[reblogged from 38 Caliber Reviews]

Recently I wrote a blog about author Lacey Crowe. Yes, I snarked, I mocked, I pointed out her less than stellar behavior. If you are going to try to make reviewers only write positive reviews then perhaps your own behavior shouldn't violate the TOS of various review sites.

I have often stated, but maybe not often enough, that violence is not an acceptable response. Mocking is. Not buying their books is. Violence is not.

This morning I found a new comment on my post for R A Nunes new release. I contacted BL but the sniveling little Weinberg drone had already deleted their guest account.

Hey, I guess it's okay to game the system and try to harass, guilt, or otherwise pressure reviewers into writing only positive 4 and 5 star reviews but mocking that behavior is beyond the pale.

I. Don't. Think. So.

All those reading this that don’t approve of kevvie’s little friend’s behavior, do me a favor, buy her new book or go donate to Rachel’s GoFundMe. It’s an important cause, plagiarism, particularly this very nasty case of it should not be tolerated.

I really hope kevvie’s little underage girlfriend didn’t skip school to post that.

[reblogged from 38 Caliber Reviews]

Scarlet on BL posted this. Let me just repost that screenshot:

Well now, isn’t this just so special? Let’s talk about this.

“Congrats! You are on my list…” Run, run now. “to receive an ebook… for free” Oh really? Just how “free” is free? “in exchange for a positive review.” Oh-oh, a positive review. It’s good to be so certain that your book is the next best thing to Hemingway or Rowling or whoever but “in exchange” is already a price attached to this incipient literary crapsterpiece (and usually when they insist on a positive review the book sucks Nile water).

But it’s free, and surely if you absolutely, positively hate it— well, we’ll get to that. “After reading”, at least the author wants you to read it. I’ve seen authors imploring their fans for reviews and trying to make it easier by saying they didn’t have to read the book. Oops, looks like that “free” price tag is getting a little more expensive. “please help me spread the word by posting positive reviews about it on all social media sites”. On all social media sites and please notice that you are posting only positive reviews. But just in case you didn’t notice, “This includes positive reviews on…”, s/he will just ever so gently repeat it. In the first three sentences s/he uses the phrase “positive reviews” three times.

Already I don’t like this book. But wait! There’s lots more, “Amazon, Goodreads, and any other“, s/he left out Booklikes and Leafmarks; continues with, “blog, vlog, Instagram, Tubmlr (sp), Facebook, Google, or any …“, left out Scrazzle. This isn’t so bad, just copy and paste and paste and paste and…

Why do I feel so tired? Now you are instructed not only where but when, “please mention it BEFORE and AFTER reading“, at least s/he said please. “including links to it on Amazon or Barnes and Noble…“, I wish s/he would be more specific.

Now we get into the whatifIhateit instructions, written with a sense of disbelief because how could you possibly hate this book? Maybe because the author took twice as long to write your rules for reviewing as s/he did to write the damned book. Am I the only one thinking this “free” book is too much work? Do I even know this author?

“IF”, and that’s a big if, “for some reason”, and really, it would be such a teeny, tiny, nit picky little reason, “you don’t like the novel”, GASP, SMELLING SALTS, “don’t think it’s worth a 4 or 5 star review”, OMG, you brute, you bully, you bully thug, you have no taste, “please DON’T leave a review on places like Amazon,”.

Why not? “as 1-3 star reviews REALLY HURT the Indie AUTHOR”. What about the poor, bewildered, exhausted reader? The poor, hard working reader who is spending all their spare time reading the book, mentioning the book, linking to the book, and finally they are ready to post and paste their review. If you, Dear Readers, are that poor reader take your finger off the post button because, “promotional sites will remove the author if you don’t have at least a four star average”.

Three words: Not. My. Problem.

Cold? Not a bit, this is a business transaction and you are not getting a “free” book, you are working damned hard for that book. The author is not without a point about this but here you have to make a choice; if you are lucky the book will live up to the author’s hype but if it doesn’t, what are you going to do next?

I recommend sleeping on it because if you’ve been busily following the author’s instructions you need to rest. Maybe a good meal, some wine. A pedicure.

So what to do if you didn’t like it, “write me and share with me why.”, or not. Just don’t tell any one else. Ever. You’ll kill my career, my glorious career. It doesn’t matter if I have written a big, steaming pile of fewmets, it just matters that you don’t tell anybody. Ever. Because I don’t care, I just want to sell it. To as many people as possible before someone who doesn’t know better or is a jealous hater tanks MY GLORIOUS CAREER by leaving a nesty, career-killing 1-3 star review.

But you won’t not like it. I spent a lot of time on it, nowhere the amount of time I’ve spent on writing out these instructions but this is the important stuff. This is where I become rich and famous. I just need as many of you as I can con persuade into writing those 4 and 5 star reviews.

Now here is the very best part. I can’t believe any author is quite this mind-numbingly stupid.

“As a huge favor, in your review, please DO NOT write things like, “I received a free copy from the author for an honest review…” Why not? “That’s an automatic turn off in review world and discredits your review from those who need to read it, so please don’t do that. Pretty please. :)” What the…?

I don’t know where to start. First, it would be a HUGE favor, all right. One that could land you in some trouble with the FTC, not to mention that some of those social media sites you are busily (or not) posting your review on take a dim view of reviewers “forgetting” that little disclosure. A review that includes the disclosure is not an automatic turn off to me, it speaks to the reviewer being honest. And second, what the hell is the author trying to say with, “discredits your review from those who need to read it”? Does s/he mean that readers skip over reviews that disclose? I’m really not sure.

So, to sum it up, the author wants you to promote his/her book by posting, linking, reviewing. The author wants you to do your very best to make sure the author sells a lot of books and maybe becomes a well-known, sought after author. The author does not want you to ever post publicly about the book if you didn’t like it. The author wants you to ignore the FTC rules and the rules of the sites you review on.

All for a “free” book.

(from Webster’s online dictionary)

Full Definition of FREE

1

a : having the legal and political rights of a citizen

b : enjoying civil and political liberty

c : enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination

d : enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another

2

a : not determined by anything beyond its own nature or being : choosing or capable of choosing for itself

b : determined by the choice of the actor or performer

c : made, done, or given voluntarily or spontaneously

3

a : relieved from or lacking something and especially something unpleasant or burdensome —often used in combination

b : not bound, confined, or detained by force

4

a : having no trade restrictions

b : not subject to government regulation

c of foreign exchange : not subject to restriction or official control

5

a : having no obligations (as to work) or commitments <I’ll be free this evening>

b : not taken up with commitments or obligations

6

: having a scope not restricted by qualification

7

a : not obstructed, restricted, or impeded

b : not being used or occupied

c : not hampered or restricted in its normal operation

8

a : not fastened

b : not confined to a particular position or place

c : capable of moving or turning in any direction

d : performed without apparatus

e : done with artificial aids (as pitons) used only for protection against falling and not for support

9

a : not parsimonious

b : outspoken

c : availing oneself of something without stint

d : frank, open

e : overly familiar or forward in action or attitude

f : licentious

10

: not costing or charging anything

11

a (1) : not united with, attached to, combined with, or mixed with something else : separate (2) : freestanding

b : chemically uncombined

c : not permanently attached but able to move about

d : capable of being used alone as a meaningful linguistic form — compare 5bound 7

12

a : not literal or exact

b : not restricted by or conforming to conventional forms

13

: favorable —used of a wind blowing from a direction more than six points from dead ahead

14

: not allowing slavery

15

: open to all comers

Edit:  Cute only has one book still listed.

Found this this morning on KDP. A Jay Cute is selling this whole list of books as his, and how do we know they aren't his? The real author's names are still on the covers.

Plagiarism to a new, lazy low.

"One thing I wasn't doing when I was young was looking for quality or character," she says. "I hope people can learn from my mistakes."- Margo Howard

Um, yeah, trouble is Howard herself seems to have learned as little as possible.

Hopefully I will be able to get back to her book on Sunday, pesky real life is in my way plus I can only tolerate so much admitted but unregretted stupidity at a time.

37 pages in and I must say it's already quite an experience. First off, Howard covers approximately 55 yrs in 208 pages so it seems that maybe there just isn't that much to tell. Howard starts out when she was 19, tossing in a couple sentences about having Ann all to herself until the age of 15 and that her parents gave her the example of a strong, loving marriage and all the advantages of a very well off lifestyle.

Chapter 1 is prefaced with a headshot of a young Margo and she is gorgeous, too bad it's only skin deep. As Howard starts her narrative she freely admits to having no ambition, no desire to do anything other than find a husband because that's what girls after college, which Howard left after her first senior term.

The tone of Howard's writing is jarring, she sounds like that 19 yr old girl. It's unsettling. On page 1 she name drops Hubert Humphrey and Dr Bob Stolar, a dermatologist of some renown. Ann Landers knew a lot of powerful and influential people.

Talking about her internship for Humphrey (new dating pool!) Howard easily admits that not only does filing bore her she couldn't be bothered to figure out how to do it correctly. Oh, well. She sounds a little testy about JFK never hitting on her. Page 6 and Howard name drops 4 names including JFK and Henry "Scoop" Jackson.

She talks about her suitors and marriage proposals, three proposals and one engagement before she settled on suitor number 4. She talks for one paragraph about the beginnings of the women's movement and how it never interested her because she liked to bat her eyelashes. So do I but then I guess even at the same age I was already more complex than Howard. She comes off as completely self absorbed and rather dim.

She talks about learning later on the difference between loving and in love and we move on to chapter 2 which starts with a picture of the bride and groom, take 1. Husband #1 is thrown under the bus- he is cold, distant, ambitious, alcoholic and married. He proposed, she accepted and then this charmer tells her he needs to divorce wife #1. This does not deter Howard and I have this feeling that the dumber the decision the harder Howard is going to cling to it. Her parents and friends beg her not to do this but being the dumbest thing to do Howard keeps going.

I wore a demure Priscilla of Boston lace gown with seed pearls. The veil was anchored by a crown. (I would love a do-over on that one.) -from Eat, Drink and Remarry. My first thought? A bigger crown?

for the first three years of her life

They honeymooned in Spain and Portugal, Howard remembers Beluga caviar and the really rich older man she met by the pool who was  a child of the shah and "endlessly fascinating".

Home again and after the thank yous are written Howard discovers she is pregnant. Easy pregnancy, hard labor, beautiful, sunny baby. Howard has a baby nurse for the first three months. As the three month period we'd engaged her for neared an end, I realized I hadn't been paying much attention to what she had done to care for Abra, and I still needed her to give me lessons in how to do this mothering thing myself. -from book

She talks of a difficult marriage, a distant husband and father and wonders if that is why she was so detached from her children when they were little and she says she regrets this and then wonders if a warmer, more loving husband would have made her a better mother. My younger two children seem to have some understanding of these early difficulties of mine and have forgiven me. The eldest, Abra, I feel has not- although it was she who had the most attention from me for the first three years of her life when she was an only child. - from book.

Am I the only one thinking somebody is angry and it's not Abra?

She had a bad marriage and a lot of money. Sounds like a description from a 40s pot boiler.They bought the townhouse of the owner of Mogen David wines and she had her "own" saleswoman at Stanley Korshak.

Howard relates a little story of being invited to dinner at the house of someone Coleman knew through business. After dinner in the parlor Howard asked who was the woman in the portrait? The wife said, "Well, that's me." Honest to God the next thing out of my mouth was,"No! Who would have a portrait of themselves with their old nose?" We were, and this is no exaggeration, shown the door three minutes later and the evening was over. (But seriously, who would not get a new portrait?) - from book.

Somewhere, back a few pages Howard mentions her mother starting the Ann Landers column and moving away from "the twin thing" and how the "twin" piggy-backed on it and became Dear Abbie. The resentment oozes.

Indeed, there seems to be a lot of resentment and pouting going on and, so far, Howard comes off as having all the depth of onionskin.

37 pages, my friends, this is going to be a looong, bumpy ride.