Posts Tagged side-bar-of-fame
#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
“It’s Okay — We’re Hunting
Communists Book Reviewers!”
Hmmm, now why does the following sound SOOOO familiar?
In the aftermath of World War II, Americans reacted with dismay as relations between the United States and the Soviet Union deteriorated, the Russians imposed communist control over much of Eastern Europe, and China was on the verge of going communist. People worried that communists might try to subvert schools, labor unions, and other institutions. Government agencies and private groups began to look for evidence of subversive activity. In this climate of fear and suspicion, the House Committee on Un-American Activities, which Herb Block had opposed since its inception in the 1930s, became active. And in 1950, a young senator from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy, seeking political gain, began a well-publicized campaign using smear tactics, bullying and innuendo to identify and purge communists and “fellow travelers” in government. Herb Block recognized the danger to civil liberties posed by such activities and warned of them in his work. He coined the phrase “McCarthyism” in his cartoon for March 29, 1950, naming the era just weeks after Senator McCarthy’s spectacular pronouncement that he had in his hand a list of communists in the State Department. His accusations became headline news, vaulting him into the national political spotlight. For four years McCarthy attacked communism, while in his cartoons Herb Block relentlessly attacked his heavy-handed tactics. In June 1954, McCarthy was censured and in December condemned by the Senate. (Emphasis are mine) Source: http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/swann/herblock/fire.html
Oh yes, of course, now I remember! I read something VERY similar over at the STGRB site. In the aftermath of the Melissa Douthit blog post which exposed Goodreads member Wendy Darling’s personal and private information in a attempt to incite fear and silence reviewers, citizens of Romancelandia reacted with utter outrage and dismay as relations between authors and book reviewers continued to deteriorate. Supporters of Douthit’s extreme political tactics formed a secret committee to hunt, expose and “eradicate” their enemies, (commonly identified as people having opinions and beliefs counter to their own), and to execute swift justice on anyone they decide it deserves. They publicly persecute the enemy for all the world to see — and, of course, to remind others just what could happen to them if they too speak out and break one of their many loosely defined laws. They brandish their own ‘special’ form of justice using smear tactics, bullying, mockery, and innuendo to identify and purge
communists reviewers and readers and other “fellow travelers” in government on the internet. They remind visitors everyday how they have a privileged right to use these tactics. They are special snowflakes, and claim to have secret knowledge that allows them to determine who is right and who is wrong in ANY online kerfuffle. They also made a spectacular pronouncement that they have a ‘black list’ of communists bullies. As of today, the committee secretly meets to decide who deserves their wrath and who will be spared, providing screen caps as PROOF. (And everyone know they couldn’t possibly be taken out of context, ever). Among their supporters, the committee’s words are law thereby eradicating the need for opposing opinions. And while no one really knows what it takes to get on that list, just be afraid, very afraid, as it might be you next.
((Way to go you STGRB McCarthyists!))
Since even vinegar can catch flies from time to time, I have to wonder how many people truly believe that the STGRB is *NOT* exactly what they claim to stand against. Or do people really believe that they have a ‘power of exception’ clause which allows them to behave in the same manner which they condemn others? So if you either support or are unsure about the nature and purpose of the Stopthegrbullies.com site, please take a seat and let me tell you my side of things. The other half, so to speak. While at first glance you might agree with them on the surface level because YES, the hostility on review sites is escalating and making news in Romancelandia and other book communities. And even I admit they have a point at times, albeit contrived with innuendos and their speculations are often misrepresented as facts. We have seen the hostility all over the internet, not just on Goodreads. The guilty culprits slinging mud and wild accusations include reviewers, bloggers, authors, readers, editors, assistants, their
husbands family members…etc. In truth, every group is guilty of behaving badly these days and it is frustrating to wade through it if all you want to find is a good book recommendation. But wake up folks, the problem is NOT limited to just a few Goodreads reviewers on someones black list of names. The STGRB site started in retaliation against a few reviewers of whom they argued with in places like Amazon and Goodreads. The real problem (as opposed to the one they would lead you to believe) is much, much wider – and it might also include you, a friend, or even your favorite author.
Let’s cut to the chase of matters: book reviews are a HIGHLY SENSITIVE topic for most people in this industry. According the NYT, unethical shops offering paid reviews are flourishing into big business because authors believe honest and unbiased reviews too difficult and timely to obtain. Sources like book bloggers and online reviewers who volunteer their time for free out of their love of reading, and who encourages their friends to read what they’re reading, are ideal but they are no guarantee. Fortunately for consumers, there are many ethical authors strongly recommending against the practice of paid reviews. Bloggers such as ‘Write to Publish’ weighed in on this last year, and the comments were intense. The ‘free’ reviews are at the heart of the issue and why STGRB started waging war on the reviewer community. They want to force their control over the reviewer communities and require all public mentions of any author anywhere (incl. reviews, chats, comments…etc.) be sanitized and formatted to reflect the author (not just the book) in a positive spin, a righteous notion found ludicrous and impossible to enforce by many. But it is their radical eye-for-an-eye tactics and blatant de-humanizing approach to achieve this goal that has the romance book community up in arms.
After first learning about the STGRB site I was horrified and shocked at their tactics, bewildered by their audacity, and outraged at their hypocritical claim of supporting an anti-bully platform when in fact that was EXACTLY what they were doing. Their site targeted a handful of Goodread members, exposed personal and private details about them, and painted a magnificently ugly and exaggerated image of each person. Then they paraded these profiles to their visitors and roared in glory that they have captured their enemies! “If we stop these bullies by torture and humiliation, we will obtain peace in Romancelandia!!” (I’m paraphrasing, but not by much.) And I asked myself, how many more amateur reviewers will they capture and torture while they act as both judge and jury before finding them guilty and executing them?!! I shuddered at the thought of how far they might go, and I was right. Not even two months later the list is up to 19 now, including me.
You see, I am a frequent user of Goodreads and am online friends with many of those named as ‘bullies’. (I have over 650 GR friends by the way, so despite their accusations we are NOT a small ‘clique’ or ‘gang’). I have been active in Romancelandia community for over 6-years, and have posted well over 10,000++ posts around the internet chatting up MANY books and authors alike. I have read close to 1,200 romance novels to date and reviewed over 500 of them on places like Amazon and Goodreads. I am not an author (nor an aspiring author) but I have many friendships and acquaintances with authors, which I cherish. I have even contributed my support to several published articles (including one in the national RWA magazine) that were aimed at bridging the gap between reviewers and authors. This year alone I have reviewed 103 books, 45 of them by new voices (indie or debut authors) who don’t have a fan following – yet. All in all, the vast majority (99+%) of my interaction online at Goodreads and elsewhere is friendly discussions about books or other shared interests.
Ironically, last January during the back-to-back YA kerfuffles all over the internet (NOT just Goodreads) I purchased the domain name ‘authorsbehavingbadly.com for the sole purpose of making certain no-one would ever use it. The level of hostility was high, and I’ve seen how people will behave when tempers are hot. I feared that such a website in the hands of people bent on revenge could create more damage, and I was right. I only got the domain name wrong. I care deeply about this community, and I am a supporter of bridging the gap between authors and readers, but not by force or humiliating tactics. So why am I telling you all of this? Because none of this is information they will openly share with you, despite Stich’s ‘incredible‘ skills of digging up information. They are only looking for dirt to expose, not truth or unbiased information that might conflict with their mission to “expose evil”. And now STGRB wants me, and others like me, silenced.
So what happened, how did I make their list? Did I write an offensive review all about the author and not the book? Nope, I have never done that. Not my style. I do comment often (daily!) on Goodreads as I am an avid reader, amateur reviewer and a moderator of a popular romance group. I can’t say I haven’t upset or disagreed with other posters over the years, even authors, who might not like me now as a result but that doesn’t make me a ‘bully’ by any definition. From time to time I do post on some ‘hot’ threads to give support or provide clarity to a subject, and maybe (gasp!) to provide my own opinion. (I am still allowed to do that, right?) I don’t participate in the quest for exposing ‘badly behaving authors’, but I do agree that many of these authors either did behave badly or have to share the blame for their very public meltdowns (at least the ones I read about). But I have never had any direct infighting with an author regarding any reviews. By my account, I have not broken the original STGRB (v 1.0?) ‘reviewer rules’ of how to get on the list. Nor this UPDATED and EXPANDED (v 2.0?) set of their rules. They must have made an exception for me under their UPDATED, UPDATED and WAY EXPANDED (v 3.0?) blanket ‘WTFery McCarthysm’ rules, which basically means all of their other rules don’t really apply. They can just do whatever they want because…well, just because they said so.
So what ‘proof’ did they use when they added me to their list of bullies? LOL. I called them ‘bozos‘ in a screen cap shown at the bottom of this article. That’s all they have on me so far. But there is always more to a story, isn’t there? What I feel I did to ‘deserve’ a spot on their side-bar-of-fame –despite not breaking their primary reviewing rules—was to give my public support to many of the people they named as bullies. Guilty by association? Maybe, I really do not know. I’m just on their list, therefore you are just suppose to believe.
Personally, I can handle the bit of fame as I’ve made many new friends as a result, but what is distributing about this is it proves a huge point I have been making all along about how dangerous they are to the fragile ecosystem of Romancelandia, and now other online book communities. The online world already divides authors and readers because fundamentally we have different reasons for engaging in social media, but the STGRB movement is not in any way making things better with their “You’re either with us, or you’re against us!” mentality. In order for them to stay alive their list of “we accused and found’em guilty!” bullies will need to get longer and longer. How many unsuspecting reviewers in total will they ‘expose’ for their entertainment and justice rituals? How far will they go at making a public example of people they disagree with? They may have removed their most offensive content of personal and private info (although they still allow some of it on their site if you look close enough), but their smear campaign is still a threat to many people yet to be named. Their site has already exposed MANY other ‘free’ reviewers in a negative light, not just those on the list. If you think: “So what?! They deserve to be humiliated! An eye-for-an-eye!! “, what will you do when they parade someone you don’t think deserves it? All in all, I find this is an ugly and unconscionable practice and destructive to the community. The end does not justify the means.
They are driving fear into the young and less frequent reviewers. They want you to believe they are only stopping negative comments, but they are really stopping many from speaking at all. 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. As a direct result of their tactics many bloggers have closed shop, some citing to be mothers with children who will not put them at risk of a similar real life exposure as when one of their named ‘bullies’ received threatening phone calls. Their sheer negligent and arrogant belief that exposing just enough personal information while accusing these people of terrible deeds was a harmless thing to do backfired and put innocent people at risk. And many readers have commented in forums around Goodreads how they will not write reviews again, also fearing how far STGRB will go to force their policy across the free reviewer community. Their message of intimidation was clear: “I know where you live, where you sleep, and who is close to you.” So how many more potential reviewers will these Macarthyist maniacs intimidate into silence? How far will they take their righteous WTFery McCarthysm’ rule of “…includes but is not limited to”? Who will the side-bar-of-fame list in 6-months or 1-year from now? If they were honest about it and listed everyone who has behaved badly or spoken thoughtlessly online, that list would be crazy long, don’t you think? Would you be on that list? Or should I ask, WILL you be on that list?
I am not making excuses for the harsh comments and criticism displayed as examples in their screen caps, they’ve cherry picked from thousands of comments from these reviewers and they are not representative of their finest moments. But nor am I self appointing myself as the new ruler in town to let people know they must do as I say or I’ll bully them into submission. The use of force and intimidation as a means to an end is an outrageous and futile attempt to control all amateur voices on the internet. I do not consider myself an outsider to this situation. It is killing me to watch them parade more victims across their pages each day. Many are occasional reviewers who were just supporting their friends while voicing their opinions, and staying within the sites posted guidelines. They are also active voices on many groups and forums that chat about books. Their crime is caring about the book communities, not trying to ruin an authors career or make her cry. The uneven handed treatment of these reviewers by STGRB is purposeful IMO, as it incite fear and not understanding. One by one I see both my friends and strangers alike being captured and wrongly crucified by a mad group of righteous McCarthy-minded fools taking comments out of context for their own twisted enjoyment and justice. They believe this is an eye-for-an-eye justice, but it is a HUGE step backwards to finding unity within the online book communities. They are everything they claim to stand against.
If you are tired of the online infighting, I don’t blame you. I am too. I think we ALL are. If you think certain practices by reviewers, authors, publishers..etc. are disturbing and should stop, that is your opinion. I will likely even agree with you on many of them. But if you think publicly capturing and parading amateur reviewers, accusing them of many misdeeds out of context, and then acting as their judge and jury is an acceptable SOLUTION to this problem – then in my opinion you are incredibly short-sighted and part of the problem. A great big part of the problem. The guilty culprits slinging mud and wild accusations include everyone: reviewers, bloggers, authors, readers, editors, assistants, their
family members. Online hostility in community rooms is a real issue EVERYWHERE folks.
So far they have been very light on me. I’ve only been accused of calling them ‘bozos’. I know that the twisted accusations against reviewers like Kat, Wendy, Jane and others are utterly short-sided and wrong too. Taken out of context, anyone of us can be seen and painted as horrible people. We have all had bad days and have spoken things we later regretted. Many of those ‘bullies’ have been outstanding contributors and a welcome voice in Romancelandia for years, far more than me. Now we are suppose to believe that all of the great things these reviewers and bloggers have done for us is nil and void because the STGRB site tells us we should?! Come on folks, WAKE UP. I realize you want some behaviors to stop, and I do too, but they are not the way to make it happen.
At this point, all I can do is hope that you not get suckered into their false promises and twisted stories. I hope you will not do as they do and target your own list of enemies. I hope you will think about keeping your comments civil, but ALWAYS speak with your true voice. Not a voice someone else tells you to use. Their site might offer some entertainment to those who like to feel superior to their victims, but they are NOT solving any problems with their tactics — they are making things worse.
I have plenty more to say about STGRB site and the exploding tension around the book community world, but I will stop here for now. When I get the notion, I may add more.
‘Til next time, happy reading everyone.