And as to dust-ups in romanceland . . . like the tide, they are.

But, oh my gawd, that cover. It makes my breathing heavy and so not in a good way!

About the whole AAR vs. blogs thing…I obviously missed the history there. I don’t really see why some bloggers reacted so strongly to that thread. And some of the AAR posters come across as holding a grudge. AAR was my intro to online Romance but I didn’t get much involved with the message boards back then, and then a took more than a year of from romance. I get the impression that there was some issue with the DA and SB ladies that resulted in them leaving AAR and starting the blogs. Is that right? Help a nosy girl out!

sigh.

When you said “declining”, did you mean you were asked to post to the thread and you declined? I

LOL. No – tragically, I’m not that important. I suppose what I meant is that I usually would take part in a thread like that, because there are good blogs I do enjoy visiting regularly, so it’d be normal to join in that sort of thread & mention them.

The timing of the thread, however, suggested to me that someone was trying to play nice: send a message to Bloggerdom that all AAR peeps aren’t cows. And that seemed like a tacit admission that the thread that caused the kerfuffle was out-of-line, and I genuinely don’t think it was.
I would have felt that posting on the thread could be read as a ‘I’m-not-one-of-those-blog-hating-harpies-look-I-love-bloggers’ message = sucking up.

It’s entirely possible the timing of the thread was coincidental. And I’m not suggesting that those who did post on that thread had any agenda other than sharing their favourite blogs.

You’re entirely right about truth being in the eyes of the beholder: I remember once visiting two houses on the same day – and in both the subject of discussion was the disgraceful bias the BBC were showing in covering some news story. Thing was, they were each convinced the BBC was biased to a different side. What you perceive depends on what assumptions you start with. (My assumptions, of course, always correct…)

I’ll say this: Teal’s apology seemed sincere and I’m giving her kudos for cowgirl-ing up and eating her crow. As oppossed to Mr. Lanyon, who simply made me want to slap him upside the head. I have this whole rant in my head about his super special snowflake “ar-teest” tone, but I won’t post it.

I was frankly confused at the kerfluffle that ensued at DA re the Piracy post. I ended up ignoring it because it got boring pretty quickly. It ended up just turning into people throwing insults and using language and tone to decry an opposing opinion. poo on that.

Lastly, that cover is…should not exist. It should never have been born. It’s a travesty of Photoshop. Bad horrible images that make you look at it over and over and over again (because, where are the boobs, now?)= FAIL.

If she had saggy ta-ta’s they’d be up around her neck and choking her while in that position. That’s what I find so bizarre about the cover. Boobs way down low on her bod, while at the same time pointing straight up, with no poofyness off to the sides from being in a laid back pose.

Sorry, I’m just bored and keep coming back to the cover to be amazed.

I’m declining to post on the reconciliatory – ‘Blogs I enjoy visiting’ thread now on the boards. It would feel like sucking up.

… thought this was such an interesting comment, M McM. When you said “declining”, did you mean you were asked to post to the thread and you declined? I tracked it down and well, I thought of “truth and reconciliation” commissions. LOL. So a last question: it would feel like sucking up to whom? Book bloggers or AAR?

I don’t own a review site, but rather a newsletter, but I have reviewed for a couple of review sites, and I can say that not all operate that way. Some are, definitely, doing it for the promo factor, but not all.