HomeReviewsInterviewsStoreABlogsOn Writing
Charming? (aka, old business is current business) (EC v DA)

I was reading #notchilled when the always entertaining TiNut spewed erm…tweeted, this particular witticism:

TiNut - EC and company are charming as witnesses and clients
Oh yeah, I see how charming it is to have Tina Engler/Jaid Black giving the finger to everyone on her facebook page.

 (embiggen at your own risk)

FIRST result, people, top left!
Very professional, indeed. Befitting the owner of a *cough* massive *cough* company.

(Please do excuse me while I laugh myself silly over here in the corner for a moment)

Okay, I’m back.

So charming as clients and on the stand that the judge in the Brashear case spanked them every which way till Sunday, tears and all.

A taste, because I just can’t resist:

Brashears v EC et al, page 25

I don’t think ‘charming’ means what TiNut thinks it means…unless it means egregious acts of bad faith, willful dilatory conduct in discover and willful disobedience of (the) Court’s orders.  (Last bit quoted from the top of page 26 in the ruling)

~ * ~

And then, from the “it was a long time ago” file…

One anonymous commenter (on a May 2007 post, mind you, so please do excuse the messed up formatting; emphasis mine):

I’m one of several authors who were hit with unnecessary litigation by EC so of course I’m posting anonymously.

It’s all about the money, and they don’t care about the authors. I’ll never forget the owner of EC (Tina aka Jaid Black) showing up at RT one year when all the authors’ royalties were late. She showed around a photo of her new Mercedes and crowed, “Look what you bought me!”

That company and its owners deserve to go down in flames.

And the update to the body of the post? It starts with this little nugget (again, emphasis mine):

You can use my words, but not my name, please. I’m a coward and I’m scared of EC. I’ll tell you right now that they’re so incredibly litigious most of their authors are too scared to speak out (hence my wish to remain anonymous). That’s why you get such a love-fest online.

Sounds familiar?

If you have a few minutes, you may want to scroll down through the comments in that thread. Some curious tidbits in there, curious indeed. 😀

~ * ~

Oh and just in case anyone needs it clarified: the above? and all my posts on this matter? are my personal opinion. As such, they are protected by the First Amendment. I have quoted what others have said, and I have provided screenshots in some cases. Those reading can form their own opinions just as well as I can.


  • Julaine
    January 28
    11:18 pm

    I must have really set PNut off when I pointed out that TE/JB/EC had a less than charming impression on the judge in the Brashears case. Malingering, malfeasance & contumacious all in one document along with obstruction. Oh, my!

    Of course PNut has flung out such non sequiturs as threatening me and others with lawsuits for having the audacity to say that I will never buy another book from EC and mocking that particular anonymous Twitter account relentlessly.

    So strange that an anonymous Twitter account proporting to be unaffiliated w/ EC seems to know so much about the internal strategy and future plans, legal or otherwise, of this particular digital first publisher.

    /eye rolling/


  • @Julaine: It is, indeed, puzzling, that a ‘scout for publisher protection’ which is absolutely NOT associated with Ellora’s Cave or with any of its principals, would be a) so interested in anything and everything that is said in #notchilled; b) have so peculiar a perspective of the people, companies and even organizations involved (RWA/PAN anyone/), and c) have so much trouble keeping its ‘insider information’ to itself.

    Discovery should, indeed, prove interesting.


  • Amarinda Jones
    January 29
    2:54 am

    Just an Aussie observation in the spelling of the word ‘colourful’ by this pubnet person. It’s not spelling an American, let alone a US publisher, would use. Now, I’m not defending EC in any way, shape or form – god no – but I found that unusual. I’ll be interested to see who this individual or as I suspect individuals are.


  • @Amarinda Jones: No worries, Ms Jones. You are not the only one to point out that TiNut cannot be Tina Engler for one reason or another.

    Both Ms Deirdre and I have posted on the topic at different times in the last four months, but obviously, no certainty unless/until subpoenas are issued

    As for the spelling…TiNut has been spelling different words differently and mixing pseudo Brit slang with American slang. At times, it has claimed to be one person–despite the royal ‘we’–or two people, or up to eight people.

    Also, at different points in time, some of these ‘people’ are lawyers, or law students, or a spouse, or…


  • Julaine
    January 31
    2:07 pm

    While it keeps claiming to not be affiliated with EC, last night PNut stated that it had a “relative” affliated w/ EC and was privy to insider information from its “source”. It is simply amazing how it can fail to get a single legal fact correct all the while proclaiming its omnipotent knowledge of all things past present and future about EC.

    Someone needs to have their internet connection taken away.


  • @Julaine: Yes, I saw that, and screenshot it (see today’s post).

    The one that literally cracked me up was the one where it claimed to be “correct as always.”


  • Julaine
    February 7
    7:07 am

    For the record, I believe, the official translation of “correct as always” from Nutlandish to English is “can’t even buy a f*cking clue”.


  • […] being a successful self-published author makes Courtney Milan not respectable–yet TiNut believes that Jaid Black and company are “charming.” […]

  • […] Black, that charming and professional CEO of a ‘massive’ company, decided that it was in good taste to mock […]

  • […] as classy and wholesome as Jaid Black and company, ain’t […]

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment