HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing

asshole

For those who were curious about Cindy Cruciger’s post that she deleted, here it is in full with some of the accompanying comments. I’ve edited out some of the more laborious comments, because… well, because they were boring and not really relevant.

Savage Incivility” – tried it once didn’t like it May 2

Filed under Jane Litte, Apropos of nothing, Assholes On the Web, Blog wars, Dirty Politics, Light a match for Karen Scott’s last bridge, Loose Thoughts, Pointless Blathering, The Four Horsemen, Writing by admin | 45 comments (K:There were 45 comments, but just 3 commenters)

Must be soap box day in 3 … 2 … 1.

_____
Pajamas Media is a feather of a conservative website pushing against the leviathon that is the main stream liberal media. There are a few conservative sites I frequent and respect and the writers on those sites know, just as I know, that Media Matters, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, MSNBC and the rest of the savages have absolutely no bottom on the depths to which they will descend in their quest to eradicate conservatism from the United States once and for all.

Tactics have included posting home addresses with google maps to the private homes of conservatives – ordinary working class people – who dared to contribute to a some cause the radical left doesn’t agree with. Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky maps out these tactics and more and the hard left follow them to the letter. It’s a viciously beautiful thing to watch, really – from a distance.

But it’s not limited to political agendas. We have it here in Romancelandia and it serves a different master – fame and blog hits. Sites like Dear Author have posted home addresses and phone numbers and argued that it was perfectly legal even as reasonable people tried to point out that it was perfectly wrong. Karen Scott and Smart Bitches Trashy Books routinely take Alinsky’s rule #13: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” and take it even further. They are like a pack of rabid dogs once they draw blood.

I won’t get into details, but the interesting thing is, when I realized it wasn’t just these particular websites doing it and started seeing it on a milder scale on other blogs and then in politics, I wondered: Is it just human nature?

The methods are simple. An idiot can do it if he or she wants.
1. Believe with everthing in you that you have the moral high ground.

2. Pick people who you know wont fight back because the are either unable to or unwilling to fight.

3. Paint a target on them. Isolate them. Make readers believe that they are different from “the rest of us” somehow.

4. Polarize them. Everyone, and I mean everyone, has faults you can exploit. If you can’t find something true, make shit up. Gossip is just an amazing thing. I’ve seen it in action. A casual conversation or comment conflagrates into a wild fire of BS. Fan it. Then pretend to offer a reasonable counter balance just to cover your ass.

But Cindy! Aren’t you being a little mean here? They do a lot of good things for the writing community. They draw attention to important stuff. They provide a place for people to get together to discuss their favorite topics.

I could make the same argument for a whore house, but it’s still a whore house. In defense of whore houses, they don’t hide what they are – well – some do – but for the most part people who visit them are intellectually honest about why they are there. Sallahdog is intellectually honest about why she enjoys Karen Scott and crew, which is one of the reasons why I respect her. As long as she knows they are dishing out poison and the risk, she’s an adult and it’s a free country – so far.

So let’s have some intellectual honesty here to drown out the savage incivility there – be it writing, politics, or whatever. Let’s recognize something for what it is so we can return to being the kind of thinking individuals that lift the human race up to achieve better things. It’s time to take blinders off, examine our beliefs, the groups we identify with and figure out who is trying to manipulate us into being useful idiots and mobs and reconnect with personal responsibility.

The article in Pajamas Media is suggesting that, if we can’t beat them, join them and engage on their level. My advice to my fellow conservatives at Pajamas Media is – don’t do it. Don’t go there. I did it once and it’s just a disgusting experience that serves absolutely no purpose. If we can’t sway people with reason, logic and civility from the nuts on the far left and far right, then let them run riot until they burn themselves out. It’s going to suck. It sucks in Romancelandia right now because more and more people seem to get pulled into the cycle and can’t or won’t break free once they are in the negative feedback loop.

It sucks because there are decent writers who withdraw because they want no part of the madness. It sucks because there are conservatives and liberals who agree on 90% of what’s good about this country and extreme groups have broken us in half. They divide us and conquer. Look around you. There are people very much like you who have shut up completely beause they were sick of being attacked when they said what they believed out loud.

They were not just attacked, they were the blog equivalent of gang raped. There are people who are normal conservatives and liberals who are silent because the lunatics have completely taken over the asylum. They feel it’s not worth it to speak out on topics they feel passionately about. There’s no discussion, just mob rule and irrational hate. They are correct.

Patience. This wild fire will burn itself out. People are not this stupid. They will eventually wake up and realize that they have been manipulated by the main stream media and by websites that are all about the famewhoring and adoring feedback. It may take a few years and bad things will most definitely be happening all around us, but everything runs in cycles.

The information overload age will, I hope, eventually give way to a new age of reason. “Reason” is not “everyone thinking alike and agreeing”. “Reason” is “everyone thinking for themselves”. We have been there before. We will get there again.
So Pajamas Media – don’t do it. Don’t go there. Stick to the facts, keep your heads down, write about what you love and passionately believe is true and leave the attacks and Alinsky tactics to the crazies. It’s ok if not everyone agrees with you.

What you DON’T want is for people to be able to point and say “See. they’re no better than we are.” and have it be true. I tried it once. I know where of I speak. Besides. The Daily Kos’s, Dear Authors and Karen Scotts of the world eat, sleep and drink the badness 24/7. That’s no kind of life for a human being. If you die tomorrow, in that last few minutes you may have left to reflect, do you want to be looking back at a legacy like that? I don’t think so. It won’t bother them at all, but a normal person? Yeah. It will haunt.
____
Stepping off soap box to garden some. It’s a gorgeous Saturday morning. Sigh. I need to grocery shop first.
____

Here are some of the comments:

(Please note, ‘Admin’ and ‘Ferfelabat’ are Cindy Cruciger.)

admin May 2
Savage Incivility would make an good book title wouldn’t it? *Pondering*

Mary Stella May 2
The Pajamas commentary lost me by pretending that it’s only the liberals who engage in digging for dirt, accentuating flaws, and dragging people through the mud to discredit them. For every stab at McCain or Palin in the campaign, there was a jab at whether Obama is actually American by birth and a bumper sticker highlighting his middle name in capital letters to connect him with Iraq’s Hussein.

As far as the four points, you listed, I’m darned if I can look at any debate I’ve read in Romancelandia and not (a) either seen both sides employ matching tactics or (b) been able to say to someone on either side, “Come on, can you honestly say that’s the motive? Isn’t is possible that you’re ascribing evil intent where none exists?”. Granted, I haven’t glued myself to every debate, so maybe I’ve missed some, but that’s my take on the ones I’ve read.
I’ve reached the point where I tune out extremism, regardless of the source.

admin May 2
Debates are different from attacks. There are places where people debate topics and it’s not for everyone but for people who love debates it’s great. But there are “relentlessly on the attack”, “wrapped around the personalities of the blog owners” blogs and they exist in a state of hate. People flock there to get their fix.

It’s true in politics on both sides and it’s true in Romancelandia. Matching tactics? You lost me there. Let use Cassie Edwards as an example. What did she do to the bloggers who attacked her to the point where her health was damaged. As far as I know she did not fight back. She did not sink to their level and dig the dirt on those individuals. And there is plenty of dirt.

There is debate or discussion and then there is evisceration because it’s just fun to take apart someone who cannot or will not fight back….

jimmyschmendrix May 2

You know you’re radical right, though, don’t you? Or nearly so. What’s the scale? You’re not as scary right as, say, the neo-nazis or the conservative relgious cults like in Texas. But, you know, I think you, Michelle Malkin and Coulter could throw tea parties and have a fine ole time.
You think most americans agree on 90% of stuff? Hee…okay…
Abortion?
Immigration?
Gun control?
Universal healthcare?
Universal higher education?
Gay marriage?
Death penalty?
Waterboarding?
Progressive versus flat tax system?
I could go on…

Ferfe May 2

I am not radical right. I am conservative. Here. I’ll lay out what I believe and why in brief:

Abortion. – If more people understood the origin of abortion as it is shoved down our throats today they would cut the knee jerk reactions and ponder what they really believe. As a woman who is missing 1/4th of her family because of the eugenic machinations of a fascist dictator you should know that Margaret Sanger has a storied past under the Eugenic Flag and deep dark secrets you can read about through the magic of google. A disproportionate number of abortions -percentage wise are performed on non-caucasians.

I believe that the closer the US population gets to even numbers of all ethnicities the less we will battle over race, thus this government sponsored holocaust called abortion is an abomination. Women should be allowed to make this decision for themselves but no government money should be spent on abortions anywhere. If we must spend money we should spend it on birth control and counsiling. Personal responsibility is the only way we keep our right to choose.

The more the government interferes in our lives the less freedom we have. Freedom also means freedom to make mistakes and grow through the process. I don’t want to abolish abortion. I want the government to stop encouraging whole sale slaughter because when we end up with national health care people will start thinking it’s better to abort babies that may become a burden to the system rather than give them a shot at life. It’s a messy complex thing, life.

I hate that we have become a nation who deals with the messiness by dumping babies into garbage cans. We need to face and deal with the issues that surround unwanted pregnancies. Rape. Incest. Raging hormones. What have you….

Gun Control – I am against it. License them. Track them. Require gun safety certification. Require proof of gun safe and locks. Other than that? No. Personal responsibility.

Universal Health care – Against it. Against it a lot.

Universal Higher Education – against it. Tax dollars should go to state Universities to offset the costs, but everyone does not have a right to a college degree. …

Gay Marriage – for it. People have a right to get married. Churches have the right not to perform the ceremony. God doesn’t make mistakes. I’ve never bought into the idea that being gay is abnormal. It’s somewhat rare, but not wrong.

Death Penalty – against it. Mostly because it costs too much to kill people. Also becuase it’s too damned easy to make mistakes in our legal system as it exists.

Waterboarding? – for it. Totally down with torture if the circumstances warrant it. I am not willing to die to assuage someones misplaced sense of superiority and bazaar ideals. …

Progressive versus Flat Tax. – Flat tax. In fact we should abolish income taxes and reduce the size of the government.
And now you so we can compare the screaming liberal side of these issues.

jimmyschmendrix May 2

Pfft…I didn’t offer a quid pro quo. I am thinking of creating a spot the radical rightie drinking game, though…
10 sips – offers Margaret Sanger as an argument against right to choose
Mwah

admin May 2

Eugenics. Not just Sanger. When the government controls health care you’re gonna care about that too.

sallahdog May 4?

Debates are different from attacks.

yeah ferf… our side always debates its the OTHER guy who attacks… heh…its all a matter of perspective…
the thing that fascinates me, absolutelyfrickingfascinates me, is the amount of concern the so called conservatives (including you, my little blossom flower) have right now over deficit spending..
Where was their outrage and concern when Lil Shrub was spending a trillion dollars on a war?

Seriously, I am pretty fiscally conservative, and am concerned about the amount of money spent right now, but it seems that a bunch of conservatives just got religion on the spending, and its because we aren’t spending money where THEY want to spend it… Its all ok buying bombs, its a horrible waste to fix roads or spend on education…
My biggest problem with the “conservative” movement, and the republican party right now, is that it has become an exclusionary party.. If you aren’t anti abortion, antigay, progun,prospending only on war, antiimmigration, you just aren’t welcome in the party… No matter if your a fiscal conservative…

Its the same kind of litmus test that decimated the democrats during the Reagan era. When if you weren’t a complete lefty you were drummed out of the party…
balance folks. thats all I wish for…

way to work in the romancelandia stuff in… You really had to work hard for that, I don’t really buy it, but kudos for the effort… heh…

FerfeLaBat May 5

…If you want to call death threats a “debate” then that’s fine for you. Taunting an author to commit suicide, wishing another elderly author would stoke out as a result of a “co-ordinated blog action” (Jane Litte’s words for taking someone they don’t like down by using the three different blogs to go after an author or editor), I don’t describe that as debate. You KNOW better. Don’t make excuses for them.

You’ve never seen anyone threaten to kill anyone or to harrass them to death on this blog. You have definitely seen snark and mockage here but I don’t pretend it’s anything but snark and mockage. You’ll see debates and even some criticism. But attacks? Like that? No. The one and only time I copied their style and words and posted it, their heads exploded all over the blogosphere. It was the grossest experience of my life, writing like them, which is why I’m telling Pajamas DON’T DO IT.

sallahdog May 5

….As for the girls,you act as though everyone on a blog site is walking lock step , or even agreeing with everything posted on said site…

You and I don’t agree on a LOT of stuff, and to the point that you squided me.
The difference is that I don’t expect people to agree with me, I am only responsible for MY words. My biggest problem with the web and some of the websites is the lack of a sense of humour about life, or the issues… I find you entertaining, I find Ann Somerville a blast to read, and I enjoy Karen and Dear Author too… I find that I don’t really agree with any of you most of the time… heck, if I wanted that I would get off the computer and look in the mirror endlessly (which depresses the hell out of me.)

Ferfe May 5

I don’t expect people to agree with me, but if they don’t agree with me I expect them NOT to attack me and threaten to kill me. I’m sure Charles Manson was a great guy to hang out with, too – except for when he was encouraging his followers to kill people. You are completely defenseless when it comes to recognizing when seemingly normal people are genuinely evil. Everyone – and I mean everyone – has a good side. Most are harmless and just a little crazy in interesting ways. But people who do not stop death threats on their websites and who encourage mob attacks are not people you should toy with.

I can’t stop you, of course. I assume you know what you are dealing with when you go there. But trust me when I say this, because in real life I have encountered some honest-to-god sociopaths who have no concern for human life, they look normal most of the time, but when the other side comes out – recognize it for what it is and know what you are dealing with. They function. They pay their bills. Some even have kids.

But mean? Abnormally cruel with no concept of what qualifies as “Too far” and crosses the civilized line? Don’t ignore those ugly reveals when they show them to you. Don’t excuse them.

admin May 5

Oh you know when the IP tracker pings a hit from Ames, Iowa that badness can’t be far behind.
*Second guessing*

Can I compare Jane Litte and Karen Scott to Charles Manson figuratively? *Pondering* *Flash backs to past carnage* *Doing body count of victims* Yeah. I’m good with that.

admin May 5

Oh and Link to Ann Somerville please?

sallahdog May 5

http://logophilos.net/blather/ is ann somerville…she hates me…she called me a troll once (and I honestly wasn’t being one…that day…lol)… that time in question was at Dear Author over the street teams issue, where I said that while the author probably used a poor choice of words or humor for a blog post, I didn’t think she deserved being drawn and quartered over asking her teams to go out ” with the stealth of a tiger” to turn her books facing out, or sneak them into the endcap areas in the local book store… she went for humour and it fell flat with those who are “oh so serious” (which is one thing I do think Dear Author as a site is often guilty of(not necessarily jane et al, but some of the posters), yet another reason I get giggles out of it sometimes)…
She doesn’t have much of a sense of humour, which is probably why I find her funny (yes, I am a sick bastid)…

I am not going to argue about the horsemen thing.. As I said before, I didn’t see offense where you did… and ferf, I have had mail sent to my house by someone who decided to track my ass down and find out all they could about me, over a show dog message board, if you can believe that… so yeah, I know about the nuts…

admin May 5
…I’m pretty easy to find if someone wanted me but god help them if they’re intentions are bad.
Jane Litte has no discernable sense of humor and neither do her followers. I wish I could find humor in that, but I can’t.

sallahdog May 6

I dont know if I was squided by you at the time or not. probably not… I just didn’t agree and kept saying so. ..lol… Ann was quite the dustup and PITA on the Dear Author boards (which of course I loved) are you blocked from posting at Dear Author? because if you are, I think you and Ann are the only ones…

admin May 6
Most likely.
I think I read about that one elsewhere. She thought she was “in” with those idiots and that – because she joined in on their hate fests – was safe from being the next author on the chopping block.
That never works out well.

One of the reasons I was so angry with JD Rhodes (K: Why can she not at least attempt to spell people’s names correctly? She’s on this guy’s blog everyday for Oprah’s sake.) was because he had the same type of thinking. Certain people are “safe” and certain people can be fed to the wolves. Where the hell did basic right and wrong drift off to? It’s like people never get out of highschool.

these are the same people who say they are against torture, btw – except when they are for it. ….It’s fair game when an author expresses an opinion they don’t agree with or says something that offends their oh so delicate sensibilities. Envy is an ugly ugly thing.

sallahdog May 6

I think its too simplistic to say this is envy. .. there is a bit of the herd mentality in effect. when someone whom you admire or respect the opinion of (in DAs case Jane) says something that people agree with, they get on the site and instead of saying “ditto” , they want to make their own stamp on a conversation and say something interesting… which is how things seem to get “amped up”… simply the weight of dozens of posts (instead of a normal conversation that would have 5 or 6 POV)..
Thats just the nature of a larger message board or blog..

I differ in that I don’t shoot the messenger, I just tune out (or enjoy) the creaking hordes trying to stand out.. which is why as much as I like DA, or SB to read, I am more likely to post here, or at Karens(things don’t become a 200 post wankfest)

I used to post all the time on Rungay and Blogging Project Runway (i love this show) until the number of posters got into the hundreds… now I just read…
I do think, if I was an author, I would avoid like the plague, message boards and blogs pertaining to books.. My line of work wouldn’t make a good blog now, but I don’t think could stand listening to online critiques of my work all day long either… but then I don’t think reader blogs (like DA) are really for authors..They are definately consumer driven..

104 Comments »

  • Gotta love the “poor me, I’ve always been a victim and they’ve always been mean!” persona she’s wearing, hm?

    ReplyReply

  • One question I have. Why did this Cindy delete her post if she wanted to be heard? She must know that you and others would pick up on it.

    This is disturbing.

    ReplyReply


  • Emmy
    May 12
    10:53 pm

    I think you just need to tell her that you love her. She’s not going to stop until you admit it :P

    also, why do I still see her last name as Kruger? dayumm that tuscan guy!

    ReplyReply


  • theo
    May 12
    11:09 pm

    Holy crow, this woman is nuts! You know I don’t post here much, though I read you all the time and follow you on twitter (nightsmusic) and I just have to say, I am ashamed as a conservative to be lumped in the same sack of s*** as this woman.

    Frankly, I love your blog, I participate occasionally on it, as well as often on both DA and SBTB. But never, never to lambaste the blog owners or their liberal or conservative posts!

    Let’s face it. I have a mouse button. If I don’t like something, I don’t click on it, or I click out of it. Wouldn’t that just be the adult thing to do?

    sheesh

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 12
    11:22 pm

    at least she is black and white crazy – what’s this “taunting an author to commit suicide”? I heard about the Carrie Edwards-arama, but never this particular one.

    And anybody who thinks Pajamas Media is their go-to everyday read is already moderately to severely whacked in the head.

    ReplyReply


  • Lorraine
    May 12
    11:23 pm

    Although these kinds of rants usually keep me silent *I piss off enough people in RL, I don’t need to do it online too* I’m concerned that my reading comprehension sucks.

    Sites like Dear Author have posted home addresses and phone numbers and argued that it was perfectly legal even as reasonable people tried to point out that it was perfectly wrong.

    Didn’t Jane at DA argue against posting personal info on people? I remember her being very vocal that people who want to post online anonymously have every right to do so. *it was a thread where some guy outed a woman who had a LJ account* Did I totally misunderstand what she meant? And did this Cindy person just out Jane’s real name?????

    ReplyReply


  • Mireya
    May 12
    11:55 pm

    Yup, wearing her bed sheets and jumping off roofs to defend only God knows what. Does that post come with an interpreter?

    ReplyReply


  • DebH
    May 13
    12:29 am

    I don’t post very often, either, but I read here (and at DA and SB) nearly every day. I don’t remember anyone at these sites posting home addresses or phone numbers. I certainly don’t remember site owners arguing *for* such things. And I’m at a complete loss as to the ‘taunting an author to suicide’ thing. I’m sorry Cassie Edwards had a stroke, but I don’t see a direct causal link (much less an intent to cause harm) between the blogs and her health issues.

    This is like a small boy, hitting a girl to show her he likes her. I think she likes you. A lot.

    ReplyReply


  • Jenns
    May 13
    12:48 am

    *Shaking head*.

    Wow. Just … I can’t think of anything to say to that. What a bizarre (as opposed to bazaar) and rambling post.

    In all seriousness, does anyone happen to know if she’s
    mentally unstable?

    ReplyReply

  • I love your blog, Karen and generally, I enjoy DA – and I say this as a fiscal conservative with strong libertarian sentiments. And I gotta wonder if extreme views on politics aren’t just hats a lot of these raging blogsters wear to look respectable while they’re flinging the dung..whether that be donkey or elephant dung.

    Anyway, you take care pretty lady :)

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    May 13
    2:16 am

    Since the post was deleted, can we say mention of Charles Manson qualifies for Godwin’s Law?

    ETA: CC’s political views are a little scary–and this is coming from a fiscally conservative Roman Catholic.

    ReplyReply


  • RoseWineGirl
    May 13
    3:31 am

    It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that CC and Ann Somerville are actually closer than they let on.. sharing the same genetic DNA as their cute little clone sisters in Brazil.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    3:49 am

    holy cow! speaking of Mt. Somerville and she erupts! What I want to know is how I got elevated to the position of “loathsome, criminally-minded stalker”? Here I thought public blogs were for reading and comment. Has she been reading my email, too? Teddy, it’s you and me, bro. She even came up with a cute moniker for me, Van Hindenberger. I guess she’s got someone keeping track of my recent weight gain.

    The paranoia… it hurts, someone make it stop!

    quote of the day: “Romancelandia, j’accuse!”

    ReplyReply

  • In the words of my “Daily Bitch” calendar:

    “And your psychotic delusional little problem would be?”

    She’s different all right!

    I have to admit, though, that I think you should ignore her because you are just feeding her trollish megalomania by posting about her.

    ReplyReply

  • RoseWineGirl the crazy is like swine flu. The symptoms look the same but the chronic underlying medical conditions may be different.

    ReplyReply

  • Damn I wanted to be “a mouthy bitch with offensive opinions” this week.

    Why do I always get stuck with criminally minded?

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    4:33 am

    @Teddy: unfortunately for our resident volcano she just accused me of a crime. And you. If they take my complaint seriously you may wish to lodge one of your own.

    ReplyReply

  • Let me know she has posted to several livejournal sites with stuff about me like that.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    4:46 am

    @Teddy: I’ll contact you via your direct email – this shouldn’t clutter up Karen’s blog and is probably not public consumption anyhew, okay?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 13
    5:54 am

    @growlycub I already tried the turning the other cheek thing. It makes her worse.

    I can telegraph what she’ll do when I respond – she deletes her posts and starts talking about lizards. She is your typical-throw-a-brick-at-a-window wacko, who then stands there with her hands behind her back, pretending innocence.

    Her cries of cyber-bullying are laughable, because every post on here has been in response to an unprovoked attack from her.

    She is chronically blind to her own obsessively stalkish behaviour, but I’m happy to continue responding to her batshit-crazy rants.At least it means I don’t have to think too hard about what to blog about. Heh.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 13
    6:06 am

    Louise, TP, didn’t have a clue what you guys were talking about, but I’ve just gone and looked at Ann’s site, and yeah she’s not a happy bunny.

    Funny, but it didn’t occur to me to remove the comments from VR and SD pertaining to her, I probably should have done seeing as this has nothing to do with her whatsoever.

    Oh well, too late now I guess. Sorry Ann.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    May 13
    6:25 am

    It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that CC and Ann Somerville are actually closer than they let on.

    Nope. Definitely not.

    Honestly, I’m always suspect of the public berating of Ann game, because it’s obvious to me that most of her rants reflect her conviction that others enjoy the sport of hitting at her. And while you can debate the validity of that perception, I do understand how she’s come to believe that and am not at all convinced by the cries of outraged innocence from those who claim they don’t understand why she’s angry at them. I’ve seen some of the stuff coming from those “innocent” corners of blogland, and I definitely think there’s a contingent of folks who get a big kick out of winding Ann up and then calling her crazy.

    ReplyReply

  • Scary-arsed woman that one

    ReplyReply


  • Nora Roberts
    May 13
    10:06 am

    It gives my day a nice start to know I’m on the opposite side of pretty much every issue from CC.

    ReplyReply

  • I do understand how she’s come to believe that and am not at all convinced by the cries of outraged innocence from those who claim they don’t understand why she’s angry at them. I’ve seen some of the stuff coming from those “innocent” corners of blogland, and I definitely think there’s a contingent of folks who get a big kick out of winding Ann up and then calling her crazy.

    Right Robin, because the event of yet another Cindy Cruciger rant was my and Louise’s fault so we deserve the abuse. Makes so much sense to me.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    May 13
    1:06 pm

    since I was one of the ones posting to her, I just want to say, I always stand by what I say (which in this case was disagreeing with Ferf)… I find ferf entertaining, actually more for her politically conservative views which I completely disagree with. I try to avoid arguing about everyones obsessions, which with CC is probably the dear author crowd…

    It must be that phaze of the moon, because its seems to be cyclical, the baiting of the tigers and then the circular discussions… I wish I could say I was above it, or didn’t enjoy it… but I must admit that I do…

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    May 13
    1:09 pm

    by the way, in this particular series of posts, I brought up Ann Sommerville, mentioning hers as a blog I enjoy reading, even though she thinks I am a troll…

    ReplyReply

  • I have a headache. Oye.

    ReplyReply

  • Most of that was really … disjointed.

    I’m a liberal, but I always believed and assumed that both sides had something to offer. I’d still like to believe that, but lately I watch the news and really have to wonder if the vast majority of Repubs aren’t apeshit. I don’t have a huge Twitter following and still lose approx. 2 people every time I mention our president. Not gushing fan girl stuff, either.

    As to the rest, I think I’ve seen this episode before and that it’s a rerun. I fear the bat has Flown Over The Shark.

    ReplyReply


  • Anon76
    May 13
    3:35 pm

    Sigh.

    The Cassie Edwards thing – she bodaciously ripped off other peoples’ work. When some of the responding posts got ugly, many people worked to keep the convo on track.

    When you don’t want to be a part of Romancelandia wars, don’t keep popping up and chattering about it.

    I’ve read DA for a long time, and never have I seen them post personal addresses. Valid business addresses or business email addies, yes. They also had the wonderful post about the “rights” of anonymous posters and a valid discussion followed.

    Don’t know anything about the suicide reference. Wondering if that was a demented conjuring on someone’s part. If it isn’t, then my heart does go out to the injured party, if it is, well…….Nuff said.

    And, people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. I seem to remember one individual who is ranting a bit now (not ferfe) made some extremely offensive artwork based on individuals from the other side. REALLY offensive. Of course ferfe was quite gleeful over the talents of said individual.

    And now I’ve said my “nuff” LOL.

    ReplyReply


  • Mireya
    May 13
    4:23 pm

    A while back this person publicly announced in her blog (I think that was deleted along with everything else she’s deleted) that she was “fighting back” against the “mean girls”. I think this ensued due to a negative review, can’t remember if it was by Karen or the SBs. I also read a rant from a friend of the author in question going along the lines that the author had contemplated suicide (I may be wrong).

    A lot more has happened after that, and she obviously is now mixing up bits and pieces from different incidents and blogs and giving “credit” of some of the shit to the wrong parties. This is where my wearing the bed sheets as a cape comments stem from. I may have forgotten the content, but I got the gist of it: she was turning herself into a “crusader against the mean girls”. You all know how Karen, the SBs and others are called “mean girls” by the sugar and spice and everything nice crowd.

    The incident about phone numbers and real names happened in Amazon by a Deborah McGillivray, who actually posted personal information on a reviewer that she targeted because the reviewer dared give her a 3-star review. Numerous discussions and blog posts in different places ensued.

    Anyone that has visited the DA’s would know FULL WELL that they have not only never done that, but also that given the fact that 1 or more of the owners of that blog is actually AN ATTORNEY, they would know better than to do that. Take it from a legal secretary who has worked in litigation for 20 years. You have to be really stupid and whacked to believe such misinformation about the DA.

    This woman is doing a mix-and-match and she really has her head firmly stuck up her ass.

    Sorry, but I just can’t keep my mouth shut any longer.

    ReplyReply

  • It gives my day a nice start to know I’m on the opposite side of pretty much every issue from CC.

    Sums up my feelings nicely, yeah.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    4:59 pm

    @Teddy

    Right Robin, because the event of yet another Cindy Cruciger rant was my and Louise’s fault so we deserve the abuse. Makes so much sense to me.

    My history with Mt. Somerville amounts to a pointed and detailed retort on her blog to her attacks on her new colleagues from Linden Bay Romance, all of whom are friends and respected colleagues of mine. I found Teddy’s blog when he was nice enough to rescue the message when it went into the embarrassment delete bin, and that is how I found Karen’s blog. And I’ve committed the deep sin (apparently a crime, too) of reading her blog every few days or so. I didn’t even know the name Cindy Cruciger until this post, I was blissfully unaware. Karen’s disabused me of my naivete. The way I feel about it, if you’re going to call your fellow authors filthy names on public blogs, someone may call you on it.

    That’s one of the things I like about Karen – she keeps it classy. And so do you, Teddy. *airkiss*

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    5:15 pm

    @Karen – hey, looks like Ann figured out someone might object if she accused them of crimes publically – now she’s f-locked all of the slander before I got a response to my complaint. Mission accomplished!

    ReplyReply


  • Anon76
    May 13
    7:16 pm

    I think Mireya nailed it on the head:

    “This woman is doing a mix-and-match and she really has her head firmly stuck up her ass.”

    Yep, she is mixing and matching different issues in the blog world and attributing them to the wrong parties, and/or leaving out key facts.

    I’m trying to think of how to word my next sentence, but all I can come up with is “some people just boggle my brain.”

    ReplyReply


  • Anon76
    May 13
    7:24 pm

    Oh, and sorry. It was another “A” first name author who created the offensive artwork. Brain aches from trying to keep all the “non-mean girl” crazies straight.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    8:03 pm

    @anon76 – so many crazies, so few rooms at the asylum.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    May 13
    10:22 pm

    What mystifies me, Louise, is why you and the other anti-Ann Somerville group would spend so much time on someone the “group” keeps saying is so worthless, so meaningless, so beneath your respect, so without any influence etc. It makes the “we’re not doing anything” argument much less palatable to me. Not that long ago, I saw a LJ post by an author that consisted of an anti-Somerville rant, followed by scads of comments along the lines of ‘who cares what she says.’ To which I mentally responded, “well, obviously YOU ALL care, since you keep talking about her.” If you truly find her so marginal, so out there and unbelievable, what, except for pure entertainment, can be the reason for so much attention toward her?

    I have never seen worse internecine fighting than within the m/m Romance community. I don’t pretend to understand it, but still, at what point in not caring about someone or what they have to say does it become truly not caring and letting them be. I realize that Ann doesn’t have the social currency of the group that you all believe you do, and so the anti-Ann contingency can get away with a lot of crap towards her without others noticing or caring. And I realize that people don’t automatically think, ‘wow, if they’d do that to her, what would they do to me if I wasn’t in the accepted category.’ And I realize that Ann makes herself a very easy target. Which is one of the reasons, frankly, the apparent entertainment that those who dislike her and poke at her get from the activity nauseates me.

    Ultimately, each of us has nothing more than our own conduct to recommend us. Nobody makes us be mean or hateful or spiteful or bullying. Those of you who dislike Ann for whatever reason may think what you’re doing reflects badly on her, and that nobody sees the missles being lobbed at her from various secure or insecure online locations, but I see a lot of the ‘we’re not doing anything wrong and she’s the devil incarnate’ as just smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors. And Ann is hardly providing the worst reflection.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 13
    10:46 pm

    @Robin this is very simple to explain. Authors who trash their colleagues working for the same firm bring shame on themselves and on the publisher, and create a chilling effect throughout the community, because all they are doing is attempting to instigate flamewars. This is the criticism I have leveled at Ann, backed up with copious examples from her own writings. Karen quoted my comment here after Ann deleted it, and Teddypig retrieved it in full so that it would be known that there are members of the M/M community who think it’s BAD when you trash authors who work for the company you work for, like pissing in your own food bowl. And why do I check in on her blog? Because she’s still at it and because people do need to know when they are getting slandered. I haven’t accused Ann of anything that isn’t manifestly in evidence under her own name and proudly posted (well, at least until she flocked it.) I’d like to see that kind of thing end, and I would like my friends and colleagues who are publishing their books to not have to be attacked – continuously and ongoingly – because she happens to dislike their writing, their political views, or the titles of their books (Cocksucker, for example) and considers herself the conscience of the genre. She isn’t, and that is the nature of my objections to her, and as long as she keeps doing it, I’m going to keep objecting. And as long as uncritical allies such as yourself pretend she is doing some hallowed work on behalf of the Greater Good, I’m sure she’ll be encouraged to continue.

    I didn’t know her from a hole in the ground until she took up the cause of namecalling a number of my colleagues, and I decided to confront her directly. Nobody ought to get away with that without comment. Fortunately her effect upon the overall community is lessened due to her eviction from Dear Author where she bizarrely accused an author of falsifying his bio, so here’s hope that she one day might stick to what she does best, writing fiction under the heading of fiction instead of criticism.

    @Karen – I didn’t want to continue to be off-topic here so if you want to pull this off it’s okay by me. I can just direct a link back to the original post on AS and why I joined the “anti-Ann” club.

    ReplyReply


  • Marianne McA
    May 13
    11:14 pm

    She’s “down with torture”?

    Torture is a crime under international law: how the frig can someone get exercised about bloggers being ‘abnormally cruel’ and at the same time casually endorse a method of torture used by the Spanish Inquistion?

    ReplyReply

  • Okay, I’m a therapist and even I was taken aback by the level of crazy hate she was tossing out there.

    On the bright side, reading this, I’m reasonably certain about my job security in the long run.

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    May 13
    11:27 pm

    Louise, that you even speak in terms like “allies” makes the agenda of the anti-Somerville collective clear (regardless of however many air kisses launched). That you call me uncritical just shows that you don’t know me. That you defend those who have IMO been far more offensive in their words and actions while trying to claim the “classy” high ground is inexplicable to me. But I guess I have to admit that I’m not surprised you tried to make this all about Ann, once again. That seems to be the primary object of the campaign, after all.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Somerville
    May 13
    11:57 pm

    “why do I check in on her blog?”

    Because you’re an obsessive stalker with an ego the size of Mount Ranier? Because you’re using me to unite your tribe of feral cats against the ‘other’? Because you’re a gullible twat? Because you have a soul as black as pitch and the empathy of a nematode?

    I don’t know. But I’m going to make it easier for you have a life that doesn’t revolve around every move I make and every comment I write, by locking you right out of the conversation. I think that will be a lot healthier all round.

    As for pissing in food bowls, I think you’ll find din dins was pretty much urine soaked before I ever came anywhere near it. Hope you and your lovely chums enjoy your much deserved status the highest peers by far in the m/m genre.

    Karen, thanks ever so. Really. Anyone would think I’d made cards mocking your health or something. One day you’ll have to let me in on the secret of what exactly I did to you to deserve all this, then we’ll both know.

    Smoochies, y’all!

    ReplyReply

  • That you defend those who have IMO been far more offensive in their words and actions while trying to claim the “classy” high ground is inexplicable to me.

    Robin,

    Um when did I personally call Anne something worse than “loathsome, criminally-minded stalker” ??? I need a citation on that one.

    I am sitting here still trying to figure out how a Cindy Cruciger rant copied here by Karen can be blamed for me winding Ann up. Because she used my name in the accusation she posted before I even got on this thread. Remember Louise had to tell me about it?

    I don’t even read her blog.

    When you connect those dots in a rational fashion then get back to me.

    ReplyReply


  • Tamara
    May 14
    12:10 am

    I’ve seen some of the stuff coming from those “innocent” corners of blogland, and I definitely think there’s a contingent of folks who get a big kick out of winding Ann up and then calling her crazy.

    You aren’t the only one with that impression, Robin.
    It feels like high school again, with the ganging up and the quick judgments and hypocritical responses. Reminds me of why I so hated high school.

    ReplyReply

  • On the bright side, reading this, I’m reasonably certain about my job security in the long run.

    I dunno about anybody else, but this amused the hell out of me.

    ReplyReply


  • Throwmearope
    May 14
    1:07 am

    My son the currently-unemployed-IT-geek (alas) always says that the internet isn’t for pussies. (I don’t think he meant LOL Cats.)

    I enjoy a spirited debate a lot of the time. And if I don’t, my mouse has this cute little scroll thingy in the middle. Very useful.

    I almost always enjoyed Ann S. (Empathy of a nematode–I know a few people like that.) And if one of her rants was a bit much for my not very delicate sensibilities, scroll, scroll, scroll.

    However, Ferfe once wanted to kill herself because of a comment I made at SB. (No follow through on the thought, however.) And I showed my son a thinly veiled threat of malware from Ferfe. He told me to stay away from that s***, because he wasn’t going to repair my computer should the malware work.

    Ferf goes beyond rant to serious bats*** bizarre. Still, kinda entertaining, if a bit too predictable.

    ReplyReply


  • Paul G. Bens, Jr.
    May 14
    2:46 am

    or the titles of their books (Cocksucker, for example)

    I find it terribly interesting that *I* was the one who brought this up yet Ann is the one who gets grief over it (other than a brief spate by Teddy when I visited his blog and pointed out that Ann wasn’t the one to bering up the issue). And still, it gets pinned to Ann. Even months after the fact.

    Same song, same singers, different channel.

    ReplyReply


  • Paul G. Bens, Jr.
    May 14
    2:48 am

    or “bring”

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    2:52 am

    @throwmearope: I do agree we are dealing with orders of magnitude here, definitely. I think I’ve seen “ferfe” banned here there and everywhere, but what puzzles me is where she calls home base since the several blogs under Cindy Cruciger don’t look like they’ve been updated since 2007. It is all at her LJ ferfelebat site?

    To be completely fair, though, I only have two cats, which doesn’t even make up a litter, not to mention a tribe. Oh wait – could that have been a metaphor?

    Trackbacks (because I don’t delete my posts,and I’ve got nothing to hide.)

    http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/01/19/and-the-comment-of-the-week-goes-to/
    http://www.teddypig.com/2009/01/dear-teddypig/

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 14
    3:04 am

    I’m curious to know, did anybody actually read the bit mentioning AnnS? I know that Ann certainly didn’t read it, because she just asked me what she’d done to deserve my wrath (paraphrasing here).

    If somebody would be kind enough to point out which bit in the actual post was offensive towards Ann, I’d appreciate it.

    Ann, I know you think the whole world is against you, including me, but even so, how did you manage to miss my comment further up, apologising for not editing your name out?

    I don’t say sorry very often, so get the fuck off your high horse and see if you can see the wood for the trees, ok?
    The original post had sweet F.A to do with you.

    @Robin, I find that I’m as inclined to roll my eyes heavenwards whenever you run to Ann’s defence, as much as I do when TP and others starts in on her.

    For what it’s worth, I think the fervour with which you defend her is just as bemusing as TP finding fault with everything she does.

    Ann is a grown woman who is more than capable of telling TP and LVH to fuck off, I think you know this, yet you insist on treating her like a wayward child, and excusing her less-than-ideal behaviour, whilst seemingly holding others to a higher standard.

    God knows I don’t see eye-to-eye with TP on most things, but I’m pretty sure he doesn’t hold himself up as the righteous innocent bystander. Him and Ann are merely two people who seem to hate each other’s guts. It happens, look at me and The Batshit Crazy One.

    I say let them have at it. Neither of them ar entirely innocent of all wrong-doing here, and both of them are more than capable of defending themselves against the other.
    I’m all for coming to people’s defence, but when it’s six of one, and half a dozen of the other, it seems a pointless exercise to me.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Somerville
    May 14
    3:07 am

    Louise, what exactly do you want? If I take down my blog, my reviews, my site and my fiction, is that enough?

    Or, if you allow that I can keep my blog and my reviews, would I have to have each post approved by a committee? How would that work, exactly?

    Would I have to confess my sins, post my full and personal details up on a website of your choosing so I can be shunned properly?

    What would be sufficient expiation for the heinous crime of criticising people for their writing and their opinions? Come on – since the past can’t be undone, obviously you expect me to pay, so what’s the price?

    How about you and Teddy tell me what you hope to achieve by all this because I’m sure you’ll be mortally offended at any suggestion that you’re trying to build your profile on the carcass of my reputation. Heavens forfend – that never goes on in m/mlandia at all.

    What’s the end game? I really want to know because I’m sick of it, you and him. Not even going to self-publishing is enough – you graciously consider me your colleague but the truth is, you never were and you aren’t now.

    So…lay it out. What exactly do I have to do to stop this?

    I can’t get over the irony of you two clutching your pearls over a post about me being angry that Karen’s carelessness would give you the opportunity to bash and harass me again – when that’s exactly what happened.

    Obviously there just isn’t room in the world for me and your friends together but as I’m not preparing to shuffle off this mortal coil just yet (certainly not to please you), you better come up with a better solution than you have done.

    ReplyReply


  • Paul G. Bens, Jr.
    May 14
    3:09 am

    Wait, Karen. With all due respect….Robin defends Ann and you say it’s pointless and half a dozen people rip into her and you simply sit back and say nothing except “ooops.” If you’re as bored by the anti-Ann crowd as you are with the one person actually trying to lay out some logic, then why not stop the whole conversation rather than just one part.

    I’m not being snide. I’m really trying to understand the logic here.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    3:15 am

    @Karen:

    I’m curious to know, did anybody actually read the bit mentioning AnnS? I know that Ann certainly didn’t read it, because she just asked me what she’d done to deserve my wrath (paraphrasing here).

    well, I did… which is part of what puzzled me so deeply when the eruption began over in Logophilosland(ia).

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Somerville
    May 14
    3:16 am

    “Ann, I know you think the whole world is against you, including me, but even so, how did you manage to miss my comment further up, apologising for not editing your name out?”

    You mean, where you failed to take the comments out anyway?

    Not much of an apology, considering. Not very commendable either.

    “The original post had sweet F.A to do with you.”

    That’s right. And yet you dragged me into it anyway.

    I would have written to you off list to ask you to remove it but judging by your attitude here, you’d have told me to drop dead. So I didn’t bother. I didn’t even link to your post. I didn’t expect you give a damn, and lo, you don’t.

    Still waiting to know what I did to make you hate me this much. I’m sure it was something terrible.

    ReplyReply

  • Still waiting to know what I did to make you hate me this much. I’m sure it was something terrible.

    Um… extrapolating much?

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    May 14
    3:40 am

    geez… I would just like to apologize to ann for saying I liked her blog on another blog which got copied and pasted here. besides this has now become the ann show which should rightfully be pissing off karen and ferf because it should be THEIR show…

    I mean really…. only one pissing contest per thread,please… I have ADD, I get easily confused..

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    3:42 am

    @sallahdog: maybe you’ve just instigated the “unintentional cyberstalking twofer.”

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    May 14
    3:51 am

    FWIW, Karen, I told Ann that I thought you hadn’t even considered the fact that her comments were included in what you posted. That I don’t feel it necessary to broadcast publicly every single thing I say privately to people doesn’t mean I don’t see the faults. It doesn’t mean I’m in total approval of everything Ann has done, and I’ve said so publicly on more occasions than I can count.

    It’s a luxury to have people stand up for you. Not everyone who has it deserves it, and not everyone who doesn’t have it deserves its lack. If anyone has a problem with me being one person who periodically gets pissed off at the massive AS pile ons, I don’t really care. I have a problem with what I think is way too much tolerance of scapegoating in these online communities.

    ReplyReply


  • Ann Bruce
    May 14
    4:02 am

    I would like my friends and colleagues who are publishing their books to not have to be attacked – continuously and ongoingly [sic] – because she happens to dislike their writing, their political views, or the titles of their books (Cocksucker, for example)

    LvH: I’m curious. Is AnnS only allowed to post about books and authors she likes? Is she supposed to give all books 5 stars/hearts/bunnies/rainbows/sparklies/whatever? Are all authors supposed to be nice and hold hands and sing Kumbaya?

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 14
    7:43 am

    Paul, I’m guessing that you don’t read my blog very often, or you’d know that halting conversation isn’t something I do very often. I only get annoyed when people try telling me what to do with my blog. Also, I must have missed something re the five people piling on Ann. I thought the conversation re Ann was between LVH and TP? Were there more people involved that I missed?

    As for being bored with the anti-Ann crowd, I think you’ll find that the last conversation involving Ann on here was months ago, I think you’ll also find that Ann isn’t somebody I talk about on any other blog, unless I’m addressing her directly. And that would only be if she’d addressed me first.

    And in case you missed it, this blog wasn’t about Ann, and the conversation had all but ceased round about comment number 21.

    Ann, out of interest, can I ask what you saw in the post that offended you so much, and led you to think I’d posted it just to piss you off? Somehow you reached the conclusion that the post was a way of attacking you, because apparently I spend my life hating you and plotting ways in which to bring you down. Seriously?

    And actually, had you written to me and asked me to edit it out, I would have done so (albeit later in the day seeing as I was out at the time of posting my apology), and not had a problem with doing so, but I suspect that that wouldn’t have satisfied you anyway.

    Robin, I don’t know if Ann’s post came before or after TP and LVH started discussing her on here, but the tone of it suggested that I’d included the bit about her on purpose, which is simply paranoia on her part. If her post came before TPs comments, then I don’t see how she was being used as a scapegoat I’m afraid.

    Ann’s battles in blogland are many, and I don’t tend to keep up with them, but what I have noticed is that quite often, I’ve never heard of the people she’s fighting with. This generally leads me to remember the saying about a thousand flies on shit not being wrong.

    If it was only ever TP and LVH that she did battle with, I’d probably be more motivated to cry foul play, but just in case you hadn’t noticed, Ann could start a fight in an elevator, whilst on her own, so I’m afraid I’m not as willing to defend her from people taking her on, because she’s usually the architect of her own downfall.

    The fact is Ann’s antics and various rants really don’t effect me either way, but if she ever went the route of CC and started posting lots of stuff about me, especially without any kind of provocation, then I’d probably behave no better than TP. I’m not great at turning the other cheek and taking the moral high ground.

    If somebody I cared about, started as many fights as Ann, I’d give them a slap and tell them to get a grip of themselves. Fortunately for Ann, she isn’t a friend or a member of my family.

    ReplyReply


  • SarahT
    May 14
    12:19 pm

    The problem with ranters like Cindy C. and Ann S. is that when they do actually have a point, no one sees it. It’s really hard to read comments by serial ranters objectively because I’m just expecting them to spout nonsense. So that’s generally all I see.

    ReplyReply


  • Sparkindarkness
    May 14
    1:14 pm

    That is a truly crazy and terrifying person to be avoided at all costs I feel. I can understand your wish to record such offenses so they aren’t lost (to many people delete trheir entries to try and hide their toxicity)

    It’s just a shame that the focus diverted away from what is a truly useful warning to the need for people to take pot shots.

    ReplyReply

  • I have never seen worse internecine fighting than within the m/m Romance community.

    ??? Maybe I spend too much time under my rock.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    3:46 pm

    @Karen

    If her post came before TPs comments, then I don’t see how she was being used as a scapegoat I’m afraid.

    Before. Ann’s entire blog post was a meta on this blog entry singling me and Teddy out, and I thought he and you might like to know that she had erupted over the casual mention of her name here. And Teddy hadn’t seen the post – I was the one who mentioned Ann’s blog at 13 after Rosewinegirl mentioned a possible connection between Ann and CC in 12.

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    May 14
    4:19 pm

    Ann could start a fight in an elevator, whilst on her own,

    and that is why I liked her blog so much… I just love reading it… I have a hard time working up a head of steam these days, but it doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate it in others (I admit, I watch fox news and catch Rush Limbaugh for the same reasons, even though I don’t agree with them)…

    ReplyReply


  • Robin
    May 14
    4:22 pm

    You know, Karen, one irony here is that for me this is less about Ann than it seems to be for you. For me it’s about the idea that there’s a group of people who seem to go after someone because it’s entertaining, all the while claiming integrity, the higher moral ground, that the other one is the bully, etc. That they pick an easy, seemingly marginalized target allows them to keep it about the target, unlike CC. I’m not going to bother tracking through a timeline of examples of what came first, since no one here really cares or wants to know anything different. But if anyone ever would bother to take a closer look, the view would change significantly. But I guess if you’re not the target, who cares, right?

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    4:28 pm

    @Robin: how goes that search for evidence of Teddy or me doing criminal stalking?

    I think you are confusing going after someone for entertainment with refusing to take them seriously. I certainly can’t take Ann seriously. Look at the messages she’s left here as an example.

    ReplyReply

  • For me it’s about the idea that there’s a group of people who go after someone *for entertainment*, all the while claiming integrity, the higher moral ground, that the other one is the bully, etc.

    So Robin now you are saying that this is about everyone else. Some organized anti-Ann smoke and mirrors group that you are shaking your finger at saying “If you can’t say something nice”.

    The DA readers who complained?
    The Samhain people who complained?
    The Linden Bay people who complained?

    You now want to make this an example of me picking on her? An example of me winding her up? An example of why Ann feels she needs to call me a “loathsome, criminally-minded stalker” in her accusation that I was actually finished with discussing here till you came in?

    I am asking you yet again to rationally explain what it was about Karen posting a Cindy Cruciger rant that everyone can read above, that I had nothing to do with, that happened to contain someone else’s comment about Ann, that made it OK for Ann to start up with her name calling on my ass.

    Now I am not innocent I have confronted Ann before and posted on my blog about it but I have not said her name for a while and nothing I can think is recent.

    Are you saying simply my difference in opinions are now personal attacks on Ann? Is my just posting here a personal attack on Ann?

    ReplyReply


  • just, sigh...
    May 14
    5:08 pm

    @Paul

    I find it terribly interesting that *I* was the one who brought this up yet Ann is the one who gets grief over it

    I followed a bit of that brouhaha, and the difference is in the delivery. A well-thought out argument delivered in civil terms usually won’t offend, even when the other side vehemently disagrees. Ann, however, has a praticular gift for the kind of cutting, belittling sarcasm that’s entertaining to read when you’re not on the receiving end of it.

    @Robin

    For me it’s about the idea that there’s a group of people who seem to go after someone because it’s entertaining, all the while claiming integrity, the higher moral ground, that the other one is the bully, etc.

    I’m seeing some irony here, too. Is the above not something Ann herself engages in? I mean, she singles people out all the time, attacking them personally (despite being vehement in her condemnation of ad hominem attacks when they’re used against her or her friends), and then wonders why everyone’s mad at her.

    Standard sequence:

    “Oh, those evil nasty bitches AuthorX and BadgaydudeY are such hypocrits. Why won’t those fucking sexist, misogynist, homphobic, criminally-minded fucknuts just shut the fuck up and go away? Here, let me tell you all about how horrible they are and why they’re the devil. Here, let me dedicate several blog posts to their deficiencies as human beings. What? They’re mad at me now? But why???????? What did I do??? I’m just here doing my own thing and now they’re all being horrible to me for no reason!! What will it take for them all to just forget I exist? Help! Ad hominem attacks! Foul! Foul!!!”

    I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with going around smacking people when you think they deserve it, but the constant affront and wounded martyr act from her when someone smacks back is just…juvenile. That’s likely why she gets so many people’s backs up. You want to dish it out, learn how to take it. You want to be a proudly outspoken bitch? Own it. Don’t whine about the consequences.

    And if people seem to pile on her, maybe it’s because the membership of the “we done wrong and got smacked by Ann” club is huge and not particularly exclusive. What does she have to do for people to just leave her alone and forget she exists? Not starting a war over every little thing would probably help.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    5:08 pm

    So, the irony, it stings. A growing skirmish party shows up in Karen’s blog with shrill accusations about a huge conspiracy against Ann when the only people getting called names are the two of us. “Criminally-minded stalker, obsessive egotistical nematode twat with feral cats”- all engineered by Karen? or whatever – how can anyone take this seriously? It has to be a joke. Right?

    @a Just-sigh – your msg just came in. You have it exactly right. It is really that simple.

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 14
    5:36 pm

    @Robin, I guess this always goes back to defending somebody who more often than not, is the bomb thrower.

    You see people targeting Ann for entertainment, I see people rightly having a go back, after she’s eviscerated them. You see a repeat victim, I see a repeat offender. That’s the crux of our difference of opinion.

    ReplyReply


  • Jenns
    May 14
    5:45 pm

    “On the bright side, reading this, I’m reasonably certain about my job security in the long run.”

    I loved this comment, too.

    ReplyReply


  • che
    May 14
    5:49 pm

    I usually avoid commenting on blog kerfuffles, mainly because I just not good at making such eloquent and intelligent comments as y’all. But here, I’ll try.

    I sort of see Robin’s point with regards to Ann S. While she is no angel herself, she does seem to be the favorite scapecoat of many. The feminist smut post at RTB is one example where she made a comment with regards to the post, then a couple of people jumped on her over something that had nothing to do with that particular post at all, but Ann personally.

    I’ve seen it happen again and again at various blogs. People seem to take glee in riling her up. I’m marginally aware of the animosity between TP and Ann, but not enough to follow in depth. Anyone has the right to blog about whatever they want, even if it’s a rant against Ann, to defend themselves, to vilify her just for the joy of it, or whatever.

    To debate with Ann on the points of any particular post she’s in is one thing, but to jump on her over something that has nothing to do with the post makes me really uncomfortable.

    I enjoy Ann’s comments. I think she’s smart and gets right to the point, when she doesn’t get into an insult fest. I miss her comments on DA’s story critiques. I think she’d make an excellent critique partner.

    Also, ps I’m having trouble keeping up with all the comments here myself, but I’m thinking maybe some are confusing Ann S. with Ann V.- artist of that vile picture.

    ReplyReply

  • I don’t know if I even want to wade into this one, but I’m going to do it anyway…

    1) I don’t think Karen was trying to cause Ann any grief when she posted the bit from CC. The CC post hit on Karen, Ann and Jane, and Karen wasn’t really singling anybody out from where I’m sitting. Doesn’t look like Ann took it that way.

    2) Ann frequently has disagreements with people-she can be very vocal-we all know that. A lot of people have been on the receiving end. But she often ends up on the receiving end herself.

    3)I can say that after seeing some of the debacles where Ann has been involved, I don’t always pay Ann much attention and there have been a few times when I know I’ve been less than fair to her because her attitude colors my viewpoint. I don’t really care for her attitude a lot of the time, but when you don’t care for somebody’s attitude, usually it’s less of a headache to just avoid that person. Responding with retaliatory attacks doesn’t do jack…which leads me to #4

    4) I’m wondering…what was the point of the Mt. Somerville comment… I honestly can’t see Karen caring that much over what Ann posted at her own blog-has Karen ever given that impression? Basically-and I’m sorry if I’m wrong-it seems like Louise posted that bit just to get a reaction out of Ann, which has me pretty much ignoring a lot of Louise’s commentary. Because it’s coming off as if she’s tired of Ann attacking people so she’s going to turn around and attack back. The only thing that happens when you fight fire with fire is a bigger fire. Nothing gets solved.

    ReplyReply


  • che
    May 14
    5:58 pm

    Too late to edit, but I should have amended to jumped on her when it had nothing to with the post, but her personally…
    or even if it had something to do with the post, they jump on her for making the same comments many others did, but they had to single her out.

    Sort of like, you know how some people single out Nora Roberts’ comments, when many others have made the same comments she did.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    6:01 pm

    @Shiloh – I mentioned Ann’s blog post (now f-locked) because it was a meta on this blog with some bombs in it particularly for me and Teddy and blaming Karen for somehow letting us run roughshod over Hers Truly (except that we weren’t – message 12 came after Ann blogged about how stalky we were.) I wouldn’t have mentioned Ann at all here except that she decided I was a “criminally-minded stalker”, I would like to see just how much benefit of the doubt anyone here would get picking a random blog commenter out of the crowd and saying “This *long string of potty-mouth here* criminally-minded stalker!” Because that’s what happened between yesterday and today. Like Teddy, I would really like to know how posting on Karen’s blog makes me an oppressor of Ann. Maybe breathing air makes one an oppressor of Ann. And we really shouldn’t take very deep breaths because it could make her explode again, and she just can’t help telling people how bad they are. (the reference to Mt. Somerville I believe came from a drawing by Mrs. Giggles and accurately describes the most explosive temper this side of Romanceland.)

    ReplyReply


  • che
    May 14
    6:54 pm

    Shiloh, I’m not sure if your post is in reference to mine. I don’t think Karen intended to cause her grief either. Just pointing out that I can kind of see Robin’s side.

    ReplyReply

  • No, Che, I wasn’t referring to yours. Sometimes I can see Robin’s side on this, too. :)

    Louise, frankly, I still don’t see your commentary as any other than to trying to stir up trouble. What does it matter if Ann feels you’re a criminally minded stalker?

    Are you? If not, it doesn’t matter what she says. But since you don’t really agree with her on anything/see her point of view on anything/whatever…then why are you reading her blog?

    It doesn’t matter to me if she’s f-locked her posts, because I don’t read her blog-like I said, I don’t care for her attitude a lot of the time, so why would I bother?

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    7:25 pm

    @Shiloh, I already answered all of those questions at least once. When someone goes out of their way to lob a bomb like that and accuse me and fellow bloggers of a crime, I don’t sit by silently. I do, however, back up everything I say with evidence. By your same criteria, Ann didn’t have to roar in here with minions on each flank accusing Karen of victimizing her and sponsoring a conspiracy against her, but she did, and here we are. I do agree with you that sometimes pushing back just makes the problem bigger. But sometimes it makes it stop.

    ReplyReply

  • Oh dear, I’m sorry, this has turned funny (for me, at least)

    Minions?

    I mean, really, minions?

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    7:30 pm

    @Aztec – okay well maybe minions is a bit much. :) I haven’t been able to take this seriously since sometime yesterday evening myself.

    ReplyReply

  • Yes, Louise, you answered. However, those answers aren’t really holding water. Frankly, it doesn’t matter to me why/how/what you do in regards to your problems with Ann.

    The opinions of the people I care about/respect are what matters to me-if somebody I liked started accusing me of being a criminally-minded stalker, I’d address it. Otherwise, it’s not worth the energy.

    However…here’s something I’d like to toss out: A lot of the time, Ann S has good points to make, on romance or just in general. I don’t always agree with her. But she often has valid points, and very often those good points get lost in her noise.

    When you scream from the rooftops, that happens. The message gets lost for the screams. Whatever point you might be trying to make, for me, has gotten lost in your noise.

    ReplyReply

  • Aztec, I want minions. Will you be my minion?

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    7:37 pm

    @Shiloh, very good points. However, I do extend my circle of concern to friends of mine whose professional reputations as authors are impugned by the shouting from the rooftops. Maybe it isn’t worth the energy. I guess I’ll find out.

    ReplyReply

  • Oh…also meant to address this:

    I do agree with you that sometimes pushing back just makes the problem bigger. But sometimes it makes it stop.

    Pushing back can make problems stop.

    However, pushing Ann isn’t going to do much. She isn’t going to change who she is just because she gets pushed.

    I’ll push back on matters of mega-importance. World hunger, my right to my faith, the safety and welfare of my family.

    But the behavior of bloggers? In the long run, the behaviors of individual bloggers definitely just doesn’t rank.

    To be honest, I’m more inclined to be the opposing force there-you don’t agree with how Ann does things/her viewpoints, her style of blogging, so you think she should shut up.

    I tend to base my decisions/actions on how I’d want it directed at me. I’ve got a lot of people who probably don’t like my blogging, my viewpoints or how I do things.

    Unless I want to be told that unless I change to accommodate others, I should shut up, I’m not going to try to force that somebody else.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 14
    7:46 pm

    @Shiloh, I guess that’s the part that got lost in the translation. I never told Ann to shut up. I told her she had lost the high ground to complain about the results (i.e. getting banned from DA, being criticized by her fellow authors and critics, and having her opinion dismissed out of hand, and alienating her editors) by pulling the stunts she does. I told her she was shitting where she eats, and she should not be surprised by her results. Never told her to shut up. Not knowing her from a hole in the ground, I thought possibly a comment coming from someone who had no personal stake (I dont write for her publishers, nor am I a romance author) it might possibly make a difference. It did. I got to know a lot of other people in the romance fandom who agreed with me wholeheartedly.

    ReplyReply

  • Heh, I thought I was your minion already, Shiloh :grin:

    On the topic at hand (okay, one of them, since that train went off the rails way back when)

    I see Robin’s point regarding how often people turn on A.S. in (comparatively at least) large numbers, and that is one reason I try to stay out of any such discussions if and when I see them in my normal blog hopping.

    I also see Shiloh’s point about agreeing (often, too) with the substance of what A.S. is saying, only to refrain from commenting at all (let alone in support of her arguments) while wincing at her confrontational/insulting/aggressive/acerbic tone.

    On the other hand, for years I’ve seen Ms Sommerville herself attack people from the first comment in a post and onwards, often in ways and to degrees that seem unwarranted. There may or may not be past history between A.S. and the people she eviscerates attacks insults calls out, but is often hard for other people to know the difference between A.S. responding to personal attacks elsewhere and A.S. attacking someone personally for not agreeing with her (or for not expressing their agreement with her in terms she approves) (or for other variety of reasons, actually).

    So in the end I tend to ignore A.S. wherever I may find her. There are exceptions, of course, but then I’m human and weak :shrug:

    ReplyReply

  • oh, yay. I got a minion. :D

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 14
    8:47 pm

    @Shiloh, this conversation has gone the way it always goes when Ann is involved. People eager to prove that they aren’t part of the baying crowd end up making excuses for her, and turn on the ones who dared to respond to her in kind.

    Same story, different names. On DA it was always Kirsten Saell, and one other that I can’t remember.

    Happens every single time without fail.

    I listened to a news report earlier that suggested that if a burglary is committed by somebody on drugs, instead of sending the culprit to prison, the authorities try to help the thief get off drugs.

    The real victim is basically ignored in order to help the poor druggie who broke into the house in the first place.

    These conversations involving Ann are very mich like the situation with the drug-fuelled thief.
    Her wrong-doings are ignored in favour of pointing fingers at the people who fight back using the same tactics that she herself employs.

    I think taking the moral high ground is vastly overrated, and even though I don’t particularly care about Ann or what she thinks, I wouldn’t sit quietly and let her ream me up the arse, and I certainly don’t see why anybody else should.

    My sense of justice is very black and white, if you stand on a street and lob a bomb, with the intention of causing maximum damage, don’t look at me for sympathy when ten bystanders drag you to the ground and give you a sound kicking.

    ReplyReply

  • I just looked up the old blog posts on Cindy Cruciger. I must have missed some of them when they were originally posted.

    Anyway, I’m stunned. I thought CC was just an annoying troll who liked to bait Karen and some other bloggers, but it seems she’s a lot worse than that. Although I’m usually a great proponent of free speech, reading that crap makes me wish there was such a thing as getting people kicked off the internet.

    ReplyReply


  • di
    May 14
    9:29 pm

    @ K. Z. Snow

    I have never seen worse internecine fighting than within the m/m Romance community.

    ??? Maybe I spend too much time under my rock.

    I don’t get that one, either.

    ReplyReply


  • Mireya
    May 14
    10:15 pm

    Anyone that has had the “pleasure” of encountering AS in any blog and dared say something she didn’t like, ended up slapped in the face. I know, I felt that way twice at DA over a couple of my comments… and considering how much I participate there and how short and inane my comments tend to be, that should tell you something. I went on lurk mode after the second incident and even considered leaving DA because she was an ever present PITA there. Shortly after the second time she regaled me with the wonderful way she expresses herself most times (I felt tempted to start a flame war but didn’t because I happen to respect people’s turf, and that was not my blog), she was banned from DA. I later found out she is banned from many others as well.

    Irrespective of all the seemingly reasonable arguments in her defense, fact remains that she doesn’t show respect towards other people’s right to a different pov/opinion and she talks to people that disagree with her as if they were cockroaches.

    Even if some people are egging her on, you know what? she’s only reaping what she’s sowed and that’s pretty much why none of her defenders are going to find a lot of sympathy towards AS from those that have actually seen her modus operandi over an extended period of time.

    Either way, I don’t care. I just steer clear from her.

    ReplyReply


  • Sparkindarkness
    May 15
    2:19 am

    Interesting – people defending Ann are her minions – or just trying to prove they’re not part of the baying crowd, making excuses.

    I love the impression that people who like Ann, read what she writes, agree with many of her points etc are some kind of blind followers. Gods forbid we may be in actual independent minded agreement.

    ReplyReply


  • che
    May 15
    3:43 am

    I doubt AS has minions. I don’t know her, never exchanged words with her. Only thing we have in common is appearing on a few blogs together.

    ReplyReply


  • Kat
    May 15
    5:27 am

    In the past, I’d have made the same argument about how the delivery of a message affects the acceptance of the message and even Karen’s point about bomb throwers.

    But. I’ve lurked enough times in enough blogs to recognise that not every commenter is given the same kind of leeway to be rude or argumentative or sarcastic (which, I think, is part of Robin’s point–correct me if I’m wrong). There was one author, for example, that I found overly argumentative but who, after a very long comment thread where others deconstructed her argument and looked at it away from the method of delivery, I had to admit I was harsh in dismissing so quickly. So I’ve learned not to take every comment at face value. I’ve also commented on popular blogs where I’ve felt that the response from the blogger was unexpectedly harsh. And, you know, I don’t even comment much relative to other people.

    Ann’s style is hyperbolic. Does she really mean someone is guilty of a crime by calling them “criminally-minded”? Having read her blog and her comments in the past, I’m inclined to say no. It would be like the time CC accused people of threatening her with physical violence in a comment thread in this blog because someone made what I was pretty sure was just an exaggerated comment and not an actual threat.

    And, you know, I’ve seen Ann sincerely apologise more than once when she felt she was in the wrong, and that’s a surprisingly rare thing in blogland.

    As for this thread suddenly becoming about Ann, well, my observation is that Ann took her concerns to her own blog. She wasn’t the one who started the comments about them here.

    (And the sad truth is that I probably wouldn’t have posted this in any other blog but yours and only after seeing Robin’s comments above because, frankly, the anti-Ann crowd unnerves me.)

    ReplyReply


  • Karen Scott
    May 15
    7:49 am

    Damn phone, I cannot find the cut and paste option for the life in me.

    Anyway, I digress.

    @Kat: Your point about not all commenters being given the leeway to be rude is on point, however, I think that in the beginning, AS was given license to be as rude and argumentative as she wanted, the problem was, there was never much of a break from the aggression. I used to agree 99% of the time with her, but trying to separate the vitriol from the common sense aspects of her arguments was very wearing, and after a while, you stop even trying to.
    I’m pretty sure this is what happens with the majority of people who have come in contact with her.

    The leeway that you speak of more often than not has to be earned over a period of time. I’m fully aware of my own penchant for rudeness when the feeling takes me, but one thing I’ve learned is that no matter how popular one is, continuous rants and raves, and ‘vitriolic attacks’ put off readers, and those readers eventually stop giving you the benefit of the doubt.

    The best real-life example of this that I can think of, is an associate in the work place who constantly argues with her colleagues, and gets involved in bitter words of war on a daily basis. Eventually, the rest of the employees start tuning her out, or jumping on everything she says without actually considering the validity of the points that she’s making.

    I remember when Teddy Pig started posting on common blogs a few years ago, man did he piss everybody off, including me, but in truth he came across no different to the way I did (and probably still do to some) in the beginning.

    Eventually I was able to read his posts, without wanting to give him the bird every two minutes, and now even when he’s ranting, I can usually see the point he’s trying to make without having to rinse my eyes out. That didn’t happen overnight, he simply learned to censor himself better. Believe it or not, I self-censor quite a lot these days (check through early posts if you don’t believe me), and if you look at the the SBs and Jane, at DA, you’ll find that even they have had to adapt and change their styles in terms of tackling issues. You trawl through their archives, and you’ll see what I mean. Jane will be the first to admit, that her posts are definitely less abrasive now, than they were in the beginning.

    Ann hasn’t adapted her style yet, and until she does, she’ll probably never be granted that leeway.

    This isn’t about asking her to change who she is, it’s about her acknowledging that sometimes it’s not what you say that piss the majority of people off, but how you say it. If even I can learn that lesson, then she surely can, if she wants to.

    And the use of the word ‘cunt’ when she’s referring to people probably doesn’t help either. She should use ‘twat’ instead. Much nicer.

    ReplyReply

  • That didn’t happen overnight, he simply learned to censor himself better. Believe it or not, I self-censor quite a lot these days (check through early posts if you don’t believe me), and if you look at the the SBs and Jane, at DA, you’ll find that even they have had to adapt and change their styles in terms of tackling issues.

    I think I learned two things over time Karen.

    Writers and publishers are in business mode online so they honestly can’t address issues publicly the same way you or I can. A writer or publisher commenting on your board has to keep in mind constantly how they come across and how controversial the topic is, how negative the review is etc etc. It is an unfair advantage in my opinion because for some of us this is not our day job. For them it’s like talking to people at work. It’s one of those things I try to keep in mind posting now a days.

    Plus I’ve also learned to talk to people in email more often than going off half cocked attack mode in the comments. There are some hard ass people I have learned to respect because they are honestly pretty decent folks who are happy to explain where they are coming from in email.

    Or Teddy Pig is just getting old who knows.

    ReplyReply


  • Anon76
    May 15
    3:24 pm

    Che, yeah, I misspoke on the “vile picture” reference but acknowledged that in a later post. Just didn’t give the last initial of the “A” in question when I did. And mostly my original post was about Ferfe’s response to that “artwork.”

    As to the AS discussion, I totally get many of the viewpoints being expressed here. I’ve on occassion found her commentary to be spot on, until…she goes ballistic and starts lobbing bombs at people. And not just little hand grenades either, but those ones that make craters and send metal shards flying in all directions.

    Near the end of her time at DA, too often I saw her turn good discussions into her own personal slug fests. The topic itself was lost as she went on attack. Granted, sometimes the post that set her off annoyed me too, but she’d go apeshit and start calling people names, insulting their educational backgrounds, and the like.

    Like Shiloh, I don’t read her blog because I just don’t want to. Yet I can understand how some who have faced her wrath want to keep an eye open for stuff about themselves. It’s pretty much human nature and the basis of this blog entry to begin with in regards to Karen and CC. Leave me be, and I’ll leave you be. If not…the gloves are off.

    ReplyReply


  • Louise van Hine
    May 15
    4:04 pm

    @anon76

    Yet I can understand how some who have faced her wrath want to keep an eye open for stuff about themselves. It’s pretty much human nature and the basis of this blog entry to begin with in regards to Karen and CC. Leave me be, and I’ll leave you be. If not…the gloves are off.

    To me, turnabout is fair play. You make public condemnations on your public blog against other people working for the same publisher, you can expect pushback, and comments telling you that you are doing bad business.

    You make hyperbolic quasi-threatening accusations against someone who is commenting about unrelated matters in Karen’s blog on your own (locked) blog you can expect them to bring it up on the blog being commented on and register objections. Turnabout is fair play. Why this amazes Ann still is a mystery.

    And as Teddy points out, those who have a stake, such as writers, editors and publishers, are “at work” so they don’t get the same leeway that freelance critics and your anonymous commenter gets.

    ReplyReply


  • just, sigh...
    May 15
    4:17 pm

    @Sparkindarkness:

    Hell, even I agree with probably 75% of what Ann actually says, I just find it next to impossible to get past the way she says it. All her opinions seem to either be applied with a bludgeon and a stream of vitriol, or a supercilious, “you have lived up to my standards, cookies for you” condescension that gets people’s backs up. And the disconnect between how she applies her own standards to others and to herself boggles the mind.

    She decries ad hominem attacks (when used against her), often only one comment removed from her own labeling of someone a racist, homophobe, talentless cunt, small-minded bitch, or any number of other more creative and entertaining insults.

    She decries insensitivity and takes people to task over their careless use of language with an arrogance that brings to mind a god issuing commandments from the mount–and then spews hate on all who cross her path and have occasion to not feel as she does, or not feel so as strongly as she does, or not feel so for the same reasons as she does.

    She champions her own right to be an outspoken bitch, but when she comes across others who exercise that right against her, she often transforms magically into a wounded martyr who can’t understand why people are mad at her.

    She’ll tar every writer and all their works at a certain publisher with one vomit-colored brush, warning people to stay away from the “creepy” and “talentless” authors there, and then berate others for trying to ruin her career for the sin of drawing attention to her own behavior online.

    She condemns hypocrisy in all its forms, except her own.

    I can understand why people who don’t like her might read her blog. Some are watching for their own names, because no one likes to be badmouthed, especially by someone who, for reasons which escape me, still has a certain amount of credibility in some circles online. Others do so for the same kind of entertainment you get from watching a yippy dog go apeshit at passersby from within the safetly of its fenced yard.

    I don’t think she has minions. I’m not even sure she has friends–because I feel true friends would try to steer her away from her self-destructive behaviors. Although, admittedly, a few who have tried are now on her shit list and have found themselves eviscerated on her blog, so I can understand why others wouldn’t.

    Still, it makes me sad when she posts something that sets a torch to yet another bridge, and the comments are filled with variations on “amen, sistah!” When she’s managed, with her friends’ approval, to alienate everyone on the internet, I hope they’ll be prepared to buy up multiple copies of her books to offset the loss…

    ReplyReply


  • Mireya
    May 15
    5:25 pm

    @just sigh: >>Hell, even I agree with probably 75% of what Ann actually says, I just find it next to impossible to get past the way she says it.<<

    BINGO!

    ReplyReply


  • sallahdog
    May 15
    8:44 pm

    which is why I enjoy her… You have to admit, its never boring..

    She champions her own right to be an outspoken bitch, but when she comes across others who exercise that right against her, she often transforms magically into a wounded martyr who can’t understand why people are mad at her.

    ReplyReply


  • Ghetto Diva
    May 20
    12:05 pm

    Why does freddy cruiger always come out of hiding and attacks Karen and the blog atmosphere, claiming how horrid they are?

    She should just take her ass into hiding forever. Nobody is truly going to care, if she ever shows her ass again.

    Plain and simple.

    ReplyReply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment