NEPAT Overflow

Christine N. said:

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.

Click to expand...

Saw that, too.
So, someone stole his password and posted the same message on the PA board. If it wasn't Carl, and it was copy pasted, then post the I.P. addy for someone to run down.

So which one is to debate the PA subject?

I don't know how they can debate a subject which either have little knowledge of.

If, PA runs and up-and-up company, they would welcome the debate, and wouldn't care if their newbies saw it. What a laugh they are.

Sean,

I don't think a time limit was set. UJ is at a Boskone convention, so his time is limited at the moment of how much time that he can spend at the debate. He also mentioned (on the debate board) that he is operating with a slow dial up while at the convention. I'm sure he will have some imput soon.

xhouseboy said:

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.

Click to expand...

I give it until Wednesday before she stomps off in a huff, declaring that she "won" the argument and yet another appeal to buy her book.

I do find it funny as all get-out that she obviously isn't even TALKING to Carl about his attempt to get into the debate. For two people who claim to be great communicators... they ain't.

my bet (in the Overflow thread) is that it won't last past Wednesday.

TracySutterer & ArgileStox said:

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

Click to expand...

You know why, Tracy? It's because Shelagh knows she (I guess she's a she...maybe she's Carl in disguise) has bitten off more than she can chew and is having trouble swallowing the truth. One of these days the truth will reach up and bite her in the butt and when it does, she will be looking for an AW member hoping they will throw her a sympathy cushion.

Could be she's doing this, hoping PA will think of her as a martyr, put her books in stores, and call her another (I won't say his name...maybe it's him)...gee whiz, I'm having flashbacks! Arrrkkkkk!

BeeBomb

It's all an ego trip...
Even attacked me on the PAMB, to make herself look good.
Sorry, but a lot of people saw right through that little charade!

BeeBomb said:

You know why, Tracy? It's because Shelagh knows she (I guess she's a she...maybe she's Carl in disguise) has bitten off more than she can chew and is having trouble swallowing the truth. One of these days the truth will reach up and bite her in the butt and when it does, she will be looking for an AW member hoping they will throw her a sympathy cushion.

Could be she's doing this, hoping PA will think of her as a martyr, put her books in stores, and call her another (I won't say his name...maybe it's him)...gee whiz, I'm having flashbacks! Arrrkkkkk!

BeeBomb

Click to expand...

actually, it's just another attempt to promote her "book"... we're back to "any publicity is good publicity!" and all that drek.

it's been noted many times on the PAMB that you have to promote, promote, harass... whether it's placing flyers on cars in the parking lots near your home, bothering the bookstore manager or sneaking into nursing homes and attempting to sell your book to invalids, it's all acceptable behaviour condoned if not promoted by PA.

so spamming a dozen bulletin boards (as we've had here) to promote your overpriced, unedited PA book is considered to be part of the game, along with vehement denials that you're doing anything wrong in the way of Netiquette and all naysayers are just jealous of your "success".

the problem is that new authors to the PAMB are told this is the Way To Do It and Everyone Does It, leading them down the same road as those before them - and everyone fails in the end.

other than ticking off the majority of people in your hometown and at least half of your family and friends, it'll do nothing to sell your book.

and it won't make you a better writer - that's for sure.

however, it will cause people to duck behind counters and walls when they see you coming... to avoid yet another sales pitch.

Christine N. said:

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.

Click to expand...

Just to be fair, we don't know who really did copy and paste it. All we really knew was that someone that didn't pay attention to details did copy and paste it. Who ever did do it didn't notice that they also copied the text for the "return to top" link on the PAMB.

actually we're dealing with the last, best desperate gasp of a lot of PA writers frantically waiting for that first royalty check.

I'll bet that when she (along with lots of others) get that check (which she won't be able to cash, btw... the horror stories about UK authors being unable to cash PA checks are documented) she'll first blame us for somehow being responsible for the failure of her book and then wander off, muttering to herself about how 'orrible we all were to her.

the first royalty check is usually the Great Revealing for most authors - they may hang on until the second, thanks to the BS about bookstores having 90 days to pay PA (which is bunk, when you think about it - they PRINT the book upon being paid, so how can any money be held back?) they might hang in until August, but then...

well, let's just say that I doubt the Cancer Society in her area will be dedicating a ward to her anytime soon.

which is more the pity - there's a lot of PA authors with their hearts in the right places promoting a variety of good solid causes... they're just with the wrong publisher to attempt to do any good at all.

she'd probably have raised more money selling pencils on the corner.

We must not interfere

Given this debate, it's not a bad idea to support UJ, however by converse that does not mean we can bash Shelagh — otherwise, that undermines our attempts at focusing solely on PA opposed to the authors.

Also by appearing to "gang up" on Shelagh, that simply demonstrates power in numbers also. How can (arbitrarily large number of AWers) be wrong? This is the same hype PA uses and we mustn't fall into that trap.

Both she and UJ have their reasons for engaging in this debate. Whether each chooses to share those reasons with us is entirely up to that person and it is not our place to speculate.

Remember, this is a private debate between Shelagh and UJ as set by their terms. We must respect that. Feel free to read and comment on the debate forum but not actually post on it. Also, whatever your opinion on either Shelagh or Uncle Jim is, do not attack either one's intentions or character. It's just plain rude.

Facts are facts, knowledge is knowledge, and the world is the world. These cannot be changed but only perceived in different ways. I think we all stand to gain from this debate by seeing how the facts are perceived and interpreted by both parties.

In summation: Pick a side, not a person.

Therefore, to Uncle Jim and Shelagh: keep it clean, no attacks on intentions or character, just use what you know for the debate. If either of you thinks a question or topic is not relevant, say so and give a brief justification.

Shelagh: I don't know at what frequency your posts are being pulled from the PAMB. This is just me, but it might be a good idea to link to the forum from your website and encourage people to go there through it.

Enough insomnia-induced introspect from me for now.

-Nick

Nexusman said:

Both she and UJ have their reasons for engaging in this debate. Whether each chooses to share those reasons with us is entirely up to that person and it is not our place to speculate.

Remember, this is a private debate between Shelagh and UJ as set by their terms. We must respect that. Feel free to read and comment on the debate forum but not actually post on it. Also, whatever your opinion on either Shelagh or Uncle Jim is, do not attack either one's intentions or character. It's just plain rude.

Facts are facts, knowledge is knowledge, and the world is the world. These cannot be changed but only perceived in different ways. I think we all stand to gain from this debate by seeing how the facts are perceived and interpreted by both parties.

-Nick

Click to expand...

I respect your opinion, and especially your right to hold that opinion, Nick.

Here's mine:

It's way past the stage of speculation as to Shelagh's motivation as to why she might wish to become involved in this debate.

As for plain rude. Whilst I wouldn't waste my time attacking Shelagh, I reserve the right to do so if I so choose. Did you miss her already having a pop at AW members in her first or second post? I'm a member here, and as such include myself among her targets.

Personally, the only thing I stand to gain from this debate is watching the foregone conclusion of a lesser intellect being laid to waste by a superior one.

Whatever Shelagh. I know you're not above covering for him. If you say he didn't do it, fine. I won't argue and I retract my previous statement.

But ask yourself why someone would copy THAT post and put it up on the debate board. Why would anyone from AW do it? Was it someone else from the PAMB? I guess we'll never really know. And why was the thread deleted from the PAMB, as if it had never been, when it was so clearly a pro-PA sentiment?

You and UJ have a good time, I'll just sit back and watch. Who's got the popcorn.

Might need a separate "AW comments on the PA Debate" topic.

Probably, but since I can't communicate with Shelagh directly, and it's obvious she lurks here to see what we say about her, I just wanted to make sure she got my message.

I'll leave the debate board to the Overflow from now on.

xhouseboy said:

Whilst I wouldn't waste my time attacking Shelagh, I reserve the right to do so if I so choose.

Click to expand...

You don't actually have that "right," at least, not here. Jenna and the moderators have made it clear that the rules of the house are "respect your fellow writer" and "we're against PA, not against PA's authors." If you want to attack Shelagh, you're going to have to do it elsewhere if you want to play by the rules of the house in which we are all guests.

I think Nexus' post was very thoughtful and accurate. Everyone should read it and take it under advisement when commenting on the current debate between Shelagh and Jim. As Nicole indicates, attacking another writer, whether or not they are a current member here, is not permitted.

The article Shelagh linked to doesn't include vanity publishing as one of the five forms of publishing the author refers to. Perhaps this is because vanity publishing, selling books to the authors who wrote them, is so at odds with the point of publication; to disseminate writing to readers.

NicoleJLeBoeuf said:

You don't actually have that "right," at least, not here. Jenna and the moderators have made it clear that the rules of the house are "respect your fellow writer" and "we're against PA, not against PA's authors." If you want to attack Shelagh, you're going to have to do it elsewhere if you want to play by the rules of the house in which we are all guests.

Click to expand...

Did I say I would do it here? In fact, I think I said I wouldn't waste my time doing it at all. I respect the rules. What I don't do is post my own rules or opinions when a certain situation arises, and suggest that my fellow posters follow these guidelines. I don't consider myself to have that right. And whilst some may not agree, I will not show any repect to someone who accepts a one-to-one debate, and practically kicks-off it off by slagging off those who have no involvement in the debate.

You got to stand for something. Know what I mean?

Shelagh: I'm confused by one remark-- you said you deleted three posts by AW members, yet you named two AW members. The person who supposedly posted as Carl... what proof do you have that that's a member here? I'm quite sure you never showed me an IP address, and I never matched it to anyone here, so why are you assuming that it's someone from here-- as opposed to, say, someone from the PublishAmerica message boards? I really have no idea either way, and can't figure out why anyone would post Carl's message onto the debate board... I'm just interested in seeing facts.

That was my question as well, Jenna. That ONE post, just that one and no others.

Methinks both sides of this debate could benefit from an empowererd moderator. Otherwise, the exercise deteriorates into a convoluted mess.

Citing or introducing supporting documentation that may not be recognized as an definitive sources by both parties is but one example of protocol issues.

*munches popcorn.*

Jousting with wet celery stalks from mopeds is much more entertaining, but this is good for a snowy weekend.

well, considering Shelagh's already avoiding a straight answer I still stick to my Wednesday prediction...



although I thought they'd at least break a single page before she veered off...

She never gives a straight answer. I agree, Liam, I think the debate could use a moderator. Mod asks the questions, each party answers - that's the definition of a debate.

UJ asks a question, Shelagh counters with a link and another question. No ground will be covered that way.