Entry tags:

author entitlement, books that should be burned, books/authors, can't escape the screencaps, community: weepingcock, if someone is a bad writer she's a bitch, look how much i don't care, reviews, this was no chicken, writers are often pompous douches

You do realize this means war.
Pop Quiz:

You are R. Malone, a new author who has a book out that is predominately getting reviews in the four to five star range when someone gives your book a review a one or two star. Do you. . .

Post an article attacking the reviewer on authorsden.com

DELETED NOW WITH SCREENCAP!

Send nasty comments and later delete them off of Goodreads

anyone

Do all of the above until readers are afraid to post reviews

REBECCA, WE WEILL PROTECT YOU!!

BONUS WANKERY IN SCREENCAP FORM!!!

Credit given when credit is due: Copypasta directly from sf_drama

ETA:

Edited in some screencaps of my own, and also: HOLY COW WAT. HIDDEN AGENDAS!!

ETA AGAIN:
R. Malone's original message to the reviewer/blogger, as found in a cached search! ~~(sceencap coming if LJ WOULD UPLOAD THE CAP ALREADY. JEEZ.)~~ YAY.

Hey Cyndy,

Why did you downrate Crimson Rose to one star on here and Amazon when you had originally rated it two stars last week? Did you read the book again and decide you hated it more? If so, then why did you read it again? I see you also deleted the comment where you stated that you ‘wished to read the sequel when it comes out, since you read an excerpt and it sounded good.’

I’m finished putting up with jealous bitches like you, Cyndy. I guess if this first book goes to shit thanks to bitches like YOU, that’s perfectly fine. I don’t give a fuck anymore, I really, really don’t.

So far, however, your bullshit hasn’t put a tiny dent in CR’s sales.

Robin

LOL, so many screencaps, IDEK. I almost want to buy Crimson Rose to make my eyes bleed like I know they will but skjdsdjfkhjdfhskdfjhsd LOLOLLLLLLL FOREVER. NO SORRY TO SAY.

MOAR ETA:
Saucy, rawr.

++Sauciness via Weepingcock.

LATE NIGHT ELECTRIC BOOGALOO EDIT:
LOL

I SWEAR IT'S THE WANK THAT KEEPS ON GIVING:

Well, duh, the only reason why everyone hates this book is because everyone jumped on the hate bandwagon. Also, Hitler.

More deleted/screencaping fun.

Some clarification, and burn indeed.

EDIT, YET AGAIN:
And what's a wank without sock-puppetry? God I love this woman. Keep up the crazy, please. The lols are great. Where we're been mentioned.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

damnedsolovey
2010-02-25 05:08 pm UTC (link)

In my experience, people use words like "non-con" or "dub-con" because the actual word rape is far too loaded for them; using other terms devalues the fact that it is a horribly traumatic act, and better allows people to disconnect their entertainment from reality. OTOH, when the act of rape was intended to actually be perceived as a horribly traumatic act than a kinky smut scene, I've always seen it called "rape" rather than "non-con".

Not defending the use of those terms, of course, just making an observation. I personally agree with the "just admit you are writing rape" sentiment.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	rganymede 2010-02-25 07:31 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah, that's how I've always seen it used. It might not be the greatest thing, but I can see value in distinguishing whether the scene in question is intended to be fantasy smut or realistic trauma when warning people about what they're about to read. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	vasaris 2010-02-25 09:27 pm UTC (link)
	Odd. I've seen any number of fics where non-con is used in the warnings and the word rape was used by the author in the fic. As far as I could ever tell, non-con was used in the warnings so that people triggered by the word rape would stay away, but not necessarily have a reaction. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	damnedsolovey 2010-02-25 11:16 pm UTC (link)
	True, but I think that can be attributed to in-universe writing. We wouldn't call rape "non-con" in the real world (at least, I would certainly hope not), so why should any character in this story call it that? (Reply to this)(Parent)

ladysphinx
2010-02-27 04:19 pm UTC (link)

See, I've always defined "non-con" as "rape" (because I don't see any situation where non-consensual sex could be anything but rape) and "dub-con" as "both parties consented under unusual circumstances" i.e. "there is a bomb in my vagina that can only be defused with sex, but the only partner available is my worst enemy (who is incidentally kind of hot but I hate him omg)."

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -