Rarity from the Hollow
robert eggleton
"Rarity from the Hollow" is now for sale at www.fatcatpress.com. It's
the first in a series entitled, "Lacy Dawn Adventures." The
protagonist is an empowered child abuse victim who saves the universe
(science fiction). A percentage of any proceeds will prevent child
abuse in West Virginia where I work. More significantly, it was
written to enrage readers about the social issue.
While heart-felt, it's a fun read for anybody interested in the
genre. A satirical essay about its self-promotion came out last week
in Wingspan Quarterly: www.wingspan.com.
Robert Eggleton
No 33 Secretary
news:1152138876.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
> I'm a Therapist in a children's mental health program. My first novel,
> "Rarity from the Hollow" is now for sale at www.fatcatpress.com. It's
> the first in a series entitled, "Lacy Dawn Adventures." The
> protagonist is an empowered child abuse victim who saves the universe
> (science fiction). A percentage of any proceeds will prevent child
> abuse in West Virginia where I work. More significantly, it was
> written to enrage readers about the social issue.
It's a pity, then, that you are far more likely to enrage potential readers
by spamming for it.
--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin
robert eggleton
Terry,
Please check it out and help if you can. I'm a novice and make zilch
money to advertise. It's an ebook and, as such, it's up to me to get
the word out anyway I can. Anything you can do would be appreciated.
Robert Eggleton
Sea Wasp
> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>
>>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>>news:1152138876.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>>I'm a Therapist in a children's mental health program. My first novel,
>>>"Rarity from the Hollow" is now for sale at www.fatcatpress.com. It's
>>>the first in a series entitled, "Lacy Dawn Adventures." The
>>>protagonist is an empowered child abuse victim who saves the universe
>>>(science fiction). A percentage of any proceeds will prevent child
>>>abuse in West Virginia where I work. More significantly, it was
>>>written to enrage readers about the social issue.
>>
>>It's a pity, then, that you are far more likely to enrage potential readers
>>by spamming for it.
>>
>>--
>>"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
>> -- William Hyde
>>Terry Austin
>
>
> Terry,
>
> Please check it out and help if you can.
You're clueless, dude. You've just been told to stop spamming the
group because it will piss people off, and -- voila! -- you're
spamming again.
Go back out. Come in and spend a few months making on-topic posts
unrelated to your book. Put a link to your book in your .sig file,
perhaps.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Wim Lewis
No 33 Secretary <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>news:1152138876.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>> I'm a Therapist in a children's mental health program. My first novel,
>It's a pity, then, that you are far more likely to enrage potential readers
>by spamming for it.
Robert Eggleston's post looks pretty spammy, but I think it's just
a breach of etiquette. Especially since he apparently stuck around
long enough to see replies.
Robert, this is really a place for people to talk to each other. Self-
promotion isn't discouraged, exactly, but if someone shows up with no
history of talking and starts posting about their book (or their
penis enhancers or free iPods or whatever) then they're likely to be
viewed with dislike. We have a pretty strong antipathy to spamlike
postings here, but that's partly because vast swathes of Usenet died
because they didn't.
Anyway, pull up a chair, join the conversation, mention your book in
your .sig but don't make a fuss about it.
--
Wim Lewis <wi...@hhhh.org>, Seattle, WA, USA. PGP keyID 27F772C1
No 33 Secretary
> In article <Xns97F7A26975A...@216.168.3.64>,
> No 33 Secretary <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>>news:1152138876.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>>> I'm a Therapist in a children's mental health program. My first
>>> novel, "Rarity from the Hollow" is now for sale [....]
>>It's a pity, then, that you are far more likely to enrage potential
>>readers by spamming for it.
>
> Robert Eggleston's post looks pretty spammy, but I think it's just
> a breach of etiquette. Especially since he apparently stuck around
> long enough to see replies.
A point in his favor. Unfortunately, his reply was more spam.
>
> Robert, this is really a place for people to talk to each other. Self-
> promotion isn't discouraged, exactly, but if someone shows up with no
> history of talking and starts posting about their book (or their
> penis enhancers or free iPods or whatever) then they're likely to be
> viewed with dislike. We have a pretty strong antipathy to spamlike
> postings here, but that's partly because vast swathes of Usenet died
> because they didn't.
And spamming for charity is the oldest scam in the book. (Whether you're
scamming or not is not the point - if you _look_ like you are, you do more
damage to your cause then anything else could.)
Marilee J. Layman
And he seems to think that a child abuse victim saving the universe is
a new plot.
--
Marilee J. Layman
http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/
El Puerco
news:e8ighh$eq4$1...@underhill.hhhh.org...
> Anyway, pull up a chair, join the conversation, mention your book in
> your .sig but don't make a fuss about it.
We find commerce unseemly as it interrupts our ordinarily elevated trains of
thought.
Choo-choo!
robert eggleton
Thanks for the advice. I guess I'm too compelled -- I'll take a deep
breath.
The cause is verifiable if interested (so, I take that comment as an
insult). (And, if you don't want to help, that's okay with me --
different strokes for different folks -- "everybody has issues and
tissues [quote from the novel])."
More spam: a satirical essay about the self-promotion of "Rarity from
the Hollow" was published last week by Wingspan Quarterly
(www.wingspanquarterly.com). The online read is free, but the printed
will cost if you want a copy.
I'll try to be less intense about my work, but it'll be hard. I come
home everyday worn out by the kids. I'm enranged about what "parents"
have done and get online to promote. Maybe there is another novel
about a child abuse victim saving the universe that I've not heard of,
but I don't want to read it anyway. Maybe I do. What is it?
Robert Eggleton
James Nicoll
robert eggleton <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>I'll try to be less intense about my work, but it'll be hard. I come
>home everyday worn out by the kids. I'm enranged about what "parents"
>have done and get online to promote. Maybe there is another novel
>about a child abuse victim saving the universe that I've not heard of,
>but I don't want to read it anyway. Maybe I do. What is it?
>
ENDERS GAME (Orson Scott Card): Kids are educated in the ways
of war, because children can be made to do things (especially if
information is kept from them) that adults will or cannot.
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
No 33 Secretary
>
> El Puerco wrote:
>> "Wim Lewis" <wi...@hhhh.org> wrote in message
>> news:e8ighh$eq4$1...@underhill.hhhh.org...
>> > Anyway, pull up a chair, join the conversation, mention your book
>> > in your .sig but don't make a fuss about it.
>>
>> We find commerce unseemly as it interrupts our ordinarily elevated
>> trains of thought.
>>
>> Choo-choo!
>
> Thanks for the advice. I guess I'm too compelled -- I'll take a deep
> breath.
>
> The cause is verifiable if interested (so, I take that comment as an
> insult).
Nobody cares what you take as an insult. You are rapidly becoming an insult
yourself, spam-boy.
> (And, if you don't want to help, that's okay with me --
> different strokes for different folks -- "everybody has issues and
> tissues [quote from the novel])."
I have tales from my father's days as a civil rights activist that would
curl your hair. Yes, even yours. But they're not relevant here, since
there's no specualtive fiction involved.
If you want to talk about written sf, this is the place. If you want to
yammer about how much money you think others should contribute to your
cause, piss off.
>
> I'll try to be less intense about my work, but it'll be hard.
Then just STFU, because it's not what this group is about.
robert eggleton
Thanks for the reference. I read it too, but it's not close to the
same plot.
Bob
robert eggleton
Terry,
Maybe I met your father in a tent city during the civil rights
movement.
You're wrong about relevancy. Highly charged human causes are the
catalysts of speculative fiction. Does your father write?
Robert
James Nicoll
robert eggleton <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>James Nicoll wrote:
>> In article <1152284039.8...@s16g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
>> robert eggleton <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >I'll try to be less intense about my work, but it'll be hard. I come
>> >home everyday worn out by the kids. I'm enranged about what "parents"
>> >have done and get online to promote. Maybe there is another novel
>> >about a child abuse victim saving the universe that I've not heard of,
>> >but I don't want to read it anyway. Maybe I do. What is it?
>> >
>>
>> ENDERS GAME (Orson Scott Card): Kids are educated in the ways
>> of war, because children can be made to do things (especially if
>> information is kept from them) that adults will or cannot.
>>
>
>same plot.
>
precision gets lost.
I'm sure there must be something from Mercedes Lackey that
could be described as a child-abuse survivor saving their world.
No 33 Secretary
I doubt it. He wasn't doing "civil rights," as such, in the way the phrase
is usually used. Divorced men's rights, during the 60's and 70's. He was,
essentially, a professional kidnapper for nearly 20 years, enforcing
custody orders across state lines before the FBI was allowed to. It's
sickening, what some parent's will do to their own children.
>
> You're wrong about relevancy. Highly charged human causes are the
> catalysts of speculative fiction.
>
It's not fiction. It's history. It's not speculative. It's history. This
newsgroup is about written speculative fiction. Real life has little place
here.
> Does your father write?
Nobody would believe most of it. I wouldn't, if I hadn't been there.
Karen AKA Kajikit
There sure is... the Serrated Edge series is about Elves who take in
abused children, and save the world several times over while they're
at it, not to mention racing very cool fast cars. It's not as corny as
it sounds from the one-sentence description, and I enjoyed them very
much indeed...
robert eggleton
Terry, isn't that the paradox -- real life is speculative fiction.
Everything else is the fantasy of it.
Karen, I read that too and not even close.
Robert Eggelton
"Rarity from the Hollow"
Norville
> In article <Xns97F7A26975A...@216.168.3.64>,
> No 33 Secretary <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>>news:1152138876.9...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:
>>> I'm a Therapist in a children's mental health program. My first novel,
>>> "Rarity from the Hollow" is now for sale [....]
>>It's a pity, then, that you are far more likely to enrage potential readers
>>by spamming for it.
>
> Robert Eggleston's post looks pretty spammy, but I think it's just
> a breach of etiquette. Especially since he apparently stuck around
> long enough to see replies.
No, I think it's clueless spamming, even if he's stuck around long enough
to see replies. I notice that he just got himself suspended from a message
board that I frequent because the only posts he made there were these spam
posts. He didn't try to get involved with the community; he just spammed,
despite being asked not to do so. Re: his comment "I take that comment as
an insult", I think I take his spamming as the worse insult.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
I'm not sure this is the same guy, but there was a Robert Eggleton
making himself obnoxious to various SFWA members a few months back,
sending around unsolicited copies of his novel by e-mail even after
being told not to.
Your typical writer who still uses dial-up really doesn't appreciate
getting an unexpected novel-sized attachment to download.
Oh, and just to clear up any possible confusion, this guy has no
connection with the sensible and considerate artist named Bob
Eggleton.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
Marilee J. Layman
Mr. Eggleton asked me for examples of this by posting a comment to an
un-related book review in my LJ.
The most obvious, of course, is Ender's Game, although I think the
novella is better than the novel.
robert eggleton
Merilee,
I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong. I couldn't
figure out how to announce on your site.
For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow." There was only one who
blasted me and I shot back -- he's an editor of a web site that gets
few hits and that the apparent by count.
There is almost no connection between me and the famous artist -- maybe
some genes because of blood He, also, has been supportive. Anything
you can do to help would be appreciatied.
Robert Eggleton
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
>apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong. I couldn't
>figure out how to announce on your site.
That may be because such an announcement isn't welcome.
>For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
>efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow."
This is not true. Most have ignored you as not worth the time to
respond.
You do not know what was said about you within SFWA. You don't want
to.
If you really want to argue about this, I'm willing to go gather some
anti-testimonials about what an annoyance you were.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>
>Marilee J. Layman wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:27:48 -0400, Marilee J. Layman
>> <mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:01:17 GMT, Sea Wasp
>> ><seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> You're clueless, dude. You've just been told to stop spamming the
>> >>group because it will piss people off, and -- voila! -- you're
>> >>spamming again.
>> >>
>> >> Go back out. Come in and spend a few months making on-topic posts
>> >>unrelated to your book. Put a link to your book in your .sig file,
>> >>perhaps.
>> >
>> >And he seems to think that a child abuse victim saving the universe is
>> >a new plot.
>>
>> Mr. Eggleton asked me for examples of this by posting a comment to an
>> un-related book review in my LJ.
>>
>> The most obvious, of course, is Ender's Game, although I think the
>> novella is better than the novel.
>> --
>> Marilee J. Layman
>> http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/
>
>Merilee,
Look! My name is just above this and still you spell it wrong!
>I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
>apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong. I couldn't
>figure out how to announce on your site.
That's because the site is for *my* reviews of books. If you'd tried
to announce anything there, I'd learn how to delete posts.
>For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
>efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow." There was only one who
>blasted me and I shot back -- he's an editor of a web site that gets
>few hits and that the apparent by count.
This sounds unlikely. SF authors are usually also fans and react just
like we do.
>There is almost no connection between me and the famous artist -- maybe
>some genes because of blood He, also, has been supportive. Anything
>you can do to help would be appreciatied.
If you're speaking of Card, I don't know what connection you're
talking about. What, exactly, has Card done to support you? And why
should I help you? So far, you haven't shown any indication of actual
ability to write, but have shown that you don't know how to approach
the fannish community.
Did you set out to write something to show that abused children can
overcome their past? That's not usually the best way to write, and
since all of us know abused children who overcame their pasts, it
doesn't seem that urgent to read.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>Oh, and just to clear up any possible confusion, this guy has no
>connection with the sensible and considerate artist named Bob
>Eggleton.
I think that was obvious.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:33:53 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Oh, and just to clear up any possible confusion, this guy has no
>>connection with the sensible and considerate artist named Bob
>>Eggleton.
>
>I think that was obvious.
When he was e-mailing SFWA members, some of them weren't sure. Bob
got a few confused phone calls.
I asked over in the SFWA Lounge what people remembered about the guy,
for quotation, and got this
"Eggleton contacted me about two years ago for advice on how to
approach writers for blurbs. I gave him quite a bit of good advice on
not sending unsolicited manuscripts to writers, on how to network
politely through the Net and at Cons, and how he would get better
results not to hide behind people's assumption that he might be the
artist Eggleton. We had several email exchanges on the subject. From
what I've heard from other SFWAns, he tossed all of the advice, and
spammed every author I know with his manuscript."
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>On 8 Jul 2006 03:23:01 -0700, "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>
>>For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
>>efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow." There was only one who
>>blasted me and I shot back -- he's an editor of a web site that gets
>>few hits and that the apparent by count.
>
>This sounds unlikely. SF authors are usually also fans and react just
>like we do.
He harassed SFWA members in two waves, in July 2004 and September
2005.
Typical comment from a well-respected author in Sept. 2005: "He sent
me a personal note atop the broad spam plus my old note asking him to
leave me alone."
Real considerate, that. Great reading for comprehension.
It was suggested we create a new verb, "to Eggle," meaning to send
e-mail which directly acknowledges and/or quotes the recipient's
previous cease-and-desist notices.
This guy obviously has no idea how annoyed SFWA was with him, but
believe me, we were annoyed. Which is why I'm not cutting him any
slack here.
>>There is almost no connection between me and the famous artist -- maybe
>>some genes because of blood He, also, has been supportive. Anything
>>you can do to help would be appreciatied.
>
>If you're speaking of Card, I don't know what connection you're
>talking about.
Not Card; he means Bob Eggleton. The good one, the cover artist.
Mike Schilling
"Marilee J. Layman" <mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote in message
news:hl11b2llj9ebtfp50...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 00:33:53 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Oh, and just to clear up any possible confusion, this guy has no
>>connection with the sensible and considerate artist named Bob
>>Eggleton.
>
> I think that was obvious.
Not to those of us for whom Bob is a vaguely recognizable name, so I'm glad
LWE cleared that up.
Mike Schilling
"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:1152354181.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
> apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong.
Yes, you are. I'll give you some free advice: stop now. You dig yourself
in deeper with each post.
robert eggleton
So, you value compliance/politeness, and put down anybody that doesn't
hold the same values. Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in --
egocentrism. Shame on you. It's no wonder that less than half of 8th
graders read the daily newspaper. They learned obligatory ignorance
from their smarter peers -- you.
Robert Eggleton
James of Pittsburgh
<snip>
Oh...my...God. I can't believe you're still posting here.
> So, you value compliance/politeness, and put down anybody that doesn't
> hold the same values.
This isn't about what Mike Schilling values. It's about what you do
and do not value. You clearly do value your novel and probably helping
children in West Virginia. However, you have repeatedly demonstrated
that you do not value this newsgroup. I know this because (1) your
first post was a spammy breach of etiquette and (2) the second thread
you started was content-free trolling.
You seem to be of the impression that this newsgroup exists to be a
means for you to promote your book. It does not. This newsgroup
exists to provide fans of speculative fiction a forum to discuss the
genre. At no point have you discussed speculative fiction. You have
spammed and you have trolled and you have deigned to assume an arrogant
and condescending tone towards those who have pointed out the error of
your ways. Indeed the remainder of your previous post (which I have
snipped if only to spare you the embarassment of having it further
propogated) exemplifies this obnoxious tone. Knock it off, man. I for
one am not under any obligation to read your novel, help you promote
it, or teach you how to promote it. I furthermore don't appreciate
being treated as some kind of tool with which you can accomplish any of
threse goals. Get this through your head, man.
If you should choose to respond to this post, I dearly hope that the
response is of the form, "Gee, you're right. I've been acting like a
dick. I'm gonna go into lurk mode for a while now, and when I figure
out what rec.arts.sf.written is actually like I'll start posting again.
This time only on-topic posts with a tasteful signature file." Pretty
much any other kind of response will lead me to label you a fuckwit and
move on.
--James of Pittsburgh
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Jul 2006 00:29:42 -0400, Marilee J. Layman
><mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>
>>On 8 Jul 2006 03:23:01 -0700, "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
>>>efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow." There was only one who
>>>blasted me and I shot back -- he's an editor of a web site that gets
>>>few hits and that the apparent by count.
>>
>>This sounds unlikely. SF authors are usually also fans and react just
>>like we do.
>
>He harassed SFWA members in two waves, in July 2004 and September
>2005.
He started spamming this book two years ago?! What the heck does he
think has changed?
>Typical comment from a well-respected author in Sept. 2005: "He sent
>me a personal note atop the broad spam plus my old note asking him to
>leave me alone."
>
>Real considerate, that. Great reading for comprehension.
>
>It was suggested we create a new verb, "to Eggle," meaning to send
>e-mail which directly acknowledges and/or quotes the recipient's
>previous cease-and-desist notices.
>
>This guy obviously has no idea how annoyed SFWA was with him, but
>believe me, we were annoyed. Which is why I'm not cutting him any
>slack here.
>
>>>There is almost no connection between me and the famous artist -- maybe
>>>some genes because of blood He, also, has been supportive. Anything
>>>you can do to help would be appreciatied.
>>
>>If you're speaking of Card, I don't know what connection you're
>>talking about.
>
>Not Card; he means Bob Eggleton. The good one, the cover artist.
Oh, of course. I thought he meant artist as creator, so an author
would be an artist.
Marilee J. Layman
wrote:
>
You think SF exists to support egocentrism? And what the heck does
that have to do with your book? There are lots of SF books out that I
haven't read, and some of them come from good authors.
robert eggleton
Don't u think this was a pretty good run? I just got another blurb and
another citation from people that actually read. Please check out
"Rarity from the Hollow." Apologies will be accepted.
Robert Eggleton
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
>posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
>exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in...
The only one disrespecting SFWA is you, by lying about what we thought
of your spamming.
-- Lawrence Watt-Evans
Lifetime member of SFWA since 1982
former Eastern Regional Director of SFWA
former Treasurer of SFWA
lclough
Well, don't hold back now. Tell the troll what you really think.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
Recent short fiction:
FUTURE WASHINGTON (WSFA Press, October '05)
http://www.futurewashington.com
FIRST HEROES (TOR, May '04)
http://members.aol.com/wenamun/firstheroes.html
Anastasia
> Don't u think this was a pretty good run? I just got another blurb
> and another citation from people that actually read. Please check
> out "Rarity from the Hollow." Apologies will be accepted.
Life's too short to be able to read even all the good books. Being a reader
or critic doesn't mean anyone's obliged to read your novel or help you
promote it. If it did, I'd owe a lot of apologies to a whole slew of
authors.
And I guess there are a lot of people here who publish worthwhile text--will
you be apologizing to the ones whose work you haven't read?
jch...@gmail.com
> efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow." There was only one who
> blasted me and I shot back -- he's an editor of a web site that gets
> few hits and that the apparent by count.
Here's another SFWA member who was most annoyed by your spam in my
LiveJournal.
If you feel there's only a single SFWA member who was less than
supportive of your spam, you're sadly delusional ... which, given your
history and the great many people who have discouraged you from
spamming like this, seems to be the case.
T Guy
>
> Don't u think this was a pretty good run?
(T Guy):
For a Troll? I've seen better round here. We seem to attract the
experts.
(robert eggleton):
> Apologies will be accepted.
(T Guy):
I think you mean 'anticipated.'
T G
No 33 Secretary
>
> Marilee J. Layman wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:27:48 -0400, Marilee J. Layman
>> <mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:01:17 GMT, Sea Wasp
>> ><seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> You're clueless, dude. You've just been told to stop spamming the
>> >>group because it will piss people off, and -- voila! -- you're
>> >>spamming again.
>> >>
>> >> Go back out. Come in and spend a few months making on-topic posts
>> >>unrelated to your book. Put a link to your book in your .sig file,
>> >>perhaps.
>> >
>> >And he seems to think that a child abuse victim saving the universe is
>> >a new plot.
>>
>> Mr. Eggleton asked me for examples of this by posting a comment to an
>> un-related book review in my LJ.
>>
>> The most obvious, of course, is Ender's Game, although I think the
>> novella is better than the novel.
>> --
>> Marilee J. Layman
>> http://mjlayman.livejournal.com/
>
> Merilee,
>
> I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
> apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong. I couldn't
> figure out how to announce on your site.
If you weren't a spammer - and therefore, by definition, stupid - that
would have been a clue that such "announcements" - spam - aren't wanted
there.
But you are a spammer, and therefore an idiot, and can't figure that out.
>
> For correction, most of the SFWA members have been supportive of my
> efforts to promote "Rarity from the Hollow."
"I get lots of support by email." Yeah, right.
Name a few.
Or not. We all know you can't.
> Anything
> you can do to help would be appreciatied.
>
Many of use have tried to help you. We've told you to stop spamming, and
stop being a fucking asshole. But that isn't what you want to hear, so you
ignore us, while begging us to help.
Rule #1: Spammers lie.
Rule #2: Spammers are stupid.
Rule #3: There is no rule #3. If someone claims there is, refer to Rule #1.
Now go away, spammer.
No 33 Secretary
>
> Mike Schilling wrote:
>> "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:1152354181.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
>> > apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong.
>>
>> Yes, you are. I'll give you some free advice: stop now. You dig
>> yourself in deeper with each post.
>
> So, you value compliance/politeness, and put down anybody that doesn't
> hold the same values.
No. We value _not spamming_.
You are a spammer.
You show all the characteristics of a spammer. You lie, you cheat, you
steal. If it walk like a spammer, and quacks like a spammer, it should be
whacked like a spammer.
> Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
> posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
> exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in --
> egocentrism.
You have absolutely, positively guaranteed that most of us will *never*
read your fucking book. If you sent me a copy, I'd tear the pages out and
use them as toilet paper before I read a single word.
I don't *care* what's in it. You're a spammer.
>Shame on you.
You're a spammer. Spam is theft. Shame on *you*, thief.
> It's no wonder that less than half of 8th
> graders read the daily newspaper. They learned obligatory ignorance
> from their smarter peers -- you.
>
Since most newspapers are shit, much like you, thank you for the
compliment.
No 33 Secretary
Who? Name names, spammer. Beacuse that is the entire purpose of "getting a
blurb," after all, to name names.
Rule #1: Spammers lie.
>Please check out
> "Rarity from the Hollow." Apologies will be accepted.
>
No doubt they would be, spammer. What they won't be, is offered.
Rule #2: Spammers are stupid.
--
Mike Schilling
>
> Mike Schilling wrote:
>> "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:1152354181.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> I'm an old man trying to learn self-promotion of a first novel --
>> > apologies since apparently I"m still doing it wrong.
>>
>> Yes, you are. I'll give you some free advice: stop now. You dig
>> yourself
>> in deeper with each post.
>
> So, you value compliance/politeness, and put down anybody that doesn't
> hold the same values. Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
> posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
> exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in --
> egocentrism.
Egocentrism is "an" history, and I pretend to invest in it?
Mike Schilling
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
news:mu93b2hsslmlr71s0...@news.rcn.com...
But the lurkers support him in e-mail.
Michael Alan Chary
I recommend he try the SFWA. SFWA is clearly not interested, but the SFWA
might be.
--
The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons
robert eggleton
Mr. Lawrence Watt-Evans,
Thank you for the official SFWA position regarding my efforts to
self-promote "Rarity from the Hollow." I was not aware that there was
one.
Almost all of the replies I got from your members were kind, polite,
and, cumulatively, full of advice and instruction to a novice in a
tough marketplace. Some were detailed and a few became dialogue. I
don't remember a reply from you, most members didn't, but, while some
were discouraging about the prospects of an unknown getting a novel
published, none were mean or disrespectful. I've learned a lot, am
still learning, and, again, thank those who helped as mentors.
And, I've made plenty of mistakes. A big one in the beginning was to
attach a sample to an email without permission. Some members of the
SFWA pointed out that this was poor protocol. I stopped. I also
received warnings about agents -- I almost signed with someone that one
of your members reported had no significant sales. Another warned me
about self-publishing. I've gotten advice about ebooks. These are
examples. Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list names.
It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful (somewhat
negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found if you search.
Last week, on my request, a writer emailed me a citation on "spam" .
I've also been told about nuances when one self-promotes -- chit-chat
for a while first. I think I'm doing better in general, but blew it on
this site (if that's the correct term). I've been banned from two
sites, but overall the results have been overwhelmingly positive.
Sometimes, after a hard day at work, I get tired and that's probably
why I was weaker in some of my posts. I try to stay close to topic
while mentioning my novel. I just don't have much time for chit-chat.
To the best of my knowledge, I have never sent somebody a second email
who instructed me not to (this happened twice in my most recent round
of announcements -- both individuals in child abuse organizations and
neither were writers. I don't have a list -- it's all "manual" and very
hard work, so I can't just delete a name. Nevertheless, I think I'm in
compliance with the advice given by the author.
Today, I received an email from another aspiring writer about his
self-promotional efforts:
"I can totally relate to your cyberspace experience. I still don't
get why "writers" sites and chat rooms get so pissy when writers talk
about (or even *gasp* promote) their own books! It's so weird to me
that it becomes humorous. I constantly and consistently got the "spam"
label foisted upon my posts, and many times they got deleted, or my
site link disabled, and that would inevitably be followed by a string
of "fellow writers" chastising me. It's downright surreal."
I agree with him.
Robert Eggleton
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>> In article <mu93b2hsslmlr71s0...@news.rcn.com>,
>> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>> >On 9 Jul 2006 14:37:47 -0700, "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
>> >>posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
>> >>exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in...
>> >
>> >The only one disrespecting SFWA is you, by lying about what we thought
>> >of your spamming.
>> >
>> > -- Lawrence Watt-Evans
>> > Lifetime member of SFWA since 1982
>> > former Eastern Regional Director of SFWA
>> > former Treasurer of SFWA
>>
>> I recommend he try the SFWA. SFWA is clearly not interested, but the SFWA
>> might be.
>
>Mr. Lawrence Watt-Evans,
>
>Thank you for the official SFWA position regarding my efforts to
>self-promote "Rarity from the Hollow." I was not aware that there was
>one.
There isn't.
Your claims about SFWA, however, are lies, and I'm calling you on
them.
>Almost all of the replies I got from your members were kind, polite,
>and, cumulatively, full of advice and instruction to a novice in a
>tough marketplace.
Yup. SFWA members are generally nice people. There are exceptions.
I'm probably one of the exceptions.
Yes, you were given lots of good advice, which you consistently
ignored.
> Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
>time out of their busy schedules to help.
Which you rewarded with further harassment.
> I think I'm doing better in general, but blew it on
>this site (if that's the correct term).
It's a newsgroup, not a site.
> I've been banned from two
>sites, but overall the results have been overwhelmingly positive.
My gods -- you consider only being banned two places to be success?
>To the best of my knowledge, I have never sent somebody a second email
>who instructed me not to
You have. In at least one case you even quoted back to her her e-mail
telling you to leave her alone.
> I don't have a list -- it's all "manual" and very
>hard work, so I can't just delete a name. Nevertheless, I think I'm in
>compliance with the advice given by the author.
No, you are not.
>Today, I received an email from another aspiring writer about his
>self-promotional efforts:
>
> "I can totally relate to your cyberspace experience. I still don't
>get why "writers" sites and chat rooms get so pissy when writers talk
>about (or even *gasp* promote) their own books!
Because it is NOT WHAT THOSE SITES ARE FOR.
> It's so weird to me
>that it becomes humorous. I constantly and consistently got the "spam"
>label foisted upon my posts, and many times they got deleted, or my
>site link disabled, and that would inevitably be followed by a string
>of "fellow writers" chastising me. It's downright surreal."
Just how clueless do you have to be to continue doing something that
you're repeatedly told is inappropriate?
It's "surreal" that you're chastised for breaking the rules, after
having them explained to you?
>I agree with him.
Then you're an idiot. Not that that's news.
Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
James Nicoll
How many loki points do I get if I give him G*n* St**b*rg's
email address?
--
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
Dan Goodman
> Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
> Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
> stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
You're more patient than I am.
--
--
Dan Goodman
All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies.
John Arbuthnot (1667-1735), Scottish writer, physician.
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood
Dennis L. McKiernan
> In article <i6k5b2hmpannp6rq8...@news.rcn.com>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>>Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>>stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>
>
> How many loki points do I get if I give him G*n* St**b*rg's
> email address?
LOL!
Daniel Silevitch
> Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
> Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
> stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
You may want to reconsider that. I note that Terry Austin is in the
process of setting out his hooks. At least for a little while, it might
be entertaining to watch.
-dms
robert eggleton
Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
> Because it is NOT WHAT THOSE SITES ARE FOR.
>
>
> Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
> Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
> stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
> My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
Mr. Lawrence Watt Evans,
Cyberspace is mostly spam. Sites, forums, blogs, and on every
newsgroup, etc.-- almost all were built to advertise products,
including those maintained my nonprofit agencies -- "please donate."
Google and Yahoo each have spots that one can buy for a cost per hit --
that's the reason that they exist for users to chat.
At this point in history, the issue is not "spam" as if its acceptable
if you pay for it and not available to the poor or less established.
Instead, the issue is the boundaries of free speech on the internet.
For example, you just used spam by listing your webpage address. I
don't find it objectionable. Much of your criticism of my strategies
at the self-promotion of my novel were intended to drive readers to
consider your books. Still, I don't object, and didn't put down your
approach to spamming this audience. It's free speech and that's the
real ammunition against spam. Censorship is a dangerous practice that
threatens cyberspace. It's the true enemy. "Spam tastes good if...
(from the novel).
Robert Eggleton
(I'd put my website address here except I don't have one yet.)
Robert Eggleton
No 33 Secretary
news:slrneb5opm....@bardeen.local:
Thanks for the assist. The hooks will set deep, now.
No 33 Secretary
>
> Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
>> Because it is NOT WHAT THOSE SITES ARE FOR.
>>
>> Then you're an idiot. Not that that's news.
>>
>> Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>> Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>> stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>
>> My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
>
> Mr. Lawrence Watt Evans,
>
> Cyberspace is mostly spam.
Because of losers like you. Rule #1.
> Sites, forums, blogs, and on every
> newsgroup, etc.-- almost all were built to advertise products,
Rule #1.
> including those maintained my nonprofit agencies -- "please donate."
> Google and Yahoo each have spots that one can buy for a cost per hit --
> that's the reason that they exist for users to chat.
Rule #2.
>
> At this point in history, the issue is not "spam"
In fact, it is. Rule #1. And Rule #2.
>as if its acceptable
> if you pay for it and not available to the poor or less established.
> Instead, the issue is the boundaries of free speech on the internet.
Standard spammer trash. "Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea
Speach! Frea Speach!" No, 'tard-boy, it's not about Frea Speach. It's not
your property. If it's about Frea Speach, then you _must_ agree to
*immediately* give me your home address so I can come by, every day, and
shit in the middle of your dinner table, because that is how I choose to
express myself - Frea Speach! - to you. If you do not *immediately* email
me your home address for this express purpose - shit in the middle of your
dinner table every day - then you are admitting that you are lying.
> For example, you just used spam by listing your webpage address.
Rule #2. He puts it in his .sig. This is perfectly acceptable, since he
does so in on-topic posts. Since you are not capable of posting on topic,
or even identify what on topic is (Rule #1), that rule does not apply to
you.
>I
> don't find it objectionable.
I *do* find your spamming objectionable, spammer.
>Much of your criticism of my strategies
> at the self-promotion of my novel
Which is to say, spamming. Rule #1.
>were intended to drive readers to
> consider your books.
Rule #1. And Rule #2. No, his posts were intended to ridicule you, and
drive you in to shutting the fuck up, and stop spamming our newsgroup.
>Still, I don't object, and didn't put down your
> approach to spamming this audience.
Just as well, since he wasn't spamming, and you were, and are, spammer.
>It's free speech and that's the
> real ammunition against spam.
Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea
Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach!
Frea Speach!
Standard spammer lie. Rule #1.
>Censorship is a dangerous practice that
> threatens cyberspace.
Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea
Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach!
Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea
Speach!
Standard spammer lie. Rule #1.
>It's the true enemy.
No, the true enemy is spammers. Like you, spammer.
Rule #1.
>"Spam tastes good if...
> (from the novel).
And it tastes like shit when it's spammed on Usenet, spammer.
>
> Robert Eggleton
> (I'd put my website address here except I don't have one yet.)
Don't bother. I can just about guarantee you that you will lost your
hosting account within hours of paying for it, because that's what web
hosts do to spammers. And you're far too fucking *stupid* to not spam the
URL if you ever get one.
(On the other hand, it's a good bet you can't afford one till you sell some
copies of your shitty, spammy book, and since that's never going to happen,
you're safe.)
I'm quite serious: You include a URL in the shit you've been posting here -
spam, all of it - and somebody *will* complain to your web host (me
included), and you _will_ lose the acccount.
Daniel Silevitch
> Daniel Silevitch <dms...@uchicago.edu> wrote in
> news:slrneb5opm....@bardeen.local:
>
>> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:22:30 -0400, Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net>
>> wrote:
>>> Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>>> Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>>> stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>>
>> You may want to reconsider that. I note that Terry Austin is in the
>> process of setting out his hooks. At least for a little while, it
>> might be entertaining to watch.
>>
> Thanks for the assist. The hooks will set deep, now.
I doubt you really needed my help, but you're welcome.
-dms
Sea Wasp
> Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
>
>>Because it is NOT WHAT THOSE SITES ARE FOR.
>>
>>Then you're an idiot. Not that that's news.
>>
>>Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>>Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>>stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>
>
>>My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
>
>
> Mr. Lawrence Watt Evans,
>
> Cyberspace is mostly spam.
You know NOTHING of Cyberspace. You also know nothing of Spam. You
appear to know nothing even of things that people SAY to you; do you
have a short term memory problem, or are you just impervious to any
and all attempts to tell you that YOU ARE MAKING A TOTAL IDIOT OF
YOURSELF?
Sites, forums, blogs, and on every
> newsgroup, etc.-- almost all were built to advertise products,
> including those maintained my nonprofit agencies -- "please donate."
> Google and Yahoo each have spots that one can buy for a cost per hit --
> that's the reason that they exist for users to chat.
Spam: UNSOLICITED advertisements. Note that first word, it's
important. If I go to a COMMERCIAL site, I accept and expect that I'll
be seeing ads for the site's products.
Now, YOU posted UNSOLICITED spam for your material. You were then
told this was rude and not encouraged or accepted on these newsgroups.
RATHER THAN DO WHAT ANY HALFWAY SANE PERSON WOULD DO -- either leave,
or apologize, STOP SPAMMING, and stay, you resolutely have kept trying
to argue that you aren't spamming... or if you are, that it's okay,
because it's you... or that no one's really mad at you about it, even
though they are...
You know, De Nile is more than a river in Egypt. You ARE a river of
denial. Or a deliberate trolling asshole.
And if the latter, you just aren't enough of one to be worthy. Begone
to the depths of Terry.
> Instead, the issue is the boundaries of free speech on the internet.
Children are often limited in what they're allowed to speak on. Even
adults are strongly admonished not to talk loudly about things they
know nothing about, and those that ignore this advice are roundly mocked.
> For example, you just used spam by listing your webpage address.
And long-established residents of real-life neighborhoods, who
contribute something to the neighborhood, are permitted to bend the
rules. This is an electronic neighborhood, to which LWE contributes
significantly, thus he is (by most) forgiven occasional reminders of
his work.
You haven't contributed, so no one's in a particularly forgiving
mood, especially when you continue your one-man crusade to alienate as
many people as possible through sheer bullheaded stupidity.
I
> don't find it objectionable. Much of your criticism of my strategies
> at the self-promotion of my novel were intended to drive readers to
> consider your books.
BWWWWAAHAHAHAA! You think that Lawrence Watt-Evans is trying to use
YOUR incompentence to SELL HIS BOOKS? As though virtually everyone
interested in his stuff on this newsgroup hasn't already bought or
looked at anything of his that was in their interest range?
Get a grip, a life, and a clue, not necessarily in that order. LWE is
a full-time pro writer. Sure, he can use more publicity (as can any
writer whose name is not J.K. Rowling), but in THIS venue? Pfui.
Still, I don't object, and didn't put down your
> approach to spamming this audience. It's free speech and that's the
> real ammunition against spam. Censorship is a dangerous practice that
> threatens cyberspace. It's the true enemy. "Spam tastes good if...
> (from the novel).
Spam never tastes good. SPAMMERS, on the other hand, can be good eatin'.
>
> Robert Eggleton
> (I'd put my website address here except I don't have one yet.)
My GOD you are SUCH a loser.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/
Marilee J. Layman
Marilee J. Layman
<robe...@charter.net> wrote:
> Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
>time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list names.
>It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful (somewhat
>negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found if you search.
Hey, you don't list names, we don't believe you.
robert eggleton
Robert Eggleton
robe...@charter.net (if I pay the bill next month)
1104 Garvin Avenue (next to the housing project)
Charleston, WV 25302
304-346-7907 (but I may switch to all cell to save money and you can't
have that because it would potentially cost more)
C'mon you guys -- think. It's all spam! The marketplace is redundant.
Creativity is stifled. Are you going to become robots? Try it for
yourself -- send out a short story or something. My biggest hero is
Richard Adams -- at least he fought for voice and it was harder then.
Robert Eggleton
robert eggleton
> You know NOTHING of Cyberspace. You also know nothing of Spam. You
> appear to know nothing even of things that people SAY to you; do you
> have a short term memory problem, or are you just impervious to any
> and all attempts to tell you that YOU ARE MAKING A TOTAL IDIOT OF
> YOURSELF?
Without insult (I noticed that members here like to do that),
cyberspace is a "property" unlike others previously and more fully
litigated. It's not land on which one can post a "no tresspassing
sign", build a house, or drive a car. Instead, it's the most
accessible form of free speech and mass communications ever available
to humankind and likely to be the subject of standards and findings
long past my lifetime, and perhaps yours.
If you guys have bought into the ultraconservative view of property
that the status quo wants to maintain for as long as it can, I don't
want to argue. The position that its property makes them lots of money
and could be a science fiction (hopefully) novel itself. My politics,
as you know, is the prevention of child abuse. I'm too old and tired
to take on more. Good luck with fighting censorship in cyberspace.
I told you about what I think is a good book with a beneficient cause
and, with some coercion, a free speech issue to challenge your
thinking. You've got my email address and I'll reply if I have time.
A couple of readers who saw posts on this site have emailed me
privately. To whomever (I don't keep track, sorry) said that I'd dug
my hole deeper, I disagree. Whether you achieve insight now or later,
I expressed honestly and in a manner that you will likely respect at
some point -- the fiction marketplace is monopolized and stale and a
threat to us all.
Robert Eggleton
Mike Schilling
> To whomever (I don't keep track, sorry) said that I'd dug
> my hole deeper, I disagree.
It was me, and, by that way, that should be "whoever".
>Whether you achieve insight now or later,
> I expressed honestly and in a manner that you will likely respect at
> some point -- the fiction marketplace is monopolized and stale and a
> threat to us all.
Let's see: "The normal channels for publishing fiction are closed to me, so
I have a right to use creative ones, like spamming Usenet.". Sorry, that
doesn't work for me. Hint: If every writer with an unpublished and
unpublishable brainchild posted it here, you couldn't find the conversation
for the spam.
So, deeper still, as the mixture of cluelessnes and entitlement takes on an
unmistakable odor of sour grapes.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Nicoll) wrote:
>In article <i6k5b2hmpannp6rq8...@news.rcn.com>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>>Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>>stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>
> How many loki points do I get if I give him G*n* St**b*rg's
>email address?
Oh, yes, please!
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>news:1152574393.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
>> For example, you just used spam by listing your webpage address.
>
>Rule #2. He puts it in his .sig. This is perfectly acceptable, since he
>does so in on-topic posts.
If I were advertising (not spamming), I'd put a link to a site where
I'm asking for donations (there are two) rather than just to the front
page of my personal site.
I've _done_ that on occasion, mind you. I'm guilty of self-promotion.
I'm not guilty of spamming.
>>Much of your criticism of my strategies
>> at the self-promotion of my novel
>
>Which is to say, spamming. Rule #1.
>
>>were intended to drive readers to
>> consider your books.
Ha. Yeah, right. I'd put a link to Amazon if that's what I was
doing.
>Rule #1. And Rule #2. No, his posts were intended to ridicule you, and
>drive you in to shutting the fuck up, and stop spamming our newsgroup.
Exactly. Thank you.
>> Robert Eggleton
>> (I'd put my website address here except I don't have one yet.)
Unbelievable.
You could, you know, put the website where the drivel you're promoting
can be found, even if it's not your personal website.
--
Anastasia
>> You know NOTHING of Cyberspace. You also know nothing of Spam. You
>> appear to know nothing even of things that people SAY to you; do
>> you have a short term memory problem, or are you just impervious
>> to any and all attempts to tell you that YOU ARE MAKING A TOTAL
>> IDIOT OF YOURSELF?
> I told you about what I think is a good book with a beneficient
> cause and, with some coercion, a free speech issue to challenge your
> thinking.
I'm going to make a brief object lesson here. I could do several things to
promote a book I found worthy: read it and put it on my blog, which gets a
respectable number of hits; assign it to classes of frosh at my university;
talk it up to writers and editors; review it; do a critical essay on it and
present it at a professional conference.
I can't in good conscience do any of those things in *this* case because you
are behaving entirely inappropriately for this venue and refuse to conduct
yourself according to the standards of the community.
My point, and I hope you take it to heart, is that there are people around
you who *could* do something, if you stopped acting as if their expertise
was worth nothing.
To put it plainly, you are already ignoring their advice, so I doubt any of
them will stick their professional reputations on the line for you--helping
you would only tarnish their reputations, as if they brought someone to a
gala book launch who proceeded to hit on the editor's spouse and then vomit
into the punch bowl.
Nobody's going to help you because you have continued to vociferously ignore
advice.
aste...@aol.com
> If you guys have bought into the ultraconservative view of property
> that the status quo wants to maintain for as long as it can, I don't
> want to argue. The position that its property makes them lots of money
> and could be a science fiction (hopefully) novel itself.
Hmn.
> Whether you achieve insight now or later,
> I expressed honestly and in a manner that you will likely respect at
> some point -- the fiction marketplace is monopolized and stale and a
> threat to us all.
>
There's this: if you have something to say, then you do have a
responsibility to say it. If you have a gift, then of course you must
say it.
However, by now, with self-publishing efforts and making so many people
angry, it's worth a thought to consider that you might not have so much
to say as you think. Or, you may be saying something (in your writing)
that's not very interesting to many others.
It's the simple truth. Good work will nearly always be published
through legitimate channels -- eventually. There simply are not vast
numbers of outstanding unpublished novelists out there, languishing.
Many people focus on "writing skills" and so-on. Quite a few un- or
self-published writers do have pretty poor writing skills. But it's
more along these lines: it's what the writers have to say. Sure,
professional writers can say little, or write to entertain. These are
skills built up over time.
It probably is very hurtful to put so much time and effort into writing
a story that just isn't working for other people.
I'll just make this suggestion, and I began as a more skilled writer
than most, with plenty to say. I myself wrote many words before making
my first professional sale. Not the fabled "million" but probably at
least 200,000. Which is NOTHING for a working writer, Mr. Eggleton.
Absolutely nothing. Beyond that, a writer has an audience to consider.
What would they like to read? Where do the stories the writer has to
tell, and the stories the audience wants to hear intersect?
Right now, you seem to be a working spammer. No matter what you say to
others online, no matter how many emails you send out, nor how many
quotes you may obtain for your work through coercion and so-on, it
doesn't make you a "writer." What's the system doing -- putting down
an amateur spammer? The existence of a certain amount of completed
words on the page does NOT make you a "writer." It makes you someone
who's set down that many words on the page.
- Amy Sterling Casil
And that's the truth, no matter what you say or do.
No 33 Secretary
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 23:47:32 -0000, No 33 Secretary
> <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>"robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net> wrote in
>>news:1152574393.9...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> For example, you just used spam by listing your webpage address.
>>
>>Rule #2. He puts it in his .sig. This is perfectly acceptable, since he
>>does so in on-topic posts.
>
> If I were advertising (not spamming), I'd put a link to a site where
> I'm asking for donations (there are two) rather than just to the front
> page of my personal site.
>
> I've _done_ that on occasion, mind you. I'm guilty of self-promotion.
> I'm not guilty of spamming.
Spam isn't defined by content, but rather, by method.
>
>>>Much of your criticism of my strategies
>>> at the self-promotion of my novel
>>
>>Which is to say, spamming. Rule #1.
>>
>>>were intended to drive readers to
>>> consider your books.
>
> Ha. Yeah, right. I'd put a link to Amazon if that's what I was
> doing.
>
>>Rule #1. And Rule #2. No, his posts were intended to ridicule you, and
>>drive you in to shutting the fuck up, and stop spamming our newsgroup.
>
> Exactly. Thank you.
I'm an asshole, not an idiot.
>
>>> Robert Eggleton
>>> (I'd put my website address here except I don't have one yet.)
>
> Unbelievable.
>
> You could, you know, put the website where the drivel you're promoting
> can be found, even if it's not your personal website.
>
But then, that web site would probably be shut down, or his book pulled
from it if it's not his.
I suspect he already knows this.
No 33 Secretary
news:44B2F329...@obvioussgeinc.com:
> robert eggleton wrote:
>> Lawrence Watt-Evans wrote:
>>
>>>Because it is NOT WHAT THOSE SITES ARE FOR.
>>>
>>>Then you're an idiot. Not that that's news.
>>>
>>>Ladies, gentlemen, and others of rasfw, I'm going to killfile Mr.
>>>Eggleton now, and I ask that you all do the same. He's clearly too
>>>stupid to be worthy of further attempts at education.
>>
>>
>>>My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
>>
>>
>> Mr. Lawrence Watt Evans,
>>
>> Cyberspace is mostly spam.
>
> You know NOTHING of Cyberspace. You also know nothing of Spam.
I disagree. From his posts here, he knows of nothing *but* spam.
No 33 Secretary
>
>> You know NOTHING of Cyberspace. You also know nothing of Spam. You
>> appear to know nothing even of things that people SAY to you; do you
>> have a short term memory problem, or are you just impervious to any
>> and all attempts to tell you that YOU ARE MAKING A TOTAL IDIOT OF
>> YOURSELF?
>
>
> Without insult (I noticed that members here like to do that),
If's increasingly impossible to discuss you in any terms that are not
insulting. Because the insults are entirely true.
> cyberspace is a "property" unlike others previously and more fully
> litigated. It's not land on which one can post a "no tresspassing
> sign", build a house, or drive a car.
In fact, it is, and such is done all the time. Only spammers would claim
otherwise.
> Instead, it's the most
> accessible form of free speech
Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea
Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach! Frea Speach!
Spammer.
No 33 Secretary
news:EnEsg.63706$fb2....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
What else would you expect from a no-talent hack?
No 33 Secretary
news:B0Gsg.7116$cd3....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net:
> Nobody's going to help you because you have continued to vociferously
> ignore advice.
>
No 33 Secretary
news:det5b29mocifihjep...@4ax.com:
> On 10 Jul 2006 15:04:03 -0700, "robert eggleton"
> <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
>>time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list names.
>>It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful (somewhat
>>negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found if you search.
>
> Hey, you don't list names, we don't believe you.
And he never, ever will. I'd guess because his lawyer told him it would be
*bad*.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Marilee J. Layman <mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote in
>news:det5b29mocifihjep...@4ax.com:
>
>> On 10 Jul 2006 15:04:03 -0700, "robert eggleton"
>> <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>>>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
>>>time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list names.
>>>It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful (somewhat
>>>negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found if you search.
>>
>> Hey, you don't list names, we don't believe you.
>
>And he never, ever will. I'd guess because his lawyer told him it would be
>*bad*.
You think he _has_ a lawyer?
I've been doing some research in the SFWA online archives, and I could
name a couple of the people who blurbed his novel -- and could also
explain that his standard method was to tell people in e-mail, "You
don't need to read it, just say something nice about it and I'll leave
you alone."
It's really dismaying how often that works.
The two names I found weren't SF writers, by the way. One was a minor
poet, the other a New Age writer.
Our Mr. Eggleton, by the way, e-mailed my conversation with him here
to the president of SFWA, asking whether I was indeed fairly
representing SFWA's official policy on self-promotion. Since I never
said anything about SFWA's official policy, only about the reaction of
SFWA's members to being spammed and harassed in e-mail, I don't know
why he bothered, but he did.
So now I've had to apologize to Robin for dragging him into this
It's been interesting, though, discussing him with other writers.
He's been more obnoxious than I'd realized.
--
Tony
>
> I'm going to make a brief object lesson here. I could do several things to
> promote a book I found worthy: read it and put it on my blog, which gets a
> respectable number of hits; assign it to classes of frosh at my university;
> talk it up to writers and editors; review it; do a critical essay on it and
> present it at a professional conference.
>
> I can't in good conscience do any of those things in *this* case because you
> are behaving entirely inappropriately for this venue and refuse to conduct
> yourself according to the standards of the community.
>
> My point, and I hope you take it to heart, is that there are people around
> you who *could* do something, if you stopped acting as if their expertise
> was worth nothing.
Highly unlikely. He seems to be acting quite similarly to "Matrixx
Entertainment" in the movie production and screenwriting newsgroups -
check out HIS record and you'll see the similarities.
> To put it plainly, you are already ignoring their advice, so I doubt any of
> them will stick their professional reputations on the line for you--helping
> you would only tarnish their reputations, as if they brought someone to a
> gala book launch who proceeded to hit on the editor's spouse and then vomit
> into the punch bowl.
>
> Nobody's going to help you because you have continued to vociferously ignore
> advice.
And will continute to do so, because he knows better than anyone else -
even those who have "made it" - because his "creativity" has not been
"stifled"
I've known far too many like him. It's not worth wasting the time trying
to convince them of anything.
However, it CAN be amusing to ridicule them...
--
"The most convoluted explanation that fits all of the made-up facts is
the most likely to be believed by conspiracy theorists. Fitting the
actual facts is optional."
No 33 Secretary
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006 16:22:52 -0000, No 33 Secretary
> <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Marilee J. Layman <mar...@mjlayman.com> wrote in
>>news:det5b29mocifihjep...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On 10 Jul 2006 15:04:03 -0700, "robert eggleton"
>>> <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>>>>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have
>>>>taken time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list
>>>>names. It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful
>>>>(somewhat negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found
>>>>if you search.
>>>
>>> Hey, you don't list names, we don't believe you.
>>
>>And he never, ever will. I'd guess because his lawyer told him it
>>would be *bad*.
>
> You think he _has_ a lawyer?
Good point. Though it's possible he's *had* to have one in the past, given
his behavior. Not that I have any real idea, of course.
>
> I've been doing some research in the SFWA online archives, and I could
> name a couple of the people who blurbed his novel -- and could also
> explain that his standard method was to tell people in e-mail, "You
> don't need to read it, just say something nice about it and I'll leave
> you alone."
>
> It's really dismaying how often that works.
So perhaps he's not a *complete* amateur, then? After all, that method
seems to work for professionals. :)
>
> The two names I found weren't SF writers, by the way. One was a minor
> poet, the other a New Age writer.
At least both deal with the written word.
>
> Our Mr. Eggleton, by the way, e-mailed my conversation with him here
> to the president of SFWA, asking whether I was indeed fairly
> representing SFWA's official policy on self-promotion. Since I never
> said anything about SFWA's official policy, only about the reaction of
> SFWA's members to being spammed and harassed in e-mail, I don't know
> why he bothered, but he did.
Because spamtards *do* that. He's probably compalined to your ISP, too, and
maybe your web host.
>
> So now I've had to apologize to Robin for dragging him into this
I suspect you feel that is an obligation on your part, but don't hesitate
to encourage this Robin person to read the entire thread him/herself.
Exposure of how looney his is, is the fastest way to get rid of him.
>
> It's been interesting, though, discussing him with other writers.
> He's been more obnoxious than I'd realized.
>
Spamtards always are.
(And "spamtard," BTW, is not just another word for spammer. It's a
significant step worse, and he deserves it if he's dragging third parties
in. He's only a hop and skip away from actual cart00nies at this point,
which could easily make him far more famous than he ever imagined, and
absolutely, positively guarantee that *nobody* will *ever* take him
serously, as a writer, or as a human being.)
Mike Schilling
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
news:23n7b2tu5m36a6kpa...@news.rcn.com...
>
> Our Mr. Eggleton, by the way, e-mailed my conversation with him here
> to the president of SFWA, asking whether I was indeed fairly
> representing SFWA's official policy on self-promotion.
And here I thought it was merely clueless, when in fact it's actively evil.
Sea Wasp
No, ACTIVELY IDIOTIC. Most idiots are merely unable to understand,
but this Mr. Eggleton is expending heroic amounts of effort in his
quest to achieve levels of idiocy normally restricted to TV sitcoms.
And it appears he is achieving his goals.
Dana Blackwell
> A percentage of any proceeds
> will prevent child abuse in West Virginia where I work.
I wonder if he means that by paying him -- allegedly a worker in a "child
mental health" program -- you are supporting him and he himself prevents
child abuse.
Besides I wanna know how child abuse can be prevented. Murder every
parent/foster parent/babysitter/priest/caretaker/coach/adult in West
Virginia? Wave a magic wand?
While you can identify abused children and remove them from the environment
where they're being abused, you can't guarantee that they will never be
abused again. This isn't prevention; it's an attempt at protection. You can
try to educate people. This isn't prevention either.
I've been an activist for many years around child sexual abuse and sexual
violence and I wouldn't dream of saying that I *prevent* child abuse.
If there is an organization that actually prevents child abuse, I demand to
know the name of it right now so that I can give them all my money and leave
them everything else in my will. Never mind the measly 20 cents from the
sale of the book.
> significantly, it was written to enrage readers about the social
> issue.
Dude, I AM fucking enraged. I am a tightly compressed ball of rage.
--
Dana
robert eggleton
Dana,
Thanks for the questions. Based on a schedule, from 10 to 50 percent
of any proceeds will go to Children's Home Society of West Virginia.
It has a child abuse prevention program with an excellent reputation.
Dennis Sutton is the Executive Director and can be reached at
304-346-7907 for further information.
Since you're in the field, I'll clarify for others that prevention does
sometime involve removal of the victim from the home or incarceration
of the parent. However, depending on the case, there are several other
strategies used to prevent child abuse: parental education, home
visiting / monitoring, treatment of a mental disorder of the parent
(such as a parent with bipolar disorder and in need of medication),
public education, victim empowerment, child advocacy centers,
strengthening prosecution, lobbying for stricter penalties, funding,
etc. This is not an exhaustive listing. I recommend that readers
contact their local child protection agencies if they are interested in
finding out how they can help prevent child abuse. For example, all
states have Court Appointed Special Advocates that help victims voice
their positions during court proceedings. Training is free and there
are no special qualifications other than concern for maltreated kids.
It's kind of like a liaison role between the child and her or his
attorney to ensure effective representation. If anybody has trouble
contacting their agency, let me know and I'll email a phone number.
I'm on the treatment end of things and with a different agency
(Prestera Mental Health Center at 304-341-0511) -- and my protagonist,
Lacy Dawn (not her real name) was once a participant in my program.
She had been horribly abused, became empowered, caused her father to go
to jail where he belonged, and helped other similarly situated children
better than any professional I'd met in thirty years of this work.
I will not monitor the use of any funds I donate, but have established
that none will be used for administrative costs -- anything that comes
from this project will go to direct services to help kids. That's the
best I can do.
I hope this info answers your questions, but feel free to email me or
post again if you have other questions.
Thanks again,
Robert Eggleton
"Rarity from the Hollow"
Sea Wasp
> robert eggleton wrote:
>
>>A percentage of any proceeds
>>will prevent child abuse in West Virginia where I work.
>
>
> I wonder if he means that by paying him -- allegedly a worker in a "child
> mental health" program -- you are supporting him and he himself prevents
> child abuse.
Judging by his behavior here, a darker interpretation could be
assigned.
No 33 Secretary
> Mike Schilling wrote:
>> "Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
>> news:23n7b2tu5m36a6kpa...@news.rcn.com...
>>
>>
>>>Our Mr. Eggleton, by the way, e-mailed my conversation with him here
>>>to the president of SFWA, asking whether I was indeed fairly
>>>representing SFWA's official policy on self-promotion.
>>
>>
>> And here I thought it was merely clueless, when in fact it's actively
>> evil.
>>
>>
>
> No, ACTIVELY IDIOTIC. Most idiots are merely unable to
> understand,
> but this Mr. Eggleton is expending heroic amounts of effort in his
> quest to achieve levels of idiocy normally restricted to TV sitcoms.
> And it appears he is achieving his goals.
>
I disagree. I consider him actively evil, as well. He's a drooling retard,
too, obviously, but he's also a spammer. Not an accidental spammer, but a
deliberate one. He's been told that he's a spammer, and he's proven he
understands what that means. And he defends his spamming with all the
standard drivel that spammers lie about, including claims of "Frea Speach!"
while using equipment that belongs to someone else. Evil is just the word
to describe him.
No 33 Secretary
news:pxZsg.155305$iF6.89455@pd7tw2no:
<spammer food>
Please don't feed the spammer. You only encourage it to spam more.
Default User
> And he defends his
> spamming with all the standard drivel that spammers lie about,
> including claims of "Frea Speach!" while using equipment that belongs
> to someone else. Evil is just the word to describe him.
Not to mention, "It's for the Children!!" And, "ABUSED Children!!!"
Brian
--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)
No 33 Secretary
news:4hkq6h...@individual.net:
> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>
>
>> And he defends his
>> spamming with all the standard drivel that spammers lie about,
>> including claims of "Frea Speach!" while using equipment that belongs
>> to someone else. Evil is just the word to describe him.
>
> Not to mention, "It's for the Children!!" And, "ABUSED Children!!!"
>
While that's common enough among annoying assholes in general, it isn't one
of the usual spammer excuses. But not surprising, of course.
Mike Schilling
"Sea Wasp" <seawasp...@obvioussgeinc.com> wrote in message
news:44B45D54...@obvioussgeinc.com...
> Mike Schilling wrote:
>> "Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
>> news:23n7b2tu5m36a6kpa...@news.rcn.com...
>>
>>
>>>Our Mr. Eggleton, by the way, e-mailed my conversation with him here
>>>to the president of SFWA, asking whether I was indeed fairly
>>>representing SFWA's official policy on self-promotion.
>>
>>
>> And here I thought it was merely clueless, when in fact it's actively
>> evil.
>
> No, ACTIVELY IDIOTIC. Most idiots are merely unable to understand, but
> this Mr. Eggleton is expending heroic amounts of effort in his quest to
> achieve levels of idiocy normally restricted to TV sitcoms. And it appears
> he is achieving his goals.
Trying to get Lawrence in trouble with his "boss" is evil. (I'll agree that
thinking the president of SFWA can or would want to discipline him is
idiotic.)
Mike Schilling
"No 33 Secretary" <terry.nota...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97FE577F68...@216.168.3.64...
> Evil is just the word to describe him.
And I would no more argue about evil with Terry than with Cthulu.
No 33 Secretary
I like you.
dlan...@aol.com
James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <1152284039.8...@s16g2000cws.googlegroups.com>,
> robert eggleton <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >I'll try to be less intense about my work, but it'll be hard. I come
> >home everyday worn out by the kids. I'm enranged about what "parents"
> >have done and get online to promote. Maybe there is another novel
> >about a child abuse victim saving the universe that I've not heard of,
> >but I don't want to read it anyway. Maybe I do. What is it?
> >
>
> ENDERS GAME (Orson Scott Card): Kids are educated in the ways
> of war, because children can be made to do things (especially if
> information is kept from them) that adults will or cannot.
>
There are several of Mercedes lacky's novels -- some of her worst work
IMO -- that features more or less this plot. _Wheels of Fire_ and the
other books in that setting, for example
Carl Dershem
@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
It's also a recurring theme (though "universe" may be a bit extreme) with
Joel Rosenberg.
cd
--
The difference between immorality and immortality is "T". I like Earl
Grey.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Robin Bailey's hardly my boss, in any sense of the word.
Michael Alan Chary
robert eggleton <robe...@charter.net> wrote:
>
>Michael Alan Chary wrote:
>> In article <mu93b2hsslmlr71s0...@news.rcn.com>,
>> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>> >On 9 Jul 2006 14:37:47 -0700, "robert eggleton" <robe...@charter.net>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >>Without reading "Rarity from the Hollow" the
>> >>posters here have disrespected a genre and an organization (SFWA) that
>> >>exists to support an history that you pretend to invest in...
>> >
>> >The only one disrespecting SFWA is you, by lying about what we thought
>> >of your spamming.
>> >
>> > -- Lawrence Watt-Evans
>> > Lifetime member of SFWA since 1982
>> > former Eastern Regional Director of SFWA
>> > former Treasurer of SFWA
>>
>> I recommend he try the SFWA. SFWA is clearly not interested, but the SFWA
>> might be.
>> --
>> The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
>> http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons
>
>Mr. Lawrence Watt-Evans,
>
>Thank you for the official SFWA position regarding my efforts to
>self-promote "Rarity from the Hollow." I was not aware that there was
>one.
>
>Almost all of the replies I got from your members were kind, polite,
>and, cumulatively, full of advice and instruction to a novice in a
>tough marketplace. Some were detailed and a few became dialogue. I
>don't remember a reply from you, most members didn't, but, while some
>were discouraging about the prospects of an unknown getting a novel
>published, none were mean or disrespectful. I've learned a lot, am
>still learning, and, again, thank those who helped as mentors.
>
>And, I've made plenty of mistakes. A big one in the beginning was to
>attach a sample to an email without permission. Some members of the
>SFWA pointed out that this was poor protocol. I stopped. I also
>received warnings about agents -- I almost signed with someone that one
>of your members reported had no significant sales. Another warned me
>about self-publishing. I've gotten advice about ebooks. These are
>examples. Regardless of the official SFWA position on my
>self-promotion, some individual members of your organization have taken
>time out of their busy schedules to help. No -- I won't list names.
>It would be an invasion of privacy, but one very helpful (somewhat
>negative instruction -- that's okay) can easily be found if you search.
>
>I've also been told about nuances when one self-promotes -- chit-chat
>for a while first. I think I'm doing better in general, but blew it on
>this site (if that's the correct term). I've been banned from two
>sites, but overall the results have been overwhelmingly positive.
>Sometimes, after a hard day at work, I get tired and that's probably
>why I was weaker in some of my posts. I try to stay close to topic
>while mentioning my novel. I just don't have much time for chit-chat.
>
>To the best of my knowledge, I have never sent somebody a second email
>who instructed me not to (this happened twice in my most recent round
>of announcements -- both individuals in child abuse organizations and
>neither were writers. I don't have a list -- it's all "manual" and very
>hard work, so I can't just delete a name. Nevertheless, I think I'm in
>compliance with the advice given by the author.
>
>Today, I received an email from another aspiring writer about his
>self-promotional efforts:
>
> "I can totally relate to your cyberspace experience. I still don't
>get why "writers" sites and chat rooms get so pissy when writers talk
>about (or even *gasp* promote) their own books! It's so weird to me
>that it becomes humorous. I constantly and consistently got the "spam"
>label foisted upon my posts, and many times they got deleted, or my
>site link disabled, and that would inevitably be followed by a string
>of "fellow writers" chastising me. It's downright surreal."
>
>I agree with him.
>
>Robert Eggleton
>
--
The All-New, All-Different Howling Curmudgeons!
http://www.whiterose.org/howlingcurmudgeons
Mike Schilling
Hence the scare quotes.
Did I misinterpret its goal though? Reporting your "misbehavior" to the
head of the SFWA sounds like an attempt to find an authority to punish you.
Default User
> "Default User" <defaul...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:4hkq6h...@individual.net:
>
> > No 33 Secretary wrote:
> >
> >
> >> And he defends his
> >> spamming with all the standard drivel that spammers lie about,
> >> including claims of "Frea Speach!" while using equipment that
> belongs >> to someone else. Evil is just the word to describe him.
> >
> > Not to mention, "It's for the Children!!" And, "ABUSED Children!!!"
> >
> While that's common enough among annoying assholes in general, it
> isn't one of the usual spammer excuses. But not surprising, of course.
Not one of the big ones, no. Seen sometimes. The biggest one is
probably, "But I thought XXX would be of interest here. Isn't this a
XXX board?" Seen lots on the programming newsgroups with dopes spamming
their job openings (Sinapore? sign me up!).
No 33 Secretary
> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>
>> "Default User" <defaul...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:4hkq6h...@individual.net:
>>
>> > No 33 Secretary wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> And he defends his
>> >> spamming with all the standard drivel that spammers lie about,
>> >> including claims of "Frea Speach!" while using equipment that
>> belongs >> to someone else. Evil is just the word to describe him.
>> >
>> > Not to mention, "It's for the Children!!" And, "ABUSED Children!!!"
>> >
>> While that's common enough among annoying assholes in general, it
>> isn't one of the usual spammer excuses. But not surprising, of course.
>
> Not one of the big ones, no. Seen sometimes. The biggest one is
> probably, "But I thought XXX would be of interest here. Isn't this a
> XXX board?"
In my experience, the most common response is to send more spam, since
you've confirmed that the address is valid. Different rules apply to
Usenet, of course. But squealing about Frea Speach! is certainly near the
top of the list.
> Seen lots on the programming newsgroups with dopes spamming
> their job openings (Sinapore? sign me up!).
>
I don't really see a lot of Usenet spam (since Newsguy is pretty good at
filtering, and XNews does the rest by just killing crossposted stuff), so
perhaps it's more different than I realized.
robert eggleton
All,
Apologies -- I made a mistake on the telephone number for Children's
Home Society of West Virginia in last night's posts (it was late and I
was exhausted). The correct number is 304-346-6644. And, before this
post causes another rant, I'm not spamming this agency -- just
correcting a mistake in case anybody wants to verify the arrangement I
previously specified.
Further, I was not spamming to get any of you involved in the social
problem of child abuse, such as to volunteer to help. I answered
direct questions that were posted.
I also was not trying to get anybody in trouble, as was suggested. I
wrote to the SFWA president to find out if the organization had adopted
a formal position on self-promotion. It has not. I believe that free
speech on the internet is an issue that will out-survive us all and is
especially relevant to the organization, some members of which project
futuristic models.
BTW, something really great happened today because of my
self-promotional efforts. I'll tell you in a couple of weeks -- "after
the type is set."
Robert Eggleton
"Rarity from the Hollow" (I was told that this is okay -- so don't
fuss)
No 33 Secretary
news:1152739433.7...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>
> Apologies
Liar. But then, spammers always are.
> -- I made a mistake on the telephone number for Children's
> Home Society of West Virginia in last night's posts (it was late and I
> was exhausted). The correct number is 304-346-6644.
How about we all call this number and complain that someone representing
them is spamming our newsgroup? That seems every bit as appropriate as
dipshit here complaining to the president of SFWA about a member's actions
here.
How about it, Robbie? We can do to you what you do to others?
> And, before this
> post causes another rant,
Too late, spammer.
>I'm not spamming this agency --
Rule #1: spammers lie.
>just
> correcting a mistake in case anybody wants to verify the arrangement I
> previously specified.
Spammer.
>
> Further, I was not spamming
Rule #1.
>to get any of you involved in the social
> problem of child abuse, such as to volunteer to help. I answered
> direct questions that were posted.
>
> I also was not trying to get anybody in trouble, as was suggested.
Rule #1.
>I
> wrote to the SFWA president to find out if the organization had
> adopted a formal position on self-promotion. It has not. I believe
> that free speech
Usenet isn't the internet, and Frea Speach! doesn't apply.
>on the internet is an issue that will out-survive us
> all and is especially relevant to the organization, some members of
> which project futuristic models.
Typical retarded spammer drivel.
>
> BTW, something really great happened today because of my
> self-promotional efforts. I'll tell you in a couple of weeks --
> "after the type is set."
rule #1.
>
> Robert Eggleton
> "Rarity from the Hollow" (I was told that this is okay -- so don't
> fuss)
>
It is perfectly acceptable to put up to four lines in a .sig, even by the
strictest standards. To do it entirely correctly, you should put a "sig
dash" before it. That's two dashes, followed by a space, like you see
below.
However, following proper protocol on .sigs does not make a spam post not-
spam. And you're stills a spammer.
Default User
> I don't really see a lot of Usenet spam (since Newsguy is pretty good
> at filtering, and XNews does the rest by just killing crossposted
> stuff), so perhaps it's more different than I realized.
NIN does pretty well with standard spam. Most of the job ones are
individually crafted Google (of course) messages, with no cross-posts,
not unlike the one here. The authors often seem quite surprised that
anyone objects.
No 33 Secretary
> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>
>
>> I don't really see a lot of Usenet spam (since Newsguy is pretty good
>> at filtering, and XNews does the rest by just killing crossposted
>> stuff), so perhaps it's more different than I realized.
>
> NIN does pretty well with standard spam. Most of the job ones are
> individually crafted Google (of course) messages, with no cross-posts,
> not unlike the one here. The authors often seem quite surprised that
> anyone objects.
>
They're probably the same authors, pretending to be someone else each time.
Most likely, from some headhunter outfit, rather than actually working for
the company the job is for.
Rule #1, and all.
Dan Goodman
> No 33 Secretary wrote:
>
> > "Default User" <defaul...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> >
> > > No 33 Secretary wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> And he defends his
> > >> spamming with all the standard drivel that spammers lie about,
> > >> including claims of "Frea Speach!" while using equipment that
> > belongs >> to someone else. Evil is just the word to describe him.
> > >
> > > Not to mention, "It's for the Children!!" And, "ABUSED
> > > Children!!!"
> > >
> > While that's common enough among annoying assholes in general, it
> > isn't one of the usual spammer excuses. But not surprising, of
> > course.
>
> Not one of the big ones, no. Seen sometimes. The biggest one is
> probably, "But I thought XXX would be of interest here. Isn't this a
> XXX board?" Seen lots on the programming newsgroups with dopes
> spamming their job openings (Sinapore? sign me up!).
I once counted the gay porn ads in alt.sex.stories.hetero; they made up
half the messages.
--
Dan Goodman
All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies.
John Arbuthnot (1667-1735), Scottish writer, physician.
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood
robert eggleton
All,
Did you get the sad news today? Following is an email that was
forwarded to me from the editor of a magazine with whom I occasionally
correspond . Call it spam if you want.
I think this news illustrates the results of the simplistic definitions
that have been used within some posts here and at many other places in
cyberspace -- and, the ongoing monopolization of the literary
marketplace the way it has happened with television and radio. Since,
as I do, you read speculative fiction, imagine a world involving your
initial reactions to my self-promotion and that of other artists.
Frankly, if I wasn't a hardened veteran of abuse, I would have given up
and left this place -- insults, rants, cursing.... It's no wonder that
our best aspiring authors stick their manuscripts in a box to mold in
the basement. How do you expect the industry to evolve if people blast
any attempt at self-promotion that doesn't involve significant costs.
It won't and readers will be left with the same old, same old, that has
been published for decades. And, they will like it because they don't
know any different.
Here's the sad news. Another goes down:
"Dear Family, Friends, Peers, Acquaintances:
Talebones has been a part of our lives for almost 11 years now. We have
enjoyed every minute of putting all 33 issues together for our readers.
It has truly been a labor of love. Most of the time that labor has cost
us money, and now, because the amount of money we can put into the
magazine has dwindled and, for whatever reason, subscriptions and
renewals have not been as strong as we had hoped over the past year, we
figure we may have to close down the magazine.
A couple of days ago, it was actually a final decision. "That's it,
there's no way can we keep going." There were tears. A few VIPs we
mentioned it to asked us to reconsider. So we took a step back and
decided: We will issue renewal notices as usual, but put an extra
strong
plea in there about this. And then we will send a more detailed email
to
everyone in our email address book who might have an interest. Based on
what renewals come in over the next month, based on the response to
this
email, we will see if Talebones can continue on past 2006. Issue #33 is
already in its final preparation stage. With our decision to make this
final stab at keeping things going came the decision to at least have
an
issue #34, to be published in November of December. We will make a
determination then if it is to be the last or not.
If you've subscribed to our magazine before, if you've never
subscribed,
but maybe sent us stories (or had stories published by us), or have
wished us well with our little venture, we hope you'll consider helping
out. (We didn't go through our files to know which of you are current
subscribers and pull you off this email list, so forgive us if you're
already subscribers in good standing. If nothing else, we wanted you to
know what was up.) At this point, even a single issue copy of our
upcoming issue #33 will help. (We've put the order form/info up on our
website early.) We have Paypal ready to go if you'd like to go that
route. Or you can send money order or check payable to Talebones to our
physical address at 5203 Quincy Ave SE; Auburn, WA 98092. Or you can
ignore this, delete this, or, do whatever you like. It won't change the
way we feel about ANY of you. We just thought we'd do something we've
never done in over a decade of publishing the magazine: beg!
That's our sermon. Thanks for your support. Regardless of what happens
to the magazine, never fear: Talebones and Fairwood Press will continue
to have a presence in the SF world.
Patrick & Honna Swenson
--
Talebones Magazine
Fairwood Press, Inc."
Default User
> "Default User" <defaul...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:4hl8mg...@individual.net:
> > NIN does pretty well with standard spam. Most of the job ones are
> > individually crafted Google (of course) messages, with no
> > cross-posts, not unlike the one here. The authors often seem quite
> > surprised that anyone objects.
> >
> They're probably the same authors, pretending to be someone else each
> time. Most likely, from some headhunter outfit, rather than actually
> working for the company the job is for.
A lot of times they're headhunters, sometimes I find them on the
company website.
Mike Schilling
news:1152743460.3...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Frankly, if I wasn't a hardened veteran of abuse, I would have given up
> and left this place -- insults, rants, cursing....
If you're waiting for an engraved invitation, I'll need a mailing address.