Typically, whenever someone mentions taking the high road, you can assume that they aren't referring to themselves. Claiming higher morals always gets an eye roll from me.

She's obviously not that bright if she's equating writing negative books reviews with stalking people and posting personal information online. Fuck her and her career.

Why is it so freaking hard for some authors to behave? I don't understand. They're dragging the very audience that employs them!

Lucy wrote: "She's obviously not that bright if she's equating writing negative books reviews with stalking people and posting personal information online. Fuck her and her career."

That's what I'm trying to work out right now. That doesn't make a lick of sense.

The woman behind that blog site is stalking people, publicizing their information, and attempting to incite violence. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT THE SAME FUCKING THING AS WRITING A NEGATIVE REVIEW?! Ms. Leto can promptly fuck herself.

Lucy wrote: "The woman behind that blog site is stalking people, publicizing their information, and attempting to incite violence. HOW ON EARTH IS THAT THE SAME FUCKING THING AS WRITING A NEGATIVE REVIEW?! Ms. ..."

Exactly. It isn't even remotely the same. Looking at this I hope I'm not going to have to write off Lauren Dane too because she has a book coming out later this year that I really want to read.

I'm so sorry to hear that you are going through this. I cannot believe that grown women are acting this way. This author will never get a penny from me.

Dane was trying to straighten Leto out, I think, so I wouldn't point any fingers at her.

Ridley wrote: "Dane was trying to straighten Leto out, I think, so I wouldn't point any fingers at her."

Okay, good. It's kind of hard to tell sometimes.

I just can't imagine why you'd feel touchy. I guess an author who is mostly offline and learns about this from a link to that website might get a false impression, but those tweets are rather clueless. They also seem like an example of "female tone syndrome" where anything said in an aggressive, blunt or snarky way is somehow bad/wrong/douchebaggy. There are certainly some male authors behaving badly, but I'm not surprised a lot of this stuff seems to happen in primarily female author/reader communities and as to do with policing other women about being "nice." Not "nice" is not the same as bullying/posting private info. Why do we have to keep saying that?

She's only jealous that your reviews are more popular than her books.

If it makes you feel better, this collection of stories is terrible. The Leto one, I believe, involves the secret sale of an MLB team. Secret.

what in the world happened? this is crazy.

Jane wrote: "If it makes you feel better, this collection of stories is terrible. The Leto one, I believe, involves the secret sale of an MLB team. Secret."

Why fact check? It's not like "real" women would follow sports, amirite?

I do enjoy her saying she doesn't want to get into a pissing match, sounds to me like she's marking every spot she comes across

She isn't the first author to claim author bashing is one sided event, i.e...'shaming one group but not the other' which makes no sense to me. This is (and has never been) a one-sided event.

I've read a ton of comments by authors bashing readers for not liking/understanding their books or fans, when they should just butt out. If their book was discussed in a library basement book-club, readers would be able to say whatever they want because the author is not there. But on the internet authors feel the right to butt into the same kind of reader-to-reader conversations to 'set us straight'. Argh.

Fortunately, most authors and readers get along great (thank God!) Leto can say whatever she wants on Twitter, but by the same freedom I can chose to be offended and consider her a 'never going to read' author. Her highroad just took a very low turn.

Guys, I hate to bust into a discussion, but I did want to point out that the comment I was replying to wasn't the one quoted, or rather, I wasn't agreeing with it in replying to it.

I wasn't agreeing in any way that there is anything good or right or admirable about the GR Bullies site--I mentioned several times in that discussion that it's awful, and have tweeted about it other times, and have blogged about it--or saying that anyone deserves it or anything like that. I was backing up Lauren's RT of Donna's tweet about just ignoring people who say things you dislike (which I had just RTd) and saying I agreed with it; I simply clicked "Reply" to the last @ reply to me I saw before it to include the other people in the discussion, since it was a very fast-moving conversation and I didn't want to scroll down.

For the record, I have said many times and will continue to say that the site is disgusting, and there is no excuse for it.

Again, my apologies for jumping into your discussion, but this was pointed out to me elsewhere and I just wanted to make clear that I in no way support or back up or approve of this site, and I do not agree with any defense of it. I obviously was not thinking of the implications of clicking "Reply" to that particular tweet, and I am sorry it appeared from that tweet that I support the vile and unconscionable behavior of those who started the GR Bullies site.

Ah, the vagaries of Twitter. I agree that the screenshot looks ambiguous for you, Stacia, and I'm sorry I didn't cut and paste better. I was trying to get as much context in as I could for Ms. Leto's tweets, and ended up dragging you in sort of awkwardly. Whoops.

I will say that anyone lumping you in with the bully site's defenders is a dumbass, so you let me know if anyone does, and I'll set them straight for you.

Ridley wrote: "Ah, the vagaries of Twitter. I agree that the screenshot looks ambiguous for you, Stacia, and I'm sorry I didn't cut and paste better. I was trying to get as much context in as I could for Ms. Leto..."


Hey, no worries, Ridley. (Sorry it took me so long to get back here.) As you said, the vagaries of Twitter. :-)