Thursday, April 17, 2008

Dead or Alive--veinglory

Last November I noticed that a new blog had arrived on the scene, by the name of PODdy Mouth. I occasionally found useful information posted there, although by February I found her perspective differed pretty widely from mine and her attitude sometimes (okay, often) annoyed me. I still checked the blog from time to time but found I was putting less weight on what I read there and often I would question the accuracy of statements about publishers made by this blogger. However, like any intelligent person I read the blog and found it interesting, being able to make up my own mind about what was said. I deemed it fairly likely that this blogger was an owner or senior staff member at one of the other self-publishing service providers.

I did notice that some other publishers took part in the comments and questioned the accuracy of what PODdy Mouth said in emotive and sometimes unnecessarily insulting terms. Regardless of what one thought of the blog to begin with I considered the choice to engage with it in that manner and tone questionable at best. More recently I found Angela Hoy had literally put a price on PODdy Mouth’s head: “REWARD!!! If you are the first to tell us the real identity of PODdy Mouth (not the original POD-dy Mouth, but the one mentioned above), and can provide verifiable proof of his/her identity, we will send you $500.”

Now Angela Hoy is, for the most part, a figure I have a lot of respect for while PODdy is a source I considered only marginally useful if considered largely propagandistic in approach. But I still find it ironic that Ms. Hoy is apparently taking the low road of using money and influence rather than (or as well as) the high road of simply approaching the webhost with evidence that their terms of service have been broken or offering calm, persistent corrections on her own site (as her comments on PODdy Mouth were apparently blocked). While Ms Hoy is routinely fairly accurate, much of the rest of her accusations about being “inflammatory” and “negative” invoke an image of a pot and a kettle. How more negative can you get than offering a three figure cash bounty and calling any person a “snide” garbage spewing “liar”. Angela knows how to do good research, she is probably right on points of fact, but she is also certainly overly righteous.

I offer you my opinion on this blog, I do not suggest it is neutral or infallible any more than the other players are. But is the answer to dubious practices and emotive rhetoric to descend immediately to that level and win the battle on those terms? As for Angela’s suggestion that you should “Never, ever trust anyone who refuses to divulge their real identity”. Don’t trust PODdy Mouth, certainly don’t trust my own pseudonymous self at all, and also don’t trust Angela Hoy—don’t trust anyone but your pet puppy dog and even then only if biscuits aren’t involved. Read what is offered, consider the sources, filter out the emotions and motivations, and check the facts.

And decide for yourself.


Mick Rooney said...


In light of the vociferous debate on Angela's own site, I think there is a certain touch of the natives fighting amongst themselves while Rome burns.

Emily Veinglory said...

Which site would this be? I admit I haven't seen much debate.

Mick Rooney said...

main page, then follow the Preditors&Editors link.

elmore hammes said...

PodyII seems to have been deleted on wordpress. Perhaps related to Angela's witchhunt?

Mrs Giggles said...

Poddymouth 2.0 tended to say many rather controversial statements without backing them up with anything more than a "because I say so!" attitude, but then again, I find that Angela Hoy's own inflammatory and sometimes drama queen antics have much in common with Poddymouth 2.0, heh.

It is a shame if Poddymouth deleted her blog because she doesn't want her real identity to be discovered. But I personally have lost considerable respect for Angela a long time ago due to her own online antics. This latest one is just another of her rather shrill and unprofessional behavior online.

Mick Rooney said...

I still feel the great Amazon beast and its supporters and tamers are looking at all this and sniggering. Let us not forget, it was Angela who alerted us to what was really going on with Amazon. Now, while Amazon doesn't really appear to give a toss what goes on in the POD world, we are all looking at each other, realising, we just scorced the first 'own goal'.

Mrs Giggles said...

This is nothing to do with Amazon, however, so I don't understand why that matter has to be brought up. Angela and Poddymouth 2.0 had been at it long before the Amazon fiasco and this is just Angela taking yet another shot at Poddymouth 2.0 for another Poddymouth slam about Booklocker. Only this time, Poddymouth 2.0 caves in, folds up her cards, and goes home.

Potato Nose said...

Amazon was brought up because Angela Hoy broke the story 24 hours before anyone else did, yet PODdyMouth failed to even credit her. The difference shows who is doing actual research and who isn't, which impacts on credibility.

I think the point people are missing is why PODdy was so worried about its identity being revealed. Seriously, if it was just a freelancer who worked with many of the PODs or an author or even a printer or staff member, it really would mean very little. The only way it would mean something is if PODdy turned out to be a direct competitor of Booklockers (owned by Hoy) — one that had a good reputation until this point. They it would have a lot to lose.

I'll leave you to draw conclusions as to who the likely suspects would be via Google cache.

Emily Veinglory said...

I am one of those people who has a reasonable idea what type of position PODdy held if not who exactly she is (something I am frankly not interested in knwoing).

But the point I am trying to make is that having a point is difference from running around poking people with the sharp end of it (e.g. making generalisations about all pen name users being innately untrustworthy, using inflammatory rhetoric etc). I feel that damages rather than enhanced Ms. Hoys overall credibiltiy and offering a cash bounty was simply bizarre and if even basically justified comes across as vindicative, to me anyway.

potato nose said...

Hey, this person was intent on damaging Hoy's rep and hurting her business. If there are complaints about her company, then let those who are involved post about it, but to have a direct competitor come online just to harm another company is tacky and unfair, particularly since so many people have always shown a willingness to follow and accept the anonymous posters (something I could never figure out, myself).

Hoy's bounty solution was fast, legal, creative and effective and certainly nothing as low as said competitor was doing with his basketball tales.

I think people have the right to post anonymously, but I think people who blindly follow them are weak and suspect.

PODdyMouth II was spewing misinformation daily, not just about Booklocker and won't be missed.

Emily Veinglory said...

Is the goal to be slightly less low than your lowest critic? Or to maintain a certain level of conduct that does not involve trophy hunting your opponents?