Absolute Write's ISP responds to allegations

[angelahoy]

The Absolute Write True Story

http://jccordray.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=2

[writerdave]

Well ain't that just as interestin' as all get out?

I didn't really follow the AW debacle but read a bit and then read this guy's letter. In the words of Elmer Fudd, "Vewwy, vewwy intuhwesting."

writerdave
_________________
right or wrong, write

[Kisha]

[writerdave]

So far as I can tell, none of the comments on Making Light are worth much. Nothing against the posters, but they all seem to be commenting without the two key parties doing some posting so that everyone else can make some informed opinions.

This case does seem to present several issues that others should be considering.

1) Thou shalt have a signed contract before transferring thine website to a new company's server. (Haven't we been harping on that about writers taking on assignments?)
2) Thou shalt read and understand the rules and regulations of the hosting company.
3) If you're going to operate a public forum, thou shalt keep a sharp eye on what posters are saying. If posters are writing dubious or potentially libelous comments, thou shalt remove them forthwith and take appropriate action against the offending poster.

writerdave
_________________
right or wrong, write

[word-o-matic]

I have to agree with Dave on this one. The entire fiasco has hijacked half the keywords on Google - all links seem to lead to Jenna's story.

I am having trouble believing an ISP dumped a good customer simply because the co-owner wanted to start her own site.

I do think that small businesses on the net are often treated unfairly by sites such as Absolute Write. Let's say some single mother is a copywriter and that's how she supports herself and her kids. Her friendly competition can easily cut into her income by going to Absolute Write and saying "has anyone had problems with Company A?" at which point a dozen freelancers with pitchforks will whip over to the site in question and point out every typo and possible comma splice they find, whether they're correct or not.

A thread begins.

Then they'll start discussing the site's fomat, colors, the "weirdness" of the company owner's name, they'll track down other links to places she's posted and make fun of those. And soon enough, everytime Company A's name is typed into Google, surfers will be led directly to Absolute Write's "scammers" list.

This works particularly well if the unhappy competition is a friend of the gang at Absolute Write.

And FTR I have never had this happen to me, I am not a member of Absolute Write and I am not a single mother.

I also don't agree that the notorious BB is a scammer. These aren't hidden fees she's charging, any potential client can go to her site and verify her claims and they should do that. If an agent wants to charge, it may not be the way things work, but it's not illegal. I'm tired of all these fools...er, "victims" hogging every forum on the net with their complaints. Read contracts. Don't sign anything without a lawyer, and use GOOGLE! If those PA members who have been "duped" by the company in the last two years couldn't find a complaint about them on Google...well, you decide.

[K Ray]

I am an active member of AW and have found it an excellent writing community. I have no idea what their member #'s are, but there are always fresh posts and a wealth of information there, as well as folks willing to answer questions. Before I get put on the "fool" list, I will say I haven't been posting anywhere regarding the mess going on now. I've just been trying to read along and see what "everyone" has to say. . .not just one side.

People tend to get over zealous when they have a "cause" to fight for, or when they lose something they depend on, whether misguided or not. If Writers Weekly is your favorite writing site, or the only writing site you depend on for writers companionship, think how irritating it would be to try to log in one morning and find it suddenly gone. No explanation, just gone. You don't realize how much you depend on something until it is out of your reach.

As for forum folks "ganging up" on others, I agree it is distasteful, but it does happen and it happens on every single forum I've ever been a member of, none excluded.

As for the role BB played in the upheavel, whoever really knows except those directly involved. I did find this link to a whispers and warnings post back in 2004 that might be of interest. See any similarities to today's complaints?

http://forums.writersweekly.com/viewtopic.php?t=2084

[angelahoy]

I agree that letting anybody post anything on your site, and then hiding behind the Communications Decency Act (CDA) , is wrong. Just because you're not legally liable for something someone says doesn't make it ethical to allow the lies to remain on your site. Doing so shows a blatant disregard for the truth (don't all good writers want the truth to be published?) and an extreme lack of ethics.

Years ago, an anonymous person posted lies about booklocker.com to Jenna's forum. At the time, Jenna was a booklocker.com author. She knew the information was not correct. I emailed her, asking her to remove the information. She did post a note under the anonymous post in our defense, but, leaving the post on there (which led to another libelous post under hers), while knowing it was lies and posted anonymously, did plant a seed of doubt in people's minds and it was wrong to leave the lies on her website. She also admitted she didn't know who posted the notes (though any good website owner can provide IP addresses of their registered users - she didn't do so). Needless to say, the relationship quickly deteriorated. Her books are no longer available on Booklocker and WritersWeekly, I've been banned from posting to her forum for quite awhile now, and she and I haven't exchanged emails in years.

Her refusal to remove the anonymous posts that contained lies, while claiming she was protected under the CDA, showed a blatant disregard for the truth and I suspected she left the posts on her site to harm us because our writing site competes with hers. Why else would she leave lies on her site? And, I knew others were being blackballed on her site, too, and that there was nothing they could do to about it if they didn't have the thousands it takes to sue someone out of state.

I have no hard feelings toward Jenna. I don't agree with how she runs her site, but that's her business. I can't imagine she enjoys all the lawsuit threats she must receive. I do know that I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing there were malicious lies told about others posted on my website. Karma, ya know. I do still occasionally post links to her site in WritersWeekly and I refer writers who have legitimate complaints about publishers to her site as well.

As you may remember, our Whispers and Warnings forum used to be a public forum. And, as you may remember, it turned into a free-for-all, just like Jenna's forum. I realized what was happening was wrong and I put a stop to it, once again making it a private forum and individually investigating each company after receiving complaints (and giving them the opportunity to respond) before posting our findings in each case. While 99% of the complaints we receive are legitimate, there are occasionally completely innocent publishers who have been set up by writers, and even by competitors. Everyone deserves to be heard before being flamed by anonymous posters online. And, in my opinion, if you have a legitimate complaint about a company, you should post your real name, not hide behind a false one. Anonymous complaints just can't be trusted.

Below are the emails Jenna and I exchanged when this happened in 2002. Note: the original post did eventually disappear, probably during software updates or when she moved her forum to another service.

From: Angela Hoy
To: Jen Glatzer
Subject: JENNA
Date sent: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 20:57:21 -0400

Hiya Jenna,

Have you seen this?
http://pub43.ezboard.com/fabsolutewritefrm11.showMessage?topicID=17.topic

It's on your site and:
1. the person is talking about something but gives no reference to
the post
2. the person has never done business with us so is spouting
without knowing anything about us
3. I can't find out who this person is. Do you know?
4. Calling us a fraud is slander and defamation. Can you please
remove the post from your site since there is no investigation
nor evidence of it?

Hugs,
Ang

~~~~~

From: Jen Glatzer
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 03:11:59 EDT
Subject: Re: JENNA

Hi Angela,

That board is purposely unmoderated, but I'd be happy to get in there and
stick up for you!

Take care,

Jenna Glatzer
Editor-in-Chief
http://www.absolutewrite.com

~~~~~

From: Angela Hoy
To: Jen Glatzer
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: JENNA
Date sent: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 16:05:48 -0400

Hi Jenna,

The post contains libel so it must either be removed or you'll need
to tell us who posted the note so we can give that info. to our
attorney. If you don't know who posted it, you really need to remove
it because publishing libel is illegal. Since you host that service, it
puts you at a liability as well.

I really appreciate you sticking up for us and your letter is
wonderful! But...

The post under yours also contains lies. The entire thread
makes readers question Booklocker.com, and they're all
posted by "friends", not by the actual authors. They're libel
and they must be removed.

Hugs,
Ang

~~~~~

From: Jen Glatzer
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 22:15:23 EDT
Subject: Re: JENNA

Hi Angela,

I'm really not fond of being threatened, even when it's worded nicely.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 largely immunizes
online service providers from liability arising from the statements of
third parties. Recent legal decisions have held that under Section 230, a
Web site owner cannot be held responsible for the defamatory or otherwise
tortious statements of individuals who post on its message boards.

I have no idea who posted the initial message.

Jenna Glatzer
Editor-in-Chief
http://www.absolutewrite.com

~~~~~

From: "Angela Hoy"
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: JENNA
Date sent: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:00:56 -0400

Hi Jenna,

The Communications Decency Act (CDA) immunizes Internet
Service Providers from defamation liability for information that
originates with third parties, although the law also encourages
such providers to make "good faith efforts" to prevent such defamation.

The ethical thing to do is to remove libel from your message board,
especially now that you have been alerted to its existence.

I don't understand why you didn't just remove the post when I
first alerted you to it, especially since you know the post contains
lies. Be that as it may, we will not promote nor endorse sites
that serve as a malicious harbor for libel and defamation.

Ang

[Ele]

Angela said:
I can't imagine she enjoys all the lawsuit threats she must receive. I do know that I wouldn't be able to sleep at night knowing there were malicious lies told about others posted on my website.

Ele replies:

I CAN imagine folks enjoying this kind of ruckus since about every board I frequent has a few folks consistenly drumming up adversity amongst the members. I think some people just like the adrenaline rush of being controversial... makes them feel valid... or something. It just makes me tired... a sign of age, I guess. ;)

[GeorgeEnglish]

I started a blog not too long ago and have been making regular postings about this situation. I'm trying to remain as unbiased as possible and request that no one post any nasty remarks about any of the parties involved so I can keep the comments section open to all.


Your humble servant,

George English,
http://poopersscoops.blogspot.com/
_________________
http://poopersscoops.typepad.com/

[writerdave]

Thanks Angela for adding some context to this.

I've been on this forum for a while (can you count the extra grey hairs?) and back a few years I tended to stay away from Whispers and Warnings because it sometimes turned into a convoluted, round-and-round mess. I've found other forums out there that seem to be like that all the time.

I was one of the people that tried hard to keep the ruckus out of the freelance forum and try to keep it relatively sane. (I remember the day that jacka$$ posted John Grisham's home address on the forum and I immediately requested that it be removed, which it was).

You host this forum as one part of your entire writers-oriented business. I think at the end of the day, the onus for the quality of the subject matter posted is not only a function of the operator (you) but also of the forum regulars. I've always thought that.

There are times when quite a few of us have gotten into a bit of a snark session with other users but those times seem rare and never seem to degenerate like I've seen on some other forums. (Well, there was that one time when things weren't exactly 'rose-y' around here).

Anyway, just wanted you to know that I think you do a bang up job and I, for one, will continue to do my part to keep things fair and out of the mud.

writerdave
_________________
right or wrong, write

[angelahoy]

Thanks so much for the warm fuzzies, Dave!

And, thanks to you and everyone who alerts me when something inappropriate is posted. I always act quickly when a complaint of that nature comes in. It's a relief to know there are people like you policing the board when I'm not able to have my eyeballs on it at all times! Don't know what I'd do without all of you. ;)

Big hugs!
Ang

P.S. Ha ha on the "rose-y" comment above, Dave!!

[Chrystalline]

I agree with writerdave - there does seem to be a lot of "should've known better" to this. No website can afford to ignore the rules of its ISP.

[mark_y48]

It was heavily moderated. In fact they have the highest ratio of moderators to members I've ever seen. I don't know what the deal is, and when I said as much at Making Light where I'd been posting every now and then, I was piled on, disemvoweled, Teresa's pet torture and public humliation technique, and banned. The Puritans would be so proud. Just like absolutewrite where I was banned for be too snarky with writers pissing in my face verbally. Yet I was the villain for fighting back. Same old same old.

Jenna can get unhinged. She did with me so why woud I doubt she would with business? I think the exchange here proves that nicely.
_________________
Always report the truth

[GeorgeEnglish]

I think some revealing information about this situation has been overlooked. I posted a new blog entry about it. I'd be interested in what people think. It's fine to post comments on my blog because I don't want to take over this site. No flaming.

George English
_________________
http://poopersscoops.typepad.com/

[Ele]

Lynne Truss (she of Eats, Shoots and Leaves fame) writes in her second tome about the curious dyanmic of website owners creating their own little dictatorships by which they can bully the membership. First, they're tempted into the folds through some ploy.... self-help, a charitable cause, etc., then you're subject to the leader's whims. I'm beginning to come to the conclusion that every yahoo crafts list has an angry menopausal mom throwing hormones around! I just had a situation with a charity knitting group that has to be referred to my attorney because some slogans I created are under my copyright and though the listowner kicked me off the forum for stepping on her toes, she continues to use said slogans. I have to wonder. Do these people not think things out before they hit the send button?