Comments on: kathy and chris publish joint statement

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:45:51 +0000

I never named those three you cited as my targets, Cadenhead. But hey, if it makes you feel better to believe otherwise, go ahead.. Blog about it. Get some linklove. Get onto Techmeme. Feed the Beast. Whatever.

By: Rogers Cadenhead

Rogers Cadenhead — Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:37:04 +0000

You can dress it up any way you like, but calling them “middle aged, self-loathing underachievers” was crappy.
The post about Maryam Scoble was inexcusable and prompted Paynter’s deletion of the site. To say that those three were responsible for it, when they didn’t make that post, is like saying that you’re responsible for my belief that you’re a mean kid.

By: Ed

Ed — Sat, 07 Apr 2007 04:26:37 +0000

I’m so sorry for what’s happened to Kathy. I agree with Katharine’s comment and her final statement about Chris Locke –accountability.
The pictures, comments and posting Kathy’s personal information is beyond childish. It’s just downright scary and criminal.
I’m glad that Kathy had another post today asking her readers for suggestions with respect to her future work.

By: Kathy Sierra

Kathy Sierra — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 05:35:17 +0000

Thanks, but I’m probably not coming back. I think we all know that nothing has changed, and the same thing would just happen again. We’re not talking about just one person, and we’re not talking just about the random trolls we ALL get. I do not have the stomach for it any longer.
Ignoring is not always a solution — I tried that, and it only became *worse* (if someone is determined to get a reaction from *you*, ignoring them just means they have to keep taking it up a notch until you do). Talking to people involved is not always a solution — I tried that, but MORE posts went up *after* I wrote to some of the people involved to tell them how freaked out I was.
No, I think there’s a visibility tipping point, and when you cross it — some people will hate you no matter what you write about. Visibility alone seems to be a big enough reason for people to want to inflict pain. And unfortunately, if you’re a female they are more likely to add in *sexual* threats and fantasies as well.
It was my daughter who found the suffocation/smothering photo. We all have our limits. Whoever created that post found mine.
[Rogers, you do not have the story quite correct. If you want to exchange private email, I can fill in more details.]

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 21:36:32 +0000

I don’t find it strange at all, Cadenhead. After seeing what was written about my friends, Robert and Maryam, on Meankids and approved by its authors, it’ll probably be a cold day in Hell before I do any apologizing in that direction.
And if I do apologize, it’ll be because one of the people you mention takes issue with it and talks to me about it directly, not because some third-party blogger has decided to appoint himself Chief Apology Officer for the day.

By: Rogers Cadenhead

Rogers Cadenhead — Thu, 05 Apr 2007 20:59:01 +0000

Your post: “Apparently these MeanKids folk were taking the occasional pop at me as well. Mommy! Mommy! Come quick! A posse of middle aged, self-loathing underachievers is being mean to me Boo hoo hoo hoo…
“[Afterthought:] Highschool Metaphor: ‘OK, so you weren’t the actual jock who raped the cheerleader. But it seems you were in the posse circling them, chanting ‘Go go go go go go go…””
Your refusal to acknowledge that these insults were aimed at the MeanKids publishers is strange. But I guess that’s one way to avoid an apology.

By: NVMojo

NVMojo — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 09:10:02 +0000

I’ll miss Kathy’s positive posts. I hope she doesn’t stay away too long.

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 09:05:04 +0000

Hey Rogers,
Of course I stand behind my comments. Because I never once said my comments were directed at the three you mentioned.
Read my post again, one more time. Thanks.

By: a person

a person — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 08:20:44 +0000

Obviously, Chris Locke is desperate for attention, and now he’s got it. That’s why people make trash sites in the first place. It’s sad. I’ll bet he knows who made those horrible underwear-faced pictures, and I’ll bet he stares that person in the eye in the mirror every morning.

By: Rogers Cadenhead

Rogers Cadenhead — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 07:42:10 +0000

Locke deleted his site in rejection of the conduct taking place there *before* Sierra posted. That should be enough. Kee-rist the outrage brigade is working overtime on this one.
Hugh: I know you were probably angry at the time, but calling Locke and the other three a “posse of middle aged, self-loathing underachievers” and comparing them to rape enablers was more shitty conduct than most of the posts on MeanKids.Org. Do you still stand behind those comments?

By: Katharine Newman

Katharine Newman — Tue, 03 Apr 2007 05:01:22 +0000

Although I haven't seen the taping that was done for CNN, I have to say that I'm not entirely convinced the blogosphere should dig out their Kumbayaa sheet music just yet. Admirable things were said in those statements - but I'm not sure Mr. Locke's halfhearted denunciations make up for his initial reaction: Does "extremely bad taste?" adequately describe what was said about Ms. Sierra? Really? Is that all? Mr. Locke has missed the point. It's not about whether he has a right to dislike Ms. Sierra or any other writer; it's not about whether what was said about Ms. Sierra were death threats or "death threats." - Hooray, the they had a couple laughs, but a laugh does not make up for the lack of outrage here. I'm sorry Hugh, but all day today I've seen people standing in line to congradulate this guy - who's writing I've enjoyed - to congradulate him for saying "the people who followed me said things that were wrong but as their leader, I wasn't leading." Accountability.