Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



miraba ([info]miraba) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2013-12-19 09:40:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:author entitlement, authors, person: anne rice, reviews

Oh look, Anne Rice is being wanky.
Thanks to an anon for this.

Anne Rice starts an Amazon forum thread on how to write better fiction reviews:

http://www.amazon.com/forum/fiction/ref=cm_cd_tfp_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx1X9OILUVOYVZ7&cdThread=Tx3SETGL9XAMJT5

As anyone familiar with Anne Rice would be shocked to hear, it goes downhill rapidly. Rice minimods the thread and scolds people for going off-topic, while straying farther and farther off-topic herself. The fun starts on page four:

The Amazon system, wonderful as it is, is ripe for abuse by the mob when they want to go after an
author. Charlane Harris comes to mind as the best recent example.
Disgruntled Sookie Stackhouse fans on the site for the last novel in the series have essentially ganged up on some positive reviewers. For a long time they "neg voted" in masse any good review.
And you're right, the focus shifts to the author, with piles of personal insults.
I infer from all this that these negative fans have found that it is just as much fun to attack an author and try to destroy a publication as it is to become a fan of a series in the first place.
Of course they cannot bring down Charlane Harris or her books, but I do think they want to ruin the experience for her and others.

Around page 59, Anne is caught trashing commenters from the review thread in another subforum:

One thing is clear to me: these Amazon careerist predatory reviewers are HIGHLY sensitive to criticism themselves. Talk about thin skin! One reason they vilify and ridicule any author who dares to respond to a review is that they simply can't take any kind of response themselves. They can't handle it. That's why they struggle for supremacy in such a situation with the endless lecturing to the author not to dare to respond. Some of them are downright scared to death of criticism.
They've picked their bully neg reviewer role because they assumed they'd be immune to criticism and they are fit to be tied when it doesn't work for them.

She explains herself:

This Forum is not about that topic.
I realize you're determined to derail this Forum.
You've been trying for days to take a positive discussion and make it negative.

Does appealing to you as a decent human being have any effect whatsoever?

Can't you understand that there are different Forums on Amazon for different purposes?
Can't you see that?
Can't you understand why some one in a "Meet the Authors" Forum might address issues
of importance to authors that can't or shouldn't be addressed here?

What is it about this that you find so difficult to understand?

Everyone understands perfectly, backs off, and has a group hug while singing a rousing round of "For She's a Jolly Good Fellow," and all is joy and sunshine in the Amazon forums forever more.



(Post a new comment)


[info]come_love_sleep
2013-12-27 07:30 am UTC (link)
♫♬Mooooost won-der-ful tiiiiiiiiime of the yeeeeeeeear♪♫

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]embyquinn
2013-12-30 01:13 am UTC (link)
Totally off-topic: I love your icon.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]havocthecat
2013-12-27 02:09 pm UTC (link)
She just doesn't know when to stop, does she?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]yattara
2013-12-27 02:22 pm UTC (link)
She would stop, if only people would stop disagreeing with her.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]havocthecat
2013-12-27 05:02 pm UTC (link)
Damn us all who don't realize her sparkly shiny authorial goddessness!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]neridne
2013-12-27 10:44 pm UTC (link)
This makes me wish that the fandom wank wiki was still up so the wank entries could be updated... Too bad no one had a backup of it before it went down.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

What actually happened to the wiki?
[info]talkingtoaster
2013-12-29 05:10 pm UTC (link)
I just remember being there a long time ago, and then one day I went to check and it was gone. This must have been a year or so ago now, but this is literally the first I've ever heard anyone acknowledge its disappearance (despite my mad research skilz).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: What actually happened to the wiki?
[info]neridne
2014-01-07 10:12 am UTC (link)
Yeah, the non-acknowledgement of the wiki's disappearance is pretty weird. I wish there was some sort of explanation posted so at least I know why it went down. But the only signs I see is that the link to the wiki were removed from fandom_wank and that's about it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: What actually happened to the wiki?
[info]white_serpent
2014-03-12 08:21 pm UTC (link)
HnK took it down. She owns the domain and paid for the server space, and one day as I was in the midst of trying to kill the latest group of several hundred spam accounts, the wiki disappeared and never reappeared.

I assume one of the following:
*She got tired of it.
*It was too much trouble (in one way or another).
*The size/traffic were getting out of hand because of the constant spambot incursions.
*She wanted to use the hosting space for something else (which she's clearly doing).

Also, there's the general truth that people would reference articles there, but there just wasn't much new content.

People post periodic questions about what happened to it, and this is the best I've got for you. I did email her about it after the fact, but she never responded. I think snacky asked her about it as well. From my perspective: even with the code mindset wrote, dealing with the constant spam was time-consuming. So, I miss it, but...

(Coming on this thread quite late because Anne Rice announced a new Vampire Chronicles book and I wondered if the wank was related.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: What actually happened to the wiki?
[info]miraba
2014-03-13 03:25 am UTC (link)
I think most people (including myself) used it to locate wanks when Google wasn't cooperating. Even just restoring it as a non-wiki archive would be worth a few bucks for me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kumquat_of_doom
2013-12-31 12:27 pm UTC (link)
Goddamn, I miss the Wiki. It was such a delightful time-drain.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mindset
2014-01-03 02:58 am UTC (link)
Yo: https://web.archive.org/web/20110219103218/http://wiki.fandomwank.com/index.php/Main_Page

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]ivyette
2013-12-28 12:16 am UTC (link)
I like that she has apparently run out of her own writing to wank about, and is now getting offended on other authors' behalf.

(Reply to this)


[info]ekaterinv
2013-12-28 05:52 am UTC (link)
I may have squealed and clapped my hands when I saw the "Anne Rice" in the title.

(Reply to this)


[info]wankismyfandom
2013-12-28 08:55 am UTC (link)
Of course they cannot bring down Charlane Harris or her books, but I do think they want to ruin the experience for her and others.

Because Charlaine Harris definitely reads her Amazon reviews and checks which ones have the most "neg votes". She keeps a detailed spreadsheet.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]paladin
2013-12-28 05:46 pm UTC (link)
Of course, just like Anne Rice does. Doesn't every author?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]cyndra_falin
2013-12-28 07:10 pm UTC (link)
Okay let's try this again!

One thing is clear to me: these Amazon careerist predatory reviewers are HIGHLY sensitive to criticism themselves. Talk about thin skin! One reason they vilify and ridicule any author who dares to respond to a review is that they simply can't take any kind of response themselves. They can't handle it. That's why they struggle for supremacy in such a situation with the endless lecturing to the author not to dare to respond. Some of them are downright scared to death of criticism.
They've picked their bully neg reviewer role because they assumed they'd be immune to criticism and they are fit to be tied when it doesn't work for them.


The irony is strong with this one.

(Reply to this)


[info]vzg
2013-12-28 07:43 pm UTC (link)
Of course a negative reviewer is a bully! It couldn't possibly be that they dislike a work or disagree with a review! Particularly when they've endured a long series to find it has an unsatisfying end. Authors are clearly all beacons of light we should praise endlessly. Isn't that right, Anne?

(Reply to this)


[info]ashenmote
2013-12-29 12:12 am UTC (link)
The predatory Amazon is Wonder Woman and the careerist reviewer is Lois Lane, I imagine.

(Reply to this)


[info]embyquinn
2013-12-30 04:49 am UTC (link)
The really sad part?

Anne can't even wank worth a damn anymore.

(Reply to this)


[info]saithey
2013-12-31 07:10 am UTC (link)
That's why they struggle for supremacy in such a situation with the endless lecturing to the author not to dare to respond.

Yes. Yes, that is the reason. It certainly couldn't be because author replies to negative reviews tend to end up going down in flames. Anne Rice used to be the Hindenburg of author replies. This is tame compared to her usual hissy fits.

(Reply to this)


[info]seca
2014-01-01 01:03 am UTC (link)
Oh Anne Rice, never change you sparkly wank diamond.

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map