Oh look, another author who can’t take criticism.

*Yawn*

The difference is, this author decided to take a potshot at the reviewer’s weight.

Lord.

Here’s the author’s rant in its entirety, crossing a line that no man should ever cross:

Seriously….you’re just going after me on Twitter and Good Reads now after savaging me on DarkScribe?

what is your problem with me?

the typos are LONG gone and the book has all been re-edited. That verison hasn’t been available for almost a year. I sent you that copy a year ago…you JUST got to it.

enough with the typo thing.

and can you not see that your hyper interest in woman studies and equality are tainting your ability to review a book with an even hand?

Jeesh…if you hate my characters because some are sexist or bigots…what kind of books DO you like?

and for every character you mention that is a “weak woman” or ” idiot cop” there are others to balance them out…yet you don’t even mention them.

You are the first person who has absolutely hated my book. That’s fine. If i wrote a horror novel that EVERYONE liked…i’m doing something wrong.

it’s just that your hate is coming from the wrong places.

anyway…you’ve blasted me enough. Shut up and movo on.

I can’t help but wonder if you’re pissed because the character “Janice” in my book…the one you posted an excerpt about:

“…She needed a man. Hell, maybe if she bothered to drop down below 220 lbs she might find one. That, and she’d have to not talk. Basically she’d have to become an anorexic mute and then she could possibly attract the attention of a blind man with no sense of smell.”

…Hits a little too close to home. Don’t take that out on me.

Others on good reads like my book, even with the old typos (see Monster Librarian member on here- they put Under on thier best of 2009 list…up with many published authors.)

Your opinion is fine….but don’t pretend your hate comes purely from my book….your self loathing is creeping in far more than any typos.

but hey…that’s just my opinion.

how about we both just forget about each other, okay?

Wow, he actually went there.

The self-pubbed author was a chap called Brad Quinn. Somebody needs to tell him that implying that the reviewer reacted negatively to his book because she was a fat cow who couldn’t get a man, is so not the best way to win friends and influence people.

Wanker.

Via Katiebabs’ blog.

Four years on, I wonder how many traditional romance authors still feel this way?

“I’m posting anonymously. I write traditional romances for a traditional press. My only deal with erotica is simple and market driven.

I do not want to sit by an erotica author or an erotic romance author at booksignings or attend events that publicize her books because WE DO NOT ATTRACT THE SAME READERSHIP *AND* (and after reading this thread I figure I can count on some people ignoring this second part and this is the most important part of my note so if you reply to this post please address the following aspect of my post)

MY READERS ARE LESS LIKELY TO ATTEND THE EVENT OR, IF AT A BOOSIGNING, LESS LIKELY TO APPROACH ME BECAUSE OF THE PRESENCE OF AN EROTICA/EROTIC ROMANCE AUTHOR THAN AN EROTICA/EROTIC ROMANCE AUTHOR’S READERS WOULD BE PUT OFF BY MY PRESENCE AT THE TABLE. Who loses? Me.”

Just try to tell me that isn’t so

That was a comment by an author on that old Elizabeth Bevarly hates erotic romance post that she wrote back in the summer of 2005. You guys remember it right?

If not feel free to click on the link, it makes for very interesting reading, hehe.

From this conversation, I hope that we have all learned to think before posting, commenting or tweeting.

It has been said, ad nauseam, that all people should think before putting their thoughts up there in the internets for everyone, their pet parrot and their alien relatives to see. After all, it’s there forever, in one way or another (from Google cache to screen caps).

It has been noted that we eeeeeeeeeeeeeebol readers keep lists of authors behaving badly, and that we are not shy to share those lists with other readers whenever flaps like this latest break out.

It has been repeated all over the cyber-universe that, however unfair it may be, authors ought to behave in a different (wiser, more professional) manner than readers do–after all, authors are selling stuff to readers, and it behooves them to keep that in mind at all times.

Please note that I abhor piracy with a vengeance–as a reader, anything that will discourage authors from writing hurts me, and since it’s all about me…

(more…)

Calling a reader white trash is one of them.

Surely that’s something anybody with half a brain cell would know?

Origianlly, I wasn’t going to do a blog post on this, because I didn’t want to cause Trista Ann Michaels (Hey Trista, I linked to your page on Loose Id and everything, isn’t that great?) grief, but then I took my head out of my arse, and remembered that this isn’t a blog known for its restraint.

Might as well live by the Mean Girl code, yes?

Anyway, where was I? Yeah that’s right, here’s a really good example of what not to write on a reader blog: (more…)

Ivanhine, over at Ann Somerville’s blog.

Ivanhine starts:

I am pretty much an outsider and an occasional reader of DA. I don’t belong to, nor am I represented by any publishers involved in any of the discussions to which you took part. In fact, the only somewhat direct contact I have is that my epublisher got a positive review from you at Uniquely Pleasurable a short time back for another author’s work (not mine.) I don’t know your work very well, except for what is put out on the net, but there is a long history of comments, blog posts, and self-disclosures here from which any casual observer can draw a conclusion. And here is what I see, for what it is worth, and you can take it or leave it.

If you want to read any more, you have to wonder over there, because I simply don’t have time to post excerpts right now.

I have to tell you though, this was my favourite bit from the rather long, but wonderfully articulate comment:

Didn’t you understand that you can’t shit in the same place you eat?

Methinks the answer to that is a resounding, no.

Edited to add:
Apparently AS deleted the relevant post, so the links will be broken. Shame, because Ivanhine’s comments were rather splendid.

Jane at Dear Author posted about some sort of harebrained idea by some novelists to expand the reach of copyright law to the sale of used print books.

NINC on the sale of used books:

Used book sales, particularly sales of used books through the Internet, have a significant negative effect on the income of publishers and, therefore, authors, as there is no remuneration to them for any sales of used books.

…

Ninc recommends that commercial used-book sellers be required to pay to publishers a “Secondary Sale” fee upon the reselling of any book within two years of its original publication date. A percentage of these fees would then transfer to authors in accordance with contractual agreements between authors and publishers, thereby reinforcing the Founders’ intent, as stated in Article I of the Constitution, to protect authors’ exclusive right to benefit from their work.

Oh really?

Many of the comments over there expressed my bewilderment over such a preposterous idea, but then there was this gem by Misi:

Well, one day there will only be e-books and all you’ll get is a license to read, not ownership, just a lot of software is now. You can’t even resell the disc (legally) under those terms. Well, you can sell the discs, but only if you delete the content.

The current copyright law is outdated. Again, used bookstores aren’t the problem. It’s the online places that have changed the situation. The law should be changed to.

I’m almost speechless here.

I mean, my mind is just a jumble of extrapolations. I guess we could say that at some point only the person who actually paid for the book should be able to read it, and that any other person reading the same physical book should pay royalties to the author for the privilege.

I ask again, what the fuck?

I pay dearly for my weaknesses, particularly my curiosity.

During a recent post discussing LLB quitting blogging, Throwmearope mentioned how it’s become sorta the “in” thing to do. Quit then come back. Quit then come back. Quit… well, you know, like Cher or Michael Jordan: lather, rinse, repeat.

And that brought to mind author Tess Gerritsen and her earlier epic flounce.  Some of you may remember that she felt overwhelmed by the meanness. Then again, some of us readers felt rather unimpressed by the whole “if you are not a writer you have no call to write a review because you just don’t understand writing” that she espouses in her blog (yeah, I’m paraphrasing—sue me).

So, since curiosity is my besetting sin, I wandered over to TG’s blog to see how that “not blogging” thing was going. Imagine how utterly unsurprised I am to see that she’s back to it.

Ah but the goodness doesn’t end there, no siree! Following a recent link, I found this little pearl of wisdom over at Murderati: Can a bad review kill your career?

And Ms Gerritsen categorically replies, “Yes.” (more…)

I usually don’t do the whole “You’re just jealous bitch!” thing, and use it as an excuse for fuckheaded behaviour, but I have to say there can be no other explanation for Chancery Stone’s never-ending rants on her blog (sorry, not linking), about Nora Roberts.

Well, there is the attention-seeking-let’s-promote-my-books-at-all-cost thing, but judging from her past fucked up behaviour, that kinda goes without saying doesn’t it?

You do remember Ms Stone, don’t you? You know, the slightly strange man-hater, who thinks that incest is romantic, and that child abuse is sexy?

Yeah, that’s the one.

Anyway, poor Chancery Stone seems to be suffering from the worst case of professional jealousy I’ve ever witnessed.

It seems that she’s got a massive hard-on for our very own Nora Roberts. No, really.

Personally, I believe that her tactic is to stir up enough shit, (the jealousy is very real too though) so that La Nora fangirls will go over to her blog to give her what for, discover her literary masterpiece, that she’s desperately trying to flog to all and sundry, and buy said book to see what the fuss is about.

Unfortunately for her, she actually needs some kind of readership to get anything going.

Anyway, because I’m always there for the desperate and the needy, I decided to post a few examples of the stuff she’s written. Here’s a fairly tame excerpt to start you off with: (more…)

Isn’t that just the most romantic thing you ever heard?

I’m sure Chancery Stone will be pleased that I posted her Youtube vid on the blog, seeing as she’s such a publicity whore.

By the way, when you look at her other videos, do you come away with the feeling that she hates men?

Just sayin’.

CHANCERY Effing STONE.

The woman is too stupid to be real. She’s spent days arguing and trying cause a kerfuffle on the Amazon boards, all because she wants to sell more books. She obviously believes that there’s no such thing as bad publicity. (I wonder how that’s working out for her?)

She then decides to act like the injured party, and posts this crap, on the Amazon romance readers board:

Hi, my name is Chancery Stone. I am the author of The DANNY Quadrilogy and I first posted on this forum two days ago. Since then I have witnessed some strange and occasionally, at least to me, entertaining behaviour, and what I want to ask you now is this:

Do romance authors hate all other authors? Do YOU hate other authors? Or is it really a small clique of authors on here that simply create this impression?

Now that we know what her usual MO is, this seems like such an obvious ploy to get people to lash out at her, thus generating more talk about her and her books. I don’t mind giving her the publicity she obviously craves, but sooner or later, she’s gonna learn that most valuable of lessons: Nothing really ever dies on the internet.

The silly arse continues:

In my short two days I’ve had authors stridently assert that my book wasn’t a romance – without them knowing the first thing about it. I’ve had them tell me it “couldn’t qualify as a romance” because it contained incest. I’ve had them assert very aggressively, and repeatedly, that ALL romance readers have to have a happy ending on their romances or they will boycott any authors that dare to do different. I’ve had them assert that Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre – the prototype romances upon which all modern romances are based – are not romances. Neither, apparently, are Gone With The Wind, or the works of Virginia Andrews.

I imagine there are an awful lot of readers around the world right now cheerfully believing they are reading some of the finest romances in the world only to be bitterly disillusioned, by this board, to discover they are not.

What an utter fuckwit.

have also been told that the definition of romance is determined by the Romance Writers of America, an appallingly xenophobic remark that we shall put to one side for just now to discuss what this says about the board. Is everyone on it really that narrow in their definitions? Are YOU only confident you are reading a romance if the RWA says so? Who exactly ARE the RWA to determine what is a romance and what isn’t, and to lay down rules – if they actually do – about it’s ‘true’ nature?

She is such an attention-seeking dickhead.

I am curious as to what all the hundreds (thousands?) of silent readers think, reading this hostility masquerading as “advice”. Does it make you want to take part in discussions? Do you feel these people represent your views? Are you afraid to venture your true feelings, ‘advertise’ your own work, say anything, indeed, in case the self-appointed clique-of-the-week decide to take you down for not conforming?

I can pretty much guarantee that the majority of the silent romance readers, think you’re a cock.

This comment had me choking on my lemon tea:

Part of this charming definition of ‘etiquette’ has, for my part, included me being threatened with the ‘report abuse’ button. It has also had me referred to as “one of those foreigners” who, allegedly, come over to Amazon.com just to break these ‘rules’ of ‘etiquette’, perhaps by stealing your jobs and raping your women.

Yes, people, this twat is actually comparing the reaction of romance readers to racism.

There are lots more, but this little comment tells you what that whole post was really about:

This sad and moving speech has been brought to you by Chancery Stone, author of The Danny Quadrilogy, volume 1 of which may be bought from Amazon.co.uk and Volume 2 of which appears here on Amazon.com.

At one point, she boasts that she has loads of readers and her sales are fabulous. But this naturally begs the question, if she’s got that many readers, why does she feel the need to go around and harp on about her books to an audience that she surely knows wont be adding to her sales figures?

This comment from ‘Francois’ had me laughing my tits off:

So we’ve established that Chancery Stone is a nutcase who’s been shilling her “novel” for upwards of fifteen years to no avail whatsoever in between masturbating to her own genius. Oh, and I have a new favorite quote:

“I like going for the jugular and watching them squirm as they try to redeem an irredeemable faux pas.” This coming from a woman who showed up on a quiet romance novel forum screeching “READ MY EDGY GAY INCEST STORY!!”

I swear, she even makes the Vicious Rhinoceros and her sidekick, look slightly less insane.

My hope for her is that one day (soon), she learns about the benefits of taking one’s medication before logging onto the computer.