she who is - critical reading and how not to judge a book

From: ashenmote Date: November 6th, 2006 06:44 pm (UTC) (Link)

Well, I guess that's her perogative...prerogative...whatever thingie. The deleting/deeply locking part at least.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: naienko Date: November 6th, 2006 06:52 pm (UTC) (Link)

Interesting that the post disappears as soon as there's criticism of it. (Though there may be others and I don't know about it.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: herongale Date: November 6th, 2006 07:03 pm (UTC) (Link)

Maybe it disappeared because you were no longer deemed trustworthy to have access to it?

It might be your personal policy to never lock anything, but that doesn't mean that it's ever been considered couth to gab publicly about what other people are talking about in locked posts, without asking permission first.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: ashenmote Date: November 6th, 2006 07:10 pm (UTC) (Link)

Thanks for helping me out. I had problems here to find a nice way of saying it.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: naienko Date: November 6th, 2006 07:21 pm (UTC) (Link)

Please to be noting a few things, and then I'm out of this brewing problem.

1) I provided no link to said post at all.
2) As I told 'mote above, CC was handing advance copies of that book out like candy at Dragon*con. Several people I know have them. NM could easily have gotten her hands on one of them.
3) The only person I mentioned by name was NM. Aside from the fact that I've now mentioned her several times in the comments, if someone were to ask nicely, I could easily remove that direct reference and leave it as "this post I found that talks about the book".

As far as an unlocked discussion of other people's comments on that book, my policy is that I only lock opinions I'm ashamed of.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: ashenmote Date: November 6th, 2006 07:28 pm (UTC) (Link)

Duly noted.
The defriending thing is just a measure of protecting my locking policy against your locking policy. I trust you understand that I like mine better.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

From: herongale Date: November 6th, 2006 07:32 pm (UTC) (Link)

However you justify your post is up to you. I won't argue with it. The only reason I replied was because you said this:

Interesting that the post disappears as soon as there's criticism of it.

I don't know what's so interesting about that. NM's restricting your access to her friends-locked post is pretty much the routine response that many people would have. It doesn't matter whether your actions were right or wrong. What matters is that you seemed surprised by a predictable response. You certainly can't be surprised by what she did, are you? Because it makes perfect, logical sense.

If she doesn't want you talking about her friends-locked content, she doesn't have to let you see it. Simple. It's a bit disingenuous to suggest that NM might have some ulterior motive when it is plainly evident to see that she needed no motive deeper than one of trust v. distrust in YOU to remove your access to her posting.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)