This is a great discussion on CNN about the outing of the blogger.  I may have to add to this discussion further.

Sphere It

Dennis Howlett writes today about the lawsuit involving Sam Sethi and Mike Arrington and Interserve, Inc., als known in our wrold as TechCrunch.  As a disclosure I remember this riff vividly as my friend and partner Tris Hussey was involved in this problem and other friends, Marc Orchant and Oliver Starr were also part of the BlogNation.com which is peripherally part of the overall story.  I am not a huge fan of what took place in that business deal and I see what happened as unfortunate to my friends.

I won’t get into the merits of the case, nor will I try to discuss the legal issues as I had plenty of the legal world after working there for 22 years.  I do want to comment on the somewhat short sightedness I see on behalf of Mike Arrington and TechCrunch as it relates to the lawsuit.  I know that Mike Arrington is giving this lawsuit less than a nuisance value and sees no merit to the claims and perhaps wants it to carry it on for more page views (which of course I am adding to albeit a small amount). I’m afraid that this is just the beginning of something that will give Mr. Sethi more fuel for his feud and make this debacle continue.

Mike has stated that he will not participate in the litigation and that they will ignore it, not planning to subject himself to the litigation process in the UK.  I think that is not a bad strategy from a legal standpoint as it carries with it somewhat of a "no harm, no foul" consequence.  California Law does not really give much weight to the UK and its judgment, be it a default judgment or otherwise. I should note that a default judgment might have  less weight than a judgment on the merits, but I digress.  From a business standpoint, I think this might be a bad move.

According to Mike his legal costs could exceed £500,000, to win the case which the experts indicated should not have been a problem.  The court would then have awarded Mike his legal costs, but that is like squeezing blood from a turnip as I assume Sethi is not in a position to pay that type of money, given what I know of the Blog Nation debacle.  The part here that is troublesome is giving life or a breath or two of life to Sam Sethi and his continued efforts to gain the upper hand and make him appear to be in a better position in his case against Mike Arrington and TechCrunch.

In addition, now Arrington must watch how he works around having this judgment against him in the UK.  I am assuming at some point it may be necessary for him to do business there or to collect from advertisers there or to get money from the UK.  I am assuming that any funds due to him or his company from that jurisdiction can be attached or to some effect, garnished to satisfy the judgment.  He has already canceled to speak at an event he told the organizers he would be a part of and who knows how many other ventures he must cancel or at least not appear for in the UK.  I am not sure the limitation on satisfying judgments in the UK, but I can assure you that Sethi will be waiting at the opportunity to get his shot in to collect if only a dollar of the judgment.  The time to put this to bed is now.  The time to finish it is here.  If not, this could drag on for some time.  As I stated above, that could be what we are looking for from someone that wants to sensationalize it.

If you are a person that is owed money as a result of the Blog Nation debacle, it might provide fruitful to see if you can attach your own judgment to funds related to the Sethi’s judgment.  Who knows it might work.  It is by far more than you will get if you are waiting for an old paycheck to clear.

Photo above via CrunchNotes*

*I wanted to point out the labeled photo on CrunchNotes is "sethiissuchadick.jpg"   Classic.

Tags: Mike Arrington, TechCrunch, Sam Sethi, Tris Hussey, Oliver Starr, Marc Orchant, Libel

Sphere It

I am wondering how this will play out but I just had an opportunity to read through a TechCrunch article by Robin Wauters where it was uncovered that Twitter, Inc. may begin reaching out to people that are using Tweet in their applications or in their businesses and asking that they refrain from the practice.  This seems to me to be a day late and a billion dollars short.  I can’t understand how they are just now thinking of trademarking in as little time as May of 2009 the word Tweet.  What other words have they asked be trademarked?  What law firm sold them on this idea?  Surely if you began to get some steam as you did back in as early as 2007 you would have thought that some of these names associated with your brand would have been at that more valuable?  To begin this process now seems like an oops to me.  I actually like the email sent as it seems to give the impression that they have no weight behind the statement:

Hi,

Twitter, Inc is uncomfortable with the use of the word Tweet (our trademark) and the similarity in your UI and our own. How can we go about having you change your UI to better differentiate your offering from our own?

They feel "uncomfortable?"  Perhaps if they really thought this was a battle worth winning they would actually be more than just "uncomfortable."  I fully expect after the update to the blog post added after the fact wherein Twitter provides a response, that we will get yet another update that says something to the effect that, "We realize this seems crazy but we forgot to actually think of this before."  The next thing you know they will be printing up business cards and hiring a receptionist. 

This all seems to be the way this company is operating behind the scenes.  They fell into a great thing without realizing its potential or what it would turn into.  They then found that it was cool and might be worth some money to someone, then they found out that they should have some idea as to how to make money with it, and now they are realizing that they should be protecting it from everyone.  I just shake my head at the way this company is shaping up.  It must just be one comedy show after another behind he scenes there.  The great thing is, it is still loved by millions.

Tags: Twitter, Trademark, Technology, Legal Issues, Business, Social Media Tools

Sphere It

I am constantly finding reasons why I am not a proponent of hosting blogging plans. I am a Wordpress supporter yet I don’t recommend hosting your blog on Wordpress.com, and in spite of the Google mantra of doing no evil, I tell many to run away from Google’s application Blogger. In a recent article by Tech Dirt regarding Google’s unilateral deletion of blog posts I get another piece of the puzzle that causes me to continue my preaching. In the post, they indicate:

An RIAA source says that the group sends Google a list of URLs it doesn’t like, and Google “then deals with the problem.” Google says that it notifies bloggers after their posts have been taken down, in accordance with the DMCA. But it should hardly be surprising that many of those affected say they’ve gotten no such notice, nor that the offending material was either legally posted and/or supplied by the labels themselves.

I have always been a strong advocate for owning my own content. Be it good or bad content it is still mine. I have heard the stories of whole blogs being deleted that were around for years and all of the data that was in that blog being lost to a black hole never to be seen. I am just not that trusting of others with my blog. I am not keen on the idea of Google being able to subjectively judge a post and remove it without any due process other than an alleged email or notice they sent. Sure it costs a little extra than just the URL and some specialty template, but paying for hosting and controlling your own destiny is something that is worth the price.

Sphere It

Transparency always comes at a price.  Normally the price is honesty and integrity, but sometimes it can come in the form of justice and wrath.  While following along with Twitter today, Anil Dash of Six Apart provided a link to a post by Adam Kuban at the Serious Eats blog that comments on an article in the Wall Street Journal by David Kesmodel and John R. Wilke about comments in forums by “Rahobed”. Now that all the attribution is out of the way let’s discuss the story.

It seems that John Mackey, the CEO of Whole Foods, has been out in the web acting as the pseudonymous Rahobed, a backward spelling of his wife’s name Deborah, and posting in forums and other places about Whole Foods and its competitor Wild Oats.  I am always amazed at what can be found by using some backend tools to uncover the identity of commenters on blogs and those in forums.  This seems to be the gist of his comments:

“Would Whole Foods buy OATS?” Rahodeb asked, using Wild Oats’ stock symbol. “Almost surely not at current prices. What would they gain? OATS locations are too small.” Rahodeb speculated that Wild Oats eventually would be sold after sliding into bankruptcy or when its stock fell below $5. A month later, Rahodeb wrote that Wild Oats management “clearly doesn’t know what it is doing …. OATS has no value and no future.”

Should he have used his own name? Perhaps commenting and conversing in forums was not the best way to achieve the conversation about his industry.  I might suggest that instead of acting as a sock puppet and making comments and disparaging statements about rivals in forums, it may have been better for Mr. Mackey to have started a blog to discuss his thoughts on the industry, about his competitors or what he thought about his own haircut.

Yes, it is a fine line when dealing as a public company where any misstated item could come back to haunt a company.  Statements made to manipulate stock prices is obviously illegal, and of course any slanderous comments or libelous articles still come with criminal penalties as well as civil.  This can all be a difficult path, but a CEO of a corporation should not be out there on the Web doing this type of activity.  For the obvious reason of the possibility of getting caught.  The results now are for worse than if he had just started the John Mackey blog.

Sphere It

After watching the story unfold about the blog post that appeared on Digg that was dugg over 15,000 times and appeared on page one of Digg.  The Digg Effect as it has become known is a phrase given when this phenomena occurs.  Many times if a story becomes popular enough it will appear on page 1 of Digg and the result is traffic soaring to the point of bringing most servers to their knees and crashing many sites.  This Digg Effect has taken on new meaning for me since seeing the resulting revolution that unfolded.

For me, the "New Digg Effect" is the power of social networks and communities.  This can be used for good or for bad actually.  In my opinion, posting something on a site that breaks the law or goes against a terms of service rules can be a very bad thing.  Mob rule takes over in this new action.  This is not necessarily unique in the instance of Digg, but its popularity was shown and the number of people that can influence an outcome was apparent here.  As I read a comment by Paul Montgomery at Tech Crunch it came clear to me that this could be a New Digg Effect:

I agree with the users on this one. They win. I just wish they could turn their power on some issue that actually mattered. (emphasis added)

That made me think of the power that social networks and communities could wield in other areas. The viral effect of this new medium.  It made me think of things like the Amber Alert System, and then I began to think of the power a mob could have on a Presidential election in online communities.  I’m not sure if the New Digg Effect has me running scared at this point or in awe how quickly something can travel from shore to shore and continent to continent when a group wants something accomplished.   Social Media and the online communities carry a new torch at this point.  Like Paul Montgomery said, let’s use this New Digg Effect for something that really matters.

Sphere It

After looking back on the time that I first was posted, my own initial reactions, the people I have spoken to and the people I have read has given me an overall perspective on this debacle. I call it a debacle because it is a classic example of the power of blogs, the power of voices and the power of people and their own thoughts all coming together with disastrous results. On one hand we have the victim who has a deep feeling of fear and anxiety resultant from the actions of others. Others had a simple and one sided account of their mission and purpose. This mission and purpose was a different idea and had nothing to do with the other, until at some point–it did. Then the two met and it became something it was not intended.

In this instance we have a group of people that are brilliant and intelligent players all in a group. This group likes to provide a separate side of the story, another possible look at the way people use words and the way people write and explain their beliefs. This began in a not so insignificant post by Tara Hunt. Resulting from that post an idea was born, "why don’t we have some fun with this, and start a new website." This is where meankids group was derived, a group of people that may be outside the mainstream of thinking, a group of people that may not agree with the popular kids and their thoughts and attitudes. "Let’s give a different side of the coin of their thoughts and let’s make it satirical", they intended. Mean Kids was then launched.

At first, the site was written and published in the mission and manner it set out to accomplish their task. They were witty, satirical, brilliant and intelligent. As in any fraternity or other sophomoric group, there became a change in the focus and mission. Suddenly the game began to be a "who could be meanest", "who could one up the person with their next post?" Someone then crossed the line. They were not satirical but actually mean.  They crossed the line in a way not intended by the site.  Nobody laughed and nobody thought it was funny.  You can almost picture the group laughing and cheering and carrying on and then this post went up, and they all stood like a deer in the headlights and all you could hear were crickets chirping.  The site was immediately taken down and the post and data destroyed.  Then Chris decided to make it work again but this time it got ugly fast and they decided to take that site down as well.  I’m not sure of the reasons for the second round, and when Chris tried to explain it I wasn’t really sure again.  I think he had a certain vision, but I’m not sure he had the right players.

I don’t condone the intent behind the posts that went bad, but I’m sure that there is call for the other side of the coin in most cases.  It’s nice to know that there are people out there with differing opinions with the mainstream, and that they are not afraid to voice those opinions.  What is not accepted is how that "other side" is published.  Calling people out for their opinions is called for, the manner is how you do it in this case was not the proper forum.  This was locker room talk that got out of hand.  It was some men trying desperately to be the cool guy and it turned out bad.  Unfortunately it also coincided with an email to Kathy Sierra, and also coincided with the comments made and then removed from her blog.  I don’t believe that one had anything to do with the other and that they are totally separate events.  Perhaps we will learn more of this when the investigation is complete.  That is, if there is ever to be a full investigation.

What have we learned?  O’Reilly has drafted his Code of Conduct. I have read many of the associated posts, and it does not appear to be popular with the mainstream opinion.  Will O’Reilly be given death threats and will they post misogynistic things about him?  Probably not.  He is not the "Cute Kitty".  The New York Times comes out today with their piece on A Call For Manners in the World of Nasty Blogs, written by Brad Stone.  It also touches on this issue.  I cannot sign on for enforcement of something that in itself will never be adopted by those that are trolls in the first place. Being nice and civil is not something we should have to write down for people to follow.  A code of conduct is not a necessary step in my opinion.

Everyone has had an opportunity to sit back and reflect on what took place and how it was good bad or indifferent.  I think the damage was apparent, and I feel that the players have all taken many lessons from this that won’t soon be forgotten.  There are some players that have yet to surface, and yet may never surface.  I do think that I have grown personally from the experience and I think I can pass that on to my, children, my clients, and bloggers that I mentor in the future.

Tags: Kathy Sierra, Tara Hunt, Meankids.org, Chris Locke, New York Times, Blogger Code of Conduct, Tim O’Reilly

Sphere It

I have been trying to determine how to continue talking about the Kathy Sierra incident without whipping a dead horse and without adding to an already overzealous echo chamber, or to provide fodder for the angry mob.  I have seen many talk about this issue, and I have seen some very good ideas and opinions and have seen some very poorly written articles that do not add anything to the conversation other than to fan flames or to hop on the bandwagon calling for prosecution or the heads of the accused.  I think that needs to be the distinction.  People are innocent until proven guilty and some adhere to that thought while others do not think that is an option.  They want to have a person to burn at the stake.  I have tried to take the information I have,  make it presentable and to allow people to be informed about the situation and be objective in the approach. I also feel that in order to prove someone guilty, you also have to know who are the accused innocents.

Since the last time I posted Part 2, we have seen CNN’s coverage of the situation, a very poor account and a unfair reporting of the entire situation.  This is nothing more than sensationalism on the part of the MSM, but at least they highlighted "Cute Kitty" for us.  We have also seen that Kathy and Chris Locke have met, and have come out with a joint statement regarding the CNN coverage.  Robert Scoble returned to his blog and has moved onward, and even Maryam Scoble has shown me that I was not wrong in my thoughts on her class and grace. Since my last post, I have had a chance to speak to Chris Locke by telephone and have had a better look into the situation from his point of view.  I have exchanged emails with Jeneane Sessum and have spoken through email to  Joey and to Frank Paynter via phone.  Where it warrants, I can add information gleaned from those conversations to fill in gaps and holes in what has not been reported for facts they were able to provide.  Anything else they may have said may be more construed about their feelings and emotions, and do not lend more or less to the discussion.

I would like to continue my objective approach as I talk about the people involved in this saga.  In Kathy’s original post, she of course names some people she felt may have been responsible for the problems.  She does not divulge any other people that might be involved, but her comments allow some to come forward.  Paul Ritchie is one such person that admits to being a player in the meankids.org blog and in the UncleBobisms.com blog.  We find on February 15, 2007, he posts about Chris Locke’s project, MeanKids.org., and about the new site UncleBobisms.com on March 20. It is interesting to note the Paul reveals that their are 7 people involved in the "new" meankids site.  He seems to know the number of people or authors, but does not tell us those involved.  He has since had his own multipart posts regarding the matter and to better understand his position I would ask you read his account. 

Joey seems to be another large player in the meankids.org site and Unclebobisms.com  He admits to being the Joey, Kathy refers to in her article and has some knowledge that I have corroborated with Chris Locke in my phone conversation.  Joey has told me that he was not an author in the meankids.org site but only left "lame comments" and read the articles there.  He did have authorship rights in the unclebobisms.com site.  The Kat referred to in the comment singled out by Ms. Sierra was in fact pointed toward Kat Herding, and the "Jane" referred to in the comment made by Joey is in fact Chris Locke himself, as his nom de plume was Jane in their exchanges.  We have all heard by now the Saturday Night Live parody at work here.  We also know that Chris Locke is an author in the Kat Herding site, and was referred to other times as Kat.  Joey explained to me more than once that between the time of his posting of comments taken out of context, and the time at which Kathy Sierra posted her article, had she or anyone else contacted him previous, he would have immediately apologized for the comment and cleared up any confusion.  He is sorry that Ms. Sierra took this comment the wrong way, and does offer his apology to her in the regard. He indicates that he did not author the post as revealed by Kathy but does admit to commenting and that his comment is also being taken out of context.  Joey was invited by email along with others to author Unclebobisms.com by Chris Locke and Frank and believes that any of the respondents were given author privileges.  He stated that on March 25, he and others received an email from Frank regarding Kathy’s issues and emailed a response but did not hear back from Frank.  Frank sent the email to all of the authors.

So all of the accused have been discussed here, but one named person is conveniently absent, Alan Herrell.  Alan provided an email to Doc Searls, and has not come forward nor has he been able to be reached by me.  Doc indicates he has tried to contact Alan without success.  I would very much like to talk with Alan as his missing piece to the puzzle I feel is a major factor.  I’m not sure if he has recovered his identity or if he is back in the saddle, but I invite him to let me update this post.  We have no idea if he is the Rev Ed (I always see this as revised edition) on the site.  I do note the blogroll indicates an Ed Hominem.

I have not talked with Kathy Sierra, as I feel she has been clear on her thoughts.  She is scared, does not feel safe and feels threatened.  I do not intend to heighten and already hypersensitive situation.  I would be happy to speak to Kathy about this and would also update my post if she herself provided other information.

I was able to visit each of the sites related to the meankids.org blogroll and have seen most of the posts and the cache of what I could read.  Only circumstantially we may get a feel into those others possibly involved as authors, or commenter on the site that may have been contributed.  When I spoke to Chris via phone he had said that their were "10 authors, give or take 1 or 2". I have no idea if we have a complete list of authors, but I think that some of the people that were authors that have not come forward are still available for comment.  It is clear that Frank and Chris are not going to provide any further names to be dragged into the fracas and perhaps that is better for everyone.  It does not help Kathy close the loop on her fear however,  I do not believe that the list of authors has been revealed in a complete form.  There are others that have not come forward.  I don’t feel Alice Cooper has any hand in talking bad about Kathy Sierra or anyone else, but I could be wrong.  I would invite the others on the blogroll as linked to above let us know if they were or were not authors.  Mr. Cooper feel free to call me directly.

Shelley Powers in a response to comments on her own site and post reveals that the original picture that is shown in the Kathy Sierra post is found on a Flickr site.  I’m not sure how she found that as I have not been able to keep up with all of the comments and blog posts as I was able to in the beginning.  Perhaps Shelley could shed some light on how she found that picture or who provided the information.  I have not been able to compare her information to mine but would also invite her to share what she has developed.

Part 1, and Part 2

Coming Up:  Epilogue – What is my opinion?

Tags: CNN, Kathy Sierra, Chris Locke, Robert Scoble, Maryam Scoble, Jeneane Sessum, Paul Ritchie, Joey, Shelley Powers,  Kat Herding, Meankids, Unclebobisms, Alice Cooper,  Frank Paynter

Sphere It

I wanted to let everyone know that I am still researching and doing some reading on the issues and events of last week involving Kathy Sierra and the misogynistic blog posts and the threats via email.  I was contacted by Chris Locke, and we exchanged some emails, and I will be speaking to him further about some of the facts as he knows them and will provide that relevant information when it becomes available.  The joint statement of Chris Locke and Katy Sierra.

I see Robert Scoble has also returned and made his own statement about his thoughts.  Welcome back Robert and we look to you for leadership and guidance as we move forward.  I will be making my own thoughts known as I wrap up with my Saga epilogue I’ll post later.

Tags: Kathy Sierra, Chris Locke, Robert Scoble

Sphere It

Before I continue with my address of my following of the Kathy Sierra incident, I wanted to alert everyone to the fact that Kathy has closed comments on her post and has provided an update of her current state.  I had an internal debate as to whether, given her comment and reasoning behind closing comments on her post, I should continue with writing this series. After much thought, I am going forward in spite of perhaps causing more stirring of the pot, because at this point it would not be fair to all involved if I discontinued.  With that in mind, I am going to move forward with my dissection that led to this saga.

***

As part 1 of the saga ended, The MeanKids.org site was torn down.  The parties could all walk away and heal.  It’s obvious to all concerned that "Sierra was upset", as she demanded the site be taken down.  Chris Locke imparts that he decided to go to the next step:

With Mean Kids gone, I thought I’d have another go at it. After all, we were mostly having fun posting totally surreal stuff about nothing particularly relevant to anything or anyone.

This does not mesh with the earlier statement that Frank imparted about trying to moderate "misogynistic postings", but it does track with the fact that they all have denied making any such postings at meankids.org, or at the next site he refers to above, UncleBobism.com (not currently available for violating Wordpress TOS).  In my mind, and in my experience using Wordpress, a application I am very familiar with, only designated authors can post using the Wordpress platform, and this would be the case even if they were using a third party blogging editor application.  Misogynistic postings were made on meankids.org, and at this time we have no idea who authored them.  Sierra refers to the meankids.org postings, but indicates no over the line posts at first:

"At first, it was the usual stuff–lots of slamming of people like Tara Hunt, Hugh MacLeod, Maryam Scoble, and myself. Nothing new. No big deal. Nothing they hadn’t done on their own blogs many times before."

I have no idea what date the picture on meankids.org was posted.  A month had gone by between the February invitation to write and I don’t know the chronology or number of postings.  I do know that on March 15, a post I consider over the line was published.  I have perhaps a lower threshold than the people visiting the site or their readers and authors. Don Park at Daily Habits has a cache of the post, but I wouldn’t suggest reading it until you are ready.  Even Don had to take the quotes down for his own purpose.  This may explain more about my own distaste and  reaction of first learning of the meankids.org site.  Maryam is my friend and it cut me deep.  Meankids.org came to its resting place on March 16.

We know that UncleBobism.com was in existence on March 19, as referenced in a post by Frank Paynter referencing a comment by Joey.  Frank again references the new UncleBobism.com site on March 20.  In that post he also refers to 2 separate links to UncleBobism posts although there is no reference as to the author of the post nor is it referenced as to the creator of the site.

On March 21, Jeneane Sessum posts for the first time about the UncleBobism site.  In her original post of that day she asks her readers:

"The web’s newest solution to twittering is, not twattering, well maybe, depending — but also UNCLEBOBISMS. Join those of us who know better but do it anyway."

There are two updates to this posting wherein Jeneane tells of her hospitalization, and that she never had the opportunity to join or logon to the UncleBobism site and she was merely referring to a post about Twitter (you knew that Twitter had to come in here somewhere). It is confusing to me the opening paragraph of her post whether this is a quotation from the referred to post or whether it is her own writing about her thoughts about Twitter.  In my own opinion given how learned I am about the female species(sarcasm), I have never ever heard a woman talk about shoving anything anywhere unless of course they were referring to me.  This is not a female quotation.  I can find no other reference on her site of either meankids.org, or UncleBobism.  I also should disclose that Jeneane is in my feedreader of blogs I read everyday, and I did click on the link in my own vanity thinking that she was somehow making fun of the BoB Awards, an award we founded here.  My ego stroke didn’t last as I found it was not a link to the awards.  Yes, we all check what is linking to our sites.

Finally with reference to Jeneane, Chris Locke adds an addendum to his post to affirmatively state:

Jeneane Sessum is being hounded over this whole affair, which is not right. I think she posted only once, but it was something trivial, if I recall correctly.

Chris Locke does not go into any further details of the authors or the parties that are authoring the site.  He does tell us in his response to questions that he had decided to give MeanKids another shot.

I am not able to glean much in the case of Alan Herrell.  As is stated on Doc Searls’ site Alan Herrell has had his site hacked and his identity stolen.  I have read and read the email and have nothing in it that tells me anything about dates, times or any other significant information. It did cause me to pause after reading it.  Alan states in his email:

How did this happen? When did this happen? shit doc, i don’t have a fucking clue. I thought i was pretty sharp. I guess not.

I paused only because I remembered that in the vile photograph of Kathy that she posted, the title of that post also did not capitalize the letter "I".  This is only circumstantial at best.

His landing page at Lemur Zone, gives us nothing that can help us.  I say that except for one fact.  Alan is a web designer by trade apparently as his tagline reads "lemurzone design – HTML with Attitude!!"  To me this is significant, not because I don’t think a web designer can be hacked, I have heard of worse stories than that from people I believe to be very brilliant web people.  Alan is a blogger.  He is vain, egotistical and narcissistic, just as I mentioned I am above, and having a tech background makes him even better at tracking and keeping tabs on everything written, linked to, or tied with his sites. Unfortunately for Alan, this occurred at a most inopportune time.  I know  there is a theory that the two things could be related, but theory in my mind cannot replace fact.

Getting back to Sierra’s post, we find that on March 24, Sierra tells us that the meankids.org site was already taken down. and that she found a different blog,  Bob’s Yer Uncle.   On that post, is the now infamous picture of Ms. Sierra, having been photoshopped to have a thong over her face.  The next two days are silent on her blog.  This silence is the last all the parties will hear for some time related to this issue.  On March 26, the Blog Storm arrived.

There are many holes and I tried not to make too many assumptions.  I would be happy to fill in holes and make the record more complete, but unfortunately, this may prove to me impossible. Most of the evidence, for lack of a better word, has been destroyed.   It will take someone far more brilliant than myself to do the technical forensics behind getting information needed to answer the unanswered.  The true mystery here is their is across the board denial of everyone to any wrongdoing.  The culprits are ghosts in the machine I suppose.

Coming Up:  The Sierra Part 3 and Epilogue:  Who Are The Real Culprits?  Where Do We Go From Here?

Tags: Kathy Sierra, Meankids.org, UncleBobism.com, Wordpress , Maryam Scoble, Tara Hunt, Hugh MacLeod, Don Park, Jeneane Sessum, Alan Herrell, BoB Awards, Chris Locke, Doc Searls

Sphere It

Tris and I have been Skyping back and forth about the latest post by Kathy Sierra where she discusses death threats among other things that have recently surfaced.  At first I was so shocked I didn’t have words, then I was pissed, and yes I don’t often get pissed.  As I read through the post, I saw some familiar names as Kathy continued to pour out her fear onto the page I was reading.  I went to each of the bloggers’ blogs mentioned. 

Chris Locke, Frank Paynter, Jeneane Sessum, and Allen Herrel,

After a good look around, I found no responses from any of these bloggers.  I can only assume that this means they are in custody and being questioned for their involvement in something so heinous. I hate making assumptions.  I try very hard not to judge people and I always thank people that give me the benefit of the doubt before making judgments.  I want to give these bloggers that same benefit, but the fact that they are associated in any way with this behavior makes it difficult to overcome my anger at not seeing a statement from them.

Other links associated with the post are also barren of any mention about their own thoughts on the issues at hand.  The people at BlogHer, an organization I support financially as a sponsor and as a evangelist has no response to one of their prominent members being named in the scandal.  At the time of this post, I could not check one last time whether they had a response to the article.  It could be they are down as a result, with all of their other readers wanting to know what they think.

Doc Searls was mentioned more than once in the piece and after a visit to his blog, I see no reference to the story nor that he has in any way reached out to his co-author for a statement.  I too would ask that Doc give us some help in determining the nature of Chris Locke’s involvement and what he intends as leader in this community to bring this to a close.

At the time I post this, not a single response in the comments from anyone that might shed light on this for the rest of us.  That is a poor PR move.    I invite all of you to give me just a note that you are doing your own investigation and that this transgression will be met with the full power of your own abilities.

UPDATE (5:36 MST):  This comment I found from Frank Paynter.  Scoble is taking a week off from blogging, and that in itself is sad.  I am going to take the other approach, I will post about this until the matter is resolved.  I will not turn my back on this despicable act until it is finished.  I’ll keep updating as I find information.

UPDATE (7:43 p.m. MST)  Stowe Boyd posts while traveling that Jeneane Sessum contacted him to say "she is sick with concern about her incidental involvement in this mess. She is heartsick about this turn of events."  At the time of this updated post Jeneane’s concern is still absent from her blog.  I can only think that she is at a loss for words.  Even that would be something she could tell us. 

UPDATE (8:18 p.m. MST)  I think that we should allow for a reasonable time and not rush to judgment in hanging the parties named.  Shelly Powers has a good post, and I appreciate some of the comments.  I liken the this to the short story by Ambrose Bierce, An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge.  Let’s not hang the innocent just yet. 

Jon Husband refers to an update to a post by Jeneane Sessum in my comments, but I did not see it on her site.  I did ascertain further Jeneane and is afraid of the legal ramifications of posting at this point.  At this time, that fear is realized, and the mere mentioning about it is good enough for me.  I consider the rest of them in the same boat with the problems of lawsuits and anything at this point becoming evidence.  I would like to know about the other evidence we know of at this point.  I will keep posting as I learn of other developments.

UPDATE (9:58 p.m. MST) Frank Paynter has now posted about his thoughts on this issue.  As I also suspected, Kathy Sierra responded in the comments with graciousness and understanding.  This is how blogging should be. 

UPDATE (10:23 p.m. MST) Robert Scoble also puts to bed his thoughts to Frank which is heartfelt.  Do you think it would be possible to actually have the parties involved in this to all have a moment of nakedness to allow themselves to shake hands and walk away with understanding?  I am always an optimist but I think that with these people it’s possible.  These are leaders in this industry and a Blogger Gone Bad scenario is trumped by Bloggers Gone Good! 

UPDATE (10:37 p.m. MST) Jeneane’s comment on her blog for whatever reason is now visible to me and I want to point out her response.  I only had Update Number 2, but now Update Number 3 is visible.  I would say Jeneane should make a statement on her on blog much the same as Frank has done.  I don’t believe that she is the one that is behind any of this.  I also have taken note that "Joey" is now working on damage control on Kathy’s blog in the comments.

UPDATE (11:38 p.m. MST) Joey is now wanting to turn himself in as a fugitive in the comments at Kathy’s post.  Not sure why he would do that at this point, but in the comments section, he has asked that he be allowed to turn himself into the authorities.

UPDATE (8:15 a.m. MST 3/27/07)  After trying to get a little sleep last night, which turned out to be futile due to sick children, I am going to try to catch up on the latest in the blogosphere about the above.

Lisa Stone of BlogHer.org, responds to the being discussed in Kathy Sierra’s post, and provides BlogHer’s position on the matter.  As I expected nothing less from Lisa and her group, it was handled with class and professionalism.  I too would look to the folks of BlogHer to be the voice of all women in Kathy’s position and would look to them to carry the banner here.  Great Job Lisa.

Doc Searls responds with an answer to my call for his help and leadership.  As is predictable from Doc, he is level headed, transparent and very intelligent in his response.  That is why I believed him to be a leader, and why I called out to him for his guidance.  His wisdom includes:

It will be easier for everybody if those involved disclose what they know.

My last post before this one was a pointer to the new Principles of Citizen Journalism site. The first principle is Accuracy, and it begins, Getting your facts right isn’t always so simple. No shit. But that’s what I’m trying to do right now. I suggest the rest of us do the same.

I have been following this as much as anyone and trying to keep my own facts straight without adding my own emotion is difficult.  Thanks for the pearl Doc.

Last night I left Frank Paynter’s post open about Mere Anarchy, The reason is, it looked as though he was beginning a decent conversation about what he knew and about what he felt.  In the comment section, Robert Scoble left a comment giving kudos to Frank for coming forward with the post, and I commented right after him with this comment: 

I think all of the named parties involved could post a comment here and have Kathy address them…it could show just how rational people work. Good exchange Kathy and Frank.

When I rushed into my office to catch up with the conversation there, Roberts comment had been deleted and m ine is still awaiting moderation.  Just when I thought the proper route was gaining traction. 

I do want to touch upon why I would have an emotional response in my own thoughts about this terrible situation.  I have met both Maryam and Robert Scoble and consider them to be friends.  They are gracious, intelligent, and very people oriented.  They have also been nothing but the best from the moment I met them.  When I read the things about them, it caused me to be somewhat enraged.  I think Robert is now feeling that more than ever, as I have seen that he is calling for a public apology, and rightly so given the comments made.  I’m merely trying to report an aggregate of information I can find here, and if I tend to get heated in my own thoughts, I wanted to explain my not so objective reporting.  I would love to see this all resolve with handshakes and hugs.

UPDATE (8:54 a.m. 3/27/07):  Chris Locke has a response to the Kathy Sierra post.  He is interviewed by Liz Tay of Computerworld Australia, and published his response to her questions.  I have never met Chris, and only know of him as an author of a great book.  After reading the responses to the questions posed, I must say I am at a loss for words. It is obvious that he has a distaste for Ms. Sierra, and I’m not exactly sure why, but nonetheless, I cannot help IMO but see the dichotomy of his responses.  The first try at a vitriolic site was not enough, a second was started to continue the one that was taken down.

UPDATE (9:16 a.m. 3/27/07) Shelly Powers updates that Allen Herrel, The Head Lemur (the link appears to be broken) has ended his blog after 7-8 years.  His thoughts are that he is guilty until proven innocent, which is a travesty in itself.  I would ask that he provide us with more of a statement than:

character assassination by image and psedonym (sic)

believe what you will

get some help

goodbye

Let’s not compound the problems here by making others quit the blogosphere.  Turning your back now will only cause more people to be part of the mob and cement their own opinions of your guilt.   

UPDATE (10:38 a.m. MST 3/27/07)  I have been waiting for Tara Hunt to make a statement that I could link to given the fact that she was also a person singled out in the Mean Kids.or case and part of the reason they called the site "mean Kids" in the first place.  It seems that Jeneane Sessum was instrumental in taking down the sites after being asked by Kathy in the instance of Mean Kids.org, and UncleBobisms site in reference to an email from Tara.  As we know Jeneane was hospitalized until recently so it is unclear if she received the email while in hospital and was directing others to take down the site.  She brings up an interesting point about Mena Trott that I had forgotten about until her mention of it.  Thanks for the post Tara.

UPDATE (8:29 p.m. 3/27/07)  It has been more than 24 hours since I began posting about this incident and I am no closer to solving the issues as I was when I started.  I have learned of a number of new people I have met and spoke to and I have seen some things I found interesting and things that made me shudder. 

Doc Searls has been great at updating his own look into what he knows and has found.  I have read literally every post I could find on this, and as part of that I have read every comment.  Yes, I have been doing a lot of reading.  I do intend to add my own opinion when the dust settles and I’m actually able to spend a moment of my own time reflecting on all that has transpired.  I know that this incident has caused a number of people to sit back and stare at their computer and wonder about their own situation, their safety, their part in what we call our blogosphere.  What I can’t seem to nail down is the one true path that is the perfect path.  There are as many opinions and thoughts about this as there are blogs.  I have learned this today. 

The people I believed to be good and the people I look to for mentoring and leadership were nothing but stellar.  People like Lisa Stone of BlogHer, Doc Searls and others have all made me feel proud that I had them identified correctly–to you folks I applaud you.  To those of you that have not yet made any statements, apologies, or otherwise, I ask you apologize where necessary, take ownership of responsibility where needed and be sure to make clear your thoughts if you are in no way involved.  I will be the first to stand shoulder to shoulder with you in any of those circumstances.

UPDATE (9:07 a.m. 3/28/07):  Jeneane Sessum has made a statement about Kathy Sierra’s post and is obviously not able to make any further statements at this time.  Thanks for the post Jeneane.

UPDATE (12:23 p.m. 3/28/07)  Doc Searls has posted an email from Alan Herrell regarding this matter.  As we can now plainly see, this has been more than just about a death threat and fear.  The storm that has hit, has hit everyone, real people with real feelings.  All actions have a certain reaction I suppose and this is unfortnate.  It looks like most of the people named have come forward with some type of statement.  Where do we go from here?

Tags: Kathy Sierra, Chris Locke, Frank Paynter, Jeneane Sessum, Allen Herrel, BlogHer, Doc Searls

Sphere It

Well it looks like the caveman has signed a deal with ABC making my attempt to copy and plagiarize GIECO’s advertising campaign moot.  I wanted so badly to have the caveman tapping away at his keyboard, making fun of Robert Scoble, linkbaiting, Digging, and perhaps even signing up to work for clamshells at PayPerPost!  How cool would it have been if he would have been like Loren Feldman on 1938 media talking about the latest in tech gadgets and testing blog platforms, all while rubbing elbows with the likes of Om Malik, and Dave Winer.  He would have been perfect making a behind the scenes deal with Jason Calacanis starting the Caveman Blogging Network!  His videodcast would be picked up by John Furrier and he would be interviewing 40 second spots (rather than a Scoble 40 minute taping) of Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and the latest in celebrity gossip like Perez Hilton.  He could write a great book like Jeremy Wright or Shel Israel or Debbie Weil.  He would be a sought after keynote at all the cool conferences like Gnomedex, Blog Business Summit, and of course Blog World Expo.  He would be sought after for his political opinions, like Instapundit, Little Green Footballs and Daily Kos.

Then I thought I might just get a variation of it and have it be "Blogging:  So easy a lawyer can do it."  Of course then I would probably be sued by litigious Mike Arrington, or I might offend for the second time people like Brian Clark.  I was soon talked out of that as a result of not wanting to offend Cavemen everywhere.

Since it seems that I am losing out here on the real wave of  "The Caveman", I have decided to do it myself and start my own campaign. Since I kind of took a beating yesterday after taking on Adobe, and since Dave Taylor believes my Bloggers For Hire operation to be similar to second class, I’m beginning the new campaign here:

"Blogging, so easy  Jim Turner can do it." 

Of course, you have my permission to actually let everyone know just how easy blogging is since nobody would possibly believe that I could actually do it successfully.  TGIF!!

Tags: The Caveman, ABC, GIECO, Robert Scoble, Linkbait, Digg, PayPerPost, Loren Feldman, 1938 Media, Om Malik, Dave Winer, Perez Hilton, Mike Arrington, TechCrunch, Brian Clark, Jason Calacanis, Adobe, Dave Taylor, Jim Turner, Bloggers For Hire, Jeremy Wright, Shel Israel, Debbie Weil, Gnomedex, Blog Business Summit, Blog World Expo, Instapundit, Little Green Footballs, Daily Kos

Sphere It

I was recently speaking with my friend Ben about blogs and sponsorship and I was inspired by Ben to write this post following a post he wrote about sponsors and blogs.   I am taking his good advice and making it more on the extreme side of blog sponsorship.  After all we all would like to make as much money as possible monetizing our blogs.  When I began to think of this I saw my blog becoming the poster child of blog monetizing and having it look like the Blog 2.0 NASCAR of the blogging world.  Sure we could put good quality content into each of our posts, but why not put a little money making scratch in alongside that good quality content.  I’m sure the readers would not have any problem reading through my words of wisdom if there were the occasional logoed advertisement with perhaps a link or two here and there to direct them to the paid sponsorship of this blog.  (Note:  None of these companies have actually sponsored this blog post, and in no way is this a paid review of any of the companies listed herein in spite of what PayPerPost may be advocating after "full disclosure".)  There appears to be a few spots left that I have not yet covered with logos, are there any other takers for the spots?

[Hat Tip For Logos to Font Shop]

Tags: blog logos, web 2.0, blog revenue, monetizing blogs, Instigator Blog, PayPerPost, blog advertising, blog marketing

Powered by Qumana

Sphere It

I am one of the biggest fans of Dave Taylor and I always listen when he speaks because it is usually brilliant information and something that I usually  implement into my own blogging practices.  With that said I now have to cry foul!  Dave recently posted about a blogger named Colleen that was warned by Wordpress.com by mail that she was violating their terms of service.  Now he is calling Wordpress.com and Matt Mullenweg out for their actions and asking whether he missed "the memo that said Wordpress was promoted to blog police?"

No Dave, the memo you refer to missing is spelled out in the Wordpress.com terms of service, something that you vehemently preach in each of your discussions of Google’s Adsense and Adword programs.  You are very good at making sure each of your presentations has a warning of paying attention to Google’s terms of service, because it is Google’s law.  Wordpress’ terms of service seem very clear to me and are spelled out in a very direct fashion, and I’ll start with their indication of "The Gist" of their TOS:

Our basic service is free, and we plan to offer paid upgrades for advanced features such as domain hosting and extra storage. Our service is designed to give you as much control and ownership over what goes on your blog as possible and encourage you to express yourself freely. However, be responsible in what you blog. In particular, make sure that none of the prohibited items listed below appear on your blog or get linked to from your blog (things like spam, viruses, hate content, etc). Please make sure you read through the list and the rest of the terms and agree with them before you get started.

In reference to the notice received by the blogger, you make a good point that 12 hours seems like a unreasonable notice of a violation, and I would also stand behind you to advocate that Wordpress.com change the notice of violation provision:

Automattic [Wordpress.com] may also from time to time change its policies on offering commercial content or displaying advertising, and it may do this without notice. (emphasis added)

Although you and I may stand on the side of fairness, we both are unwarranted in our plea.

I should note that in their Responsibility of Contributors section, a subtopic of the agreement which is also in highlighted text, asks that the contributor warrant that [agree to]:

the Content is not spam, and does not contain unethical or unwanted commercial content designed to drive traffic to third party sites or boost the search engine rankings of third party sites, or to further unlawful acts (such as phishing) or mislead recipients as to the source of the material (such as spoofing); (emphasis added)

Although I cannot completely agree to the statement as printed, it is clear that they do not want a blogger to commercialize their blogs for the benefits of companies or in the case you speak of, advertisers, and more particularly, using PayPerPost.com.  I think your common sense question of "(Unwanted? According to whom??)" is very easy to answer–according to Wordpress.com.  This is of course a very literal and hyper-technical reading of the terms, but I’m sure it would be used in any brief in support of their position.

Finally, paragraph 2 goes on to empower Wordpress.com to:

(ii) terminate or deny access to and use of the Website to any individual or entity for any reason, in Automattic’s sole discretion.

I would also add that "any individual or entity" would also describe the blog contributor, and unfortunately in this case, Colleen herself.  What you consider and argue "arbitrarily dropping the axe" may seem arbitrary, but is without merit.  Colleen has agreed to all of the above before she ever wrote a word.

Your examples of a fast food chain post, an affiliate link and the rest is all a red herring.  Wordpress.com has the power and ability to, in your words:

Wordpress now deems that bloggers cannot earn money from blog entries on their sites. Period. No question, and if you ask, you’ll be given the boot with just a few hours warning, if any.

The next point of your post is excellent advice to any business, and advice I always give to each of my clients.  I  advocate having  power over your own site.  Don’t ever give another company power over your blog.  Hosting with Wordpress.com and others is a problem in that regard.  If a business cannot afford to host their own site, then they are probably not long for the business world.

I did acknowledge your link to Robert Scoble’s post about the issue and I agree with Robert in part about Wordpress.com protecting its reputation, but I also asked myself the same thing after seeing Robert’s Wordpress.com hosted site with your statement:

Robert has Amazon affiliate links on his page to monetize his blog traffic, and that’s apparently not any sort of problem.

Then of course, my legal mind went back to that question you asked of monetizing being "unwanted" by whom?  Apparently, Wordpress.com in its own discretion believes that Robert’s affiliate link is appropriate, and the PayPerPost.com business model is inappropriate.  Is this far to PayPerPost.com?  It’s not about fairness would be my answer, it’s about Wordpress.com’s ability to do what ever they feel is in the interest of Wordpress.com.  Is it the proper thing?  I would advise Matt against continuing the practice strictly from a public relations point of view. 

I trumpet your advice not to recommend any company using  Wordpress.com for their company blog.  I should admit I have recommended that people that want to practice blogging use the Wordpress.com service.

Calling Wordpress and Matt Mullenweg blog policemen as if to infer that they are the SS of the blogosphere is over the top even for your well stated opinion.  Are you willing to stand behind that statement by labeling Google with that same moniker? If not, perhaps Wordpress.com is owed an apology.  If you are willing to make that statement on your blog, I will in advance apologize to you.  Of course, if you did disparage Google, you might be jeopardizing your Google account by arbitrarily violating their TOS.  Shall we test those waters?

Tags: Wordpress.com, Dave Taylor, PayPerPost.com, Robert Scoble, Matt Mullenweg, Google, Google Adsense, Google Adwords

Powered by Qumana

Sphere It

There’s a story worth paying attention to in The Wall Street Journal (available via MediaChannel.org): Blogger Faces Lawsuit Over Comments Posted by Readers. I firmly believe that bloggers themselves need to make sure they follow commonly-held standards about libel, copyright violation, fair use, and other legal niceties (and not simply because it’s required.) But fact-checking and/or editing your comments? I’d worry about the negative message that sends your readers, and know that going down the slippery slope of editing/vetting comments could very well create more troubles than it solves. I know, for example, that the standard for bulletin boards and other forums used to be the ‘hands off’ model – or in other words, to treat the service as a common carrier instead of an adjunct of your own publishing model, following the theory that AT&T can’t be held liable if you transmit information about bomb-building over their telephone lines, for example. And, in fact, the article’s initial conclusion supports my stance:

Legal analysts said the case falls into somewhat murky legal territory, but that Mr. Wall may have some protection from liability under federal law. Courts generally have held that the operators of computer message boards and mailing lists cannot be held liable for statements posted by other people. Blogs might be viewed in a similar light, they said.

Of course, you want to reserve the right to delete truly egregious comments (not to mention spam or off-topic postings) – but I’d recommend that you do so as part of an overall comment policy that you make readily available to your readers – and you do so with a very light hand. Should bloggers fact-check their commenters, though? I’d argue against it. First of all, in an open comments system, anyone has the right to reply, to refute, or to take on critics. And secondly, unless the errors are truly glaring, I think it’s not necessary. Agree? Disagree? Have at it…!

Technorati Tags : Blogger+Lawsuit, Aaron+Wall, Blog+Comments, Wall+Street+Journal

Sphere It