#10 – Being One-Sided Conversationalists
Despite allowing a very few pointed comments that mentions their objection to the STGRB’s bizarre methodology of ‘we’re bullying to stop bullying‘, they do not allow or encourage open discussions that might introduce other possible–and more civil–solutions. In fact, they really don’t even discuss any of the recommended methods suggested by major and accredited anti-bully organizations. The posts they do allow are by a small group of their supporters and which have a singular tone of snark, mockery, and hate. These supporters (sock-puppets?) primarily engage in more ‘bashing and trashing’ conversations. Bottom line, their platform is CLOSED for OPEN discussion.
#9 – Maligning Goodreads’s Good Name
No social media site their size is without some trolls or some members disagreeing in a heated manner, but to single Goodreads out as the primary location for such behavior is irresponsible and even damaging. To prove my point, many of the screen captures used on their site are pulled from many other sources such as personal blogs, Amazon, Twitter, Facebook and email posts. Goodreads.com is currently the most open, flexible and advanced social media site for book lovers and authors. They claim that 99.9% of the interactions on their site is friendly and without issues. But they are NOT the source of this issue, not by a mile.
#8 – Creating a Bigger Divide Between Authors and Readers
They want you to believe they are only stopping the negative comments about authors (not the book), but what they are really stopping are potential reviewers from speaking at all. Out of fear of the STGRB’s wrath and persecution methods, innocent book bloggers have begun to shut down their sites, and many readers have stated they will not review anything. They fear they might be supporting an author behind that site, or that STGRB will expose private details about them. The risk is no longer worth it for many. So do they care how this hurts the authors wanting honest ‘free’ reviews?! I doubt it; to them it is collateral damage that can’t be helped.
# 7 – Falsely Representing Themselves as an Official Anti-Bully Group
Official organizations such as CivilNation and Pacer National Bullying Prevention Center are government backed and certified, non-profit groups with 501(c)3 authorization who do not hide behind cartoon personas and who are dedicated to addressing the same causes that STGRB falsely claims they support. They do not allow supporters to publicly engage in conversations on their own site using the same behavior they claim not to condone. In contrast, STGRB has neither the credentials nor a visible board of members to back their claim of validity, and they regularly allow malicious conversations that mock and belittle others.
- The Huffington Post withdrew its support just minutes after allowing their post to slip through the cracks unchecked
#6 – Falsely Accusing People of Being Bullies
Several weeks ago I ended up on their blacklist of ‘bullies’, but the ONLY ‘proof’ they provided was one screen capture of me calling them ‘bozos’. That’s not to say I haven’t pissed people off over the years, but implying I bash authors to ruin their careers, or that I write bogus reviews is simply FALSE. Their ‘fact checking’ department needs some work, and their ‘ethical’ department needs fired.
#5 – Their arrogant assumption that they have the right to define how amateur book reviewers voice their opinions
If they remained only focused on the mantra ‘review the book, not the author!’ I might not have added this point to the list, but over the last two months the examples paraded out for persecution went far beyond this scope. If what they display represents their actual goals to “eradicate their enemies”, then they want to force their control all over the internet and demand that all public mentions of any author anywhere (incl. reviews, chats, comments, Facebook, Twitter…etc.) be sanitized and formatted to reflect the author (not just the book) in a positive spin. This is a righteous notion found ludicrous and impossible to enforce by many.
#4 – De-humanizing Real-life People to “Eradicate their Enemies”
Their radical eye-for-an-eye tactics and blatant de-humanizing approach to achieve their twisted goals has the romance book community up in arms. After they put a human face and name behind several of their bullies, they have since posted COUNTLESS examples of their attempt to humiliate, ridicule, and bully these real-life people.
#3 – Expecting kudos for taking down most, but not all, of the real-life personal and private information
I am glad they came to their senses and have ceased this deplorable tactic used in their failed attempt of to “eradicate their enemies”, but the damage done cannot be undone. This would be like saying “Hey, I no longer drink and drive anymore, so I should be forgiven for the time I killed that family last year when I was drunk driving.” The only upshot is that MORE damage will not be done. To justify their behavior with excuses and imply it was harmless, instead of taking ownership and apologizing for their clear misdeed, tells me so much about that groups lack of understanding of just what is and is not a cyber-bully victim.
#2 – They exposed real-life personal information without thought of the potential risks
Their argument of “Hey, it was already public information!” should have been followed up with the statement “…if you know where to dig and how to connect the dots like we do, you can create profiles on all kinds of people!” Sadly, this is true but their purpose and intent for exposing this information does not get whitewashed away with that technicality. The real-life information was pieced together bit by bit with the intent to profile their intended ‘bully’ victims and display them for all of their visitors to mock and ridicule alongside with them. Their message was clear: “We know where you live, where you sleep, and who is close to you”. They purposefully exposed just enough personal details (photos, full name, city, family relations, day job company name, favorite restaurant including the day/time they frequent it…etc.) so that any crazed lunatic could (and did) connect even more dots to information about these people’s real life.
The REAL-LIFE information they posted:
- Lucy’s STGRB profile
- Ridley’s STGRB profile
- Holy Terror’s STGRB profile
- Wendy Darling’s profile This was posted on Melissadouthit.com, an author acknowledged to be closely associated with STGRB. It too was deleted many weeks after it was first posted. Wendy Darling later broke her silence on the matter that caused Douthit to write her blog.
#1 – Not taking the threat of violence against a person they exposed seriously
Personal threats are NEVER a joking matter, but that is exactly what the STGRB did (and continues to do). Any mature-minded person with a conscience knows to take personal threats seriously. So for a site claiming to be anti-bullying to act as it does–calling these women a liar and continually joking about this issue as a means to discredit them and shuck any responsibility (as they are for Lucy)—is a slap in the face for people who truly were victimized by personal attacks and bullying.
- Read Lucy’s own words: “We can find you bitch!” What it’s liked to be stalked
- Just a FEW examples of how the STGRB founders and members are treating this very serious matter