Comments on: RWA: Trigger-Happy Much? Urrggh

By: EC Sheedy

EC Sheedy — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 07:10:12 +0000

I’m a regular reader and a fan of Dear Author and Jane & company’s honest reviews–even when they bite.

But when I try to broaden my writerly mind enough to accept romfail, I fail. Just can’t do it. While the books being *failed* might not be to my liking, neither is the method of, uh, reviewing them. So, like most authors, I suppose, I stay away. But that said, it’s Jane’s party and she can review how she wants to. As to why RWA made the decision not to renew membership, I guess the same can be said.

By: Teddypig

Teddypig — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 01:12:43 +0000

I probably should not say anything but I will leave it at

I do think there has been a change in tone at DA recently.

and I think the twitter Romfail thing was something that was noticed by way too many people and not in a good way.

By: Anya Howard

Anya Howard — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:41:09 +0000

I don’t belong to RWA and I don’t know much about DA or Jane. But IMHO, if an organization is offended by a member’s actions or what she/he says, one would think they’d rise above the pettiness they believe that member is showing and approach them in a manner befitting the nature of their angst. And if their reason for this decision is valid, why didn’t they tell her before now? All things considered, their timing here does seem a little too comfortably coincidental.

By: Christine Rimmer

Christine Rimmer — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:25:21 +0000

Hmm. On further evaluation, I also like what eggs said. I’ve been resisting Twitter, so pretty much knew nothing of romfail until I read about it here and at DA just yesterday. Sometimes I’m so behind the curve. Wait. Didn’t I say that about RWA…???

By: vein

vein — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:24:34 +0000

I do think there has been a change in tone at DA recently.

By: AztecLady

AztecLady — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:02:37 +0000

Dittoing what eggs said, pretty much word for word.

By: eggs

eggs — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:05:11 +0000

TBH, I think the letter to Jane was poorly thought out (we are keeping files on you!), but the denial of membership doesn’t really seem like such a big deal. Jane clearly didn’t meet the membership criteria, and she’s made it clear that she herself wasn’t interested in renewing it, so: big deal, not so much.

When a blog is as prominent in Romanclandia as DA, then you would have to assume that many RWA members are reading simply because they have mutual interests (romance books) in common. It was inevitable that numerous Members would notice Member Jane wasn’t meeting membership criteria and some of them would complain about it to their organization.

The problem here is not the RWA enforcing their membership rules. The problem is the ham-fisted way they have gone about it. They should have waited for her to ASK for membership for next year before sending her a letter saying she couldn’t have it. That’s just embarrassing. You always wait to be asked to dance, before offering your refusal.

The letter itself was also embarrassing. You just need a simple “you do not meet membership criteria” letter to deny membership. Putting all those half-baked reasons in the letter just made them look, well, half-baked. The problem with the RWA lies not with their rules, but with their lack of a halfway decent PR person to vet the official communiqués going out the door.

By: ReaderGrrl

ReaderGrrl — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 01:00:02 +0000

I agree with you, Wendy. (On a side note, I remember reading your reviews @ TRR way back when. Loved your review of The Black Rose!)

I am a long-time reader of DearAuthor. I think it had only been up for a month when I found it. Jane has accomplished some good things in the online romance community, no doubt about it, but it seems like in the last year or so she has gone off on this weird mean streak that makes no sense.

She has invested so much in the romance world these last few years that it’s baffling to me that she’d engage in such destructive behavior.

As with the whole HarHo thing, I don’t think RWA had much choice. As you said, the combination of her prominence in the community (including doing workshops at National, for heaven’s sake) plus RomFail were more than RWA could countenance.

By: vein

vein — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:20:36 +0000

I think romfail, which was cited as a reason, could be described as a form of “negative review”.

By: Douger323

Douger323 — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:53:56 +0000

It may have something to do with Jane saying she would like to see Harlequin sue RWA in the recent thread about the organizations being mad at Harlequin.