What happens when you mix the First Amendment and Jesus? This:
So, you have freedom of speech and damn any author who gains to protect their work from your disgraceful site. You, who feel you are bound by copyright law to violate book jackets and work (work I quote) from published authors. You boast also that you can bring any author down who dares to oppose you … but you have made one fundimental error in your arrogant and appauling ‘Copyright Statement’; a flaw that may cost you dearly. You are completely disgraceful in what you do and though you may feel you have the support of those who follow you – God help you in how you treat others. This post will not be responded to becasue I (you may well ironically know) have freedom of speech – and it’s as legal as yours. Make of it what you will .. but your site is utterly detrimental to those who have dreams. You are DISGRACEFUL.
What Robert, Oracle of the Most High, fails to realize is that HIS freedom of speech means absolutely bupkis on MY website, just like I can make snarky comments in the comfort of my own living room but I’m under no obligation to let him in my front door to call me to repentance.
Of course, by both approving his comment and then reposting it in a post of its own, I’m showing that I’m at least a little confident that YHWH will not strike me down in His wrath over this — or at the very least, He has several billion people who’ve violated the bigger sins (you know, lying, adultering, murdering, engraving images) that it’ll be a while until He gets to me.
And by the way, Robert ol’ chap, I got the message the first time. You didn’t have to repost the same come-to-Jesus comment another ELEVEN TIMES. Welcome through the pearly gates of Ban-Land!
(Note: You may think, from the above, that I’m not a Christian. Actually, I’m a very committed believer. However, I have very little patience for people who call me to repentance out of the blue as if they were close enough to Jesus his get me His autograph.)
I can’t believe no one commented! You actually provide a service by letting people know their covers are horrid. Could explain why their books don’t sell. Just a shot in the dark there.
Aww. Which post did he object to?
I dunno — he copied and pasted his diatribe into the comments of a dozen recent posts, so no clue there. I think he just objects to my (and this website’s) very existence.
I know it’s tough to deal with a cold splash of reality. In fact, I dread the day I click on this site and see one of my covers. But dealing with criticism is part of writing, and one can either get defensive or try to learn from it. If a cover of mine ever makes it here, at least I’ll know it needs to be changed – and why.
Aside from playing the God card, I found it curious how “Robert” railed against what he felt was a copyright violation (although he didn’t say what), but then ends with an odd statement that your freedom was as legal as his. Hum…
I think “utterly detrimental to those who have dreams” is going to be the new subtitle on the header.
Now I am become Nathan, the destroyer of dreams.
ROFL!
“You, who feel you are bound by copyright law to violate book jackets and work (work I quote) from published authors.”
What does that even mean?
Something tells me the only way he’d ever have his ‘work’ published is if he went around Sellotaping random pages to public lampposts.
What awful grammar – like the e-book industry really needs that as their post child.
¤ poster child.
Sorry, my inner grammar nazi just could not be held back 🙁
It’s not even a grammar mistake.
I guess Robert did not get the memo about parody with regards to copyright.
Wait, you are violating book jackets? I did not know you were that kinky.
Damn it, Michael Waller beat me to the “violating book jackets”!
Has anyone ever been kicked out of B&N for public lucidity?
Isn’t making a lousy book cover one of the seven deadly sins?
I’d suggest that he try spell check, but he probably thinks it’s witchcraft.
How does one “violate book jackets”?
Nevermind, I don’t want to know.
Unfortunately, he’s probably mad because he’s one of the authors whose work appeared here. But that means that someone who writes as “appaulingly” as he does is the kind of person who self-publishes and then thinks his book is beyond rebuke!
Well, as far as violating book jackets goes: sorry, Nathan, but the champion in that game remains the playwright Joe Orton (a story well worth looking up, if you do not know it already).