- The Blogger Blackout did not go unnoticed by one particular author:
- Despite claiming there's not a bloggers vs authors "war" (details to follow), she then claims there is:
- Anyway, her first Tweet brought back memories:
- Which seemed quite odd, when she has a history of being the negative one:
- Key word: "dictate". *headdesk*
Anyhoo, this next Tweet (also from back then - June 2013, according to the date in that review she linked to), she followed that up with:
- Which seemed odd, because accusing others of "dictat[ing]", and subTweeting, may not be "grown-up" ways to respond to criticism, either.
Now, back to recent times. J.H. reTweeted this:
- Actually, the "Press' coverage" and many Tweets we'd come across inspired the Blogger Blackout, but not in a "bloggers vs authors" way. Instead, it's a period wherein participating bloggers take time out to get back to their reading roots, share fond memories, and speak up about the issues that affect so many readers and authors.
But maybe it was too much for her to research. *shrugs*
So instead of realising that the blackout is designed for bloggers to put their own needs and wants first:
- So she basically said, "Not all authors." And played the victim: "[D]on't make this about everyone."
Then she's asked for advice:
- And without clarifying what the other person found to be "malicious" or "defamatory", J.H. jumped to conclusions:
- That's right: a "troll". Because no one wants to admit that a reviewer may have made some legitimate "negative" points about a book. *eyeroll*
And here's an example of her blaming someone for blaming authors. If there's no "war", why does J.H. keep talking like there is one?
- Even though J.H. herself is "show[ing] hostility towards a whole group" of bloggers participating in the blackout - which she didn't stop to actually RESEARCH; just assumed it was "hostility".
And then calls stalkers "unstable people", but their victims (reviewers) "troll[s]":