted both Gale and March (who had participated in that thread) and they deflected and evaded.

    So now I start wondering things like: where does Caridad Ferrer stand in all of this? Her blog is linked on Ferfe’s page and she’s March’s friend. I have several question marks like that, around authors and bloggers who haven’t ever publicly indicated that they’re not on board with the mudfest. Not that any of those authors or bloggers may care one whit, but I can’t imagine I’m the only one asking those questions.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 7
    8:32 pm

    So now I start wondering things like: where does Caridad Ferrer stand in all of this? Her blog is linked on Ferfe’s page and she’s March’s friend.

    I think Ferrer’s probably savvy enough to keep her thoughts out of the public domain, whether she agrees with them or not. She, unlike CC is a serious writer who probably wants people to read her books, and from what I hear, she’s pretty talented too. I think I have her Rita winning YA book on my TBR actually.

    I think she’s a better friend of March’s than she is Cindy Cruciger’s, so for all we know, they may not even have too much to say to each other other than the mutual acquaintance.

    I’m happy enough to judge March and Gale on the company they keep, but they’ve been very vocal in all of this, whereas the other people CC might be friends with have firmly (and wisely) kept out of it. Publically at least.

    I imagine that CC and AV’s behaviour has probably been the talk of the writerly loops. Women being women, there would have been private mutterings of ‘What the fuck is she doing to herself?’ and general whinging about how she’s making them all look like unbalanced fruitloops.

    I’m willing to bet that even authors who she’s friends with have been tut-tutting at her within the private confines of their instant messengers.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 7
    9:00 pm

    I think Ferrer’s probably savvy enough to keep her thoughts out of the public domain, whether she agrees with them or not. She, unlike CC is a serious writer who probably wants people to read her books, and from what I hear, she’s pretty talented too. I think I have her Rita winning YA book on my TBR actually.

    If her authorial work is good, I have no problem reading her books. I know she’s been well-reviewed and, as you say, seems to take her writing very seriously. At this point it’s all about my curiosity to know where those who seem close to Ferfe stand on the malice expressed over there — for MY benefit, not theirs.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 7
    9:34 pm

    I know that I said that I don’t even take asshat behavior as a sign not to read an author that I enjoy, but I would even less worry about it with someone linked to said asshats page..

    I see Ferf has linked to MJD, Jennifer Crusie and a lot of other authors, she did a review of Jackie Kesslers new book. Those authors can’t go around and personally vet where all their links are. Or that someone who has asshat tendencies admires their work…

    I am actually a bit sad about CCs asshattedness, because I would love to comment on her blogs on her topics of the suburbanization of the Keys(our family farm was run over by developers and a city) and other topics, but for me to comment there would be interpreted to mean that I agree with her completely assinine behaviour on the topic of readerbloggers.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 7
    9:46 pm

    I see Ferf has linked to MJD, Jennifer Crusie and a lot of other authors, she did a review of Jackie Kesslers new book. Those authors can’t go around and personally vet where all their links are. Or that someone who has asshat tendencies admires their work…

    That’s part of the reason I won’t penalize a book, sallahdog. But people interact in the online environment all the time, and that’s something different, IMO, and at that level I do wonder about certain folks who seem close to or part of Cruciger’s circle. It’s certainly not a life or death kind of thing, or even an automatic guilt or innocence thing, but IMO just part of understanding where someone in the online community is coming from.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 7
    9:51 pm

    I am actually a bit sad about CCs asshattedness, because I would love to comment on her blogs on her topics of the suburbanization of the Keys(our family farm was run over by developers and a city) and other topics, but for me to comment there would be interpreted to mean that I agree with her completely assinine behaviour on the topic of readerbloggers.

    I’m sure there must be folks who comment on her blog who don’t endorse some of her tactics. As I said before, if I’m curious enough about someone in particular I’ll ask them straight out. But when stuff flares up, I do kind of wonder.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 8
    3:43 am

    Lets see, now we are up to “classic web war tactic number 99″ where asshatted acting blogger decides that evil other blogger, or commenter is attacking innocents connected to her by linkage and is now taking her cookies and going home…

    completely disregarding that evil commenter and bloggers said that asshatted behaviour could not be conferred upon innocent linkers… and that no one was attacking her in the firstest place…Merely commenting on her assinine behavour…

    Classic… this stuff never changes…Let me tell you the END of the story, because its one I totally enjoy seeing…

    After a week or two, there will be a leak of a “super secret” new website where martyred asshats go to complain…but this gets boring because… No one knows about the super secret decoder ring needed to enter place, and frankly its no fun to complain if no one is reading…. so it gets leaked… frolics ensue…

    Finally, after much grumping and fanfare, Asshat “decides” that she simply MUST go on, that her friends NEED her( they will post many emails and comments about “Not letting the haters get her down”) and she will bravely once again go public with her blogs…

    heh… this stuff is like a well worn and beloved book… Even when you know the ending, it just never loses its appeal…

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    November 8
    4:07 am

    Sigh, Sallahdog made me go look, and…have you check the new post in the Snark Underground website? Apparently, if you follow that wild woman Nora Roberts, you’re gangsta.

    Sigh. Why, why can’t I stop looking?

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 8
    4:14 am

    sallahdog, you nailed it. (And I’m still giggling)

    Ah, the nonsense!

    Fascinating, I tell you–morbidly so.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 8
    6:44 am

    Lets see, now we are up to “classic web war tactic number 99″ where asshatted acting blogger decides that evil other blogger, or commenter is attacking innocents connected to her by linkage and is now taking her cookies and going home…

    completely disregarding that evil commenter and bloggers said that asshatted behaviour could not be conferred upon innocent linkers… and that no one was attacking her in the firstest place…Merely commenting on her assinine behavour…

    All wonderful snarkage in your comment aside, I really do hope it was clear that I was not leveling an accusation against Ferrer or anyone else beyond those who have publicly declared their support of Ferfe Inc. And if that wasn’t clear, I am happy to apologize to Ferrer, since I invoked her name specifically. A couple of other names came to mind, too, but hers was in my mind because of another issue I had been thinking about and it ended up in my comment.

    I won’t, however, apologize for asking the question about how far the circle of approval for the vitriol goes. I don’t think that’s an unfair point of curiosity, especially since it’s Ferfe and Vremont’s blogs that have been hosting what IMO amounts to an outright hate and malice festival (and appear to be having fun doing it). No one has to weigh in publicly, of course. And I haven’t written off anyone who has remained silent. I can certainly imagine there are those who like Ferfe but don’t agree with her strategy. But hey, if wondering how many people are in the circle of approval is considered to be a personal attack, well, that, IMO, is really faulty logic.

    I do find it interesting that asking a question about how far the circle of approval extends amounts to “smearing” someone (or “isolating” Ferfe). If Ferfe thinks what she’s doing is good and noble, why would wondering about an association with her be “smearing” that other person? And if there are “legions” of people who hate [insert whatever configuration of evil bloggers/commenters here applies], then why is wondering who makes up those legions so horrific? And why is there no responsibility taken by the person who has made her blog host to the malice in the first place?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 8
    7:55 am

    Lets see, now we are up to “classic web war tactic number 99″ where asshatted acting blogger decides that evil other blogger, or commenter is attacking innocents connected to her by linkage and is now taking her cookies and going home…

    Ahhh, not only is she keeping up with my blog, she’s keeping up with the comments on this thread. Good to know.

    I’m not going to look, I’m not I tell you!

    Oh Damn, I looked! Sallahdog, you’re a bad influence!

    She seems to have conveniently forgotten that she started all this in the first place. She started the ‘moral’ crusade, then I offered her the olive branch. That lasted for about 98 days, then she decided to post about my child-bearing issues. Tell me again, how exactly she and her stooges are the victim in all this?

    She has such a damn selective memory. The bit about the blogosphere exploding anytime either me, DA, and the SBs are criticised seems a little retarded. As far as I’m aware, there hasn’t been any explosions from our side of the camp (the side that she desperately wants to be part of by the looks of things), and the little hand grenades that have been thrown in our direction, have mostly come from her and The Slightly Unbalanced One.

    SD, I think you were right, Cindy Cruciger sure wants me bad doesn’t she? This is definitely a classic case of woman scorned type behaviour.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 8
    11:35 am

    I guess it was time to take the martyrdom up a couple of clicks. And as usual she twists the facts in order to set herself up as the oppressed, and the champion of the oppressed.

    I have a gang now? But, but, I haven’t picked my gang colors or the tattoo.

    More than selective memory I’d say it’s a lame manipulation of facts and reality to suit a personal agenda.

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    November 8
    12:10 pm

    I am NOT going to go look at that blog. I ain’t doing it (you all can insert a mental image of me standing here with my hands over my eyes, screaming, I’m NOT, I’m NOT)

    :P That said, I don’t need to look to take an educated guess that somebody commented you all were now smearing other authors simply because their names were mentioned somewhere on said blogs.

    Assuming I’m right…the way I was reading most of the comments was just that a few of the commenters here were wondering if these authors were really friends with said blogger~ and if they approved of her maliciousness.

    BTW, if certain people are reading this, there is nothing else to describe the comments posted regarding Karen’s inability to have kids ~ it wasn’t snark, it wasn’t humor, it wasn’t some weird payback for whatever slights Karen might have dished out. It was malice. It’s like making fun of a kid that was born missing an eye, or a child that was born asthmatic. This is a biological fact of Karen’s life and to poke fun at it, in any way, for any reason, is just sheer ugliness. Twist it however you want, but there you go.

    Anyway, back to my original train of thought, before it totally leaves the station, the way I was reading it, Robin was just wondering if they approved.

    Exactly how is wondering that smearing anybody?

    Nobody came out and screeched, OMG, like THAT auther is listed Meangirl’s blog? I’m like totally not going to read HER.

    Seems the general consensus is that their staying silent, (those who have been silent) are making a wise choice all around.

    If they truly are friends, and they don’t approve, being quiet online is the wise way to go forward. Taking the high road and all that.

    Likewise, even if for some reason, they think it’s hilarious, they can see easily enough that coming out and joining on the mean-fest isn’t going to do their careers any good.

    How is that smearing anybody?

    Me, I’ve got several friends who have done things that I find less than professional but I also know I can’t control them. In most cases, I can’t even help them, other than to offer my opinion…which I do OFFLINE… if they listen, great. If not, I’m not embroiling myself in their mess just out of some misguided sense of loyalty.

    Loyalty is a wonderful quality~but people need to sit back and decide whether or not they are being loyal for the right reason.

    :OP Did I ramble enough?

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 8
    1:23 pm

    Is it wrong of me to be picturing West Side Story when I think of Noras gang? Great lighting, the fights choreographed… someone singing Nora instead of Maria…

    I mean, Noras gang wouldn’t be flashing the signs and wearing droopy drawers or have massive tattoos would they?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 8
    2:27 pm

    I have a gang now? But, but, I haven’t picked my gang colors or the tattoo.

    Oooh ooh!! Can I be in your gang Nora? I say we should have Azure Blue as our gang colour. I have bandanna in that colour, that I totally rock, when I’m wearing. I also have some brown snake skin boots that look the business.

    Can we forego the tats? I’m not so fond of them, they don’t look refined at all. Also, the personal hygiene thing has to stay too. I need a shower at least once a day. Smelling like dirty drawers isn’t my ambition in life. Can we pretty please Nora?

    SD, you’ve been watching Ugly Betty haven’t you? *g*

    Shi, CC’s post about my child bearing issues exposed her even more for the mean-spirited hypocritical person that she truly is, so it’s all good as far as I’m concerned.

    Robin, I agree with you, if she truly believed that she was totally in the right, why would she be so bothered about it negatively impacting the people she’s linked to?

    Know what I think? I think at this point she’s gone so far with this that she can’t see any other way out, other than continuing with it. She’s totally obsessed with the idea that we are just here to make her and every author’s life a misery. Talk about an overblown persecution complex.

    She really should realise that the majority of those authors she’s taking a stand for, thinks she’s a fucktard of the highest order, and would just like for her to stop making them all look bad.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 8
    2:29 pm

    Maybe Nora’s gang color would be a pale lavender and her tattoos a small tasteful hummingbird.

    –Jackie L.

    ReplyReply


  • Jane
    November 8
    2:35 pm

    Selah March seems pretty happy to be within Ferfe’s circle:

    That’s me paraphrasing something I keep reading over and over and over in various places using various sorts of language. But the thing is? In my case? Not so much, really.

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but every time I let myself be weak and participate in a little Romancelandia free-for-all, my Fictionwise sales spike. This year’s post-RWA conference Battle of the Bloggers saw a rise of between 5% and 10% in sales of my work there. Which really? Isn’t saying much, because I’m hardly a bestseller on my finest day. But it does seem to point to the above statement being a crock of the ripest kind of bullshit.

    And while it was nice of you to apologize for something for which you did not need to apologize, Robin, I am guessing that Ferrer and most of those other authors don’t care what we readers think.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 8
    2:44 pm

    This year’s post-RWA conference Battle of the Bloggers saw a rise of between 5% and 10% in sales of my work there.

    What she may not be considering is that, the 5-10% rise may have had the potential for even more of an increase. If she’s a good writer, and I can’t imagine that she isn’t, then she would have had a decent readership anyway, and that her readership’s growth may have been slightly stunted due to the association with Cindy Cruciger.

    ReplyReply


  • shiloh walker
    November 8
    2:48 pm

    I don’t play well enough with others to get into a gang. Aren’t there like rules and stuff? Would give me hives.

    If I don’t want to join the gang, can i still keep my I adore Nora button?

    Shi, CC’s post about my child bearing issues exposed her even more for the mean-spirited hypocritical person that she truly is, so it’s all good as far as I’m concerned.

    Still leaves a bad, bad taste in my mouth.

    Know what I think? I think at this point she’s gone so far with this that she can’t see any other way out, other than continuing with it.

    Sometimes a person gets so caught up in the world of their own making, they actually start to believe in that world. I suspect this is a big part of it.

    Is it wrong of me to be picturing West Side Story when I think of Noras gang? Great lighting, the fights choreographed… someone singing Nora instead of Maria…

    Oh, geez. I did NOT need that image in my head… a bunch of mean girls and mean girl followers running around singing, wearing turquoise or lavender bandanas, dancing and singing.

    And I seriously hate that you have to sign into blogger to get follow up comments.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 8
    2:55 pm

    ~I think at this point she’s gone so far with this that she can’t see any other way out, other than continuing with it.~

    I think this is likely true.

    I don’t really know Barbara, but she strikes me as a smart, savvy, interesting woman–who’s probably opted–wisely–to stay out of all this if she even knows about it.

    I don’t March at all, but I’d have to say she’s certainly loyal, and I have a hard time arguing with loyalty to friends.

    But I do have a problem with encouraging someone to perpetuate really ugly behavior. CC’s posts were ugly.

    Sales rise and they fall, but the essential element is building readership, book by book, then expanding and maintaining it.

    I don’t wish anyone’s sales to fall. There’s plenty of room on the shelves for all–just as there’s plenty of room in blogland for all.

    As for colors, I like the lavendar, I like the blue. Maybe we can make them work together. (Karen can go with the stick-on tat.)

    ReplyReply


  • Jane
    November 8
    4:06 pm

    I’ll have to sit out on the gang thing. I can’t sing. I can’t dance. I don’t like purple, lavendar, many shades of blue. I don’t think I would like a tat – even a stick on one. Large groups make me a bit curmudgeony.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    November 8
    6:49 pm

    Exactly how is wondering that smearing anybody?

    It’s not. Nor is it bullying. I know that, and no matter how Ferfe or March or anyone else tries to skew and warp it to make it all my fault, I’m not the one who’s been hosting a slugfest of the lowest order. It can’t possibly have escaped those who have eagerly participated in said slugfest that people might be wondering how far out the circle of malice extends. Is there a universal cut off point, say, at someone’s bff or crit partner? Shit, I wonder about people’s opinions all the time — who knew that was black market blogland activity.

    Loyalty is a wonderful quality~but people need to sit back and decide whether or not they are being loyal for the right reason.

    And there’s always the middle ground of appreciating or liking a person while not endorsing their actions. I’ve told Karen (not that she necessarily cares) that I don’t always agree with her style of blogging, but I find her intelligent, funny, and honest about what she’s doing. Same with a few other folks. Some blogs I don’t comment on at all or don’t ever visit. Not all the blogs I visit are run by people I agree with. I expect others do the same. Which is why I merely have curiosity, not a campaign. It’s not a crime. It’s not irrational. It shouldn’t be unexpected, IMO. And I know for a fact I’m not the only one with that curiosity.

    ReplyReply


  • shiloh walker
    November 8
    7:48 pm

    And there’s always the middle ground of appreciating or liking a person while not endorsing their actions.

    Amen. Man, there are a lot of people out there that I like even though I know I flat out disagree with them on a lot of things.

    ReplyReply


  • Tee
    November 9
    12:23 am

    Karen,
    New edits from Ferfelabat’s Snark Underground, asking for a truce from you, with certain demands, of course:


    __________________________________

    Nov 1

    eta – She posted all of these things about herself on her blog and asked what people thought. This is no different from what she has been doing to people online on her blog for more than a year. She hunts people down, takes quotes and information from their blogs, websites and comments, and puts them up for public humiliation by inviting her friends to judge them. The “truce” she offered was disingenuous and she had no intention of honoring it. I never accepted it. Once she goes after someone, she doesn’t stop until she’s run them into the dirt and they are forced off line.

    I’m not going anywhere.

    When she went nuclear this summer, I accepted the gauntlet. I don’t back down from the Karen Scott’s of the world, ever. And. I sincerely do not care what you think about my blog war with her. As you can see from her own words in the quote above, she’s in it for the long haul. I won’t be making it my career, but when I get bored …

    Feel sorry for her if you must. I certainly do. Think long and hard about this one thing. The only difference between what Karen does and what I am doing is that she chooses anyone at all. The next person she goes after could be you.

    There is one person whose opinion matters to me and I am sorry I disappointed her. It was her recent blog post that prompted this addon.

    If you want your comments to get through please honor the rules as stated on the sidebar and the about page.

    ____________________

    Nov. 7th

    I’ll make a deal with Karen. If she takes down the two weeks worth of posts blasting the hell out of Jade Black and Jaynie R. over Jaid’s husband which was none of her business, but she said since it was on the web it was fair game (a standard I applied to this post – she put it out there on the web and asked for opinions), I’ll take this one down. Even better, if she swears to stop beating the hell out of people on her blog and sticks to reviewing and general newsie stuff, I’ll leave her alone for good. I’m betting she can’t give it up. She can’t stop herself because she wants the audience that it attracts.

    This is in no way, shape or form, a retreat. Her first call for a truce was complete BS and she never had any intention of honoring it. She won’t accept the terms of this one, which is actually genuine.

    _____________________________

    So if you take down posts the way she deletes blog posts, everything will be all nice again.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 9
    12:50 am

    Lemme see if I understand this right–English not being my first language and all that.

    As long as Karen lets CC dictate what she–Karen–can post, and the tone and content of said posts, CC will magnanimously refrain from indulging in behaviour that she claims is online bullying.

    Is that a fair interpretation?

    ’cause if it is… *scratching head*

    Well, let’s just say that if that’s what CC means, then she reeeeeeeeeally needs to take a good hard look at herself in that mirror she says she’s holding up for the “meangirls” to look into.

    Not that I think such a thing could happen, just saying *shrug*

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 9
    1:14 am

    Its a complete load of BS..

    and I am pissed that CC can’t substain a strike for more than a few hours… sheeiit.. I thought she had more stamina..

    CC would DIE, if Karen ever went away and never posted again… she would then have to confront the fact that indeed, CC is the source of her own problems, not Karen or any other “mean” blogger..

    I have watched (and enjoyed) more rants and mean girl blogging from CC than pretty much any other blogger… Seriously, read her blog, she hates or has problems with pretty much everything..

    Hey, I have no problem with this, I am pretty much a grump myself, but lets all walk in the truth..

    Karen is a shit stirrer, no doubt about it. But she generally doesn’t shit on the sidewalk first… So who is really to blame in the land of ” lets all be nice and not say anything negative”….

    Personally, if people would quit crapping on the pavement, Karen wouldn’t have any crap to stir (which I hope never happens because I love this stuff, I truly do.)

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 9
    7:35 am

    She hunts people down, takes quotes and information from their blogs, websites and comments, and puts them up for public humiliation by inviting her friends to judge them.

    She’s such a drama queen isn’t she? I love how she uses the word ‘hunt’. Apparently, she doesn’t realise that if I’m a hunter, she’s a barbarian of the highest order.

    I see she’s definitely keeping up with the convo, she’s even gone the ‘poor Jaid Black’ route.

    two week’s worth of posts? It’s weird how she makes this shit up. I think she actually believes them too. I did two posts about Jaid Black. She took a public stance on something that I disagreed with, and I said so. I’m guessing that CC also believes that murderers are misunderstood and need better treatment from the state, yes? I wonder if she’d feel the same way if it was her child who was so brutally murdered?

    As for JaynieR, I’d love for Cindy Cruciger to show me one post where I dissed JaynieR. Just one. The post was never about Jaynie, who I actually happened to like, and as far as I’m concerned, I still don’t have a problem with.

    This is just a case of me telling her that the sky is blue, and she arguing about it, just to be contrary. She no more believes Jaid Black to be a victim than I do, it just suits her to say so.

    You know what I would love, I’d love it if Cindy Cruciger decided to repost the whole Jaid Black thing, and held it up as an example of my Mean Girl streak. I’d absolutely freaking love it. And if she also puts up the posts that I did about people who had lost their lives to other people, I would be in absolute heaven.

    This is in no way, shape or form, a retreat. Her first call for a truce was complete BS and she never had any intention of honoring it. She won’t accept the terms of this one, which is actually genuine.

    Wow, has she forgotten that she started this from the very beginning, and perpetuates it today?

    If she wants this to end, she has to end it. She’s the one who keeps putting up posts about me.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    November 9
    12:39 pm

    Do exactly what I demand you do, or I’ll never stop. Hmmm. What exactly IS her definition of bully?

    Interesting, too, how she KNEW your intentions. Though as far as I remember nothing you posted on here since the offered olive branch referred to her until she posted personal, ugly things about you.

    She’s psychic now?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 9
    1:17 pm

    She’s psychic now?

    I think the word you’re looking for is psychotic, Nora.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    November 9
    3:14 pm

    And CC would not only not be the only one, but neither is she the worst… Lookee what’s now at AV’s “graphic blog” as disclaimer:

    “If you weren’t stupid, I wouldn’t have to tell you, but here it goes:

    “The images and stories on this site are a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents are products of the author’s/artist’s imagination or are used fictitiously and are not to be construed as real. Any resemblance to actual events, locales, organizations or persons, living or dead or undead, is entirely coincidental. If you can’t tell otherwise, you are stupid.”

    Yeah, sure. And the stuff at her other site is just a coincidence too.

    But hey, apparently all they have to do is take down the contents and rewrite history, and they’ll all come out smelling like roses.

    Not.

    ReplyReply


  • anu
    November 11
    6:17 pm

    Hello, lowly spectator to this bit of circus here. I’ve been following this scuffle since I saw Monica’s post. Got a question.

    Why do you all play into Ferfelabat’s games?

    This post has gone into 113 comments (well, 114 with my comment, heh). In response to someone whose behavior is the equivalent of a bratty 10-year-old’s. She needs you all to pay attention to her. And your response is to give her exactly what she wants?

    As others have mentioned, CC needs the MeanGirls to feel relevant. Look at her patterns in the last few weeks. Nobody has talked about her for months, which she obviously can’t stand.

    She and her friends apparently swore off the MeanGirl blogs, but she certainly knew enough of what’s going on to insert herself into the race conversation at DA. Only long enough, though, to make it about herself, so that she can then run back to her blog and talk about the meanies again. Her group has now dedicated two public sites just to the MeanGirls. She cannot stop talking about you on her main site, whether it’s whole posts or little digs.

    She’s in a blog war in which she is the main participant! She skews and twists meaning to draw attention to herself. She says heinous things, then cops out with some weak mirror BS. I mean, seriously, she can’t even own the shit she talks! Truly the sign of a lame shit-stirrer. Then, when she’s got your attention, she goes into an absurd dance: i.e., the truce was fake anyway, so I’ll say what I want to. I will then offer you another truce if you do what I say. What?

    Crackpots come with rising popularity. Some crackpots are worth responding to because they actually do contribute to discourse. Others just stir the pot. What is the value of responding to the latter? None.

    If there is a war here, it’s already been won by the so-called MeanGirls because you don’t need this fight like she does.

    So fucking act like it.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 11
    8:12 pm

    Why do you all play into Ferfelabat’s games?

    Well to be fair, I think most people tend to ignore her most of the time, but I think the post re my fertility issues was a good example of her hypocracy, and nicely illustrated the falseness of her crusade.

    Plus, her obsession with me is a tad amusing at times.

    CC’s actually not quite as bad as her friend Ann Vremont. In terms of just pure evilness, AV wins everytime. (Can you believe I’m saying that?) That broad has more issues than Fleet Street. I wish she’d work them out though. The things that she depicts in her art are enough to make you lock up your pets, and all sharp objects.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    November 11
    9:03 pm

    this is karens blog, but for myself, I just find CCs behaviour amusing as all get out. I can’t help it, I enjoy watching people make total dicks out of themselves. I rarely take anything in blogland too seriously though.

    by the way, I stopped posting about this on the 9th,because this incarnation of the CC show was over. At least for me it was… I take it that CC doesn’t want it to be over? Well darn. If she can’t substain a strike, it doesn’t mean I have to keep my fickle interest in her silly vendettas..

    Err… yeah, Karen… CC is a bit of a narcissist but Ann? hmmm… Freud would have a field day..

    ReplyReply


  • anu
    November 12
    3:18 am

    Karen,

    CC didn’t go way below the belt with me. And there’s obviously lots of history here that I’m not clear on, nor do I want to be. So I understand that it’s easy for me to stand on the sidelines and spout random opinions.

    I just think that some people are so completely not worth any bit of attention you give them. There’s nothing to say to them or about them that makes anything better. The alternative is to get into the dirt with them. And sure, there’s lots of things to battle over, but, like, CC? Is so not one of them. *shrug*

    Btw, do you post as KarenS at AAR?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    November 12
    7:15 am

    Btw, do you post as KarenS at AAR?

    Nope, but I know that somebody else does.

    As for CC, yes, there is history there.

    ReplyReply


  • anu
    November 12
    5:23 pm

    As for CC, yes, there is history there.

    Apologies then for intruding. Just can’t keep my mouth shut.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    November 15
    2:26 am

    CC said on her site that Robin had silenced her. Unfortunately, that wasn’t true. Wonder what it would take to silence her for more than a coupla months.

    –Jackie L.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Aguirre
    November 15
    4:25 am

    Heh. I got an email about this. Apparently the “WWND” post I made has been interpreted in a militant manner?

    Dang! I didn’t realize I was a gang lieutenant. I haven’t been on the blogs much lately, been nose to the ground working.

    Now that I’m apprised, I really don’t know what to say. The only thing that comes to mind is “Cor!” and I’m aghast to find myself quoting Penfold from Dangermouse at a time like this.

    I suppose I’d better ask if Nora has any orders for me, though. The last one I took from her, although not directly, was “Quit whining! Butt in chair! Write!”

    (I was at the QnA session in Dallas. Pretty sure she flashed me some complicated gang signs too. Or she could’ve been drinking water. So hard to tell.)

    ReplyReply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment