Malicious Review(s)

[Sharon]

Well, I have just experienced something that Jaimey wrote about a while ago -- a malicious review. In this case, the reviewer is a former friend. He decided he wanted to end the friendship, which was fine ... except that when I didn't grovel and beg for him to change his mind, he started posting inflammatory things at various places on the internet where he knew I read.

Today he went too far. He posted a review that Mark Coker of Smashwords described to me in an e-mail discussion as "obviously malicious" ... of a book he hasn't read (which I could tell from the review). He posted the "review" as a personal attack and nothing more.

Mark offered to take down the review if I wanted him to, but I decided to leave it so that people can see the hate-filled rantings of a man in desperate need of counseling. Obviously he wants my attention very badly, which is peculiar in a person who "excommunicated" me (he's a self-proclaimed Randian Objectivist) because I refused to reform my thinking to match his on a number of issues.

If you don't want to be part of my life, Robert, why don't you leave?

Those who have read "Les Pensees Dangereuses" and wish to opine on the book may find it here, along with Robert's psychotic screed: http://www.smashwords.com/b/4319

[Jaimey, Co-Moderator]

I'm so sorry, Sharon. (And I apologize for taking so long to respond. Truth is, I just saw this.) It's always hard to get a negative review and much worse when it comes from a (former) friend.

It was kind of Mark to offer to take it down. And it seems that the review has been taken down.

I am sorry this kind of thing happens to anyone. It is unacceptable, immature behavior. :o(

[Sharon]

Jaimey wrote: "I'm so sorry, Sharon. (And I apologize for taking so long to respond. Truth is, I just saw this.) It's always hard to get a negative review and much worse when it comes from a (former) friend.

It ..."

I think Robert took it down, actually. After Rashas (who has known Robert for as long as I have) wrote her review, his disappeared within hours. Rashas pointed out, quite rightly, that my decision to not respond had nothing to do with her ability to lay out the truth for anyone who cared to look.

I did get Visual Bookshelf to take down his review that described my novel as "slash fiction." That's an industry term that generally means gay porn -- which anyone who has read "In The Eye of The Beholder" can tell you it is *not.*

I am sorry to see, Jaimey, that your harasser has started up again. I don't know what people gain from this kind of behavior.

[Jaimey, Co-Moderator]

I recently discovered that what my harasser is doing to me is nothing compared to what is happening to some other self-pubbed authors. Why, oh why, does any author think they are in competition with other authors? Readers read. It's what they do. They read what they want, when they want.

Meanwhile, I have received two other negative reviews, one for Heartless and one for Betrayal that I am perfectly fine with. They seem to be honest reviews and if I think the 1-stars were kind of harsh, oh well. It was the reviewer's choice to rate them that low. After Betrayal's review posted, my sales increased. I'm quite all right with that one, believe me. :o)

[Sharon]

And here we go again: http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_.... The same person did it on Amazon, with "reviews" that attack me and say nothing about the books.

I am sure Goodreads will be equally non-responsive to what they've been in the past, on the grounds that "how can you know she didn't read all of them." Really? 9 1-star reviews, within minutes of each other? Why would anyone read so many of an author's books if they were so bad? This is obviously a smear campaign.

[Jaimey, Co-Moderator]

Your link isn't working; there's a period at the end preventing it.

http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_...

And wow. That stinks. :O(