HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing

Awwww….they make it so damn easy for me to be…. well…me…

Anyway, since author, Deborah Smith (I believe she wrote the award winning book, Crossroads Cafe) has much to say for herself, I thought I’d give her comments the exposure they deserve, cuz you know, I’m nice like that.

Thanks to the Anon commenter who posted this link of a cached Amazon post that she wrote, presumably, at the height of the CE Love Fest.

This is what she had to say:


“Hi, y’all. I debated whether to post publicly {K: Ooops, too late, and Google forgets nothing unfortunately} about this tempest in a teapot in the romance world, because the last thing I want is to be eviscerated by Nora Roberts’ avid fangirls. But there’s a quiet little stream of conversation in the world of romance writers as to why Roberts, unquestionably the richest, most award-winning, most successful romance novelist in the world — in fact, one of the most successful novelists in the world, period — hangs out at a blog site called “Smart Bitches,” where the topics include open attacks on authors so far down the food chain that one wonders how Nora has time in her busy career to even notice they exist.

Now Roberts has weighed in (via an interview with the national press) on a controversy surrounding old-school historical author Cassie Edwards. I don’t know Cassie Edwards; I’ve never read one of her many (nearly 100) historicals. But so far as I can tell she’s a hardworking, 71-year-old author who’s never slammed any other author in public. To the best of my knowledge Ms. Edwards is considered a rollicking good storyteller who likes to write westerns and pirate novels. She does not appear to have any pretensions, and her fans clearly love her books.

But — according to reports launched by the Smart Bitches bloggers, who admitted beforehand that they don’t like Ms. Edwards’ old-style books, and have spent considerable time making jokes about them — the author “plagiarized” bits and pieces of research material. The horrendous offense? Some passages about (I’m not kidding) buffaloes and ferrets. Looking at the passages myself, all I see is a writer who maybe should have paraphrased some research info a little better. I don’t see malicious or greedy intent; I don’t see “plagiarism” in any serious legal interpretation of the charge. If there’s more to the issue than that, I haven’t seen the evidence.

But I kinda doubt that Ms. Edwards’ success is built on her nature writing. I kinda doubt she sat at her computer thinking, “If I use this other author’s description of a buffalo, I’ll sell ten times more books.”

But now this grandmother (and accomplished violinist) is fielding national wire service inquiries about her alleged misdeeds. And Nora Roberts — unsolicited, unharmed, with no personal beef with Ms. Edwards in any way, as far as I know — has stood up atop her unassailable pile of money and awards to say — in the national media –that Ms. Edwards appears to have committed plagerism.

Why does Roberts feel compelled to play lawyer, judge and jury regarding a fellow author? Roberts has achieved a level of good fortune 99.9 percent of authors can only dream about. But does that make her not only the spokeswoman for the romance genre, but also its enforcer of public condemnation for unproven offenses?

Not for me, and not for thousands of other hardworking authors trying to earn a living down here in the trenches, that’s for sure.”

And on that bombshell, I’m off to the pictures with TTG. I may even buy a violin with my popcorn whilst I’m out. :)

Updated to add: Here at Karen Scott Central, (thanks to AztecLady) we’ve realised that Ms Smith’s motives may not have been so pure after all. She was the lady who ‘jokingly’ accused Mancusi and Maverick of encouraging pedophilia by wearing their school girl outfits, at the height of the RWA Swanhat-gate Lovefest last year. She originally posted on the SBs blog, but here’s her comments at DA.

Now we know why she’s hating on Nora and the SBs so much; she’s getting them back for making her look stupid and clueless. *g*

155 Comments »


  • damned music
    January 19
    8:27 pm

    One of my pet peeves is people who have music that blares out of their website when you visit. Why would I want to listen to their crappy musically choices when I was perfectly happy listening to mine in Itunes?

    btw the word verification says fcxuk – is that deliberate?

    ReplyReply


  • Kristie (J)
    January 19
    8:52 pm

    “Why does Roberts feel compelled to play lawyer, judge and jury regarding a fellow author? Roberts has achieved a level of good fortune 99.9 percent of authors can only dream about. But does that make her not only the spokeswoman for the romance genre, but also its enforcer of public condemnation for unproven offenses? “

    For the record I’m not a Nora fan girl. I’m nobody’s fangirl. Well – ok – maybe a case could be made for a certain series, but I digress. I don’t read that many of her books anymore although at one time I inhaled them like – well you know. And to a reader new to the genre I’d say start with a Nora Roberts book and your starting with the best. I do love the In Death books to pieces and pieces – but I can separate the books from the author. I do admire her online presence tremendously. She has a lot of class and she intermingles with readers in a very dignified way. She has a great sense of humour and I am sounding a bit like a fan girl aren’t I? But I’m not. Really.
    But to answer Ms. Smith’s rhetorical type question
    Because Nora Roberts herself has been the victim of plagiarism and knows the damage one can feel on a personal level more than anyone.
    I’m not going to bash Ms. Smith, everyone is entitled to their opinions whether we agree or disagree. But Nora Roberts also has the right to HER opinion. She has experienced it. And she was vilified by some during that time -which I can’t comprehend. So my reply to Ms. Smith would be because Nora KNOWS.
    (although she hardly needs this non-fan girl to defend her *g*)

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 19
    8:57 pm

    ~And Nora Roberts — unsolicited, unharmed, with no personal beef with Ms. Edwards in any way, as far as I know — has stood up atop her unassailable pile of money and awards to say — in the national media –that Ms. Edwards appears to have committed plagerism. ~

    Unharmed? Plagiarism harms every writer, imo. I didn’t have to stand on top of anything to give my opinion that the side-by-side comparisons I read seem to be plagiarism.

    If I’ve received good fortune in my profession, I’ve done so by writing my own books.

    I don’t believe it’s okay to copy chunks of someone else’s work, just because, gee, it’s only about ferrets.

    Ms. Smith obviously feels differently. So since she questions my right to speak my opinion in this matter, I guess I could question hers. What gives her the right to criticize me, all over the internet, for standing up for my beliefs and expressing my opinion?

    Oh yeah, it’s that pesky freedom of speech thing.

    Oddly, I never got personal in my opinions regarding this issue. But Smith seems to have no problem getting personal about me.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 19
    8:58 pm

    I may not need it Kristie, but I appreciate it.

    ReplyReply


  • byrdloves2read
    January 19
    9:16 pm

    Well, darn. I’m a real fangirl of Deb Smith’s books, but I’m terribly disappointed in her position. I learned in junior high what plagiarism was and that it should never be done. Books are copywrited for a reason – so no one can steal your words without paying for them or asking your permission. Is it so hard to ask permission? Shoot, I don’t care how old CE is, she should have known better.

    ReplyReply


  • wendy
    January 19
    9:47 pm

    I have read 2 CE books (the second one because I forgot how bad the first was) and consider that the SB’s are right about her being the worst romance writer evah.
    I stopped reading NR sometime in the early nineties.
    I have all of Deb Smith’s books.
    I have all of J Crusie’s books.
    In a job I had many years ago I resarched a situation, wrote a report and a submission which helped change policy and some arsehole higher up on the ladder removed my name and replaced it with his. Not the same as plagiarism, but it stung enough for me to get out of that job.
    I am behind NR, the SB’s and the Ja(y)nes 100%.

    ReplyReply


  • Lurker
    January 19
    9:49 pm

    How embarassing for her. It makes you wonder at how clueless some people can be.

    ReplyReply


  • meljean brook
    January 19
    9:50 pm

    “But I kinda doubt that Ms. Edwards’ success is built on her nature writing. I kinda doubt she sat at her computer thinking, “If I use this other author’s description of a buffalo, I’ll sell ten times more books.””

    Wasn’t there something about her reputation for meticulous research? Wasn’t she selling herself on that reputation? Don’t readers typically expect that if an author of historical fiction does meticulous research, that research is incorporated into their books instead of being lifted?

    Her books ARE sold on her reputation of her romances and her research. So, yeah — there is a sense of “if I put this person’s words in my book, I’ll sell more/keep selling books!”

    (In a way, I kind of feel ridiculous for even responding to that. Like it’s a comment that seems to make sense on the surface, but is really just silly on the bottom.)

    Sometimes I wonder if NR doesn’t feel like she has a big target painted on her back. Is it a tall poppy thing? I don’t know — it’s just sad to see NR’s strong (and IMO always reasonable) voice reduced to her piles of money and success.

    I’m guessing that since this was a cached post, that Deb Smith has removed it from Amazon. I hope that was out of a change of heart/mind about the issue, not just because she might have been slammed (deservedly) by comments pointing out how hypocritical and unjust the statement was.

    ReplyReply


  • Bernita
    January 19
    9:53 pm

    “Plagiarism harms every writer, imo”

    I agree.
    Nora, apparently, was supposed to sit on her pile of books and awards and money bags, and say “Tough,guys. Doesn’t affect me this time.”

    Fangirl is not my style, but I’ve come to admire and respect Nora Roberts based on her statements and comments on this issue.

    ReplyReply


  • web
    January 19
    10:22 pm

    Not to put words in her mouth, but I would guess Nora Roberts “hangs out” at SB,TB for the same reason the rest of us do – because they’re interesting and damn funny.

    Can someone please tell me what the hell CE being a violinist has to do with anything?

    ReplyReply


  • meljean brook
    January 19
    10:41 pm

    I think it’s a way of saying she’s sensitive — humanizing her, and shifting attention from the books (and the issue of plagiarism) to the artist beneath. Of course, she dehumanizes NR in the next breath, taking attention away from the human behind her statements and the artist and strong voice at the root of her success.

    Oh, wait — was that a rhetorical question? :-D

    ReplyReply


  • Stacy~
    January 19
    11:10 pm

    When it comes to speaking out, I don’t think it makes a difference if Nora has made $1 or $1million from writing her books. As someone who has personally experienced plagarism herself, she more than most definitely has a right to stand up and voice her concerns about what is going on in the industry. Not that she needs my permission or anyone else’s, but speaking from personal experience definitely holds weight. But even if she hadn’t had it happen to her, it doesn’t mean that she shouldn’t speak her mind about it. It’s an issue that needs to be taken seriously and addressed.

    As for CE’s books not being sold because of her passages on ferrets or buffalo or whatever, that is entirely beside the point. It’s a question of intregrity. If she is “allegedly” guilty of lifting passages for her research, what else does she do that could be along those same lines?

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    January 19
    11:14 pm

    Looking at the passages myself, all I see is a writer who maybe should have paraphrased some research info a little better. I don’t see malicious or greedy intent; I don’t see “plagiarism” in any serious legal interpretation of the charge. If there’s more to the issue than that, I haven’t seen the evidence.

    How embarassing! This from an author who should understand the importance of the stolen words. Her ignorance leaves me open mouthed.

    Sonia

    ReplyReply


  • Jenns
    January 19
    11:41 pm

    Okay, this does it. Those unread Deborah Smith novels of mine are going to charity – and I’m not buying (or reading) another of her books.
    More disrespect is being dished upon the reader. Really, how much more condescending can this woman be? She’s not only avidly defending a writer who showed complete, utter disregard for her work and her fans, but DS is pretty much saying that anyone who is offended by CE’s actions is blindly following Nora’s word.
    I love Nora’s work and I respect her, don’t get me wrong, but I can think for myself. I’m sure we all can.
    Envy, DS, is unflattering. Very public envy is just ugly.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 20
    12:01 am

    ~I hope that was out of a change of heart/mind about the issue, not just because she might have been slammed (deservedly) by comments pointing out how hypocritical and unjust the statement was.~

    I have to say I doubt it, as she’s made similar posts in various other sites and blogs. I have to think this is what she believes, and how she chooses to express her beliefs.

    My financial position really has nothing to do with my stand on plagiarism. Neither do my awards or my ‘position’ in the community.

    I’m against it. I believe there were enough incidence reported in this matter to convince me copying was done. I believe it speaking my opinion.

    That’s it. That’s all.

    I never spoke against CE on a personal level. I spoke, and will continue to speak about the issue. The issue is plagiarism.

    Quite obviously, Smith’s definition of it and mine are in opposition. And, quite obviously, her means of expression of opinion and mine are also at odds.

    She’s made a point of making personal statements about me. That’s her choice. I can’t do the same as I don’t know her.

    ReplyReply


  • Michelle
    January 20
    12:27 am

    I think it is one of two things, either she is incredibly disrespectful of writers and feels that there is nothing wrong with plagerism or she is just using this as a spring board for her jealousy and envy. There has to be a reason to target Nora and try to sweep CE’s misdeeds under the carpet. Or lastly she is off her medication.

    It seems odd that she is so secure in her appeal that she thinks nothing of alienating readers-not merely Nora’s “fangirls” but any reader who is insulted by her approval and acceptance of plagerism.

    ReplyReply


  • shilohwalker
    January 20
    12:45 am

    Daggone it…blogger ate my comments.


    For the record I’m not a Nora fan girl. I’m nobody’s fangirl.

    For the record… *G*… I am. And I can only say that about two authors. ;)

    Ya know… what these people don’t get is that it’s entirely possible to adore a person’s writing, to respect that person… AND disagree with the person.

    I almost pity the people that can’t see that, because chances are, that is how they are~ they think respect =blind adoration and therefore, they squash any individual thought that might run contrary to what their particular group thinks.

    ReplyReply


  • shilohwalker
    January 20
    12:50 am

    Sometimes I wonder if NR doesn’t feel like she has a big target painted on her back

    I’ve mentioned this elsewhere, but I don’t mind saying it again. I suspect NR very much feels like she has a target on her back… but I’d bet my next advance she probably knew it was going to happen, wasn’t particularly looking forward to it, but made her stand anyway because she feels this is an important matter.

    And even if hadn’t already admired the hell out of her, her stand on this issue would have changed that.

    I’ve got nothing but respect for the lady…

    and that still doesn’t mean I can’t think for myself.

    ReplyReply


  • meljean brook
    January 20
    12:56 am

    “I have to say I doubt it, as she’s made similar posts in various other sites and blogs. I have to think this is what she believes, and how she chooses to express her beliefs.”

    I saw the one on Mrs. Giggles that also included the Mean Girl Pile-On but hadn’t run into others, so I wasn’t sure of the timeline. I’m sorry to hear that it continued to be posted, just as I was sorry to see everything turned into a mean girl agenda in the other post.

    What a crappy feeling it is, being disappointed by statements from someone I don’t even know. I usually save up my disappointment for family and politicians, but it’s been well-used the past week.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    1:04 am

    Indeed, these past couple of weeks I’ve been wincing in shame on behalf of a few other people–no need to name names, really.

    ReplyReply


  • Jackie L.
    January 20
    1:17 am

    I am, of course, openly and unabashedly an RFG of Nora Roberts. Luckily for the world, Georgette Heyer is dead and Linda Howard does not have an on-line presence. Going after either of them would really make me rabid.

    I have figured out that Nora is more than capable of defending herself, so I don’t chime in as often as I used to. (Or I try, but dang, some people’s children need a virtual head smack. Some of them repeatedly.)

    Just gotta, gotta say, DS has a lot of gall telling Nora which websites she can visit or comment at, and which topics she can address.

    If nobody appointed Nora goddess, for sure nobody appointed DS. And isn’t she the one who posted how much she hates romance readers and then writes, oh yeah, romances?

    I just love triumphant illogic.

    And Merlin, whoever you are, you’re a hoot.

    ReplyReply


  • HelenKay
    January 20
    2:16 am

    Since when is the rule that copying another author’s work is okay if it’s about ferrets or some other subject you don’t care about? That logic is just plain scary.

    The idea that Nora Roberts should stay quiet because she has clout is equally illogical. Being a mega-bestseller does not mean she gives up her right to have an opinion. If anything, she’s earned the right to be heard. Disagree if you want, but at least do so in a manner that’s not equal parts personal attack and back-handed smackdown. I just don’t get why stealing the work of others is even a divisive issue. As authors I’d think we’d understand the danger of allowing for any excuses for this behavior.

    ReplyReply


  • MB (Leah)
    January 20
    2:18 am

    I’m fairly new to the romance reading and the romance blogging world and have been reading all this stuff with interest. From what I’ve read, it’s totally clear that C.E. did plagiarize others’ material. What she should have done with such a clear comparison is just fess up and say she fucked up and this would have blown over with a lot less scandal.

    What compelled me to put my two cents in is the commentary of Deborah Smith. I’m shocked, really shocked, that another author, an award winning author at that, would make light of plagiarism. Not only that, she gets personal by bringing NR’s personal success and money into it making it seem as if some rich heartless tycoon is picking on some poor innocent person because she can.

    Moreover, she goes on about NR hanging out on these so called “mean girls” blogs in a tone that implies she’s part of the evil dark side. It’s pathetic. I for one love that NR posts on these blogs. She has a right to defend herself against those vilifying her and all I’ve seen is that she does so with class and dignity.

    I’m no fan girl of anyone. In fact, I’ve only read one or two of NR’s books since I’m so new to the genre. So as someone who has no personal vested interest in defending NR I can say that D.S. totally comes across as someone with a personal bone to pick with NR and if not, it definitely looks like sour grapes. If she has some personal issue with NR, which really appears to be the case, then she should have written to her personally, not publicly try to knock her down a peg. It only made D.S. look bad as far as I’m concerned.

    It’s really interesting to me how this kind of thing brings out who people really are inside. To me, this whole thing has been about plagiarism and that alone. It seems though that a lot of people want to make it into something more than that.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    2:33 am

    This is what puzzles me no end, still.

    The cached page is dated Jan 11th. At that time, the PDF was already up, with passages from what? seven books under CE’s name on side by side comparison with other people’s original writing.

    At that point, five days into this, and with that much evidence, how could there be writers–let alone published authors–arguing that CE didn’t plagiarize?

    Yet, almost two weeks later, some people seem entrenched on that position. Makes one wonder–whether wondering is fair or not.

    As far as Ms Roberts’ behaviour: class act, all the way.

    ReplyReply


  • Angela James
    January 20
    2:36 am

    “Hi, my name is Angela and I’m a Nora-fangirl.”

    *chorus of hello’s fills the room with enthusiastic applause*

    “It’s been many, many years since I read my first Nora book and well, I’ll be honest, I don’t want to stop. I don’t always love her books, each one is not my favorite, but still, she spins a good tale. And ever since I started seeing her online and witnessed what a class act she is, I’m afraid I’ve just come to realize I don’t have the strength to quit her. So I’m here today to say again, my name is Angela and I’m a Nora fangirl. Long live La Nora.”

    *chorus of “long live La Nora” fills the room.*

    ***

    All silliness caused by puppy-induced sleep deprivation aside, I don’t often comment on posts of this nature but you know what? If Nora can speak up on a national level against the act of plagiarism, I can speak up against the act of tearing down an author like Nora, who is nothing but a terrific representative of not just the romance community, but the writing community in general.

    Nora is a great example of professional and courteous behavior. It’s hard to tear someone like her down because she doesn’t rise to the bait. Because she is a class act, puts her best professional foot forward, it’s not her that ends up looking bad in situations like this.

    Thanks for representing us so well, Nora.

    ReplyReply


  • Jaci Burton
    January 20
    2:58 am

    nature writing? Isn’t CE a fiction author? And just buffaloes and ferrets? It wasn’t just buffaloes and ferrets to those who did the research and wrote the books. It’s never ‘nothing’ to those who bother to do the work themselves. Something that’s obviously escaped Ms. Smith.

    Seems to me Ms. Smith did a whole hell of a lot of skimming, zeroed in on Nora leading a bandwagon and jumped on one of her own. Her attack seems more against Nora and much less a defense of CE.

    Speaking as one of the lowly writers in the trenches, I don’t wish to be lumped in with anyone like Deb Smith. I’ll stand with Nora on her unassailable pile of money and awards, thanks, and speak out loudly against anyone who thinks plagiarism, in any form, for any reason, is okay.

    Oh, and like Angie, I’m proud to be a huge NR fangirl, and am always hugely awed by how well Nora represents the interests of romance authors with every word she speaks. Thanks Nora!

    ReplyReply


  • Jane
    January 20
    3:16 am

    Damn, I wrote a long ass comment and blogger ate it. I guess its a sign or something.

    I remember reading in the Amazon thread that some commenters felt like Nora was inserting herself into the situation because she wanted the press. I felt like screaming because we all know that Nora making a stand made her a target. She took hits, not just for standing up for DA and SBTB, but for standing up for romance.

    She was the one person from the romance side of things in the press that didn’t look like an ass. She made us look good. She made us look like a community who cared about intellectual honesty.

    I haven’t read a romance book since the CE thing. During the past couple of weeks, I’ve been so disillusioned by many of the public statements and (purportedly private) emails of authors who haven’t seen anything wrong done that if it weren’t for Nora, the authors here, Julie Leto, Leslie Kelly, and the others who have spoken out, I think I would have to take a break from romance entirely.

    I’m not sure what a fangirl means anymore, but I guess if it is that I can appreciate and be thankful for authors who are willing to make a courageous stand for the romance community, including the readers, then I am a fangirl.

    ReplyReply


  • sula
    January 20
    3:27 am

    y’know, I have been following the whole CE drama since it began and actually haven’t put in my two cents because there are so many more eloquent people saying what I’m thinking. But this just makes me angry.

    To start with, it is astounding to me that anyone who has taken even a passing glance over the passages under discussion (that monstrous PDF over at SBTB is quite neatly organized and should be simple enough to peruse) could possibly blow it off as “a writer who maybe should have paraphrased some research info a little better”. I’m only a lowly reader and not an author, but I would think that being in a line of writing that is already maligned and trivialized would lead one to be more and not less sympathetic to other genres of literature. Plagiarism is wrong. Period.

    Then we have all kinds of snide remarks about Nora Roberts. Apparently, she keeps company with the wrong kind of people (le gasp), has been successful and made money from her work (horror!), and has the audacity to actually give a straight answer when asked. Maybe Ms. Smith has another definition for “unsolicited”, but I would think that being contacted by the AP for an opinion on a matter related to your profession is not it. To quote from the Princess Bride, “you keep using that word…I do not think it means what you think it means.”

    Personally, I’m glad to have a classy and professional woman like Ms. Roberts as the public face of romance, and if Ms. Smith’s erudite contribution is any example, I’d say she’ll never have to worry about being in the same position. I know one thing for sure and that is that this is one reader who won’t be purchasing her work.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    3:32 am

    Sula said, “I’m only a lowly reader and not an author, but I would think that being in a line of writing that is already maligned and trivialized would lead one to be more and not less sympathetic to other genres of literature. Plagiarism is wrong.”

    Word.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 20
    4:05 am

    I want to thank everyone–RFG and non-RFG–for the words of support.

    As I said I don’t know Smith. I don’t believe we’ve ever met–not that I remember. I don’t believe I’ve read her work. So all I know are her words on this issue, and how she’s chosen to express herself regarding it on various blogs. It leads me to believe she doesn’t take copying text–fiction or non-fiction–the same way I do.

    Her opinion, her right.

    It also leads me to believe she has a serious problem with me, my enjoyment of and participation on certain blogs–and with my right to express my opinion on plagiarism. And apparently to give that opinion to the press when asked for it.

    She can either get over it, or continue to spout off. Either way, I’ll go on posting where I like, and saying what I think.

    ReplyReply


  • Jennifer McKenzie
    January 20
    4:36 am

    It seems simple. Why would Nora Roberts say something? Because she’s been a victim. That’s what I said on Deb Smith’s blog.
    I’m sorry that she’s felt the need to blog EVERYWHERE about this issue. (She left comments on a fellow author’s blog about the legal aspects of the issue. She was incorrect, I might add.)
    To me, the issue is clear. If you use (word for word) someone else’s work, credit them. Thank them for doing the work you didn’t have to do. And leave another writer’s ideas alone.

    ReplyReply


  • Katrina Strauss
    January 20
    5:18 am

    where the topics include open attacks on authors so far down the food chain that one wonders how Nora has time in her busy career to even notice they exist.

    Snotty much, is she? That statement offends me more than her potshots at Miss Roberts, her lame defense for CE, or her disregard for victims of plagiarism. I’m adding Deborah Smith to my “bitchcott” list. Yes, I can separate the work from the author, but that doesn’t mean I care to contribute to their sales numbers.

    ReplyReply


  • loonigrrl
    January 20
    9:49 am

    Wow. I’m overwhelmed by such idiocy, I really am. I doubt she’s even read the plagiarized passages, not really. Maybe she skimmed it before jumping to her conclusions, maybe. How else could she not think CE plagiarized? And to try to drum up some sympathy by referring to her as a grandmother?

    It’s amazing how fast you can lose respect for someone.

    ReplyReply


  • Michelle
    January 20
    12:06 pm

    I picture this scenario with Deb Smith’s editor/publishing house: ( I know it is a fantasy but makes me smile)

    Nervous editor assistant whose job it is to keep track of writers behavior approaches his editor. “Umm sir I need to update you”. “What is it now Bob?” editor asks irritably as he opens his desk drawer and reaches for the Maalox bottle. “Umm well she has been doing it again, you know giving out wrong legal advice”. Editor answers “Well thats not so bad” and takes the cap off bottle but doesn’t yet take a swig. “Well, that and she has been defending the right to plagerise works both fiction and nonfiction” Bob reports nervously. “Damn, is she trying to give us a black eye, when will she learn to think before she writes/speaks”. Editor takes big gulp of Maalox and then roots around in drawer to find box of Pepcid and starts to shake the box when he finds it empty. He looks up to see Bob still standing there. “Well why are you still here, don’t tell me there is more”, Editor now glares at poor Bob. “Well, lastly she has been rude and nasty to Nora Roberts and has been calling her fans rabid fangirls” Bob barely gets out in a squeek as he wrings his hands together and his shoulders sag. Editor simply stares speechless and then silently downs the entire bottle of Maalox. Scene fades.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 20
    12:30 pm

    And to try to drum up some sympathy by referring to her as a grandmother?

    That and the fact that Smith stated that CE was an accomplished violinist, (like that has anything to do with the plagiarism issue) annoyed me as much as her very obvious jealousy.

    Apparently, Smith used to be a journalist, so maybe she’s forgotten, that there are some things that need to kept out of the public domain; Like bashing Nora Roberts, and exposing herself for the ignorant fool that she seems to be.

    Methinks that she may have seen the error of her ways,hence the deleting of the post, but she should have known better in the first place.

    We’re all entitled to our opinions, but if it’s gonna be bad for business or bad for your reputation, then sometimes you have to curb the temptation to tell it like you see it. Or at least practice the art of diplomacy. (What? I know about diplomacy, but I don’t get paid to blog, so I don’t have to utilise my diplomatic skills!:))

    As blunt as I can be, when it comes to business, I’m a firm believer in not doing anything that would ultimately effect my bottom line.

    By the way, anybody commenting may want to copy before pressing send, because blogger is acting up, and so may lose your words. Damn blogger.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    1:05 pm

    Jennifer McKenzie said, That’s what I said on Deb Smith’s blog.

    Ms Smith has a blog?

    ReplyReply


  • shilohwalker
    January 20
    1:21 pm

    We’re all entitled to our opinions, but if it’s gonna be bad for business or bad for your reputation, then sometimes you have to curb the temptation to tell it like you see it. Or at least practice the art of diplomacy.

    man… can I quote you on that?

    ReplyReply


  • Dianne
    January 20
    2:32 pm

    “Why does Roberts feel compelled to play lawyer, judge and jury regarding a fellow author?”

    Perhaps the question should be asked is why Ms Smith feels compelled to play lawyer, judge and jury regarding fellow author Nora Roberts. As a victim of plagiarism, NR voiced her opinion against an author stealing someone else’s work. There is a very good reason there is a law against plagiarism.

    At the end of the day, an author only has h/h words to show for their efforts. NO ONE has the right to steal those words and claim credit.

    The only thing NR stood on was her integrity and reputation as a straight shooter as she voiced her opinion when asked.

    How long has DS been lying in the weeds waiting to take this shot?

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    January 20
    2:55 pm

    Is anyone keeping track of the various “loose rules” for plagiarism that CE’s defenders keep coming up with?

    So far I have that plagiarism is okay if you are a violinist (not sure if skill level matters), any part Native American, a grandmother (and/or of a certain age–65? 70? is this a benefit of AARP membership?) or if the stolen material involves ferrets (does this extend to the entire weasel family? If so, does the character “Wolverine” count?)

    Have I missed any?

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    3:05 pm

    anonymous at 02:55, there are a few others, yes:

    –but it’s RESEARCH!!! see? CE knows whereof she speaks/writes (aka, “it’s badly integrated research”)

    –but it’s DETAIL, BACKGROUND, who cares?

    –it is not copying/plagiarism!! CE changed a word or some punctuation here and there, so it’s “paraphrasing”

    and my personal favorite:
    –but we all have done bad things, so we have no right to call CE on this one.

    (What can I say? I couldn’t resist. Note to self: work on self control.)

    ReplyReply


  • Katrina Strauss
    January 20
    3:49 pm

    That and the fact that Smith stated that CE was an accomplished violinist, (like that has anything to do with the plagiarism issue)

    I’ve been pondering that point myself, and I think I’ve figured out why it’s relevant!!! It explains why we keep hearing that sad violin striking up in the background everytime someone comes to CE’s defense! :P

    ReplyReply


  • Lynne Connolly
    January 20
    3:57 pm

    I disagree, at least slightly.
    Nora Roberts’ position does matter.
    It’s a bit like Bono of U2, who said that since he was famous and he did have the ears of the powers that be, he might as well use it for good.
    Nora is far better known than most of us, and she has been quoted because of that. Newsworthy, as we aren’t.
    And good for her! She has used her position, whether she meant to or not, to express her point of view, and from what I can gather, the point of view of most authors in the romance industry who have either stayed silent, or have come out and said that plagiarism is wrong and shouldn’t be condoned.
    I’ve said it, too, but I can’t see me being quoted in the national press!
    When the whole CE affair first started, some thought it was the Smart Bitches picking on Edwards again, since only the black-footed ferret quote got national coverage. But since then, the other passages have been read by most and people have either gone quiet or agreed that yes, this is plagiarism.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    4:21 pm

    Ms Connolly, while I agree that AP contacted Ms Roberts because of her position–consistently in Best Seller lists, winning the Quill Award, what have you–I think most of us agree that that still has nothing to do with Ms Roberts stating her position when asked.

    Which is another reason to scratch one’s head when reading Ms Smith’s diatribe–Ms Roberts’ opinion was solicited, by AP.

    And lets not get started on the ‘unharmed’ bit, since all writers and all readers are harmed by plagiarists.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 20
    4:29 pm

    ~I don’t see “plagiarism” in any serious legal interpretation of the charge.~

    Here’s where Smith continues to speak inaccurately. Plagiarism isn’t a legal issue, but an ethical one.

    The victim(s) may fight for a cease and desist, for acknowledgement and so. But it wouldn’t be a legal charge–it’s ethical. It deals with reputation.

    Copyright infingement is the legal issue.

    Plagiarism is the copying of another words and passing them off as your own. Not a line, not a phrase, not a fact or two, but copying chunks, with little or no paraphrasing. It is literary theft, but it isn’t a legal term.

    Copyright infringement is the legal issue, which addresses the theft of another work–plagiarism and/or the unauthorized use of that work–which is copyrighted. In this case, the victim has legal recourse.

    From the 60 or so pages of side-by-side examples in this matter, it’s clear to me Ms. Edwards both plagiarized and infringed.

    Smith can disagree with that, but at least she should disagree accurately.

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    January 20
    4:33 pm

    I hope no one ever “paraphrases” Ms. Smith’s work. And why is she concerned about what Ms. Roberts may or may not be doing? I’ve never read a Nora Robert’s book (hence the anonymous posting) so no, I’m not a rabid fangirl but in my opinion LaNora is the matriarch of our genre and has done quite a bit for it. I have a tendency to listen when a seasoned, successful, and prolific author has something to say.

    ReplyReply


  • Leslie Kelly
    January 20
    4:50 pm

    Jeez, Nora, what did you do, run over her dog or something?

    (running now…)

    ReplyReply


  • Leslie Kelly
    January 20
    5:02 pm

    Thank you, Jane.

    As I mentioned on Alison’s blog…my eyes are a little more open than they were on the day this broke. I sadly concede that you had a point. I still think there are a number of silent people out there who are angry about the plagiarism issue. But there are also some whose comments make me wonder where on earth they went to elementary school if they didn’t have the copying = plagiarism lesson drilled into them before fifth grade.

    This discussion being a perfect case in point.

    ReplyReply


  • Gennita
    January 20
    6:29 pm

    No, Leslie, the correct word is BOIL her puppy. :grin:

    Karen, when it comes to why her Amazon blog post is gone now, sheesh, don’t you know it’s tradition to pull off censuring posts after a few days? Like an Internet hit-and-run.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    January 20
    6:40 pm

    –but it’s DETAIL, BACKGROUND, who cares?

    This is the one I always find most fascinating as a defense. So does this mean that authors will readily admit that parts of their books are basically insignificant? Because it seems to me that if it’s important enough to use in your book, it’s important enough to acknowledge.

    ReplyReply


  • web
    January 20
    6:43 pm

    “I’ve been pondering that point myself, and I think I’ve figured out why it’s relevant!!! It explains why we keep hearing that sad violin striking up in the background everytime someone comes to CE’s defense! :P”

    And the world’s tiniest violin, no less! :-)

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    January 20
    7:29 pm

    Totally unrelated… but Karen, that survey?

    So far, ages ranging from 17-70, give or take, the majority between 30 (ish) to 50 (ish)

    And… drum roll… a slew of nurses, SAHM, several pharmacists, paralegals, office (from assistant to manager) housewives (however, not one of them was a bored housewife) I think 5…maybe 6 lawyers, 5 doctors, retail industry, food industry, student, retirees, business owners.. and the list goes on… and on…

    :Op Yeah, we’re a real typical bunch, aren’t we?

    ReplyReply


  • Slings & Arrows of Outrageous Fortune
    January 20
    7:47 pm

    God don’t any of you ever quit your bitching? If it isn’t one thing, isn’t another. It always has to be something, doesn’t it?

    And if someone plagiarized a Nora Roberts novel I have to say I’m appalled. Someone went to the time and trouble to copy the words of some hack romance author who puts out her books on conveyer belts? Ferrets, I get. Worth plagiarizing, even. Nora Roberts? Good god. It may be a sign of the apocalypse.

    Glad Deb, whoever she is, took a stand against the drama. Nice to have a voice of sanity amidst all the cackling craziness. Nobody dying? Nobody starving? Nobody unjustly imprisoned? Gee, what a great stand to take against injustice we have here by some gossipy bitches and a drudge of a romance writer who’s got some sour grapes cuz someone once borrowed some of her hackneyed phrases!

    One word: Perspective. Get some.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    8:06 pm

    s&aoof, some people are rather good at multitasking, savvy?

    (and the obligatory, “pot calling kettle black again?”)

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 20
    8:09 pm

    Glad Deb, whoever she is, took a stand against the drama. Nice to have a voice of sanity amidst all the cackling craziness. Nobody dying? Nobody starving? Nobody unjustly imprisoned? Gee, what a great stand to take against injustice we have here by some gossipy bitches and a drudge of a romance writer who’s got some sour grapes cuz someone once borrowed some of her hackneyed phrases!

    Hey Slings, you know it’s a free world dontcha? That means, you can switch off the computer whenever it gets too much for you. Even better than that, you can go and find Deb Smith, and commiserate with her. Nobody bullied you into coming here, but I’m pretty sure you’ll be reloading over and over, just so you can keep up with us ‘gossipy bitches’.

    By the way, you my friend, are a Fucktard.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 20
    8:11 pm

    Hey AL, do we think that Slings and Deb Smith are the same person? *g*

    ReplyReply


  • Barbara B.
    January 20
    8:19 pm

    Slings & Arrows apparently doesn’t understand what the phrase “sour grapes” means. It’s all the more amusing because her comment positively reeks of them and she’s oblivious.

    ReplyReply


  • cumhitherglobal_admin
    January 20
    8:34 pm

    Regarding the person who commented under the Shakespearean-quote nom de plume:

    “The lady doth protest too much, methinks”.

    Hack(?) writer, essayist, literary critic, literary novelist -whoever they are and whatever they write- no one asks to have their words stolen out from under them.

    ReplyReply


  • Baffled
    January 20
    8:50 pm

    You can add review to that list. Still remember a certain reviews site that was shut about five years ago because they were caught plagiarizing reviews. It’s unethical, and it’s WRONG. No matter who does it and what is being copied.

    And I am a bit tired of having my intelligence insulted as a reader. I can reach my own conclusions thank you very much. How dare these people say that nothing wrong was done. Do they really think that readers are THAT stupid???

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 20
    9:13 pm

    baffled asks, “Do they really think that readers are THAT stupid???”

    Probably a rhetorical question, but… *shrug*

    Yes, baffled, they really think readers are that stupid.

    ReplyReply


  • Lauren Dane
    January 20
    9:14 pm

    Oh fer frak’s sake! Can someone please, please tell me why anyone would spend five seconds on lecturing Nora Roberts when it’s Cassie Edwards who’s in the wrong?

    Is this genocide in the Sudan? No. Does it mean that we shouldn’t speak out unless the issue is as grave as human trafficking? Come on. What this is – is totally relevant to authors and readers alike. We can all address it in our own ways, but certainly, it’s an important issue to us all.

    ReplyReply


  • Shiloh Walker
    January 20
    9:29 pm

    Wow.

    Isn’t that off on a tangent…

    Oh fer frak’s sake! Can someone please, please tell me why anyone would spend five seconds on lecturing Nora Roberts when it’s Cassie Edwards who’s in the wrong?

    Lauren, I was thinking the same thing, but I suspect the answer is pretty simple.

    Insults often come up to piss people off, out of petty jealousy, to distract them from whatever the real issue is, or to draw attention. *G* Or all of the above.

    If that was some attempt to shame or guilt people in being silent, I’d say the technique needs work.

    ReplyReply


  • Kat O+
    January 20
    10:02 pm

    Saying that Nora Roberts shouldn’t comment on issues in the romance community is like saying Bill Gates shouldn’t make comments about computers. Asking what right Roberts has to talk about plagiarism is like asking what right Gates has to talk about software piracy. I can’t believe this even became an issue.

    ReplyReply


  • Anne
    January 20
    10:03 pm

    Why does Roberts feel compelled to play lawyer, judge and jury regarding a fellow author? Roberts has achieved a level of good fortune 99.9 percent of authors can only dream about. But does that make her not only the spokeswoman for the romance genre, but also its enforcer of public condemnation for unproven offenses?

    Why? Why Because she’s Nora fucking Roberts, that’s why. She IS the face of the romance genre, and if she’s been asked her opinion it’s her right to give it. Now anyone can disagree but generally I find Nora’s online presence to be profession and courteous. Don’t get me wrong, she can crack jokes like the rest of us, but I have never seen her deliberately slam someone, no matter how much they deserved it.

    While I admit to being an avid fangirl of Ms. Roberts’ (which is not a surprise to anyone who knows me), if she were to be cruel and condemning online to others, acting like she rules the world and we are just her mere peasants, I honestly think that would change my viewpoint on her as a person. But she doesn’t. Ever (at least that I’ve seen). I don’t see what she said about the situation with CE as being malicious or mean or anything in between… she just gave her viewpoint of plagiarism (which she was a victim of) and that was that. Plain and simple. Nora Roberts is a fabulous author and a very classy lady.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 20
    10:14 pm

    Oh, okay. Unless it deals with say murder or world events, it shouldn’t be discussed. It’s just not important.

    Check.

    Then . . . why are you here again?

    ReplyReply


  • Anonymous
    January 20
    11:19 pm

    ROFL, this whole thing reminds me of when celebrities start talking about politics. That whole Sean Penn with Saddam thing just blew up with most of the people I heard ranting over saying filthy rich celebs should shut their mouths about politics because ‘we’, the general public, don’t give two poops about their input. It isn’t like they’re actually on the lines, etc, etc, etc.

    I think that’s gotta be what this Smith woman, and quite a few other folks, are chatting about. NR is rich and famous, she should keep her mouth shut.

    It’s always funny to watch the storm from the sidelines. Over here, it’s we’re right and they’re wrong and the few who post off the main are slammed. Over there, same gig.

    Reading all of this is a damn fine way to entertain me for an afternoon. Thanks!

    Shirley

    ReplyReply

  • oops commented on the wrong blog….

    I just posted at Dear Author so I am not gonna repeat it all. You are most welcome… I think I was like comment 70? 71?

    Anyhoo after seeing your post I have to say I think the same thing. Post has nothing to do with CE. Zip. Zero. They are about stupid fucking reader bloggers who the fuck do they think they are… without naming names.

    AND it is about stupid fucking famous rich bestselling nora roberts sticking her fucking nose in shit again.

    Deborah Smith is a good strong writer, who can’t get a NY deal and was if I recall correctly dropped from warner because of sells. Bitter much? Or it could just be she is outspoken, opinionated and doesn’t give a fuck cuz she was the one who went as far to say Liz and Marianne were pedo bait. (I think that was what she said).

    so really ::shrug::

    but it is funny to mock

    Nora will always get more press because she is Nora Fucking Roberts. I am sorry if any other author is upset by that and not knowing Nora very well, I would go out on a limb and say, she would be just as happy to have had Smith Quoted in NYT. It is the issue not the press Nora seems to want.

    And the moment we stop talking about things that are important to us, be it books, laws, who is gonna be pres, what to wear on a date, or WHATEVER you want to – is the moment your blog is no longer ‘your blog’ and you no longer own your mind.

    Yes I like Nora Roberts. And I have told her, if the ‘face’ of romance is going to be Nora Fucking Roberts, I am thankful for that because I happen to think she is a hella smart chick. Do I always agree with her, nope. Would I say so, uh… yeah. Do I think she would give a fuck? No. Do I think she would listen? Yes. And if I had a valid point… she would even think it over.

    That to me is a great thing and has nothing to do with her talent or lack of as a writer.

    Of course, I could be wrong… what the hell do I know. (yeah so much for being quick)

    ReplyReply

  • Totally off topic (and totally tongue in cheek), I wonder if Ms. Roberts gets up in the morning, showers, puts on her makeup and just before she leaves the bathroom thrusts her hand into the air and says to her reflection in the mirror “I am Nora Fucking Roberts, bitch!”, then goes on her merry way?

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 21
    4:12 am

    I guess I commented on the wrong blog, too. When did you move, Karen??

    Anyway:

    ~There are times when she does play the diva.~

    Do I know you? I must assume we know each other as you claim to know so much about my behavior. Yet oddly, it’s generally people who don’t know squat about me who like to toss the D work around.

    I’ll say again–since you seem to have missed it–the side-by-side camparsions certainly seem to indicate Ms. Edwards copied considerable text from previous published work.

    I don’t consider it an ‘abuse’ of my voice to state my opinion on an extremely important issue in my profession.

    ~She could voice something that would be totally 100% wrong and there would be 100′s on the net that would blindly follow and support her.~

    You obviously think very little of the intelligence and integrity of hundreds of readers and writers–and seriously overestimate my powers. I get disagreed with all the time.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 21
    4:15 am

    Makeup just to sit at the keyboard and write? This removes one of the main perks of, well, sitting at the keyboard to write.

    ReplyReply


  • eggs
    January 21
    4:24 am

    Deb should shop a novel starring a “feisty” heroine who “innocently” becomes involved in an online war that creates heaps of drama for her. Imagine how much easier it would be to sell a book like that if Deb herself “accidently” did the same thing in real life? Holy serendipitous coincidences, Batman! What a great marketing angle that would make.

    ReplyReply


  • Jenns
    January 21
    4:26 am

    ~ Oops. I answered the would-be Shakespeare on the wrong blog. Glad to see I’m in some excellent company. ~

    Umm… Yes. There are some horrible things going on in the world, of which you seem most aware. And we are obviously annoying you.
    So. What are you doing here and why did you even bother to post?
    Envy is really a powerful thing, isn’t it?
    Here’s a thought: maybe if you used your seething energy for something like work, some of your bitterness might wane. And you’d actually be getting something accomplished.

    ReplyReply


  • laura
    January 21
    7:34 am

    Ah, thanks for the update Karen. I thought I remembered some previous asshatishniss on the part of Ms. Smith; I just couldn’t remember what it was about.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen
    January 21
    8:29 am

    Right, still working on tweaking. AL, recent comments was on there, Luna will get it fixed as soon as she can. In the meantime, welcome to my humble abode, I’ll put up an official welcome as soon as the tweaks are done!

    ReplyReply

  • Makeup just to sit at the keyboard and write? This removes one of the main perks of, well, sitting at the keyboard to write.

    Good point! :)

    ReplyReply

  • What the hell is wrong with Nora Roberts speaking her own mind on what is right or wrong? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. I only wish more people in general were able to be this way.

    ReplyReply


  • GrowlyCub
    January 21
    5:29 pm

    I cannot get over the fact that some few people think that there is not enough evidence or that we need some higher authority to tell us whether plagiarism has occurred, when all is needed is an ability to read and compare.

    I’m plenty smart enough to figure this out without some authority telling me what to think.

    Obviously, the people who claim that a higher authority is needed are not sure in their own abilities to recognize what’s obvious.

    I’m getting more and more disgusted at these blatant and hypocritical attempts to divert the attention from the offending party and her misdeeds.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 21
    5:33 pm

    GrowlyCub, I think it truly says more (and none of it good), about those pointing fingers at Ms Roberts, or Dear Author, or the SmartBitches, than it does about anything else.

    Food for thought, no?

    ReplyReply


  • c
    January 21
    6:01 pm

    Pertinent Deb Smith post from SB:

    For every perky little author who dresses like a pedophile-luring schoolgirl or wears a swan hat or shows her rack or whatever in the vague hope of becoming a bestselling author that way, there are a hundred who a)don’t wear costumes, b)are fat, middle-aged and flat-chested c) don’t even go to conferences, in costume or not, and d)are hugely successful. So, like everything else in the world of extravagant self-promotion, the message continues to be: the best self-promo is sitting yo’ ass at home and writing another good book.
    Posted by Deb Smith on 07/18 at 08:14 AM

    ReplyReply

  • OMG. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that silence doesn’t do a thing for ridding any wrong? Kudos to Nora for speaking out. As an injustice plagiarism may not have the serious or glaring effects as say murder, rape or kidnapping but it is still an injustice. Having read last week those side-by-side comparisons as they appeared at the Smart Bitches site, it is clear to me anyway, this is a case of more than trivial borrowing of ideas. I don’t care to see anyone persecuted in the media, and perhaps this is an issue that needs and deserves to be resolved in a court of law, but still people should be discussing it. Rationally, maturely, but discussing nonetheless. And, IMHO, if one writer is bashing another person for taking a stand against plagiarism then that writer is just dishing out another cup of injustice.

    Just my two cents worth.

    ReplyReply

  • You know, it seems to me that being one of the most successful authors in the romance genre might come with some perks, one of those being the fact that people listen to Nora when she expresses her opinion. Beyond that, people seek it out. And why not? Not only is Nora in the position to do some good by shedding light on one of the vilest and most rampant problems within the writing community, but she can bring a personal experience to the mix, having been a victim of plagiarism herself.

    In my opinion, she’s earned the right to say what she wants, and have people take notice.

    Regardless of whether one enjoys her books or not (I’ve never read one myself), the proof is in the pudding, or the sales figures as the case may be. More importantly, I’ve never once seen Nora say, “You must listen and agree with me.” No, she says, “here’s my opinion, take it or leave it how you will.”

    I may not agree with everything Nora Roberts says, but she’s got a right to say it, and I respect her for not being afraid to speak her mind.

    Can I be a Nora fangirl without reading her books? If so, count me in. No shame in that at all.

    Kayleigh

    ReplyReply

  • Makeup just to sit at the keyboard and write? This removes one of the main perks of, well, sitting at the keyboard to write.

    EXACTLY. I work at home doing medical transcription, and unless I have an appointment somewhere later in the day, no makeup for me… and I so love being able to wear lounge pants all the time too. Heh.

    ReplyReply

  • Yeah, I’ve been a little put off by Deb Smith since reading the pedophile comment.

    If she thinks what CE did wasn’t so bad, perhaps she’d be willing to volunteer for her books to be used as similar “research” for other authors. With luck, they might paraphrase it enough for it to be OK. Right?

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    1:27 am

    Once again, I mention, why is Deborah Smith’s comments on another subject being used to belittle her comments on this one?

    So you didn’t agree with the way she worded how she felt about the costume?

    What the freck does that have to do with how she feels about this subject?

    ReplyReply

  • Once again, I mention, why is Deborah Smith’s comments on another subject being used to belittle her comments on this one?

    You found us then Cattymiss? Well done. Nice to see you back, you can even stay around, (as long as you don’t go into a diatribe about how we’re all wasting our lives on this blog, cuz ya know that would just be… erm… hypocritical).

    ReplyReply

  • It goes to pattern, as they say on L&O. The only time I see comments from Smith is when she sees an opportunity to shred another author. One wonders why.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 22
    1:42 am

    I understand the ‘misplaced’ comments will make their way to the appropriate threads eventually, but in the meantime, this is part of cattymiss’s original comment:

    NR is a person just like you and I. She has her faults. No, you haven’t seen them? Well, she does, believe me…. lol. There are times when she does play the diva. I guess after almost 200 published works, she has a right to.

    To repeat myself: I think the handle is a nice Freudian slip.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    3:00 am

    karen,

    You found us then Cattymiss? Well done. Nice to see you back, you can even stay around, (as long as you don’t go into a diatribe about how we’re all wasting our lives on this blog, cuz ya know that would just be… erm… hypocritical).

    Hi karen… (waving)…

    No diatribe about wasting lives, yours or mine. Did I say that? I don’t think so. What I said had to do with being careful to not to jump in on a mob mentality and judging someone guilty before one reviews all the facts. I have only been in on this for a couple of days so I am certainly not gonna do so. But looking at the history of it, I am seeing that mob mentality.

    Also, you did not answer my question in that last post regarding why Deborah Smith’s comments are being belittled because of her comments on another subject.

    I can’t force an answer, but I would certainly respect someone if they did at least try.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    3:10 am

    azteclady,

    LOL. I have four cats and have a bad habit of being a bit facetious sometimes in my comments. It is a nickname or username I use on several forums.

    However, on a side note and using your post as an example, I will say I am seeing a trend here of people only posting bits and pieces of someones post.

    I think pulling that one bit without the other is really putting my whole post out of context. It puts the whole focus on me saying NR is a diva, without the rest which explains how I feel about the whole thing, deb smith’s blog and the CE subject.

    Isn’t this what everyone is doing with Deb Smith comments on the swan-gate??

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 22
    3:18 am

    I don’t know about others, Cattymiss, but I know that my reaction to your entire post (which can be found following the link, by the way, so that the full context is garnered by those who so wish…)…

    My reaction to your post was derailed by what I saw/see as an unprovoked attack on Ms Roberts from you. It was, insofar as I know, your first post at Karen’s blog, wasn’t it? And your opening salvo was that paragraph I quoted.

    My reaction was raised eyebrows and a catty remark of my own.

    For your other question regarding Ms Smith’s comments elsewhere, I believe that Shannon Stacey did answer you, just a couple of comments up.

    ReplyReply

  • Cattymiss:

    Please see comment #85.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    4:04 am

    azteclady,

    My first post started with “Anne”, which meant I was responding specifically to “Anne’s” post in the comments section. Did everyone miss that? I had read her comments and felt compelled to respond on what she said.

    And I went on later in the post to imply that I agree with some of Ms. Smith’s blog but only to a point. and went on to say why. If you read my whole comment and not just that first paragraph, I think you would understand that.

    I will say it again, I think the responsiblity is not on NR’s shoulders to hold back what she thinks, but rather on our shoulders to understand that she is only one voice and is just a normal person just like the rest of us when it comes to an opinion.

    However, I do agree with Smith and think her(NR) voice does carry power because she is NR. I don’t know why people are shaking their heads at that. For every 10 that knows the difference, there is one on the net that thinks “oh, it is NR, she must know what she is talking about”. I don’t think that should stop NR from speaking out. Just stop those that automatically think “NR thinks she is guilty so she must be guilty”.

    Does she know what she is talking about? I am not sure if I agree with her. Can I say that and not get blasted all to hell and back here?

    So, I am a newbie here? Not really, I have commented on Karens blog for a couple of years, usually just quickly and anon. I enjoy her blog tremendously, but I do not like condeming someone in mass on the net, implying that she has another agenda when I am not sure she does, based on one post incident.

    Btw, both Deb Smith and Nora Roberts are very much favorite authors of mine, if you are wondering. They both get moulah from me.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    4:10 am

    Seressisa,

    thank you for responding. Can you give me other examples of what you are talking about? I had not noticed this. Other than the one incident where she was talking about a subject (Swangate), not just one author, I had not noticed this.

    Because after reading the one example, I get that she was speaking in general about the Swangate hoopla, not just specifically trashing that one person. Addressing the issue.

    Karen mentioned she felt DS had an agenda. Am I missing something else?? because on that link given I see no altercation between NR and Deb Smith.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 22
    4:13 am

    Oh dear.

    Cattymiss, you realize how utterly insulting it is to assume (and you know what happens when you do) that everyone (or one in ten, or whatever other made up percentage we want to discuss) who reads Ms Roberts statements to the press will blindly believe what Ms Roberts had to say when asked?

    From where I sit, this is the translation of your posts: “Those women are too stoooooopid to think for themselves, so either Ms Roberts refrains from expressing her opinion–even when asked, mind you–or I, cattymiss, will crusade through the web setting them right!”

    Please note: I’m not blasting you for disagreeing with me, or Ms Roberts, or the doomsayer on the town square. I am, loudly and snarkily, disagreeing with your view of all those poor women who can’t look at the evidence here and decide from themselves.

    And for the record, for everyone who thinks Ms Roberts doesn’t know whereof she speaks when dealing with plagiarism, a kitten keels over.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    4:32 am

    azteclady,

    Let me make this clear.

    I read deb smiths blog.

    I do not agree that Nora Roberts should refrain from posting her opinion on this subject.

    I do agree with her that NR’s voice does have power and does influence some people without thoroughly checking out the facts. You pick the percentage. 1%, 2%, less? Does it matter? One? But I never said everyone. Hell, in fact I said 100. Nora sells how many books to how many fans? But one would still be too much.

    My point is that instead of Deb Smith saying “NR, don’t speak”, instead she needs to be saying “Before we in mass decide that the woman is guilty, make sure you know the facts”.

    And on a side note, I have read the two links that Karen and you provided. I do not see the agenda you are trying to imply Deb Smith has. I do not see why that previous subject or issue is proof that she has an agenda against NR. Not based on those two links.

    Is there more I am missing on “this agenda”, I would seriously love to read it. It might change my mind on this.

    ReplyReply

  • I do agree with her that NR’s voice does have power and does influence some people without thoroughly checking out the facts.

    I’d have to point out that NR, or any other author, isn’t responsible for what people make of their opinions. They can’t be held accountable because somebody didn’t investigate on their own.

    Now if an author came out and slung personal insults regarding intelligence, personal lssues, weight, appearance…etcetcetc, then I’d look down on that author and pay little attention to them. But most of the perceived attacks on the author are actually directed at the ACT.

    People should from their own opinions. Will everybody? No. Of course not. I always try to read up and see what my general idea is on something before I form an opinion. So I can respect that maybe DS was trying, unsuccessfully for the most part, to get people to read up and not make snap decisions.

    What she failed to realize is that it wasn’t that hard to read up, make comparisons and form an opinion and implying that few people had was an insult.

    When I read a post like DS’s amazon post, I see somebody who is saying don’t judge, but then whispering her own ‘judgement’ out the side of her mouth. The way I read her post, I see her appointing herself as Nora Robert’s judge and jury, I see somebody saying don’t attack, while the implication DO ATTACK.. but ATTACK THIS PERSON comes through in her words

    Is that how she meant to come across? I can’t say. I don’t know her. But I do know that she is a writer and that writers, better than anybody, should understand the power of words.

    More, the implications that none of the readers or writers are ‘qualified’ to decide if plagiarism occurred is a backhanded insult. Again, whether she meant that or not, I don’t know… but that is the message that came across. Again, writers should understand the power of words.

    But what really struck me as odd was the “violinist” and “grandmother” part, as though to incite pity.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’ve publicly stated I feel a little sorry for CE~NOT because she was caught and not because she was caught publicly, but for whatever reason drove her to this.

    But putting a ‘human’ face on an unethical act doesn’t change the fact that the unethical act occurred and I don’t care to have somebody attempt to manipulate me into feeling otherwise. I get the feelings others don’t care for it either.

    The other that struck me wrong was the deletion of this post shortly after more *allegedly* plagiarized info came to light. Maybe it was deleted because she didn’t want to catch the flak that arose. But it also appears that she realizes maybe the readers/writers concerned about the plagiarism had legit views and leaving her views out there wasn’t a wise biz move? Or maybe she realized the implied insults and realized she’d made a poor judgment call~ that’s possible.

    IMO, the wiser move would have been to leave the post, with an update explaining that her views had changed, or this or that… and if she deleted it because of judgment call, realizing maybe she’d bit off a bit too much or insulted people, intentionally or otherwise, then an apology would have reflected much better on her.

    And an apology because the insults to NR and to readers in general is implied, if not stated.

    Perhaps she didn’t intend to insult but people did feel insulted. I might not intend to bump into somebody when I’m rushing into a store, but if I do, I owe that person an apology and an ‘excuse me’. Last year, I did something unintentionally that upset a reader~unintentional, but nonetheless, it happened, it was my fault and it was my responsibility to offer an apology.

    So what we have is an author saying one thing, but implying another, an author implying that unethical acts shouldn’t be addressed if the person is an accomplished musician or has grandkids. We have the implication that many of us can’t think for ourselves.

    And yes, those are how DS’s comments came across to me.
    The bottom line is that DS’s post came off as insulting not just to NR, but to a number of people. When people feel insulted, or when somebody they respect has been insulted, however backhandedly, many people are going to respond in kind.

    So there is my opinion on the whys….

    I don’t know DS. Prior to this, I don’t know that I’d even heard her name. I have no personal beef with her. But she made some unwise comments, some insulting ones, and instead of making an apology, she deletes the post. Whether that was WHY she deleted it is unknown, but by deleting it and acting as though it never happened, it only made things worse.

    ReplyReply


  • guh… tired, need caffeine. or sleep.

    This wasn’t entirely clear

    Now if an author came out and slung personal insults regarding intelligence, personal lssues, weight, appearance…etcetcetc, then I’d look down on that author and pay little attention to them. But most of the perceived attacks on the author are actually directed at the ACT.

    The perceived attacks I’m referring to are the ones against CE. People are taking criticism of an unethical act and seeing it as personal insults. There is a different. Yes, criticism of an author’s work can feel very personal… but writing is a business. Writers who’ve been in the game a while know this. The wise ones act accordingly.

    People weren’t coming out and screeching on blogs some intentionally hurtful, personal slur against CE.

    They were making a stand against the ACT of plagiarism.

    and pardon the italics, guys… it’s late and I oughta be in bed.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 22
    12:42 pm

    Maybe Smith should have refrained from stating, on Amazon and several other blogs and sites, that I had no business giving my opinion. Maybe she should have refrained from using inflammatory language when speaking about me on numerous blogs. Maybe she should’ve stuck with her opinion on plagiarism (even though she doesn’t appear to understand the correct definition of the term) instead of questioning my right to give my opinion on an important issue.

    Maybe you should have refrained from stating I play the diva now and then, and that hundreds of people will blindly follow my lead.

    But we all make our own choices when we speak.

    I made mine.

    ReplyReply

  • I do agree with her that NR’s voice does have power and does influence some people without thoroughly checking out the facts. You pick the percentage. 1%, 2%, less? Does it matter? One? But I never said everyone. Hell, in fact I said 100. Nora sells how many books to how many fans? But one would still be too much.

    And, you see, this is where we keep getting stuck. Please tell me why? Why is it unacceptable that Nora Roberts influence people with her opinion? It’s part of what it means to be a publicly respected figure, or in Nora’s case, a jabillion time bestselling author.

    I think she’s earned the right to have her voice be heard.

    No where did Nora say, to my knowledge, “Cassie Edwards plagiarized, take my word for it. Think what I think and do what I do.” She seems to give her fans a hell of a lot more credit than you do.

    I, for one, had been following the CE story on Smart Bitches, long before Nora’s comments to the AP were published. The situation seemed pretty damn clear to me. When the AP’s first article came out my reaction was, “you have got to be kidding me!” Then when Nora’s comments were released, my initial thought was, “thank god, finally someone with a brain.” Further, I didn’t see it as “Nora Roberts, uber author speaks.” I saw it as “Nora Roberts, victim of plagiarism and person in a position to make a difference, does her part.”

    KJ
    who really needs some coffee

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    2:39 pm

    Nora,

    Maybe you should have refrained from stating I play the diva now and then, and that hundreds of people will blindly follow my lead.

    Why should I? I believe this. My stating this was directly in response to Anne’s post. Saying you sometimes act like a diva is certainly less than Karen or others calling Deb Smith a “fu*ktard. I do not regret stating my response to Anne on this, or my opinion.

    And I think it rather ironic that people have missed that point. But I guess it is okay to do that since she is not a regular here and you are.

    However, this is more about eveyone’s comments on Deb Smith’s blog. Karen is allowing comments on this blog as to how you feel about her comments on Deb Smiths blog. I am therefore just stating my opinion on the matter.

    I disagree with her (Deb Smith’s) stance that you(NR) should not speak out on the subject. And instead offer that when someone of your stature and power does speak out, we need to simply make sure of what the facts are, not blindly follow. Just because you speak out, or anyone else of your stature and power speaks out, we as readers, simply need to be aware of the facts before we make a decision.

    ie… you have an “opinion” on the subject, ie you are a person too, with all the normal vices and virtues.

    This is how I feel that Smith should have approach this subject.

    That is my opinion.

    And like you, I have one.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    2:47 pm

    Kayleigh,

    I think she’s earned the right to have her voice be heard.

    If you look at my first post, I think I said the same thing.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 22
    3:02 pm

    I want to add one more comment on this thread and then I will leave. Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR and is not afraid to say it….lol.

    I agree with the tone of Deb Smiths blog were she implies that she is uncomfortable with the ruining of a woman’s career and livihood so swiftly.

    I think the mob/frenzy on this subject on the net needs to back down and lets hope the author addresses the whys and wherefores on this subject.

    She may be guilty. I have not had a chance to really research it myself yet. And I am not ready to make that judgement on the net and am unwilling to do so based on what I have read by authors (NR for example) or bloggers, discussing that they think she is guilty.

    I think some people are simply to busy to do that research and would simply believe what is being said in blogs like these.

    That is meant to be uncomplimentary to those people who do this. I have no regret in saying that I think some people will do this. You guys have so much faith in all readers that you are willing to negate that as a reasonable assumption? Fine. All readers are rocket scientists who know everything.

    I do not have that faith, because I know some will simply not take the time.

    That scares me for everyone. That a frenzy on a subject can steamroll from blog to blog within a matter of days and ruin someone’s career.

    And given the trend for romance writers to NOT use footnote or referencing in the back of their books, I think when people start researching other works, it’s gonna be a real eyeopener.

    ReplyReply

  • My first post started with “Anne”, which meant I was responding specifically to “Anne’s” post in the comments section. Did everyone miss that? I had read her comments and felt compelled to respond on what she said.

    Me, “Anne”? WTF did I say to start the thread of bitchery? LOL

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 22
    3:39 pm

    Catty, as I said we all make our choices when we speak. We each made ours. I suppose what I object to is your wording. Especially when you go on to state:

    ~Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR and is not afraid to say it….lol.~

    See, this is insulting to me, and to others who’ve commented. This makes it personal again, and isn’t addressing the issue. It sweeps in generalization.

    You choose, again, to make your point in disagreeing that readers can and will make their own informed decisions by leaping to the other end of the pole with the rocket scientist remark.

    For me, this isn’t the way to make your point or add to a discussion.

    And it’s not a ‘trend’ for romance writers (or indeed the vast majority of novelists) not to footnote.

    ReplyReply

  • If you look at my first post, I think I said the same thing.

    Yes, you did. But your numerous subsequent posts on the subject imply that you don’t really think so.

    I have not had a chance to really research it myself yet. And I am not ready to make that judgement on the net and am unwilling to do so based on what I have read by authors (NR for example) or bloggers, discussing that they think she is guilty.

    Well I for one have. My opinion of CE’s guilt is based upon my own research and what I’ve seen with my own two eyes and processed with my own brain.

    I am always amused by the standard response of anyone whose opinion is unpopular or, in some cases, flat out wrong. Everyone else is a mob! They’re unfairly prosecuting, blindly!

    You’re voicing an unpopular opinion here. Don’t expect people to agree with you. I fail to see this mob mentality that you and a handful of others continue to claim.

    KJ

    ReplyReply

  • I agree with the tone of Deb Smiths blog were she implies that she is uncomfortable with the ruining of a woman’s career and livihood so swiftly.

    I agree with this statement, but what does this have to do with Nora Roberts? She wasn’t the one who first spoke of this. She was asked her opinion on the subject of plagiarism and gave her opinion on the subject. I didn’t see her making it personal but rather referring to the act of plagiarism and the consequences of the it. YOU are the one making it personal when it doesn’t need to be.

    ReplyReply

  • Oh, for the love of Pete, I backtracked and found out why I, indeed, am the “Anne” in question. Funny how people can misconstrue and manipulate posts. Do you know Nora Roberts personally, Catty? No? Me either which is why I spoke in general terms when I referred to her online persona that I’ve seen. Calling her a diva makes it seem as if you know her personally which obviously is not the case. Yes, she has a lot of influence over the romance community, but you know what? She has EARNED that right. She has become THE face of romance which, I imagine, can be daunting at times. But you know what else? She handles it with grace and professionalism and from what I’ve seen, she hasn’t resorted to finger-pointing as some others have. Finger-pointing reminds me of high school, and are we not adults? Stop making it personal when it doesn’t need to be… and Ms. Smith should do the same. If she has a problem with NR, she should take it up with NR rather than making it public and running wild with accusations and comments that aren’t necessarily true.

    I’ve HATED this subject since it was brought up… Ask Karen, she’ll tell you… and you want to know why? Because it went from being about plagiarism to being about CE, then about Ms. Smith, and then about NR… I KNEW it would be blown out of proportion, name calling and finger-pointing would ensue, and it looks like I was right. For the love of all that is holy, LET THE SUBJECT DIE ALREADY!

    See Karen? THIS is why I was avoiding this whole thing. LOL Oye.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 22
    4:01 pm

    I’m going to continue being catty myself, and post a further translation of cattymiss’s posts:

    “If I disagree with your take on the evidence, it’s not because you have seen the evidence and I haven’t; it’s because I know better. And when I disagree with NR (and everyone who happens to agree with her because they have seen the same evidence she has), it’s because I’m the only one capable of thinking for myself. Finally, when you explain to me why you continue disagreeing with me, I resort to calling you a mob of NR’s fangrrrls. See how superior I am?”

    Now I’m going to have coffee and get a hold of myself.

    ReplyReply

  • If I disagree with your take on the evidence, it’s not because you have seen the evidence and I haven’t; it’s because I know better. And when I disagree with NR (and everyone who happens to agree with her because they have seen the same evidence she has), it’s because I’m the only one capable of thinking for myself. Finally, when you explain to me why you continue disagreeing with me, I resort to calling you a mob of NR’s fangrrrls. See how superior I am?

    If it’ll make you feel better to do so, then feel free. *eyeroll*

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 22
    4:29 pm

    *horrified* Anne, this was my, azteclady’s, interpretation of cattymiss’s posts–it was NOT a direct quote.

    Now I feel awful.

    “Kids, this is the morale of this story: don’t indulge in cattyness. It never turns out the way you wanted it to.”

    Wish I could state categorically that I’ve learned that lesson.

    ReplyReply

  • Oh, oops. Snort See what happens when you paraphrase instead of plagiarise, Azteclady? LMAO Oh boy, this was funny. Heeee!

    ReplyReply

  • I want to add one more comment on this thread and then I will leave. Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR and is not afraid to say it….lol.

    There is a HUGE difference between being blinded and admiring somebody for their work & their online presence.

    I admire NR a lot. Seriously. A lot. There is only other writer that I admire on the same level with NR. Two authors that might make me do a fangirl ‘squee’ should I get to meet them.

    However…. I have no problem disagreeing with anybody, regardless of who they are, and voicing my opinion if I feel it’s relevant. (And often, even when it isn’t)

    What you don’t seem to understand is that a person can agree without being *blinded*.

    Writers are entitled to make our viewpoints clear without or without being asked. Just as NR has done. And yes, even as DS has done, although DS did so in a way that came across as a backhanded insult. That is what people are taking exception to. It isn’t the fact that DS had an opposing opinion, it’s the fact that she used her opinion to attack a popular author and slap at anybody that didn’t see things her way.

    And please, do not make the implication that I’m a blind fangirl following merrily along. Anybody that has more than a bare acquaintance with me can easily tell you that I’d rather take an opposing stance on a controversial subject just to be obstinate. It’s a character flaw~however, it also pretty much means I’m never going to blindly follow anybody. If and when I voice my opinions on a controversial subject, they are *my* opinions and mine alone.

    Your repeated insinuations that none of us have a thought in our heads unless NR put it there are insulting, and it’s why very few people look past those insults to see if you might have anything worthwhile to say.

    All of this, naturally, is just my opinion, but it’s something to consider.

    ReplyReply

  • it went from being about plagiarism to being about CE, then about Ms. Smith, and then about NR… I KNEW it would be blown out of proportion, name calling and finger-pointing would ensue

    Yep. It’s why I’ve tried to keep my comments about plagiarism itself. It should be about the ACT. Slurs, personal insults, personal attacks have no place in the discussion, IMO ~ even as far as CE goes. The places where I’ve seen what I perceived as an attack on CE and not on the issue are places I didn’t linger long.

    ReplyReply


  • Jenn L
    January 22
    7:30 pm

    What I find intriguing is the interpretation of an article that was only a few paragraphs in length. If those defenders of Ms. Smith could remove the blinders momentarily and put themselves on the other side of the argument they might have a little more compassion.

    Forget for a moment that the person speaking out about plagarism is Nora Roberts, but some other author who had his or her work copied and passed off as someone elses. Would you feel hurt or meligned? Absolutely, and justifiably so.

    The AP approached Nora, more than likely for her persona and national appeal I’m not denying that. Whether you agree with her or not she is successful and therefore has earned respect in this community.

    So you don’t like her books, you think this topic is trivial then make a choice and go away. Until you have walked in the shoes of someone who has had there work “Borrowed” then you have no say in the matter.

    Nora has been wronged before by plagarism and that alone makes her a voice to be heard. I for one think she is nothing but gracious and respectful of all posters here and she has not stooped to a level that many against her have. Yet she continues to respect you when clearly you have lost the right to her respect.

    Plagirism may not be a legal crime, but to the writer whose work was stolen I am sure it feels like one.

    ReplyReply


  • Michelle
    January 22
    7:47 pm

    I and others have said it before. The best defense is a good offense. When there is no way to defend one’s actions-plagerism, you see the attacks, the phrases “witch hunts” and mob mentality. Because they can’t just stick to the facts when the facts are undefendable.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 22
    8:01 pm

    She may be guilty. I have not had a chance to really research it myself yet. And I am not ready to make that judgement on the net and am unwilling to do so based on what I have read by authors (NR for example) or bloggers, discussing that they think she is guilty.

    Who are you talking about? Deborah Smith or CE? If you’re talking about DS, well let’s say you haven’t read her blog the same way I (and many others) did, and let’s leave it at that. If you’re talking about CE, then what do you have to research exactly? All you need to do is to look at the side by side comparisons of ‘her work’ and the work of the people who she’s lifted from, on the Smart Bitches blog.

    Although, I must say, if you’ve entered this conversation without reading those excerpts in the first place, well… you are seriously in danger of having a permanent place on my ‘Fucktard’ list.

    ReplyReply

  • So you didn’t agree with the way she worded how she felt about the costume?

    What the freck does that have to do with how she feels about this subject?

    No, I didn’t agree with DS’s comments about the costumes. That’s exactly why it didn’t surprise me that I disagree with the stance in her blog about CE.

    There’s no cause and effect relationship there. I disagree with both opinions and would disagree no matter who had said them.

    The fact that DS made both statements shows a pattern–that’s all.

    ReplyReply

  • Although, I must say, if you’ve entered this conversation without reading those excerpts in the first place, well… you are seriously in danger of having a permanent place on my ‘Fucktard’ list.

    Excited girly clapping. I do so love your fucktardation list, Karen.

    Which reminds me, will your “Authors Behaving Like Fucktards” list reappear on the new blog? I loved reading those when I was bored.

    KJ

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    5:14 am

    karen,

    Then put me on your fucktard list because I have not finished reading it yet and I doubt it makes much difference in this conversation because that was not my point. But for the record, I had read some and am not sure of the laws and definitions of plagerism, so I am not willing to state CE is guilty yet.

    I have learned several lessons from this foray into posting on your blog:

    It is okay to call deb smith a “fucktard” and not okay to say Nora Roberts sometimes acts like a diva.

    Everyone here believes all romance readers and authors have time to read everything. Everything. They don’t make snap judgements based on a frenzy happening on the net.

    It is not okay to make generalizations that may or may not be true based on opinion.

    I am sure I am on the fucktard list after this.

    These are things I have learned.

    I am a fucktard.

    Back to your regularly scheduled programming folks.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    5:31 am

    and Ps, for the record.

    I believe that Nora Roberts has a right to say whatever she pleases. Not because she is Nora Roberts, mega author, but because she is Nora Roberts, human being.

    Do I believe she has expertise in the field and this area of plagarism? She has mega expertise.

    But once again, I understand Deb Smith’s underlying point that when Nora speaks, people listen. Let’s just hope that she (Nora) knows what she is talking about and is always right.

    Always.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 23
    8:07 am

    I had read some and am not sure of the laws and definitions of plagerism, so I am not willing to state CE is guilty yet

    OK, why don’t you go away, read all of it, because I suspect you haven’t really read any of it, which strikes me as being particularly stupid when you’re trying to defend somebody.

    Do I believe she has expertise in the field and this area of plagarism? She has mega expertise.

    You’re back-tracking dear.

    But once again, I understand Deb Smith’s underlying point that when Nora speaks, people listen.

    What a crock of shit. Deb Smith’s underlying point was nothing to do with people listening to Nora when she speaks, she was berating Nora for speaking out in the first place, which yes, makes her a ‘Fucktard’, and quite frankly, everytime you post, her status as a fucktard grows, because you make her look even worse.

    She’s a multi-published author who really should have known better than to go off half-cocked in public. It made her look stupid, and it seemed to those of us who can see word for word copying and know that it is indeed plagiarism, that she was almost condoning it, and urging the community to be quiet, and stop picking on the poor old woman.

    Catty, let’s agree to disagree, ok, because it’s obvious neither of us will change our minds on this issue, which is perfectly fine.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    1:01 pm

    Do you really know what is so frustrating about this foray into commenting on your blog.

    I have six or seven people who read snippets of posts. It’s like you can’t read beyond two sentences and assimilate what I am saying as a whole.

    I am not backtracking, deary! Read my original post. You seem to use that justification when arguing with people quite a bit. Do you know the difference between backtracking and expanding on what a person has been trying to get across?

    The other thing is having someone call you a liar when they are trying to justify their own point. I have done exactly what I said I did on the CE issue, Karen. Just because you saw what you saw and decided CE was guilty does not mean that I am willing to do so. Stupid? No, I consider it prudent and smart because, duh, we are talking about a woman who has had a long career and I am not willing to just blow shi*te on that because some Fucktard who has a blog says I should.

    If you want commentors who say you are right all the time why didn’t you say so in the first place. I could have saved a couple of hours of my life.

    As far as how you feel about DS? You apparently decide people are Fucktards based on snippets of what you read.

    I got her main point. You didn’t.

    So yes, lets agree to disagree.

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 23
    1:44 pm

    Catty, I read all of your posts, and assimulated what you said. I’ll wager most if not all of the others posting here did the same.

    People disagreed with many of your statements, and the manner you chose to state your opinions.

    Posters here read DS’s post in its entirety, too. And, obviously, have a different take on it than you do.

    ReplyReply

  • Just because you saw what you saw and decided CE was guilty does not mean that I am willing to do so.

    Since this is a common theme in your comments, Cattymiss, I have to ask—what, exactly, are you looking for as far as evidence? If documented plagiarism in at least 20 of CE’s books isn’t evidence of plagiarism, what is?

    If you’re waiting for the Smoking Gun to report SWAT teams crashed through her windows and shipped her off to Gitmo, that ain’t gonna happen.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    2:36 pm

    Nora,

    Thank you for saying that at least. I can accept disagreement.

    Stacey,

    What is funny about this to me? I keep saying I started my comments on the blog about deborah smith. Not specifically about CE, only about what deb smith was saying about NR. Within the 1st 2 or 3 comments I made it clear that I had not finished reading all the stuff. Many who have responded to me seems to think I should be able to read it and immediately judge. I am not willing to do that. I had no idea that I needed to be completely informed on the CE subject before I would be allowed to be taken seriously to comment. I had only had a chance to briefly read thru the pdf at SB.

    ReplyReply

  • If you have neither the time nor the inclination to read the documentation, that’s fine. If you don’t have the information you feel you need to judge for yourself, that’s fine.

    But to say WE don’t have the documentation needed to judge whether or not CE is guilty of plagiarism and are condemning her only because Nora Said So is wrong. Scrolling up through the names, I know most—if not all— the people in this comment thread have been following this incident from the beginning and reading the documentation as it’s been presented.

    So, while YOU may not be willing to make a judgement, most or all of the people in this ‘room’ know Cassie Edwards has committed numerous, ongoing, deliberate acts of plagiarism.

    Which makes DS’s defense of her and unprofessional, unwarranted snide remarks about NR rather suspect.

    ReplyReply

  • Do you really know what is so frustrating about this foray into commenting on your blog.

    Catty,

    I’ve already said this once, but I have no problem saying it again.

    I’d like to point out that there’s something equally frustrating about your comments on this blog and it has nothing to do with the fact that you don’t agree with people, or that you don’t agree with Karen.

    There are very often times I don’t agree with Karen. Or anybody. It’s in my makeup.

    No, what is frustrating about your comments is your refusal to see that you’ve insulted people. And because you keep doing it, you can’t see that we’re disagreeing with your insults… NOT telling you that you aren’t welcome to an opinion.

    Yes, Nora is a respected woman and yes, she speaks and people will often listen. I get that. Nora gets that. I don’t recall seeing her tell anybody to go out and grab plagiarists and string them up.

    Could she have instructed people on the in and outs of plagiarism and urged them to educate themselves on it? Yeah. I imagine she could have… and I also believe she has in several areas.

    But she was asked for a statement on whether she believes somebody plagiarized. She responded honestly and I believe she responded professionally.

    I’d imagine Nora puts thought into what she sees says and whether she likes it or not, I bet she knows that she has a lot of people who respect her and look to her as an example.

    I would hate to be in her shoes. It’s a high standard and I think she does an admirable job of meeting it.

    I also believe that her speaking out made her a target to certain individuals, simply because she had the guts to speak out. She’s getting slammed left and right for giving an opinion when asked.

    But if she hadn’t given that opinion, a lot of people would be unaware of the importance of the issue. Unaware people don’t always bother to educate themselves on an issue.

    So again… it isn’t that you disagree with the general commentary.

    It’s that you are insulting while doing it.

    It’s that you repeatedly do it.

    And that is what many people are taking exception to.

    you want to take time and educate yourself on plagiarism, understand it before you make a judgment call, cool. I can get that. I can respect it. I’d rather something know what they are speaking about before they make a statement.

    But I have little inclination to read the opinion of a woman who condemn others for making judgment and being insulting when that woman is doing the exact same thing.

    You don’t people here to insult you. Fine.

    But it might be best to stop being so insulting towards them.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    5:27 pm

    Shannon,

    I don’t know how many times I have to say this. I NEVER SAID the following about anyone on this blog comment.

    But to say WE don’t have the documentation needed to judge whether or not CE is guilty of plagiarism and are condemning her only because Nora Said So is wrong.

    Please, I would like you to take the time to specifically find in my comments where I said people here(on this blog comments) are doing this. I am serious, give me that one consideration, and if I am wrong I will apologize to all here. No backtracking.

    It was obvious to me that people here have done the research before I even started commenting on this blog. Nora pointed out that my problem may have been that I was making sweeping generalizations, but within one or two follow up posts, I corrected that and made it plain. Not backtracking, simply expanding on what I meant.

    My comments were about people in general, even if it is a small percentage out there. I consider myself one who has not yet taken the time, so I could see where DS was coming from. The frenzy out there on this is out of control.

    Finally, with the exception of the “diva” comment about NR, which I made in replying to Anne’s comments, I had no intention to insult anyone here, until I was insulted. So for those, if my opinion insulted you personally, you need to understand that in some respects, the blog tone that day bothered me. Which is probably why I finally came out and posted in the first place.

    ReplyReply



  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    5:28 pm

    freck, sorry for the “bold” problem on that last comment.

    ReplyReply

  • For Nora Roberts to state publically that CE is guilty of this from an armchair/internet without seeing all the facts on paper would be irresponsible and an abuse of that “voice” she has. (…snip…) Everyone is judging this woman without all the facts and is doing so on just partial information or what appears to be the facts.

    *

    What I said had to do with being careful to not to jump in on a mob mentality and judging someone guilty before one reviews all the facts. I have only been in on this for a couple of days so I am certainly not gonna do so. But looking at the history of it, I am seeing that mob mentality.

    *

    I will say it again, I think the responsiblity is not on NR’s shoulders to hold back what she thinks, but rather on our shoulders to understand that she is only one voice and is just a normal person just like the rest of us when it comes to an opinion.

    However, I do agree with Smith and think her(NR) voice does carry power because she is NR. I don’t know why people are shaking their heads at that. For every 10 that knows the difference, there is one on the net that thinks “oh, it is NR, she must know what she is talking about”. I don’t think that should stop NR from speaking out. Just stop those that automatically think “NR thinks she is guilty so she must be guilty”.

    *

    I disagree with her (Deb Smith’s) stance that you(NR) should not speak out on the subject. And instead offer that when someone of your stature and power does speak out, we need to simply make sure of what the facts are, not blindly follow. Just because you speak out, or anyone else of your stature and power speaks out, we as readers, simply need to be aware of the facts before we make a decision.

    A sampling pulled from your comments during this conversation.

    It’s all well and good that now you want to say it wasn’t directed at anybody here but rather is aimed at a small percentage of somebody else, but that’s the problem with sweeping generalizations—instead of insulting a small percentage, everybody’s insulted.

    But I’m curious—since you freely admit you’re not aware of all the facts relating to this incident, does the fact you’d post on a blog and defend Deborah Smith’s opinion make you a weak-minded follower, too, or does that only apply to people who agree with Nora’s opinion?

    ReplyReply

  • …But once again, I understand Deb Smith’s underlying point that when Nora speaks, people listen.

    You’re right. When Nora speaks, people listen. But more than that, when Nora spoke, some people in the industry hit save on the current wip document and spent the time checking out whattheh*llisgoingonnow. And that’s what was needed, because upon first glance, some of us deadline dementia writers did the “oh, for pete sakes CE what were you thinking” eye roll and went back to work.

    Bad move. Stupid move. But sometimes the whizzing sound of that approaching deadline sucks the non-writing brain cells right out of the head and creates major tunnel vision.

    But it doesn’t mean that we let Nora make our opinions for us–the facts are out there in enough detail to make our own judgement call.

    I for one wouldn’t have seen how horrible the situation was if Nora hadn’t spoken out. Of course on the other hand I might be closer to hitting the deadline, but this educational side trip was needed.

    Nora should be thanked for calling our attention to the matter at hand, not thwapped for doing so. It makes me cringe to realize that the thwapping came from someone in the same industry. That’s just…for lack of a better description…that’s just sad.

    Nora, thank you for speaking up and out.

    And now I’ll return to normal cloak mode and get back to work.

    Denise Lynn

    ReplyReply

  • Please, I would like you to take the time to specifically find in my comments where I said people here(on this blog comments) are doing this. I am serious, give me that one consideration, and if I am wrong I will apologize to all here. No backtracking.

    I’m not sure why I’m responding to this, Catty. The few times I’ve bothered to offer my opinions as to why people are coming down on you, I’ve been ignored.

    But I’ll take you up on this…. and it’s right here.

    I want to add one more comment on this thread and then I will leave. Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR and is not afraid to say it….lol.

    Considering you were discussing how people too often blindly follow because they are busy and don’t wish to research…etcetcetc, prior to making the above comment, and then you tell us

    Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR

    and it’s directed at anybody participating in the conversation, it sort of leads one to believe that we are blindly following.

    The “LOL” part doesn’t negate that fact that we were all told we are blinded by Nora. Any attempt at levity doesn’t negate that we were told we were blinded by Nora.

    If you weren’t trying to imply that all of us are nothing more than lemmings, then perhaps you should look back and read that line again and see how it can come across as very insulting.

    And speaking of being clear, I want to make it clear that I’m not trying to pick on you or insult you. I see no point in it. If you weren’t trying to be insulting, hey, that’s fine. I’ve unintentionally insulted people plenty of times. It does happen.

    But it’s been mentioned that comment was insulting. Several times. From several different people.

    You persistently continue to overlook every time somebody has pointed this out to you. Most of the commenters here have made been upfront about stating their opinions~yes, often agreeing with Nora, but agreeing doesn’t equal blind adoration.

    If you weren’t trying to make a blanket statement regarding all of the commenters here, then where did this statement come from and how else should we take it?

    Obviously you guys are uncomfortable with someone who is not blinded by the greatness of NR and is not afraid to say it….lol.

    ReplyReply

  • Within the 1st 2 or 3 comments I made it clear that I had not finished reading all the stuff. Many who have responded to me seems to think I should be able to read it and immediately judge. I am not willing to do that.

    Yes, “picking” out one or two lines of your post again so that you can assume I didn’t read the whole thing, when I have, in fact, read your entire bloody diatribe and rolled my eyes at the whole.

    If you have enough time to batter back and forth with us here, on Karen’s blog about the CE/DS issue, then why do you not have time to go and educate yourself about the core of the controversy? Seems to me your time could be better spent doing that than this.

    I have no idea what your livelihood is, so I can’t draw a comparison here for you, but imagine you’re at work, and you spend copious amounts of time on a project. You work your ass off, and turn it in. Then a week, a month, a year later someone else comes along and says, “hey, did you see Kayleigh’s project? It’s awesome! It’s going to make the company millions.” You double check and sure enough, Kayleigh’s project is YOUR project, copied word for word. Then someone comes along and says, “Well, I don’t know, I can’t really be bothered to compare the two, but even if she did take your work, it’s not such a big deal.” Kayleigh gets the promotion. You don’t. Kayleigh gets famous, you don’t. Wouldn’t you be even slightly offended, not only at Kayleigh’s wrong actions, but at the person who seemed to think it no big deal?

    KJ

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 23
    7:40 pm

    Okay…

    More from Ms Smith on Angelle Trieste’s blog:

    Your comment about “dead authors and/or expired copyrights” points to a huge mistake people are making when they yell “plagiarism.” It’s not Plagiarism to use works with expired copyrights. It’s also not plagiarism to quote nonfiction sources to a certain degree. There are “fair use” regulations in copyright law — they’re complex and open to a LOT of interpretation, which is why NO ONE should be accusing C.E. or any other author of “plagiarism” until the case has been fully reviewed by copyright experts. The piling on by bloggers and Nora Roberts is reckless and unfair at best, libelous at worse. C.E. has been dragged over the coals in the court of public opinon over what may be very mean-spirited, ignorant and WRONG assumptions.

    For anyone–looking at you, Cattymiss–who cares to see where Ms Smith is completely off her rocker, allow me to point you to the fabulous primer for copyright, plagiarism, fair use, etc. at the SmartBitches.

    Once you are all edumacated on what is and what ain’t what, then you can go read the side by side comparisons on the pdf document, and then you can come and share your wisdom with us ignorant twits.

    (Yes, that last bit was sarcastic)

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 23
    7:50 pm

    Oh and rats, I forgot the other leetle thang I wanted to post…

    Ms Smith posted this in her amazon blog (apparently the only blog she has–but please don’t take my word for this, my Google-fu ain’t too good on the best of days):

    Hi all

    Above is the title for the sequel to A Place To Call Home. Coming in 2008. And look for an audio edition of A GENTLE RAIN by spring. “Rain” continues to rack up nice reviews and has just won a Reviewer’s Choice Award from CATA Network.

    In other news, the Cassie Edwards controversy is bringing some notable self-proclaimed “snarkers” to epiphanies. Over on her “arrggh” blog, author Jennifer Cruisie vows to tone down her own (self-described) love of “snide and demeaning” gossip — and also vows to no longer hang out at the blog that launched the Edwards attack.

    Legendary reviewer Mrs. Giggles blogs that she’s re-examining her take-no-prisoners style out of a concern that her writings will be viewed in the same light as the Edwards’ bloggers. IMHO Mrs. Giggles is delightfully terrifying but very, very fair. No comparison to the tone of the blog site that made Edwards a target.

    There does seem to be some rancor towards the Smart Bitches in Ms Smith’s heart, doesn’t it?

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    7:59 pm

    Shannon,

    I really appreciate you taking the time to talk with me and give me examples.

    If a person just read those snippets and did not clearly understand my perspective or motivation, then I might feel exactly as you feel. I do apologize.

    This will be a lesson learned in making sure I qualify that pespective first and being more careful of using the “us and you” words in my generalizations.

    I promised no backtracking with that apology, so I will respond on another comment in a bit about your last statement.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    8:23 pm

    Azteclady,

    I hope I am not gonna get shot down for this, but I have a love/hate relationship myself with the SB site. I don’t comment there much, but there are days that I love SB’s rancor and then there are days that I think they go too far beyond the pale.

    But regardless of their movtivation, I do not believe in shooting the messenger if the message is truth.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 23
    8:29 pm

    Cattymiss, there’s one of my comments, prior to the one you are replying to, that is still awaiting moderation *looking pointedly at Karen*

    Once that one is visible, it may help you understand why some of us (okay, at least ME) find Ms Smith’s comments at the very least biased.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    8:42 pm

    If you have enough time to batter back and forth with us here, on Karen’s blog about the CE/DS issue, then why do you not have time to go and educate yourself about the core of the controversy? Seems to me your time could be better spent doing that than this.

    Um…I am doing it. I am about finished. I was doing it when I made my first comment. Which was about Deb Smith’s blog. I have spent too much time defending “my initial opinions” about that. You are right.

    Also, sorry if I did not respond to your previous posts but I am but one person and have several people responding to me about the same time I am trying to type a response to another. Each time I respond, I have seen several other posts made since. I can’t respond to all. I have a life here somewhere… lol.

    Several, including Karen’s response, made me angry and I responded out of anger and cattyness. Okay, now you guys know why for my username. I admit it. But more than that it is out of frustration.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    8:45 pm

    Azteclady,

    What is “waiting for moderation” mean? Remember, I am new at posting on this new blog so I do not quite understand. When I post, my comment is in a big white box for a while. Does this mean something?

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    9:11 pm

    azteclady,

    Oh good lord, before I forget. I just went thru all the comments again and realized that I had missed this exchange which almost made me just squeeeeee peeeeeee in me pants.

    Azteclady 107
    I’m going to continue being catty myself, and post a further translation of cattymiss’s posts:

    “If I disagree with your take on the evidence, it’s not because you have seen the evidence and I haven’t; it’s because I know better. And when I disagree with NR (and everyone who happens to agree with her because they have seen the same evidence she has), it’s because I’m the only one capable of thinking for myself. Finally, when you explain to me why you continue disagreeing with me, I resort to calling you a mob of NR’s fangrrrls. See how superior I am?”

    Now I’m going to have coffee and get a hold of myself.

    Anne
    Posted: Jan 22nd, 2008 at 4:14 pm 108

    “If I disagree with your take on the evidence, it’s not because you have seen the evidence and I haven’t; it’s because I know better. And when I disagree with NR (and everyone who happens to agree with her because they have seen the same evidence she has), it’s because I’m the only one capable of thinking for myself. Finally, when you explain to me why you continue disagreeing with me, I resort to calling you a mob of NR’s fangrrrls. See how superior I am?”

    If it’ll make you feel better to do so, then feel free. *eyeroll*

    azteclady
    Posted: Jan 22nd, 2008 at 4:29 pm 109

    *horrified* Anne, this was my, azteclady’s, interpretation of cattymiss’s posts–it was NOT a direct quote.

    Now I feel awful.

    “Kids, this is the morale of this story: don’t indulge in cattyness. It never turns out the way you wanted it to.”

    Wish I could state categorically that I’ve learned that lesson.

    Anne
    Posted: Jan 22nd, 2008 at 4:46 pm 110

    Oh, oops. Snort See what happens when you paraphrase instead of plagiarise, Azteclady? LMAO Oh boy, this was funny. Heeee!

    I think if I had seen that I probably would have stopped everything and just slunk away. But looking back it is hilarious to me now. Very ironic and hilarious!

    On a more serious note. Your interpretation… I am sorry that it came across that way. It was certainly not meant that way.

    Does anyone ever get a second chance to redo here? I think I know how to word what I initially meant a bit better now, but am just scared it would no longer make a difference.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 23
    9:16 pm

    Modration: when a post triggers some sort of alarm for the site, and it’s sent to some sort of folder until such a time the owner gets a chance to approve it. You know whether one of YOUR posts is awaiting moderation because a)it says so in grey letters at the top of the comment, and b)no one else can read it *sniff*

    Incidentally, I see that the comment in question is now visible (thank you, Karen dear).

    As for second chances, I fear that you won’t be willing to give me one after reading that post! *wince*

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    January 23
    9:18 pm

    It’s not my blog, but I think everyone’s entitled to a second chance, especially when they cop to a mistake and apologize for it.

    I think Karen would say the same.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    January 23
    9:34 pm

    Does anyone ever get a second chance to redo here? I think I know how to word what I initially meant a bit better now, but am just scared it would no longer make a difference.

    Nora’s right, I’m all for redoing cuz I do understand that not everybody is as perfect as me.:) So, yes, go forth and redo!

    By the way, my blog will hold in moderation, any comment with over three links included within it. It’s just an anti-spam thing.

    AL, my blog clearly isn’t feeling you, because it keeps catching your posts in my spam catcher.

    ReplyReply


  • JaimeK
    January 23
    9:40 pm

    Wow! I have kept up with the Bitches on this and then found this thread today and read through it completely. (shiloh you are my hero.)

    It was stated a couple of times at the beginning, but not forcefully enough:

    What Cassie Edward’s has done, regardless of age or if she plays a violin, is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. PERIOD.

    Ms. Smith putting her two cents worth in is her right – what I question is her need to bitch slap another author, whether she is accomplished or has money (how the hell would Smith know what Nora does or does not make?). All of that being completely and totally beside the point! If there is someone to champion any cause it should be someone who has been in the business, is accomplished and has had the nasty deed done to them – if Nora Roberts is not qualified, then who is?

    My other question and I am not, repeat, not attacking anyone – but why would you comment at all on something that you had not read what research had been done? Agreeing with an author’s tone? Big Freakin deal! Read all the info out there so you know what she is talking about and why.

    Yeah, there have been some jokes at Cassie’s expense, and that is sad because this is not about her as a person, but it is totally about her writing career and the fact that there is one too many books that have copied material in them. Yes, this is now for the publishers to decide, but we as readers, researchers, writers, etc have the right to debate BUT there is not point to attacking other people – bloggers, authors or otherwise.

    There…my two cents.

    Peace.

    ReplyReply

  • Holy smokes! This thing is still going on? Cripes. I feel compelled to note my shock at the way this whole subject has been blown out of proportion. I chose to just walk away and I’m still walking…

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    10:00 pm

    Thank you Nora, I may try a little latter on that first, but I guess now that I have finished researching, it will be moot anyway.

    Azteclady, I understand your sarcasm so no worries. I agree. She (DS) is missing the moral and ethical point completely and seems to be looking only at a copyright issue… and in fact mixing the two up. Did you noticed she did not answer the blogger after her comment. Is that deliberate or has she just not seen it?

    I have to admit, until I read the SB primer, I was doing the same, mixing it up with copyright. I just finished reading that completely today…and I am going to thank SB for the research and posting of that. It has helped tremedously to understand this.

    I have had a chance to review the CE stuff at SB. I have to say this is a weird case. It is, IMHO, and I agree with you…plagiarism. No way around it. While it is not huge passages, it is, especially when she is describing certain things like the ferrets or customs etc, words of another published writer, whether it be fiction or non fiction.

    If I were to be lightly censoring her, I would say that she simply did little or no paraphrasing at all and was too lazy to source biblio in her published book. If I were being extremely harsh, I would say that she was extremely lazy and cut and paste from the net into her document for filler and word count. But either way you look at it, she is plagiarizing. On that ground, copyright does not play into this to weaken the crime.

    God, if she had simply credited her book with a source biblio at the end, we would not be talking about this much at all. In a historical novel, it would be kind of hard and distracting to reference credit or footnote each and every passage within the body of the book, but at least a source biblio would give some credit to the original writer on non fiction facts or descriptions.

    There is no excuse on other works of fiction that were used.

    As for the rest, I will say this: I stand behind my original assessment of Deb Smiths blog on one point. She has no right to ask any other person not to comment publically on something. That is her mistake. If she had simply said the rest, I don’t think we would have been having much conversation on this. I do understand some of what I think her motivations were on the rest because it affected me, one of the uninformed few.

    I don’t see anywhere on the net where she had it out for Nora Roberts prior to this, so I am kind of shaking my head at those who are implying she did. Even Nora said that she didn’t know her or have interaction with her personally before this. So those of you trying to build a case on that point I don’t really agree with until I see otherwise.

    What I believe now is she is just being too softhearted in the CE case because of CE’s age and stage of life and in career. Regardless of the degree of the moral and ethical crime, I am struggling with that aspect myself. But it does not stop me, as I said in another comment, from saying she needs to publically apologize and make retribution. Should she never publish a book again? I would never say that. For a writer, it would be like giving them a lobotamy. I don’t think anyone deserves that.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    10:03 pm

    ps.. Shiloh.. sorry for not responding to your posts also. As I said with the other poster, I was not able to respond to every post but I did go back and read all that I missed.

    I think my last post will clear up most of this issue and hopefully finish it… hopefully.

    ReplyReply


  • azteclady
    January 23
    10:08 pm

    Cattymiss, you said in part,

    God, if she had simply credited her book with a source biblio at the end, we would not be talking about this much at all. In a historical novel, it would be kind of hard and distracting to reference credit or footnote each and every passage within the body of the book, but at least a source biblio would give some credit to the original writer on non fiction facts or descriptions.

    No, that still would be plagiarism. Word-by-word. And many of the instances are from a time where she probably had to type each one of those words–preGoogle books for sure.

    On Ms Smith’s comments: all I know is that I have seen her come swinging, in a multitude of blogs, at everyone who agrees with the SBs and Ms Roberts that yes, CE plagiarized other writers in her books. As far as I have been able to assert, Ms Smith has not returned to any of those many blogs to engage in any sort of constructive conversation. It looks like a “drive by” campaign to me.

    I don’t know Ms Smith’s motivation for those comments, but if I were to guess, I would guess at envy *shrug*

    ReplyReply

  • Jaime, thanks but you don’t want me for a hero. ;) Trust me.

    Catty, yeah, I’ve read your recent comments~there’s no explanation needed. This did get rather drawn out.

    And Karen’s right, not everybody is as perfect as her, so second chances are always good.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    10:19 pm

    Azteclady,

    I did notice that in her older works. I guess no excuse would be simply no excuse. The harsh look at this is needed. She didn’t paraphrase enough and she cut and paste others work into her own without giving credit.

    I do have a question about DS. In light of her behavior does anyone know if she is good friends with CE? Cause her actions to me, if what you say is true about what she is doing on blog, speak of me as someone trying to desperately save the situation? I have only seen her own blog now and the one you pointed out today.

    I have read her books (DS) and she does not write like CE, so I don’t think personal save own ass motivation is the key here. (Cattymiss blinks.. gawd I hope not). My list of current readable authors has dwindled down to almost nothing. (Even Nora Roberts can’t write enough to fill that void…lol.) And may I say that I do not have a problem with authors who make stupid net comments and asses of themselves, affecting my my buying choices. Thank gawd for that or I wouldn’t have anything to read… lol.

    ReplyReply

  • Holy crap, this is heading toward a group hug, ain’t it?

    And may I say that I do not have a problem with authors who make stupid net comments and asses of themselves, affecting my my buying choices. Thank gawd for that or I wouldn’t have anything to read… lol.

    We all have our moments, don’t we? And now, thanks to the wonder of the internet, we get to have them in public.

    ReplyReply


  • Cattymiss
    January 23
    10:51 pm

    Shiloh,

    And Karen’s right, not everybody is as perfect as her, so second chances are always good.

    Okay, that is whole other subject, Karen’s questionable,debatable, perfection. Don’t get me started, I am tired and don’t want to get into that one…..lol. (Really, Karen, I am just teasing, see my teasing face..see, see??? But I want you to come up with another word besides fucktard, well, because it offends the fuck out of me.)

    Shannon,

    We all have our moments, don’t we? And now, thanks to the wonder of the internet, we get to have them in public.

    I personally think that the reason we readers are running out of books to read is because authors are spending huge amounts of time having fun on the internet rather than sitting down writing. (Straight deadpan poker face). Stopppppppppp doing that. Internet providers need to limit your time on net…lol. Let’s take a vote. If you do one book you may have one month of spendable time…lol.

    I will say it has been much more intersting though..

    ReplyReply

  • My list of current readable authors has dwindled down to almost nothing.

    Hey, you’ve spent the last few days arguing with a bunch of authors here… *wink wink*

    I’m glad you took the time to research the whole CE mess, and you seem to now understand why a lot of us are fairly upset about it. At first I, too, felt some pity for the woman given her age, but then I realized it doesn’t matter how old she is or what she does (guess what, I’m a concert violinist myself), she was wrong. She hasn’t exactly done much for the romance genre, which is already the red-headed step child of publishing in most peoples’ eyes.

    I really don’t think people have been that nasty in their comments about her, on the whole. Sure, there have been a few nasty, personal zingers, but I don’t see the lynch mob mentality others have claimed to see, here or anywhere else.

    -Kayleigh

    ReplyReply

  • I am new to this blog and am reading the comments from earlier this year.

    Ms. Roberts, as far as I’m concerned, You da bomb!!

    I heard a little bit about the CE controversy but don’t remember what I heard so I cn’t speak to that here.

    Everyone has the right to their opinion and the right to speak their mind.

    This past week I was the personal recipient of two nasty, vicious e-mails from the powers that be at NCP in which I was called the following list of names: idiot, moron, thief, liar and psycho. I’m still reeling over them. I’ve never been called names like that in my life. I hope this situation will be resolved soon so I can put this behind me and move on.

    This whole thing has been so upsetting it’s been hard to focus and concentrate on my writing.

    Cher

    ReplyReply


  • Zelma Orr
    November 10
    2:51 pm

    Anyone remember how Nora Roberts got started? I met her (yeah, long time ago) when she first started writing successful novels. The only way I can tell she’s changed in all these years is to get better. No matter what type book she writes, somewhere in there you’ll find humor. Any author who can do that is ‘good.’ What a bland word to describe Nora Roberts! I might envy her, might wish I could come somewhere close to writing like her, but I can only admire her for her talent – not her millions or her popularity.

    ReplyReply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment