We’re all human here in this giant blogosphere and that means human things, like bad days, or flippancy don’t always translate to the written word. Sometimes, it only takes something very small to set of a chain of events that leave you watching, wondering how did that happen?
I wasn’t part of this one, just a witness after the fact.
Twitter is, by it’s nature, an extension. An extension of us, of our blogs, of our websites. It doesn’t matter how much we might try, we can’t explain ourselves fully in 140 characters. God, I’ve had trouble explaining myself completely in 1000 words!
Another problem with twitter, is that if you’ve been unfollowed, everything you say after that point is moot, because they can’t see it.
I witnessed this this week and thought it interesting, how something so simple, could spiral downhill so quickly.
The tweets following are from @TotalArtSoul and @frogpondsrock respectively.
Please note, I am not taking sides with EITHER person, I just thought it was interesting.
At which point, Total Art Soul blocked and banned @frogpondsrock and left in a huff.
Which proves my point, that 140 characters is not enough to explain yourself, or to ask questions or make statements if someone is having a bad day.
Total Art Soul is a forum for artists. Unfortunately, not everyone who signs up for forums has time to be an active member and I can vouch for Frogpondsrock being a VERY slack member, as I’ve seen it first hand on AMB. Hehe.
However, MY issue with this whole thing is something different:
When does supporting your community and helping out other people on the InterWebs, start being a push/pull shared thing?
Is there a point when you look at what you’re doing for your community and decide that it isn’t worth it? That YOU aren’t getting enough out of it personally to bother promoting anymore?
If you run a forum, you help to publicise your members, you RT links, you share experiences and you do all that without any glory, because it’s part of being a social network owner. Banners on sites aren’t about traffic, so much as brand awareness. Brenda and I don’t expect hundreds of click throughs to AMB based on our badge, because it isn’t about traffic. It’s about having people aware of your logo and knowing instantly, who you are.
Without the goodwill of your members, your social networking site sinks pretty fast.
I’m not saying Total Art Soul was wrong, to be honest, it looked like she was having a bad day, with too much work and not enough appreciation. A flippant comment from frogpondsrock hurt and she got snippy.
But, 140 characters is not enough to explain yourself in and it leaves itself open for misunderstandings, which is where TAS blocked and banned Frogpondsrock and left.
The other problem with twitter, is that if you are too prolific, people will unfollow, not because they don’t care about you, but because you’re cluttering up their timeline with things they aren’t interested in. I’ve had it happen personally and okay, I was a bit stung, but it’s how things work.
There seems to be a problem here on the Internet, with ‘bigger’ bloggers (I use the term both bigger and blogger very lightly) thinking that by every link they RT, by every mention, by every helping hand, that they are doing the ‘smaller’ blogger a giant favour. In reality, unless that ‘bigger’ blogger is in the league of Dooce, it’s very unlikely that your helping hand has been as big as you think it has been. This isn’t aimed directly at TAS, mind you, it’s something I see all around the blogs/forums.
People are by nature, judgemental. You like to look at someone and know how you fit in, in relationship to their life. She’s got better shoes, but your handbag is nicer. Her car is more expensive, but you ate at super exclusive restaurant last night. She has more money, but your kids are cuter. Their house is bigger, but you’re pretty sure you get along better with your husband. Right?
It’s how things work on blogs too. We visit a blog and while we may not notice that we’re doing it, we scroll the sidebar looking for our own link (even if we’re certain it’s not there), we tally up the amount of comments on the last two posts, we check out follower/subscriber numbers and subtly, sometimes without even realising it, we’re deciding whose site is more successful. The more blogs we discover with ‘less’ numbers then ours, the bigger we feel.
When really, we’re not at all.
I’m guilty of this too you know, making a snap decision on whose blog is better. I tend to smack myself up the side of the head though, because it’s not what the Internet is meant to be about – unlike some bloggers I’ve stopped reading, because their opinion of themselves makes me stabby.
So really, no matter how much better your numbers are, don’t feel like you’re doing someone a giant favour by sharing their link. Share their link because you like it, or because you like them. Don’t feel inclined to RT their horoscope, just for the sake of retweeting them. It’s not smart, it’s silly. People will pay more attention if the links you share are quality, not if you share loads of them.
And if that means we get to have favourites, then brilliant. I have my favourite bloggers and I share nearly everything they write. Because I love them and because the quality is there. Not because I’m doing them a favour, but because I want people to see their amazing work and love it like I do.
Maybe that’s what we all should do. Share because we love it, not because we feel obliged to.
Hear hear!
And, how did I miss the that one? Hmph! <— this is me being flippant, btw. Harumph!
Great post – I am totally in line with your way of thinking, well said.
It’s all starting to worry me a bit too.
When you can’t explain yourself, your point comes across in a different way.
Thanks to this, I’ve had to delete my facebook page from someone who took something I said in innocence completely out of context, called me, texted me, abused me via facebook and wrote to all of my friends. Is still writing on my friends facebook walls accusing me of different things now even though I haven’t contacted this person since.
Having all of this technology simply gets everyone confused, and gives everyone the opportunity to get snarky. In ‘real life’ you can say to someone ‘What do you mean?’ when you think they are coming across as rude/bitchy/stabby when it was meant to be flippant and you talk it out whereas in the internets it seems to state something else.
I do see where you’re coming from, everyone comments, and if you don’t you’re one of the quiet ones in the corner who nobody reads. It’s a risk I guess,
You raise lots of good points Veronica.
When I said I didn’t get any traffic from TAS I was simply stating a fact. Not whinging or having a go at her. I liked the site and got to check out some pretty cool artists. But as a ceramic artist, mother, grandmother and now film maker, I am flat stick busy and barely have time for my own blog let alone forums. (sorry AMB)
Great article! I’m one of the ones that sits quietly in the corner and I pretty much like it that way! 🙂
well written and I totally agree.
Well said 🙂
Great post, and something I often think about. I sometimes worry after I click enter that what I’ve said could be taken the wrong way.
There are people I follow on Twitter that make me stabby. I should unfollow them but I’m scared! Sad I know
Well, on the upside, I’m so not prolific on twitter that I must have loads of fans!!
I also have to admit to being really rubbish at forums and stuff. I join full of good intentions and then get sidetracked and forget to go back. And I know that post wasn’t about me, but I do feel better for getting that confession out in the open!
I’m another that’s terrible at forums. I take on far too much and then it’s easier to concentrate on the bits at home on my own blog rather than getting out and talking to other people. Even on the internet, I’m an introvert loner 🙂
I think there is some obligation to share, especially on social media. Not because you are doing someone a favour or because of a quid pro quo, but to build relationships. I’m quite a selfish blogger – I read a lot, I adore comments and interaction on my own blog, but I don’t often think of retweeting, sharing or commenting on others. It’s something I have to consciously make myself do otherwise I become a bit of a dead end, if that makes sense – everything goes in and I don’t pass it along. So I go through phases when I’m remembering to do it and then forget or lose the energy again. But even when I’m in a remembering phase I only pass on things I’ve enjoyed, not because I have a checklist of who RT’d me last.
I’m reeling from some of this at the moment. I apparently have quite a weird way of saying things which makes me sound much more negative than I really am. This has made a group of friends online act really frustrated with me for being ‘negative’ and ‘impossible to please’ which I’m not, really. It’s just if people give me advice that isnt applicable or practical, I’ll thank them and then tell them why I (regrettably) can’t do what they suggest (I’m sure you know what mean….the ‘go for a walk!’ when you’re down or bored, and trying to explain why it’s NOT THAT EASY.) I don’t want to waste their time, or smile and say ‘thanks, I’ll do that!’ when I can’t. Or am I missing some vital social clue? Am I supposed to do that? Am I supposed to just nod and smile?
As far as twitter goes, I follow people because I want to hear what THEY think and feel and are doing. Sometimes that includes what they’re reading, but I am quick to unfollow people who only ever seem to act as a mouthpiece for blogs they follow. Or their own blogs. SHUDDER. I love Derren Brown but he posts like four links a day to his own blog, and rarely anything funny or real inbetween. Yawn.
Social Networking is confusing, blogs are confusing. I don’t really care about other bloggers in comparison to me. I read blogs because they’re relevant to me, or they strike a chord. Sometimes those bloggers follow me back to my blog and sometimes they have something helpful to say, but I don’t expect it. I have one follower and even THAT confuses me because…dude. I’m not that interesting, I have no ‘angle’, and I’m not imparting any useful information.
Also, I think I leave inappropriately long comments on peoples blogs. I have no idea if this is a good or bad thing, but even when I try REALLY HARD not to write an essay, it doesn’t seem to work. Poor you!
Oh dear. It reminds me of a recent episode of How I Met Your Mother where Robyn mentioned how she forgot you couldn’t convey tone in a text message. I also worry sometimes that my sense of humour could be taken the wrong way, so I often write something, then read it and delete it! I comment on blogs I love, but not as often as I’d like to!
Very interesting. I am only just realising how much twitter can be viewed as a ‘you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours’ kind of medium. I am really poor at the RT for RTs sake, and only RT something that I find genuinely amusing or interesting, or a blog post I really enjoyed. As a result I feel like I’m not really utilising the ‘relationship building’ side of twitter, that many seem to be so good at. Now that I’m blogging more, I’ve been giving myself the ‘shoulds’ – I should be on twitter more, should be connecting with more people, should be getting myself out there more. But I agree that when it becomes about ‘should’ we miss what it really is all about. Sharing things you like, observations and connecting with like minds, not necessarily those that just have greater exposure.
Arianette – I tend to smile and nod a lot, but sometimes I’ll take the time to explain why it isn’t that easy. The exception is when it comes to Amy, because nothing is ever easy when dealing with her and explaining that all the time exhausts me.
I feel like such a little old lady when I say this, but I’ve just never really understood Twitter. Maybe it’s bcause I’ve never been able to get into it (Except for that one “Sh*t my Dad Says” guy). Every time I’ve tried to figure it out, it feels like I’m stuck in an endless loop of bursting, angry commercials. Maybe some people can be pithy and intelligent in 140 characters— but most people can’t, and that includes me.
It’s like trying to argue by text message— sooner or later you just feel dumb for not picking up the phone and calling.
On a side note… how much easier would it be if we could find a way to invent a sarcasm font? It’s long since overdue. Bold means HEAVY emphasis, italicize means to emphasis, underline means emphasis, caps lock means you’re shouting….It’s ridiculous we have so many ways to emphasize and nothing for “sarcasm”, when it’s so easily misunderstood. Having a sarcasm font would make twitter, text messages, and writing in general less prone to misinterpretation… wouldn’t you agree?
V— I apologize ahead of time for being off topic but I had to google whinging, as I’ve never heard that term before (which I find surprising as I’m a bit of a word whore.. I collect them all.) What’s the difference between whining and whinging? And is that a popular term over in your neck of the woods?
Becky – Whining is high pitched and annoying complaining, while whinging is like moaning complaining. Completely different. Kids do the two things rather well and very differently.
I think it’s not just the 140 characters but the limitations of communications via text, which don’t convey tone, etc. It’s so easy to misconstrue or read something the wrong way. For the record, I’m following TAS on Twitter because FPR sent out the recommendation to do so to all her friends.
At the moment, however, I’m thinking being blocked sounds much more pleasant than being cyber-stalked (waves to husband).
Hi Veronica, i think this is the first time I’ve commented on your blog and I enjoyed your article very much. Its a subject I ruminate over frequently as I grapple with what tweeting has come to mean for me.
I have a personal twitter account and one for the business. I struggled for a while with my personal account as what I do for a living is so linked with who I am but I felt I was starting to promote my business, though not overtly but enough for me to take stock.
I dont gravitate toward tweet accounts that bang on, endlessly spruiking themselves, product or business so I decided to creat just one for business purposes.
On my personal account I have pruned many many followers not to be nasty, simply because I just dont have the time or inclination to read every comment. I know that this might have caused sokme people to get upset but its just being pragmatic.
Also, I cant get sucked into this whole ‘I’m almost at 3,000 followers’ thing as It sounds a bit tragic actually-I dont care if I dont have many followers, the ones I tweet to are the ones that matter to me, not winning some sad popularity contest.
I have to disagree about the 140 character thingy though. Instead of it being touted as not conveying enough to the downfall of language as we know it, I think it requires real discipline to get your point across in that short amount of characters, but thats just me.
Finally I find blogging & tweeting very rewarding but it takes up much time. Time that I have to compartmentalize into chunks that dont interfere with family & work responsibilities-which as i know you understand, is a challenge. However I know you share my own compulsion to write-so somehow I always make time!
Cheers Steve
Amen to that. I dunno, this is where the ‘etiquette’ sometimes leaves me cold.Is it really polite to blog roll someone who isn’t quality, for example, just because blog roll you? No, I think not.
Be generous, people,w ith your links and Tweets, but do it in a benevolent, quality-assurance kinda way. Yuhuh.
Great post Veronica. I am not very good at expressing myself – let alone in 140 characters and I am bound to have pissed someone off enough to unfollow me. For me I cannot get hung up on who follows me and who doesn’t, I am just grateful to anyone that does! (even if for a bit) I just love reading twitter and gosh it’s laugh out loud funny sometimes.
I only ever have blogs on my blog roll that have moved me (to laughter, tears, or contemplation) when I have visited and I then feel like I don’t want to miss a post. I’m not good at Twitter, I can’t keep up and don’t log on nearly enough. My twitter roll (is that even what it’s called??) is regularly taken up by the people I follow making in-jokes with each other that I can’t get a handle on and it makes me feel even more outcast. It’s not a ‘follow me’ thing for me anymore. I am about quality of readers – and love to hear from them when they do comment – not quantity of followers. It took me ages to work out what I really wanted out of my blog, though, and what (and who) I am still writing for. As for Twitter, I like to read snappy, witty comments which is why I follow the people I do – some of whom have already commented here. The comparison-split second judgement game will eat you alive if you let it.
This is just one more reason why I’ll never be on Twitter or Facebook or any of the others.
More and more it seems to be about promoting yourself, which is probably okay, and about how many people are following. As if having 3,000 followers makes you any more important than someone with 30 followers.
I think you wrote about this very fairly, without hurting any feelings along the way.
It’s very true that you can’t easily convey tone in a text message, especially one that’s limited to 140 characters.
I love the idea of a sarcasm font. I think that would get a lot of use.
River – I tried to be really balanced, because I wanted to talk about it, but I didn’t want to upset TAS in any way.
Being Me – The in jokes! Oh that drives me mad. I tend to spend all my time clicking back through time streams, trying to work out what people are saying. Ugh.
All very interesting and I think fab that you had the guts to post this. You Aussie Mummys seem more balanced in general. If this had been posted on a UK blog there would be world war 3 by now! and I may just have started it by stating this! lol No, I m not that important to the big bloggers! lmao….
Mich x
Well written, Veronica. My Facebook account was originally a means of keeping in touch with the younger members of my extended family, but has expanded to include people from my primary or high school years, who I’ve not seen in 20-30 years! I find it quite weird.
Twitter, I simply don’t get. tried a few times but just can’t work out how to use it properly! Writing is so very literal – there’s facial expressions, tone of voice, environment to influence or give context to the words. What’s more, communication is very culturally dependent, filtered by each individual’s experiences over their lifetime that when you prune the other non-verbal information, interpretations can be so very different. What we mean, can be totally different to how we express it, let alone how several other people interpret it!
As my advocate GOFA says, there’s always at least three (and sometimes more) versions of the truth – the defence, the prosecution and the judge’s!
Interesting post, thanks! Being quite new to Twitter I think I’m getting a handle on it now, and ultimately agree it sharing and RT’ing should be done because you respect those people/like their content. That said, I think a level of self-promotion is to be expected from all of us.
Outright bitchiness, or even subtle underhanded comments in tweets is to most, glaringly obvious. Doesn’t matter if you don’t ‘rely’ on certain followers, if you’re not a nice person, over time I think people will notice and generally start unfollowing you.
word.
i am only just starting to get how much the ‘networking’ of mom/art/craft bloggers isn’t all about spreading love really. odd.
hear hear, well said. 🙂
very well said!!
love this post. nothing much else to add, just that I love this post.
This is a great post. I find the drama over little things on Twitter can be so overwhelming, I am not very active there but when I go and find things blown out of proportion I have to just walk away.
Total Art Soul sounds strikingly close to Total A*se Hole doesn’t it?
Really interesting and well-thought-out post. I’ve seen Twitter end in tears on several occasions in my six months at the party and have learned a few lessons along the way. Mostly to think really carefully before I tweet. As for forums, I am hopeless – I thought I’d joined AMB, for instance, and confidently went to log in the other day, only to discover that I’ve not a member. What did I join? Did I join anything? In cyberspace, noone can hear you scream…
Great blog post. I think it pays to just be nice in general – online and offline. The world really is a better place this way.
Very interesting, Veronica. Thanks for sharing… We can all learn to be more empathetic to each other.
WOW! WHat an interesting Twitter thread. I’m not a real twitterer (is that a word?) or is it twit? Maybe that’s a bad thing because I tend to use it mainly for post updates. Anyway, a good read and I really like your points about linking. I agree!
More importantly, why discuss it on twitter? Cause now it is public domain … You are sharing what others have already put out there via twitter, not sure how that is slander.
Perhaps if someone didn’t want the conversation featured it should have never happen on social media.
I know. Also, I should point out – when I said ‘slander’ I was quoting from an email. Slander is spoken and libel is written. Also, there needs to be false claims made in order for it to actually *be* libel.
Apart from many issues relating to this blog that need to be addressed, you say that you are not taking sides, but what is your relationship with kim/frogpondsrock?
Sorry, you got caught in the spam filter. Double posts generally do for some reason. Akismet is funny sometimes.
@frogpondsrock is my mother – that’s common knowledge.
A General Rule – If you put yourself out there in public cyberspace, and someone picks up on it, and maybe wants to blog about it, that’s your own fault.
If you don’t like that, because you happen to come off as a jerk for no reason, also your own fault.
How this particular situation can go from one person letting another person know that their tweet couldn’t actually be seen by those it was ‘intended’ for, to having the person you were HELPING, Jump Down Your Throat and turn into a defensive psychopath and then not even realise your own mistakes, even though it’s blatantly obvious in this post, exactly how the conversation went down. – Well it’s beyond me.
And then to go and threaten another person for “slander” for simply discussing the situation that concerned someone dear to them (in a public domain, which is OK because the tweetversation was conducted in a Public domain). Well. You’ve slandered yourself, and don’t need any assistance in that.
THANKYOU. God, this feels like the Dominos debate all over again, where I have to keep repeating myself.
Firstly, I have to point out that Total Art Soul was not notified of this article and by the time it came to our attention we no longer had ‘right of reply’ as the comment section had been closed. We requested that it be opened or the article removed.
Quoting conversations from anywhere is breaching copyright laws. Any of you can Google this, it’s not difficult information to find. Just because something is in the public domain, does not mean you can republish it verbatim. If someone publishes a book, you cannot republish it or extracts without express permission.
Moreover, this article is totally biased since Veronica is a relative of frogpondsrock so to say that she is not taking sides is not believable.
This article clearly puts TAS in a bad light as the comments bear out. It is libelous because incorrect information has been given as Veronica jumped to erroneous conclusions. Her opinion is based on a conversation which has been taken out of context. Moreover, the conversation posted here has been edited and there is information missing.
We at Total Art Soul, feel passionate that creativity should be nurtured and is why we set up this entirely free and non-profit site. We spend hours each day giving publicity to other artists. We do this willingly but when people clearly want something for nothing, then it is not possible to spend our time on those people.
We have worked tirelessly for almost 1 year now to have a platform which is both interesting and gives exposure. Articles like this serve no purpose other than to negate all the good work we have done. Any other conversation could have been used by way of example but Veronica chose this one because she had an agenda, ie to show a united front with frogpondsrock. This proves that the article was written for one reason only.
I linked to you – I assumed that like anyone writing on the internet, that you would have Google Alerts set up to notify you of incoming links. Comments on ALL old posts are closed due to spam, it wasn’t something done specifically for this post. And you’ll notice, I opened them for you, so you could have the right of reply you wanted.
The article may be biased, but most opinion articles are. I tried to remain as fair as possible and noted that Frogpondsrock was being flippant.
Quoting conversations is not breaching copyright law, not when the parties involved were given full credit for their remarks. I can quote from blogs, twitter etc, provided I give a full accounting of where I found the remarks and who said them.
I would like to know what information I was missing, as I went back through all tweets from both parties and made sure I had screenshotted every one in relation to the conversation, so I could present a fair picture. As these tweets were public domain, anyone else could have done the same thing. You are more than welcome to provide any extra information that shows I was missing something huge. It’s possible, I am human after all.
It doesn’t put TAS in a bad light – I even go so far as to mention that you were probably having a bad day and that miscommunication happens when you’re talking solely in 140 characters. I wanted to expand on that to talk about the blogosphere in general terms and this conversation was a useful tool for doing so.
Firstly, Veronica didn’t need to notify you of this article in the first place.
Secondly, it is not Copyright because one half of the people involved in this tweetversation gave permission. Same goes with recorded conversations.
Thirdly, the reason this article was written was to show How Easy It Is to misinterpret something written in text, with this incident being a prime example AND because she felt hurt for the person involved.
Lastly, more face could have been saved if the actual person who was tweeting under the name TotalArtSoul apologised for the misinterpretation and took the responsibilty away from the company(or whatever it is). But this has not happened. And there has been no apology that I am aware of ,not that I need to be aware, but If it were publicly done like the incident in the first place, there probably wouldn’t still be so many people talking about it.
I don’t see that the conversation has been taken out of context at all and I was party to half of it.
I was being flippant and a bit of a smartarse and the conversation spiralled downhill from there.
You blocked me before I could explain that I wasn’t after “Something for Nothing” from your site. I was simply stating via the medium of twitter that I hadn’t received any hits from TAS even though I had displayed your badge on my sidebar.
How can an “article” like this negate all your hard work?
There are many issues in this blog post that need addressing, but one thing that is not absolutely clear, is that you say you are not taking sides, but what relationship do you have to frogpondsrock?
She’s my mother – that is common knowledge.
Sorry about the comment not coming through, you unfortunately got caught in the spam filter. Fished you out!
I made her. She is my greatest work of Art
Where is that common knowledge?
Everywhere. I refer to her as Mum (with a link to her blog) in most posts and on twitter. I apologise if you missed that, but it’s not something we hide.
We reiterate, we were not given right of reply. Linking us and expecting us to see hits on a site that gets thousands of hits per day is not being ‘notified’. We should have been asked for permission to post this conversation since you used information copyrighted to us. We did not give permission and the ownership remains with TAS and frogpondsrock. BOTH parties would have needed to agree.
Please also check the Twitter terms and conditions. They clearly state that ownership of conversations remains with the authors.
Not only that, but the conversation quoted here has been edited and there is information missing as we stated before.
If you produce the missing information, I will be happy to amend the post to include it, with a note to say I wasn’t aware of it. I repeat though, that I went back through BOTH twitter streams rather carefully, to make sure I hadn’t missed any replies.
We would also like to add that any of you are quite welcome to be members of TAS whether you take part or not. Obviously, we will spend more time giving publicity to those members who contribute.
Does that include me as well?
Bugger! I seem to be blocked from that site as well. Oh dear.
You are not blocked frogpondsrock. You need to re-register. Since your account was inactive for several months, it would have been deleted.
Veronica, we do not wish this conversation published. We have never given you permission and we want it removed. We will not give you the missing information for this reason.
You can put up a notice to say that the conversation has been removed due to breach of copyright laws.
If you are in any doubt about this, please contact your lawyer.
frogpondsrock, yes, you are still welcome on our site. We just ask you to respect our rules and our members.
Are you implying that I did not respect your rules and your members?
No.
As far as I’m aware, I haven’t breached any copyright laws.
You’re wrong, you have. Please contact your lawyer.
Some comments are not being published here.
You didn’t answer my question TAS
Sorry, spam filter caught you. It’s an automatic thing.
Usually I have very little time to comment on posts, but felt that I just need to on this one.
I am not one to enjoy listening to snark, but I can completely understand where Total Art Soul is coming from. I am not saying that when I RT something for someone I EXPECT them to do the same for me. But it is nice to see them pop up.
I get extremely excited when I see our banners on someone’s site. Not for the hits, but just like to know that what we have written meant that much to someone else that they wanted to put it up on their site!
I honestly think that there is no tone whatsoever that comes through on twitter – or facebook for that matter. BUT having said that, if you have nothing nice to say, DON’T say it. It will come back and bite you.
Oh and before I go back to watching the Arias, I dislike people who continually post their post links in twitter, I am do unfollow on that basis. Especially when I saw it the first three million times 😉 But having said I go through my tweets every morning + night and I read most blogs from my phone – hence the lack of comments, because seriously, commenting from an iPhone is just ANNOYING!
xx
I can’t get commenting from my phone down pat either!
Thanks for chiming in Carly – I can see where TAS is coming from too, hence the reason I tried to be fair in my post. And when I RT, it is nice to be RT’d back, a give and take, but it’s not something I *expect*, you know? And if I got to the point where I was giving so much more than getting and it was annoying me, well, no one said I had to keep doing it.
But that’s my opinion.
I should add though, that when I RT from the AMB account, I don’t expect anything in return, ever. It’s part of AMB that I do that. First comment I was thinking solely about my SN account, which is my personal one. Just to clarify!
Completely agree.
🙂
Oh and EVERYONE is entitled to their opinion.
Carly, everyone is entitled to their opinion but if libelous information is put out there, the very least the other party should have is right of reply. We are now getting this.
This does not negate the fact that copyright laws have been breached and we did not give permission for this conversation to be republished. The conversation published here has been edited and therefore we are being misrepresented. Opinions based on this cannot be correct.
TAS, with all due respect, Veronica has asked you to point out the missing parts of the conversation. I imagine the rest of us are quite curious to see them as well. I know I am.
Also, when exactly have you have never been denied the right of reply? As stated, comments are turned off after 30 days to prevent, and were turned on again at request.
And, let’s look at this logically- if i want to blog about, say, IndieInk, *why* would there be any requirement or responsibility on my part to notify them of that? That is a bit of a far fetched expectation to put on all bloggers, for *everyone* they blog about, surely?
And for a company named “TotalArtSoul”, you really don’t seem to be very supportive of freedom of speech. Or very zen, for that matter.
Lori, please read our comments above because we have to keep repeating ourselves. No permission was asked of us to republish this conversation. This is breach of copyright, the conversation rights belong to us and frogpondsrock. One party giving permission is not enough when 2 parties took part in that conversation.
Please check Twitter terms and conditions, they are very clear on this point. Ownership of tweets stay with the author and cannot be republished without express permission of the parties.
You do not have to take our word for this, please check with your own lawyers and arm yourself with information before responding further. It seems that most of you are assuming or guessing what the law is.
Our problem with this article is that there was a hidden agenda on the part of Veronica in support of her mother. This means the article was totally biased and only published to put TAS in a bad light. As we were not asked for permission, we came to this article only yesterday when the comment section was already closed. This meant we had no right of reply. That’s the issue + the copyright issue relating to the conversation.
I am asking for the conversation to be removed because it serves no purpose in relation to this article. Any other conversation or example could have been used (with permission) but they chose this one because Veronica had an agenda.
Giving the missing information serves no purpose other than to satisfy your curiosity. The fact remains that this is a breach of the law and we will not give further information to continue this to happen.
We give people total freedom of expression on our site but there are limitations. No laws can be broken and people have to stay respectful and not cause offense. Laws were broken here and this is what we object to. This has nothing to do with whether we are zen or not?! This is about protecting our rights and our site/members.
We should also add that if any other conversation by one of our members had been used in this way without their express permission, we would be reacting in exactly the same manner.
I am sorry, but I didn’t only publish this to paint you in a bad light, as far as I can see, you managed that all by yourself in the comments here. I saw the conversation, thought it was interesting and used it to point out and expand on some things happening in the general community that this case was a prime example of.
I wasn’t taking sides, no matter how you feel about that.
That relates to what you do on Twitter itself because an @reply is totally public on Twitter. This does not relate to republishing elsewhere. The copyright of my words always belongs to me as they also state in their TOC.
Publishing content from emails is absolutely against the law. Check emails from many large companies and they will have small print at the bottom stating that the information cannot be passed to a third party without their permission.
Books are published and put in the public domain. That does not give people the right to replicate the words.
Freedom of speech is one thing, but libel is another. I am sure that you will find a lot of court cases where someone’s ‘opinion’ has turned out to be libelous.
And where does Total Art Soul deny freedom of speech? Our members are very well supported, we do not censor or edit any of their posts (unless they are blatantly spamming!) and encourage discussion fully, though we would definitely not entertain negative comments on the site towards anyone else, on the site or off the site, negativity is not productive.
Having a biased blog, (frogpondsrock is the mother of Veronica), that misrepresents us, giving misleading information and using copyrighted material without permission (please check copyright laws), does not constitute freedom of speech.
If I were to belittle you in a public domain, whilst breaking the law, have an opinion about you that you are an ‘idiot’ or whatever, that your website (or website name) is rubbish, would you not feel that you also have the right to freedom of speech to put these things right?
Yes, you can blog about anyone you wish, but if it takes things out of context, and breaks the law, expect repercussions, at the very least, an opinion from the ‘offended’ party.
As for Google Alerts, we get thousands of hits every day, (in October alone we got 7200000 page hits alone, yes that is over 7 million), we already have trouble sifting through all the data we get, so to miss 2 hits is quite easy. So, no, we weren’t aware of this biased and somewhat negative blog.
As Carly says “We Heart Life was started because there are so many sites that discuss the negative aspects of life, sure this information is needed in small doses, allows us to feel the same, but I was yet to come across a site that promoted happiness for women”, which is interesting in this context.
I’m sorry, but libel has to be stating something that is untrue. Where did I state something that is untrue? I went back through ALL the tweets at the time and screenshotted the ones that mentioned @totalartsoul and @frogpondsrock from both parties. I don’t feel that I missed anything that would cause the conversation held to be suddenly untrue.
Also, I’m sorry, but this is the INTERNET. Where is it written that I am required to let you know about a post I wrote?
I don’t think that there are any copyright laws being breached though, you’re twitter account is not private therefore your tweets can be searched on google. Veronica gave the credit back to your twitter account – which is all that is needed.
She doesn’t need to tell you that she has written an article about you either, I never get told so I just see them pop up in my feed. I stay proactive in making sure that I see all feeds/trackbacks to the blog. I have had stuff stolen and only find out by word-of-mouth.
Plus, I don’t feel that Veronica was at all biased in the above piece. If anything in fact, due to her writing I sided with you, but now with all your snarky comments in the reply – and I should mention the other party also – it is just getting a little childish. And I bet that you are all older than me.
Breathe. Calm blue ocean 😉
Carly, please read my response to lori. You are guessing what the law is. You are incorrect. Just because something is put in the public domain, does not mean anyone can republish it. Giving credit back is not ‘all that is needed’. Where did you get this information from? Can you back this up? You cannot simply state this because that’s what you think or assume. This is what the problem here is. Everyone is assuming they know what the law is.
We are not being personal in our responses at all. We are not even going into the entire scenario with frogpondsrock because it serves no purpose. We are only standing up for our rights and protecting our site.
We feel that we have given all the information necessary for Veronica now to do the right thing. We are taking further legal advice. There are several places where a breach like this can be reported and we are also looking into this. We have made it very clear that we wish this conversation to be removed.
Wow.
OK, TAS. Yes, the purpose of pointing out the missing information would be to satisfy my curiosity, as well as everyone else’s.It may also serve to restore some of the credibility you’ve lost here…?
And, also correct, I’m guessing the law. I fail to see how something published so publicly- like on Twitter- cannot be republished. That’s not really my concern here. And I doubt my lawyer would appreciate being woken at 10:30 on a Sunday night to clarify the claims of someone from relatively unimportant website on the comments section of another relatively unimportant website (sorry, V, but ya know what I mean).
More than anything, I am rather concerned about you, TAS. The way you’ve reacted, both in the Twitter conversation, and in the comments section here, really makes me wonder what else is going on in your life right now? As I said, not very zen. You may say that has nothing to do with it, but we’re all people here.
There are lots of facilities available for people with problems with anger management and social skills. Please, feel free to let any of us know if you need to someone to talk to. It must be very difficult, living with that kind of chip on your shoulder.
Please don’t sue me. I should disclaim here, this is only my opinion, and a genuine offer of help, I’m certainly not trying to paint TAS in a bad light, or throw any shadow of doubt on their well-constructed, totally un0hysterical reaction to this matter.
What you see on websites, what you hear, (in public), on the radio or tv, or in newspapers, magazines, or any other media is all subject to copyright.
No argument there, Joe. I’m not arguing that it is subject to copyright. Or that you own the rights to them, as the Twitter TOS says.
But, obviously, there are correct ways to republish things that are subjected to copyright, depending on the terms of the copyright. I would be sure enough to put money on it that Veronica has met all those requirements in the republishing of these Tweets.
Except the one where she ‘forgot’ to ask permission!
TAS, I’m just going to re-publish (without my own permission, but crediting myself) the comment I posted to Joe further down the page. Think about this logically.
“So, Joe, if I happen to be researching for a university assignment and come across a reference I would like to use on, say, a site that contains a lot of information on Shakespeare, i should personally contact the author of that site, and check it is OK to quote him with a reference back to his work?
And so should every single other person who wants to do this, every day…?
Really?”
Yes, you should get permission from the author of the site that has information on Shakespeare, as it is copyrighted.
If you are talking about using the works of Shakespeare, copyright doesn’t last indefinitely.
Fantastic. I will have to start doing that, and advising everyone I know to do the same. So, if they don’t reply to me, because of the sheer volume of emails they receive, should I assume permission has not be given? Yes, I suppose I should.
Wow! How efficient!!
Novel that TAS can’t get their lawyers to write something, since it’s unlikely your lawyer is going to be able to work out what their problem is. Perhaps they should write something themselves – there’s plenty of examples on the internets – this one sprang to mind: http://www.somethingawful.com/d/legal-threats/legal-threat-era.php.
The site generally is something awful so avoid the rest of it if you dislike juvenile, poor taste humour. It’s my vice.
That link made me giggle.
I did think it might 🙂
Twitter says you are the owner of your own content on twitter. Your own.
You can’t claim copyright to a two party conversation.
Twitter also says if you feel any of your ‘work’ on twitter has been copyrighted, that you should take it up with them.
Twitter also says to be careful what you post because the whole world will be able to see it!
“Everyone is assuming they know what the law is” Does this include you?
You’re all about telling us we all have the wrong information, well we’d be happy for you to enlighten us. A referenced quote of that explains exactly WHY this is supposed to be copyrighted.
Just show us where it says it, so we can all be on the same page.
And “It says in Twitter” doesn’t count because I’ve already read that and that does not apply here.
Thanks for republishing what I said, I feel though that it is the truth. If you look over all these comments, they are all negative and snarky. Something that I do not like about the Internet and the reason why I avoid commenting on posts where people are very fired up.
I am going off how I have been taught to reference. I am fairly certain I don’t email every author of each article I read to make sure it’s okay I use their content. But that’s just me.
I’m sorry you feel your site is being portrayed in such a way, but as I said before I did not read any bias in the article or seen it as portraying you in a bad light.
I’m off to bed now, thanks for the enlightening discussion and I hope that you have a great day/night 🙂
According to Twitter:-
“You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services”.
http://twitter.com/tos
Twitter also says:
“This license is you authorizing us to make your Tweets available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. But what’s yours is yours – you own your content.”
So, yes your content Is your content, but by agreeing to use twitter both it and others have been given the authority to use it ….
http://twitter.com/tos
Also:-
Copyright Policy
Twitter respects the intellectual property rights of others and expects users of the Services to do the same. We will respond to notices of alleged copyright infringement that comply with applicable law and are properly provided to us.
Yes I did say I had read that.
Yes, your rights to it, meaning it’s your responsibility, and should you wish to claim copyright to your tweets, you have a right to do so. But if you tweet AT someone else, you are then trusting that content with that person. If you do not trust that person with that content, then don’t send it.
Sending a tweet to someone is no different to sending an email to someone. I could publish the content of an email I have received, and it is not copyright infringement.
My inbox, my property. My twitter handle, my property.
Copyright is granted automatically, to the content writer, on Twitter and other websites. You cannot reproduce anything posted on the internet without permission, just because it is ‘public’ doesn’t give you any rights to do with it what you please.
Just because a car is parked is parked in a public place, doesn’t give you the right to drive it away without the owners’ permission.
E-mail is a literary work so it is protected by copyright.
If you publish private emails, or pass them on without permission, it is illegal.
So, Joe, if I happen to be researching for a university assignment and come across a reference I would like to use on, say, a site that contains a lot of information on Shakespeare, i should personally contact the author of that site, and check it is OK to quote him with a reference back to his work?
And so should every single other person who wants to do this, every day…?
Really?
See my reply above
First paragraph of Twitter ‘Basic Terms’
“You are responsible for your use of the Services, for any content you post to the Services, and for any consequences thereof. The Content you submit, post, or display will be able to be viewed by other users of the Services and through third party services and websites (go to the account settings page to control who sees your Content). You should only provide Content that you are comfortable sharing with others under these Terms.”
You have missed the point yet again.
Yes, it can be read on Twitter, but reproducing it contravenes copyright laws.
Twitter
“Tip! What you say on Twitter may be viewed all around the world instantly. You are what you Tweet!”
Regardless of any copyright issues, I still think TAS has deeper issues.
Yes, being misrepresented in a blog is the main issue
I mean emotional issues, Joe. If TAS can get this stirred up by a blog post, the world must be a frightful place for them.
Whether TAS has personal issues or not, do you think it is fair to misrepresent anyone on the internet or anywhere else?
All that TAS is asking, is to remove a biased blog that shows TAS in a bad light, which was done purely out of sour grapes.
Actually, I think that insinuating that someone has personal problems is quite low, and really shows that the main issues here are being ignored, and of course all the other ‘agendas’ that underlie the majority of comments.
As I said, Joe, I can’t see the misrepresentation here. the conversation has been repeated, verbatim. Veronica is simply commenting and commentating on an issue that she saw arise on Twitter. A matter of personal opinion.
Secondly, my regard for TAS’s well being is genuine. Even the intiital Tweet, that started alll of this, shows some kind of insecurity. I understand how it happened, though, those manage Twitter apps where they show who unFollows you- they can be hurtful.
Thirdly, as someone who struggles with mental illness , myself, I’m quite insulted that you believe that ‘insinuating that someone has personal problems is quite low”. There is no shame in mental illness or disability, are you trying to convey that there is?
I think I’ll be contacting my lawyer. No, wait… I have far ore important things to do!!
Ironically, I agree with you, there is a lot of hostility in this world, and this blog post really shows that, maybe that explains everything.
You can’t claim copyright on a conversation involving two people. lol
One of these people decided to give permission for this conversation to be published. And that is all that is required.
lol I think the giggles are settling in, I’d better go to bed.
Anywho, TAS is either going to do something about it or not. And the post will remain until V is told to remove it by an actual official of some sort.
We are all repeating ourselves for not really any reason at all but to get the last word in and be *right*. I know that’s why I’m still here. Can’t help myself really. I’m standing up for the people who stand up for me.
TAS-“Except the one where she ‘forgot’ to ask permission!” lol she didn’t need it. Just like I didn’t need permission from Virgin Mobile when I blogged about my experience with them. Thankfully they fronted up and said sorry and all was well in bloggyland once again.
Prob not going to happen here though.
Goodnight little pumpkins
(LORI- Should I email Virgin Mobile and tell them I mentioned them in a comment to a post on some random persons blog?)
You still don’t get it
To be honest Muffin I quoted Judy Blume in a blog post the other day. I’m really thinking I should look up her email address and check that was OK.
Sarcasm doesn’t help you to understand that this blog post is incorrect in its ‘facts’, and if this happened to you, I am sure that you would act the same.
Quoting people and actually misrepresenting them because of your own agenda may be two quite different things.
I don’t see any misrepresentation here, Joe. The conversation is displayed, as it happened, to the best of everyone’s knowledge. The people who are saying they have been misrepresented are TAS, but they also are refusing to produce any further information, or even cite the relevant copyright law they are referring to (please, no more links to Twitter TOS, we’ve read it).
And, Joe, this is the interwebs. Things like this happen all the time. If it did happen to me, I’m fairly positive I’d say my piece, light a ciggie, chill out, and have a laugh.
If your going to play in the social media, you need a thicker skin. Bioth you and TAS.
This blog was a set-up, written by Veronica to defend her mother, Kim, who wanted Total Art Soul to publicise her without her being an active member on TAS, but TAS wouldn’t do it – hence the ‘escalation’.
Trying to be very fair and objective, whether the information in this blog is correct or not, it still seems very biased, with incorrect assumptions, and laced with quite a lot of bullying in the comments section.
Total Art Soul policy is that it promotes active members, people who join up just to use it as a ‘link farm’ do not get promoted. It is a community site, to show creativity in all forms, just opening an account to see what you can get is not what we are about.
Any members that ‘disappear’ do not get publicity, retweeted or whatever, because of the amount of work this involves. That is all that this is about.
If you go to work, and then not get paid for it, is that fair? Or ask Google to make sure that your website is in the top ten search results, for free, and without you doing any work for that.
Can anyone actually see the big picture here? There are two sides to every story, but I suspect one isn’t getting heard that well, probably because there are all sorts of ‘deeper issues’ here.
I certainly didn’t join up to TAS to use it as a link factory. I joined up to TAS because it looked like a interesting site, I put the button up on my sidebar, I uploaded a couple of images to the gallery, clicked around a bit and found some interesting artists, bookmarked the site and wandered off into the interwebs.
I did not have an agenda. I did not want TAS to Retweet me. I was simply being a smart arse and pointing out that if someone unfollows you, they wont be able to read your tweets.
I think upon reading through all this which gives TAS far more negative impact than the original article, I have a partial solution.
Joe says, ““You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services”. ”
Simple then, really, Veronica. Just re-post all the TAS parts and then, since you “displayed and posted” them on your own Twitter account, they should now belong to you?
Also, TAS if you don’t like being held accountable for your comments to your members, then might I suggest you make your Twitter account private or hold your tongue? You are making yourself appear an ass. That said, I didn’t know Frogpond was Veronica’s mother and thought she was just commenting on blog issues, but I do not think she owed it to you to alert you to the fact that someone actually {gasp} wrote about the interaction. Had the post been a glowing, positive report, I doubt you would have relayed that point.
In the end, as an American, this coming across as very, very silly.
It still breaches copyright. If I took someones book, and posted it on my own site, I don’t become the owner of that material, as I have breached copyright in the first place.
This is mind-bogglingly illogical. So, if I take a popular song or artwork or book, put it on my site, I automatically get the royalties, sounds like a good way to print money!
Scout’s Honor, you think that TAS looks an ass, which is correct, that is what this blog has set out to do, that is why the relevant information is missing, and has been added to with hearsay and opinions by the blogger. TAS didn’t leave in a huff, it was Kim, that is why this blog was posted the day after as revenge, don’t you get it?
I agree, silly it is.
You are right that you can’t just take someones work and claim it as your own, that is plagiarism and yes that is illegal, however you can use and/or reference someone elses work if you give credit, it is done all the time in schools, weather they be high school or college, heck it is done all the time in business and news articles. As long as credit is given to the original author there is nothing illegal happening.
So what you are saying, Joe, is that you have sought and received copyright rights to your tweets legally? Where does it say that on your account? Twitter can not provide copyright standing–that is for the courts. They simply say you have a right in their eyes to what you post. At least in the U.S., short phrases are not even copyrightable. So please, do tell, with which government or court of law you registered your tweets? Hmmm? It is on you to copyright your tweets and I sincerely doubt you did so before Veronica put these here. Otherwise, she gave credit and attributed your work so it falls under fair use.
Please read the terms and conditions of Twitter, which I also posted above, copyright laws already exist in most countries to protect intellectual copyrights, so it is not a case for the courts.
In the US, it is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This is a law in the US for protecting copyrights of individuals.
You do not have to register your tweets to copyright them. If you publish any content on your own site, for example, the copyright is automatically yours.
Can you please show me where it is stated in the US laws that you can use other peoples intellectual property on your own site, and it falls under ‘fair use’.
Scout’s Honor, may I suggest that you read things correctly. We are totally accountable for every word but we object to having only partial information published and have it taken out of context. The conversation has been edited and there are parts of it missing. Your attack on us is totally unfair as are all the other abusive comments.
Many of you seem to be ignoring the points we are making to further put us in a bad light. If this had happened to any of you, you would be reacting in just the same way. We, a non-profit organization have been totally misrepresented, our conversation edited and none of you care about this. You care more about winning or causing an argument.
May we also point out that we have at no point singled anyone out nor made any personal abusive remarks to anyone. We are simply defending ourselves which is our right. All we want is for our copyrighted information to be taken off this site. We will take whatever steps we can to make this happen.
You say you object to having partial information published, TAS, however you have been given full opportunity here on this blog multiple times to provide these mysteriously missing tweets and the information so *egregiously* not provided or edited as you accuse.
You have declined that right.
That is your right, but then you can’t use that point of a complaint then can you? In fact, your statements suggesting Veronica edited and was than upfront can also be viewed as both damaging and libelous. You as the accuser have the burden of proof.
I think Veronica might have a better case, should you truly try to pursue this since you have been unwilling or unable to provide these “edits.”
Yes, it stinks when I’ve been portrayed in a bad light, but then neither am I so thin-skinned to react as you have. It’s part of the business of blogging and social media. Your reaction to this has created more buzz than a simple little post edifying one on blogging issues, hasn’t it?
BTW, I do not believe for a second Veronica left out any points in the conversation or you would have been very quick to post the on her comments. You have been asked many times in these comments to produce these that you reference and squirm away. These alleged “missing” tweets are ridiculous. Pufff, puff, give. Either they exist or you are just full of hot air. Produce, or shut up about them, m’kay?
OMG! If we produce these, then we would look pretty stupid asking for this to be removed! It’s against the law! Which part of that don’t you understand?!!!
Please cite to which law you reference? As accuser, you have burden of proof, yes?
You do not have proof otherwise, it seems, but if you read any terms and conditions, anywhere, and copyright laws of your own country you wouldn’t need to make such a comment.
If that is so, why are you so defensive? Veronica posted your interaction and her take on the situation as a way to edify readers on blogging issues.
Please read the following post “You Cannot Copyright a Tweet.”
http://www.zeldman.com/2010/02/25/you-cannot-copyright-a-tweet/
You might be surprised that terms of service do not equal law.
I am not the accuser so I do not have the burden of proof, you do.
We didn’t know about this blog until today. You obviously haven’t read this correctly, seen the timeline in this blog, or know what is really going on. You assume that we are making this up, yet you do not question Veronica’s integrity, and her ‘nepotism’, like I said, this blog was revenge because TAS wouldn’t retweet for Kim/frogpondsrock, an inactive member on our site. Just wanted something for nothing.
Revenge? That is a bit far fetched. If I had been truly worried about the little spat on twitter I would have used my own blog as a platform to have a whinge, not left it to my daughter.
So does that mean every time I put a post on Yelp, Trip Advisor, Priceline, Expedia, etc. of a review of an experience I had with a particular service or company, that it’s revenge?
That’s ridiculous. Consider Veronica’s blog a form of review. She thought your service and it’s “I’ll Scratch Your Back if You Scratch Mine” as pretty petty. It’s her opinion and she has a right to it. She used your own tweets that you placed in the public domain to back it up. She never claimed your words as her own and always attributed them to you. Unless you have used a service to patent your words or Creative Commons to copyright your tweets as an original body of work, you are kind of out of luck! Even then it seems pretty nebulous whether you would win in a court of law. Yes, a court of lawn because Twitter TOS has nothing to do with your accusations of libel and threats for Veronics to get a lawyer. Next time, I would just guard your words because the negative always seems to be passed on.
This post wasn’t revenge and at the time I wrote it, I had no ill-feeling towards TAS (the person, not the forum, I should add that I still have no feeling either way about the forum) – I repeat: I thought it was an interesting conversation and used it to illustrate how things can be taken badly when written as opposed to spoken.
Revenge? For not Retweeting her? As you can see, both Kim and Veronica have all the support they need, and would never have to rely on any one person for RTing them.
Of course we do not “question Veronica’s integrity” because we know her better than you do. And you’ve only just heard of her now, which is why we understand that you might think she is “out for revenge” – “want something for nothing”, .
I’m sorry but I can’t believe your still here repeating the same thing over and over, trying to get the last word in, and now your saying that Veronica and Kim planned this whole thing with a hidden agenda to ‘take down’ TAS Simply because TAS wouldn’t retweet?
Did you ever consider that if Kim didn’t like TAS that she would, I don’t know perhaps unregister from TAS site and remove the button, and UNFOLLOW TAS on twitter?
She obviously could only see TAS tweets in the first place because she was a follower, a supporter.
If TAS can’t handle friendly tongue-in-cheek from of it’s own members, it’s no wonder things have become this bad.
Here, I’ll help you out:
“Dear Kim,
I am very sorry I was a bit snippy to you on twitter, I was having a bad day and your cheeky comment kind of pissed me off lol (don’t forgot the ‘lol’)”
and then,
“Dear Veronica,
I have made amends with Kim for the silly disagreement we had on twitter. I would really appreciate if you could remove the conversation from your article, or perhaps change the names. I don’t want my personal actions to put my TAS in a bad light and I understand that I may have hurt you also by treating your mother like that, I’m sorry.”
Your welcome to re-publish that word for word if you like. (Yes, there is sarcasm in that, but I am being extremely serious)
Seriously, that’s all it takes.
This blog entry does not seem to be about revenge at all. All of Veronica’s remarks throughout it are fairly unbiased and neutral. I find it interesting that you simply want your tweets removed TAS, rather than any of Veronica’s commentary. That tells me (and I can see this for myself just by reading the entry) that the only thing that is painting you in a “bad light” came from you, yourself. Yes, the comment section is rife with people talking about their opinions, which do not favour you. This is not due to anything Veronica said, rather it is due to your own tweets which people have made up their own minds about. It is no wonder you want them removed. It would have been so much easier for you if you had acknowledged that you had publicly humiliated yourself with those tweets, apologized for it and requested that they be removed due to your shame, which is obviously all this is about. I should think most readers can see for themselves that this is NOT about sour grapes or someone wanting something for free (frogpondsrule was just having a spur-of-the-minute moment of smart-arsery when she pointed out that people who aren’t following you won’t see your tweets, nothing more, nothing less).
Take responsibility for your own words in future. Like I said, requesting that your tweets are removed but not Veronica’s commentary just shows that you know where the “bad light” lies…and it’s not in the blog entry.
Thankyou for commenting Emmalina.
I tried to write the entire post in as well balanced a tone as I could. I wasn’t upset when I wrote it, I thought it interesting and wanted to expand on what I’d seen to include things concerning the greater blogosphere.
Unfortunately it’s been blown out of context.
Personally, I’m finding it very entertaining 😉 I love an idiot to sharpen my claws on…..
Be nice Lori, no personal attacks okay? At least, not from our side 😉
*ahem* Oops. Sorry, V. Retract that.
I love having something controversial- or, not so controversial- to argue about. Especially when I have PMS 😉
Ok, not going to read through ALL the comments, but LOVE what you’re written, and I totally agree with your last statement.
If you’re false in any way on Twitter and other SM platforms you get caught out eventually and you become spam and eventually ignored… it’s all about trust really, and if I can’t trust you to retweet what you really like, then there’s no point in following you.
Thanks lovely, I thought it was a topic that warranted discussion. Maybe not quite as much as it’s had the last 24 hours though!
Hmm, well, I read but didn’t comment on this post originally by the looks of it, so it didn’t really make me feel I *had* to have an opinion on it, but seeing the comments from TAS and Joe just leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. The longer these arguments go on, the less credibility you have in the community surrounding this blog. Seems to me you would be doing yourselves a favour by just stepping away. None of this was even thought of as being a ‘big’ thing until you found this post yesterday, just someone’s opinion, and it was stated as such.
Some things aren’t worth the hassle… if you have THAT many people visiting your site every day, do you really need to be so up in arms about such a ‘small’ blog anyway? Probably not…
It’s leaving me with a bad taste in my mouth too.
If someone wrote a blog about you, using false or, at the very least, manipulated information, to make you look idiotic, and just out of spite, would that leave a bad taste in your mouth? Or would you just step away? You haven’t here.
This blog doesn’t mention once that frogpondsrock is the mother of Veronica. Also, I have gone through quite a lot of the Twitter archives, and it is actually frogpondsrock that comes off looking worse. Hmm, funny that. By the way, the Twitter timeline archive is fully public, you can look for yourself.
Ok, you’re the one now making accusations and presumptions about why this post was written, and taking it completely out of the context it was in. Your irate responses are not helping anyone, and making yourself look bad.
This BLOG mentions that frogpondsrock is Veronica’s mum, many many times. This particular POST, does not, but the vast majority of people reading this know that they are related, and they are the people who this post was aimed at. I am aware the twitter timeline is public, and I also know that Kim was being a bit cheeky at the time with it, people are like that sometimes, but that’s the internet for you. There’s no need to take this out of context, which is exactly what you’re doing. There was nothing spiteful intended about this post, you’re the one who is assuming that, just because it says something you don’t like. Which, by the way, you are reading into the wrong way, not as it was intended. That’s what it’s like when you’re reading rather than talking though. Sometimes things get misconstrued.
Get off your high horse and stop making yourself and TSA look worse, because that’s what you’re doing. YOU and TSA are giving yourself the bad publicity here with your comments, not this post.
Twitter’s TOS really have nothing to do with copyright – in fact there’s a whole article about how it is extremely rare that tweets can ever be copyrighted http://www.canyoucopyrightatweet.com/
Thanks for the link Zoey, that makes for interesting reading for sure – obviously I was wrong before in my comment about fair use, because fair use only applies to things that are copyrightable, which aren’t tweets.
Wow, so much ado about nothing. Three things:
1) Misinterpreting the law and restating that misinterpretation time after time does not make truth out of something that is false.
2) As Veronica said, slander is spoken defamation and libel is written defamation. An example of libel might be Joe’s accusations of nepotism and his assumptions stated above:
“This blog was a set-up, written by Veronica to defend her mother, Kim, who wanted Total Art Soul to publicise her without her being an active member on TAS, but TAS wouldn’t do it – hence the ‘escalation’.”
This is in stark contrast to the actual blog post, which was a non-opinionated representation of an actual conversation that was published publicly.
3) What do you think you’re going to gain by publishing negative reviews of Veronica on SU and contacting her host? She has a huge and loyal and influential following in the blog world. Now she will only get 600 positive reviews on SU. And who knows, maybe some of her loyal followers are attorneys. You know what they about playing with fire.
P.S. First line is a quote from Shakespeare, unless anyone is making up new copywrite laws as I type.
Yes, I was a touch shocked by the negative review on stumble, considering it’s blatently false information and posted as ‘fact’ – unlike my post which is opinion and posted as such.
Your blog is not posted as an opinion, as you have posted other information ie, the screenshots.
Maybe you are all right, maybe we should just shut up and disappear, probably would be best to stop us digging an even bigger embarassment pit for ourselves to wallow in.
But before that, I would just like to point a few things out. Our main issue is that this blog seems to have been deliberately set up to make Cathy (totalartsoul) look bad.
As the onus is on us to provide evidence that Veronica has ‘creativley’ edited the tweets to do this, I have gone through the Twitter archives, this is not easy, and will take quite a bit of work to put the original conversation together.
What has been interesting in going through the twitter archives so far, is that Veronica has copied part of a different conversation, and made it look like part of the original conversation.
Apart from this, what lends weight to the fact that there is a bias in this blog, is that frogpondsrock is Veronica’s mother, which Veronica says is common knowledge, but to anyone reading her blog will not know this, unless they are part of her ‘inner circle’. We only found out by accident. Being extremely objective, there would have to be some suspicion that all is not what it seems, given these facts.
Now, Veronica, if your ‘inner circle’ that so vehemently defend you and so aggressively attack us were to find out that the twitter conversation, that is on this blog, have been edited to be in frogpondsrocks’ favour, would that redeem us? And what would they think about you if that were the case?
By the way, do you still have the original screenshots on your computer, in their entirety? The screenshots which you went to great pains to edit, and intersperse with your own opinions?
When I put together the tweets, I used the public timeline, as well as the timestamps – if you look at the times in the bottom of every single image, it tells you when they were tweeted – date/time.
If I missed something, which is possible, then that is because I am human, not because I was ‘out to get you’.
My ‘inner circle’ if they were to find I missed something, would assume that’s because I’m human and go ‘oh well, the conversation of tweets was a minor part of the post anyway’.
Now, as I’ve got a lot on my plate right now, either put together your own timeline of when things were said and ‘prove me wrong’ (and I want to see the time/date stamps in there too please) or go away.
Word.
Where’s the “like” button?!
Methinks it’s time to close comments again V. All has been said. Copious opportunities have been given (and not taken) to produce evidence. At this point it’s just repetition of unfounded accusations.
You have things of actual importance in your life that require your attention and energy. xx
Comments will be closed now. Because of things I’ve got going on IRL I don’t have the time to moderate here.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }