- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,376
- Reaction score
- 539
- Location
- Seattle, WA
- Website
- www.mattdinniman.com
I may be just stupid but...........
On the debate board
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Debate/index.php?showtopic=4
"What a remarkable illustration of self-inflicted poverty, knowing it possible to hold one’s life quest, bound in hand, but opting instead for the wrapping."
I just don't get it. What is Carl talking about?
Dee
On the debate board
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Debate/index.php?showtopic=4
"What a remarkable illustration of self-inflicted poverty, knowing it possible to hold one’s life quest, bound in hand, but opting instead for the wrapping."
I just don't get it. What is Carl talking about?
Dee
DeePower said:
His inductive argument is based upon his own flawed hypothesis.
Scottish interpretation: Shite - talks a lot of.
Hmmm. Carl Baxter's posted at the debate. I thought this was to be one to one:
Mo
Unregistered
(body of message Snipped)
Carl Baxter
Mo
Last edited:
What I don't get is why Dee's post was pulled but Carl's remains on Shelagh's one-on-one debate with Jim...
Level playing field you might ask? I wonder.
Level playing field you might ask? I wonder.
to be fair (which is more than Carl or Shelagh will be) Shelagh does run on a different time zone.
it should be removed by tomorrow night, unless they figure it'll take two of them to create one coherent argument.
it should be removed by tomorrow night, unless they figure it'll take two of them to create one coherent argument.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,705
- Reaction score
- 1,336
- Location
- Where the Wild Things Are
- Website
- www.christine-norris.com
Shelagh,
From what I've read of your thread on the PAMB, it's becoming a free for all.
There is a phrase where I come from that fits this situation perfectly:
"The rattlesnakes are committing suicide."
I know that Jim can hold his own against a thousand PA people, but I agree with others on this board. It is very hypocritical to allow Carl to post on the debate forum. I thought it was just for you and Jim?
Tracy
From what I've read of your thread on the PAMB, it's becoming a free for all.
There is a phrase where I come from that fits this situation perfectly:
"The rattlesnakes are committing suicide."
I know that Jim can hold his own against a thousand PA people, but I agree with others on this board. It is very hypocritical to allow Carl to post on the debate forum. I thought it was just for you and Jim?
Tracy
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 311
- Reaction score
- 69
- Location
- The gap between dimensions
- Website
- nexusman.atspace.com
The Great Debate...
Call me devil's advocate, but I think we should give Shelagh benefit of the doubt for the time being. I can't speak for her directly but I know not everyone has consistent internet access. She hasn't posted since Carl has, so we have no way of knowing whether she even knows his post exists.
-Nick
Christine N. said:
Call me devil's advocate, but I think we should give Shelagh benefit of the doubt for the time being. I can't speak for her directly but I know not everyone has consistent internet access. She hasn't posted since Carl has, so we have no way of knowing whether she even knows his post exists.
-Nick
And then the shirt off his back as the latest PA 'special offer price for a hundred of your own books' hits his Inbox.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,705
- Reaction score
- 1,336
- Location
- Where the Wild Things Are
- Website
- www.christine-norris.com
Which is why I said "IF she leaves it up"... I'm willing to give some lag time.
Now, on the other hand, UJ's original offer was to debate Carl one-on-one, or PA's best debater. If Shelagh wants to hand off to Carl, that's ok with me. Of course, UJ's opinion is the only one that matters there.
Now, on the other hand, UJ's original offer was to debate Carl one-on-one, or PA's best debater. If Shelagh wants to hand off to Carl, that's ok with me. Of course, UJ's opinion is the only one that matters there.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 6,561
- Reaction score
- 1,206
- Location
- smack dab in the middle of nowhere
- Website
- astonwest.com
MMo said:
It's one thing to debate. But this guy's the equivalent of someone escaping from the asylum and gatecrashing the first conversation he stumbles across, to spout the biggest load of pretentious **** it has ever been my misfortune to witness before he's recaptured.
I think Jim made it clear that he's glad Carl posted, so if Shelagh chooses to let him stay, that's OK. Please do feel free to comment on his debate... comments about the size of his... um... manhood, on the other hand... are not kosher. Thanks.
But what I'm working on now is figuring out some kind of common thread between people who've been given their termination papers lately... I know about Sara and Anjie (CONGRATS!), but who else? I'm busy making charts and graphs and trying to connect the dots. I figured maybe others had come out on Mindsight, but I'm on there now and don't see posts like that. Anyone know? Aston?
If you're reading this and you've recently been let out of your PA contract and don't want to announce it, I'd still love to hear from you privately. I won't reveal anything about you if you want to stay anonymous-- I'm just trying to see if there's a pattern here.
But what I'm working on now is figuring out some kind of common thread between people who've been given their termination papers lately... I know about Sara and Anjie (CONGRATS!), but who else? I'm busy making charts and graphs and trying to connect the dots.
I figured maybe others had come out on Mindsight, but I'm on there now and don't see posts like that. Anyone know? Aston? If you're reading this and you've recently been let out of your PA contract and don't want to announce it, I'd still love to hear from you privately. I won't reveal anything about you if you want to stay anonymous-- I'm just trying to see if there's a pattern here.
Debate purpose?
Ok, I did read the debate messages obviously (from the above post). Part of me finds this interesting, but I am also irked by it. What is this debate supposed to prove? How is this debate going to help us here or anybody who is signed, was signed, or about to sign with PA? I am presently one of the 'is signed' authors trying deal with this PA stuff. I understand that it was Shelagh's idea for a debate and all, but part of me is very INSULTED. It is real life for me, not some internet messageboard debate, sideshow, or game. I'm not downing UJ at all, but this is ridicules! I'm pretty sure UJ will do excellent, and I can use something to look at, but when it is all over, how will this help me?
Ok, I did read the debate messages obviously (from the above post). Part of me finds this interesting, but I am also irked by it. What is this debate supposed to prove? How is this debate going to help us here or anybody who is signed, was signed, or about to sign with PA? I am presently one of the 'is signed' authors trying deal with this PA stuff. I understand that it was Shelagh's idea for a debate and all, but part of me is very INSULTED. It is real life for me, not some internet messageboard debate, sideshow, or game. I'm not downing UJ at all, but this is ridicules! I'm pretty sure UJ will do excellent, and I can use something to look at, but when it is all over, how will this help me?
Ilovepensandpaper said:
Unfortunately, I think the intent of the debate ultimately is to demonstrate that PA is simply not a good choice for writers. So this is more focused on saving aspiring writers heartache, but does little for those like yourself.
Mike
I can see a few reasons for the debate.
1. Depending on where it gets posted, it may warn new writers away from PA.
2. PA authors who haven't read about the problems with PA elsewhere may read the debate because it was posted on the PA board. Some might realise what's happening before they spend money on books and promotion.
3. It sets up a new dialogue that may be effective in ways we haven't thought of. This is often quite limited because those who disagree with PA's practises can't post on the PA board.
Unfortunately, it doesn't help those in your position, already signed with PA but aware of what they are, but I do think it could have other positive effects.
1. Depending on where it gets posted, it may warn new writers away from PA.
2. PA authors who haven't read about the problems with PA elsewhere may read the debate because it was posted on the PA board. Some might realise what's happening before they spend money on books and promotion.
3. It sets up a new dialogue that may be effective in ways we haven't thought of. This is often quite limited because those who disagree with PA's practises can't post on the PA board.
Unfortunately, it doesn't help those in your position, already signed with PA but aware of what they are, but I do think it could have other positive effects.
Sheryl Nantus said:to be fair (which is more than Carl or Shelagh will be) Shelagh does run on a different time zone.
it should be removed by tomorrow night, unless they figure it'll take two of them to create one coherent argument.
Christine N. said:
Without a third party that is agreed upon by both debaters to mod the scene, the whole thing is kind of silly. Jim can't be both debater and mod.
Canada James
Ilovepensandpaper said:
Hopefully you will feel encouraged to write another, better book (every subsequent book you write is always better than the last) and then you can submit it to publishers willing to pay you for your work.
Canada James
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 311
- Reaction score
- 69
- Location
- The gap between dimensions
- Website
- nexusman.atspace.com
Canada James said:
A neutral third party, no less — or a party that can put aside personal feelings about the situation and assume a neutral stance.
-Nick
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,705
- Reaction score
- 1,336
- Location
- Where the Wild Things Are
- Website
- www.christine-norris.com
You've got to be kidding...
Yeah, right... that's why the same post was on the PAMB, also signed by Carl. You need to keep up Shelagh. It was Carl, and if he told you different he's a liar.
Or maybe you read this board and realized he was going to embarass you.
And the 'debate' thread is gone from the PAMB too... I sense some collusion giong on here. From PA? Nuh uh.
Yeah, right... that's why the same post was on the PAMB, also signed by Carl. You need to keep up Shelagh. It was Carl, and if he told you different he's a liar.
Or maybe you read this board and realized he was going to embarass you.
And the 'debate' thread is gone from the PAMB too... I sense some collusion giong on here. From PA? Nuh uh.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,705
- Reaction score
- 1,336
- Location
- Where the Wild Things Are
- Website
- www.christine-norris.com
Nope, no "I've deleted Carl's post" , just this load of horse crap...
Whatever makes you feel better, Shelagh.
Whatever makes you feel better, Shelagh.
Methinks this little lady is on a bit of an ego-trip, and is relishing (not to mention milking and manipulating) every second of it.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 7,705
- Reaction score
- 1,336
- Location
- Where the Wild Things Are
- Website
- www.christine-norris.com
Ya. I think she missed the fact that Carl posted the same thing at the PAMB, and people answered it.
Oh, and the post on the PAMB is gone now too. Whatever.
Oh, and the post on the PAMB is gone now too. Whatever.