Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Kair,It is creepy. I agree with everyone who has said that this author, in writting this article, has done herself no favors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 And the correct response to that is EVER to show up at their house? Holy shit, you could have at least finished reading my post, it was only a handful of sentences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Holy shit, you could have at least finished reading my post, it was only a handful of sentences. I think this thread shows exactly that people don't finish reading things before they comment :P and not a professional reviewer even, but a Goodreads blogger. Can you imagine if, based on the threads and posts in this forum, authors started showing up at the doors of Westeros.org posters because they took issue what someone said about their work? That is both the most hilarious and terrifying thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 weird double post. i blame people who gave my other post bad reviews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farseer2 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 What that author did was wrong and creepy, I certainly won't dispute that . However, I can't help feeling more sorry for her than for her online tormentor. I mean, let's look at the facts: The reviewer in question wrote an inflammatory review trashing her book. Perfectly OK so far (the reviewer is wrong, in my opinion, but even so, she has a right to be wrong). Apparently, the reviewer has a history of writing that kind of reviews and harassing other reviewers who disagree with her. Then the reviewer contacts the writer and offers to give her ideas for her next book, without mentioning that she is thrashing her book in Goodreads (nothing illegal here, but this is already creepy). Then the reviewer starts tweeting in tandem with the author, ridiculing everything she says (isn't this stalking already?). There is no doubt in my mind that the reviewer is a bully who preys on weak authors and baits them to engage. If that happens, then the author is the one in the wrong and the career-ending campaign can begin. Now, with that kind of behavior it is completely evident to me that the right response for an author is to shrug and ignore it. Anything else only gives power to the bully. However, I can understand some writers being sensitive, weak and, plainly speaking, not very smart. I'm sorry for the writer here, even though she certainly did not do the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farseer2 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 My favorite comment is one the user "arthur2sheds" made on the Guardian article: "I was sort of half hoping this would end like the film Angel Heart where Kathleen realises that she is Blythe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Did you read both articles? Cause if you did I think we may have different definitions for the term bully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edda van Heefmstra Ruston Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 What that author did was wrong and creepy, I certainly won't dispute that . However, I can't help feeling more sorry for her than for her online tormentor. I mean, let's look at the facts: The reviewer in question wrote an inflammatory review trashing her book. Perfectly OK so far (the reviewer is wrong,[1] in my opinion, but even so, she has a right to be wrong). Apparently, the reviewer has a history of writing that kind of reviews[2] and harassing other reviewers who disagree with her. Then the reviewer contacts the writer and offers to give her ideas for her next book[3], without mentioning that she is thrashing her book in Goodreads (nothing illegal here, but this is already creepy). Then the reviewer starts tweeting in tandem with the author, ridiculing everything she says (isn't this stalking already?)[4]. There is no doubt in my mind that the reviewer is a bully who preys on weak authors[5] and baits them to engage. If that happens, then the author is the one in the wrong and the career-ending campaign can begin. Now, with that kind of behavior it is completely evident to me that the right response for an author is to shrug and ignore it. Anything else only gives power to the bully. However, I can understand some writers being sensitive, weak and, plainly speaking, not very smart. I'm sorry for the writer here, even though she certainly did not do the right thing. [1] Why? Why can't a reviewer write a review of a book? As long as she's not trashing the author, and everything in the review is accurate, then why should she censor herself? [2] According to whom? STGRB, who are themselves a bully group? Hale? Do we have any record of the reviewer's other reviews? [3] Asked for by the author. If someone thought a book was shitty, and the author asked for honest feedback on new ideas or areas of improvement, why shouldn't someone respond? Should new ideas only come from those who think the book's perfect, or even good? [4] Not really. It might be harassment, though we again don't have anything except Hale's memory of things, which has been shown to be fallible already. [5] Why do you think this? Do you have anything other than what Hale wrote that supports this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 my one-star reviews often attract the wrath of five-star avengers. maybe I should find out where they live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkynJay Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 my one-star reviews often attract the wrath of five-star avengers. maybe I should find out where they live. Man everything on this forum sounds like a knock of serial comic these days. The Five Star Avengers! Social Justice Warriors! Bully Reviewer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farseer2 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 [1] Why? Why can't a reviewer write a review of a book? As long as she's not trashing the author, and everything in the review is accurate, then why should she censor herself?[2] According to whom? STGRB, who are themselves a bully group? Hale? Do we have any record of the reviewer's other reviews?[3] Asked for by the author. If someone thought a book was shitty, and the author asked for honest feedback on new ideas or areas of improvement, why shouldn't someone respond? Should new ideas only come from those who think the book's perfect, or even good?[4] Not really. It might be harassment, though we again don't have anything except Hale's memory of things, which has been shown to be fallible already.[5] Why do you think this? Do you have anything other than what Hale wrote that supports this? (1) There seems to be a misunderstanding here. I'm saying the same thing as you. I just said that I disagreed with the review, but that she is perfectly within her rights to write it.(2) According to the Guardian article, which is written by the author. I don't have time and do not care enough about this to conduct further investigations.(3) Yes, asked for by the author. The author had not asked for criticism or areas of improvement, though. She had asked about ideas for her next book. If you are writing everywhere that an author's work is shit and then you respond to a request like that then I find it shifty and weird. That's my opinion, and I feel that it's just another element in a pattern of harassment against the author.(4) It's harassment, and yes, that's assuming that what Hale wrote is mostly accurate (see point 2).(5) Again, see point 2. Please, notice that I'm not defending the writer's actions. I'm just saying that she looks to me like an overly sensitive and not very bright person who reacts to online harassment in a wrong way, and that the reviewer acts like a bully from the beginning. For me it's important the distinction of who started the harassment and who reacted, even if both of them are in the wrong. And yes, my opinion is based on the assumption that the article describes the facts more or less accurately. If it does not, then I obviously know nothing about this case and can not comment on it. Regard then my post as an opinion on an hypothetical case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theda Baratheon Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I can't believe people are even thinking about siding with the author on this. She fucking hired a rental car, went to someone's HOUSE, harrassed her at work. For leaving negative GR updates on her book. She's creepy as fuck and this isn't the first time she's internet stalked someone. Found this article in the comment section of the Dear Author piece. http://thoughtcatalog.com/kathleen-hale/2013/02/169836/She's good at making herself seem like a victim, but she turned up at that ladies house because of a bad book review and there is NOTHING okay about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farseer2 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I can't believe people are even thinking about siding with the author on this. I'm not siding with the author. I think she did wrong. I'm just saying that I don't feel sympathy for this Blythe Harris person. If you spend your time acting like a jerk to people then I don't feel sorry when one of them acts like a jerk to you. By the way, I can't believe either that you think the problem was about the reviewer "leaving negative GR updates on her book". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 This author was in the wrong. I don't think that is debtable. However, it prompts another question. Should we all have a right to absolute anonymity from other users online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninefingers Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 This author was in the wrong. I don't think that is debtable. However, it prompts another question. Should we all have a right to absolute anonymity from other users online? This. The question about whether the author acted like a [poop]head is not (or should not be) in dispute. The much more interesting question to me is did the reviewer (or can a reviewer, in this situation) do anything wrong? Suppose reviewer X writes/says things about a book that are demonstrably untrue. And further suppose that this reviewer has enough influence to meaningfully impact sales. Does the author have a legitimate civil case? I saw a couple of comments upstream that seemed to imply that people should be able to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninefingers Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 One more comment: I find it absurd that the author kept referring to what the reviewer was doing as "catfishing". The reviewer wasn't catfishing. She sounds like a garden variety internet a-hole who had layered on a false persona to increase her level of anonymity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eponine Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 I can't believe people are even thinking about siding with the author on this. She fucking hired a rental car, went to someone's HOUSE, harrassed her at work. For leaving negative GR updates on her book.She's creepy as fuck and this isn't the first time she's internet stalked someone. Found this article in the comment section of the Dear Author piece.http://thoughtcatalog.com/kathleen-hale/2013/02/169836/She's good at making herself seem like a victim, but she turned up at that ladies house because of a bad book review and there is NOTHING okay about that. That was incredibly disturbing. my one-star reviews often attract the wrath of five-star avengers. maybe I should find out where they live. I hope Stephen King starts stalking me. This author was in the wrong. I don't think that is debtable. However, it prompts another question. Should we all have a right to absolute anonymity from other users online? In this case, I'd separate legal rights from ethical behavior. I don't think we should or can have the legal right to absolute anonymity. When we chose to engage with people, we give them information about who we are, and we can't expect anyone to enforce that they never use that information to identify us. It's even less reasonable to believe that we have a right to anonymity when we've given out our real name and picture, but then expect other people to pretend that doesn't correlate to a real person. (I use my real name on Goodreads). OTOH, I think it's "ethical" to give people the amount of privacy and anonymity they want, within reason. (I think it's a pretty common sense thing 99% of the time. I mean, I know your name and city, but it'd still be creepy as hell if I used that info to travel to your exact house without warning. I see my coworkers all the time, some of them I know pretty closely where they live because they've told me, but I still don't get to look up their exact addresses and leave stuff on their doorsteps even though they really don't have anonymity from me). This. The question about whether the author acted like a [poop]head is not (or should not be) in dispute. The much more interesting question to me is did the reviewer (or can a reviewer, in this situation) do anything wrong? Suppose reviewer X writes/says things about a book that are demonstrably untrue. And further suppose that this reviewer has enough influence to meaningfully impact sales. Does the author have a legitimate civil case? I saw a couple of comments upstream that seemed to imply that people should be able to It's possible to sue someone for slander or libel. I would expect that an author would have a legitimate case. (In this situation, it looks like the author says the reviewer said that the book had rape and that was demonstrably untrue, but others have noted that in the state where the book was set, the ages of the characters involved fell under statuary rape laws, one was 16). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Errant Bard Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 This author was in the wrong. I don't think that is debtable. However, it prompts another question. Should we all have a right to absolute anonymity from other users online?We do not. Slander someone, and he can bring the matter to justice, and they will find where you live: you are not anonymous, a website, an user name are better to identify you than telling your interlocutor that you are named John Smith. And blogging/tweeting with some volume is hardly compatible with being anonymous anyway.It is not relevant here as even if you were a famous/known/public person, it would still not be ok to show up at your door when you says something another guy on internet does not like... in fact it shows why anonymity is necessary: so a random crazy lady does not decide to make it personal. ETA: which I realize only now might have been what you meant all along, oh well.I would formulate it differently: do every other entity crawling the net have a right to know my private information?What you are implying is that when you go in a pub you should know immediatly the names of everyone there. Even Google with their Glass balked at that. Of course, should something happen, the proper authorities have the means to get those infos, but not you, and it's fine. It is exactly the same with internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 There is more than one link in the original post. I think a few of you need to read the other articles that were linked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Eponine,I had a boarder, no longer posting who really didn't like me, figure out my real name and where I worked. It creeps me out, a lot, to this day.You mean it's not Scot A Ellison?!!?Next, you'll tell me you aren't a knight either!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.