What's Happening at the Herald: 3

You can read episodes 1 and 2 of "What's Happening at the Herald" to understand this correspondence.

hi Prok -

Just wanted to let you know that we're giving Pix a little promotion, though it's one that's going to be accompanied by a slight editorial policy change at the Herald. And of course, it's one of those promotions that only comes with more responsibility, not with any more money or a better title, but as Pix already knows, we're punks that way. The editorial change affects your posting status, which is why I'm writing.

Basically, we're going to let Pix do things like add new authors to the Herald so that they can post drafts of their stories and she can then edit and approve them. To level the playing field, I've made your posting status "Junior Author," which is going to be the default status for all the Herald writers who aren't Pix, Uri, Pat the Rat or me, at least for the moment. That means that all the writers will post drafts, Pix will edit them, and then post them when she sees fit, which will help her regulate news flow and editorial schedule. We felt
it best to put all the writers at the same level of authority so as to keep things very democratic and so as not to create any kind of FIC at the Herald, which, as I'm sure you'll agree, is best for all.

So keep the stories coming, they'll just be going through the U-bend from now on, along with everyone else's.

Cheers,
Walker

Hi, Mark,

I won't be posting any more stories to the Herald then, because far from being a "FIC" (rolls eyes) I was merely a staff reporter with posting privileges on level with other editors and staff reporters with posting privileges, such as at other blogs like Terra Nova or SLOG.

If you can't achieve a level of like-mindedness among a core of editors and staff writers who trust each other to post stories, and consult when needed voluntarily, then you can't have a newspaper, or at least, not one with me in it, because it signals that the lack of trust has become so prevalent, and the pressure for political correctness so high, and the backlash by those covered in unflattering ways -- and properly so -- so fierce -- that you can only use vetting with politically-correct considerations to mute and soften coverage.

The Herald has always kept close to mafia, griefer, fraudsters, prostitutes, and pornographers so as to keep the headlines and news flowing. Apparently it isn't interested in having any critical stance towards these forces, that often themselves are in great positions of power and influence, and surely not the downtrodden.

What's been happening at the Herald is appalling, because far from be willing to cover these characters both positively and negatively, the no-show editors are merely caving to the mob of minority readers who are in those very groups covered -- not the general readership.

Each time I report a story, and cover what's *really happening* in a group, the people who have been covered and don't like the coverage (island fraudsters, notorious PN and w-hat griefers and sectarian Dutch
artists) all glom on the comments and jackboot me in the face, over and over again, with a handful of 3-4 trolls like Csven or Reality who should have been long ago crushed by one-liners from Uri.

No editors fight back against the mob justice of the comments. No editors take a stand. Editors are silent. A call for having me fired is made, and nothing is said. I point out that without any defense of principles, I'm sorry, I have to go on responding to baits in the comments. NOT responding DOES NOT make them go away, but only makes them pile on more and more and more, publishing more lies and spins to the stories.

And in a grave disservice to readers, the policy of moderating comments wasn't even TOLD or EXPLAINED, and that's unconscionable.

In fact, the latest controversial story bout the raid in Blister *was given to Pixeleen to edit voluntarily and in good faith, and she edited it*. Hello? We discussed over a 24-hour cycle how to cover the conflicting sources and the controversy *and Pixeleen ruled on it*.

That's how it should be done -- with voluntary submission of controversial stories.

However, my VOLUNTARY action in good faith wasn't then followed with good faith. There was abolutely no further defense AND OWNERSHIP by Pixeleen of that story. She went and second-guessed me, spending hours with the artists, sympathizing with them, hearing their side *and never even reporting that side*, which would then come out with the obvious fact: that this supposedly little-trafficked artist's studio in Blister
where she didn't want too many visitors was supplememented by a HUGE MALL with 22,558 traffic on it PLACED IN SEARCH WITH AN AD, with a brisk sale of the art, and camp chairs to encourage traffic. It took me finally doing a follow-up on this story to put the entire thing into perspective. And no, by then, seeing Pixeleen's refusal to provide even a semblance of objectivity on this story, or to stand by the story SHE
EDITED before that, I wasn't willing to run yet another story by her in good faith.

If Michael Linden has given a private clearance to a controversial artist for their works and set the lines for "broadly offensive" higher than we thought, we all need to benefit from it. No one else reported on that picture, remaining for sale, with the artist claiming a clearance. Not a single other SL blog or newspaper covered this story *period*. I at least took it on, knowing it would only end in the usual hatred from all parties concern.

If I had waited for Pixeleen, who saw it days ago to report it -- it wouldn't have happened. And btw, I waited in vain for the promised "editorial policy" to materialize that would defend principles -- that reporters can't be second-guessed, that people are willing to comment and send in their own stories, but they can't keep harassing reporters.

In fact, I'm not so sure the way to "balance" my stories that in fact are *rightfully* critical of these characters who lie and misrepresent themselves so egregiously is to allow them or the trolls in the comment section like Jessica Holyoke to provide the "balance". It's not balance, it's sand-bagging, and Pixeleen, instead of taking an editorial stand herself, or putting in her own reports or those of other staff writers, has instead preferred to take baldly propagandistic material and just place it as is. That's just not good journalism, even for a virtual tabloid.

The place to review staff writers is when you include them for posting. If you can't do that, and feel each and every piece they do has to be vetted, you can't have a blog in real time, given that every single person except me makes the Herald generally come second after very demanding real-life jobs.

So go through the U-bend yourself, Mark, and let the Herald come out as a pretzel contorting itself and bowing and scraping to ugly forces in SL. The Herald is well on its way to become as politically-correct as
the Blingsider, Terra Nova, and Clickable Culture, with no serious criticism of the major power holders of Second Life and other worlds.

Prokofy

Good try, Prok, but none of that is what's actually happening. I'm not clear on why you were cool with being edited last week but you aren't cool with it this week, but if that's the case, we'll be sorry to see you go. If you can't take the heat of an open comments thread (the policy on which was set more than a year ago), the kitchen door is open. I invite you, however, to give the new policy a try. I think you'll see it's not as bad as you may fear.

No, Mark, that's all wrong -- I *do* take the heat of open comments day after day, night after night *AND NONE OF YOU DO*. So piss off with any idea that I don't take heat or can't take it. I take it; I answer it.
None of you reply. It's absolutely despicable of any of you to claim I can't "take the heat" of an open comments policy when none of you are ever targeted nor ever respond nor ever comment in defense of
principles, even for your own stories (and that's why you aren't targeted -- but now you will be, you're on your own).

I take heat for stories that I didn't even write (!) or caption (!) such as the island fraudster article where *I* am singled out for inworld harassment, bullying and abuse merely because I went to take a picture (!), a picture which didn't even show any names when Pixeleen captioned it later. I'm the target of a frontal campaign on this even involving SLBB merely because I'm a target -- Pixeleen is missing in action.

I take the heat from Lisae, who is clearly an organized manipulator of media, and her cheerleaders, though Pixeleen had edited the story -- and had promised that she would do a editorial column finally on the
problem of witch-hunting in general -- which never materialized.

I take the heat for Woodbury, when I had absolutely no prior take on that story, went to cover it because several readers were urgently clamouring about it and the Lindens even closed it for 5 days and put it on the police blotter and April, and I was surprised to discover it was PNs -- and covered it objectively as a PN-infiltrated operation.

That led to the Herald once again having to shut down the comments and moderate them due to PN spamming -- a policy that was never explained.

Pixeleen actually believes that every author should be removing comments they don't like -- not just spam. Are you cool with that Walker? Can you *claim* that the Herald has an "open comments policy" with "heat" for reporters to take when a) they are moderated and b) Pixeleen removes any she doesn't like where she can, and not just spam?!

Why aren't I "cool" with being edited? Because a) Pixeleen did not respond and had absolutely nothing to say in the comments and instead, prefers to set up antagonists like Lisae or Jessica to do *stories* not comments which merely adds to the sectarian feels of the whole enterprise; b) Pixeleen did not publish the editorial promised that would be protective of the reporters to publish their stories and that while readers were welcome to comment, they could not expect the Herald to remove stories or fire reporters and c) because Pixeleen went and hung out at the same mall I went to and never followed up with the real story of this Lisae. Instead, you and she decided to let Lisae have her own article -- and once you do that, you might as well let them all write the paper themselves. That indeed is what has been happening, as appalling stories have gone in from people who should only be in comments, not writers.

The solution to the problem of one voice becoming too dominant is to have more writers, but to give them posting privileges. Onder Skall, Fiend Ludwig, Curious Rousselot, and anyone else you can encourage to
step up, should all be encouraged to write more and have posting privileges. There should be a pool of a dozen people, and not 4 -- given that of those 4, only one posts at least every other day, and the others post not even once a week.

The solution isn't to make everyone squeeze through Pixeleen's keyhole, when she can wait 24 hours or longer due to RL job and life exigencies to clear a story.

I could have scooped the story of FlipperPA's PPV 10 days ago when I first had it, long before Barney had it, but like other controversial stories I've held (like the Volunteers going on child porn raids), I've held the stories for weeks because I'm tired of being accused of bashing people or selectively targeting the FIC or whatever. So as a result, the Herald comes after Barney, and frankly, after my own blog when it finally gets the Flipper story.

So that's why I will not be posting. I won't resign, because I think it's important for you wafflers to decide what you want at the Herald, and stand up for it, and not let assholes in the comments run a reporter out on a rail and do your dirtywork for you. Get rid of someone you don't like YOURSELVES instead of making the griefers the bagmen.

I resigned before when you did this because I really felt you caved to ESC pressure and you still fail to see how much Christian Prior and FlipperPA knew about and were involved in Copybot before the story came
out. I seriously don't think you should be involved in the Herald because of your obvious conflict of interest. I don't even understand why you *are* still involved, except for one reason: so that you are still involved when your book comes out.

A book for which you hasted to use everything about my story for free, and to take my picture and use it. Yes, Walker, sure looks great to push me out of the Herald just when your book is coming out. At least
wait until your book comes out, sells, and then gets in the bargain book, THEN fire me : )

I will simply move to my own blog and post the news. No one is indispensable, and you can find other strong writers, surely, and increase readership if you steer clear of controversy that you feel can't gain public acceptance.

If you feel so strongly that you have to make up an entire new editorial policy just because of me and my stories, even those I've had Pixeleen share in, then you need to fire me, silence my voice, and take
responsibility for what you are doing, not cloak it as "editorial policy".

I'm happy to wait as long as it takes for you to realize what is needed here: staff writers you trust to post on their own -- more of them -- and an editor who isn't taking sides with griefers and scam artists merely to get the story.

Prokofy

Actually, Prok, we really are doing this to give Pix more control over the flow of stories, not to shut you up. And yes, we may well restore various people's free posting privileges, even yours. That's a decision that will be made over time, probably by Pix with some input from us. But at this point, it's more important to me to groom Pix for further greatness than it is to give you the free rein you seem to think you / we need. If you aren't going to post, you can't be considered on staff, sorry. Although I'm happy to have you remain on
the masthead for the moment in case you change your mind.

As far as why I'm still involved, I'm still involved because I love the Herald, because I run all the ad stuff and pay Pixeleen every month, because I am a visible presence out in the physical world (which helps us draw readers), because I still edit and post other writers' stories (such as Lisae's, which I handled all by my little
lonesome, thank you very much), because one or two of us just aren't enough to manage the whole thing, and so that we have someone to do things like talk to you in emails, head off takedown notices, etc. Oh,
and *definitely* so that I'm still here when the book comes out, you got that right. I am one happy ho on the internets, believe me.

Mark/Walker,

Actually, you *are* doing this to shut me up because you know full well that Pixeleen doesn't wish to have me to post, is unhappy with my criticism of her wimpiness -- and yours -- and wishes to have a place to shine without me to worry about, yet wishes to hide behind someone else to have this happen.

Do keep in mind that the Herald only descends further into silly fanboy amateur hour with this sort of policy. Writers have posting privileges at Terra Nova, the Blingsider, SLOG, and Metaversed, where groups of
COLLEAGUES all EQUALLY SHARE FREE POSTING PRIVILEGES, under their own name, and are NOT funnelled through one editor. Why? Because they have collegiality and trust. When that goes, it goes, and you don't fix it by funnelling.

If you can't make this decision NOW, about restoring people's free posting privileges and ADDING to the list for "balance's sake," or if you can't imagine coming to this decision within some reasonable amount of time, say, 30 days, while you "restore" whatever "balance" you think the Herald needs and restore collegiality, then you have to FIRE people who you can't use. Sorry, but I won't resign, nor let the comment-fiskers and griefers do your dirty work for you.

And I'll be forced to publicize what you are doing if you can't have the courage of your convictions, and post an editorial, in which you announce that a) all writers are being funnelled through Pixeleen b) all comments are moderated and removed as each writer sees fit, regardless of whether they are spam and c) those writers who can't agree to this are removed from the masthead and fired from the Herald.

Of course that policy will be rightly seen as caving to people who file libel protests speciously to intimidate reporters and who subject the Herald to denial-of-service attacks with spam.

If you feel that if you can't have people on the masthead if they don't post, then you have to announce that you are firing them, full stop.

Saying "they didn't wish to follow simple rules" is bullshit, as you know exactly what you are doing.

So it's about me remaining on the masthead and not announcing my resignation in case YOU change your mind, big guy -- not about me remaining there in case *I* change my mind. And I will make this public
if I see you continue in your passive/aggressive stunt here.

Your decision to publish Lisae's story was a very poor one, and shows you being whipsawed by whoever threatens you with complaints about libel to the ISP. Pixeleen's befriending and sympathizing with the
fraudulent and manipulative Lisae is also hugely poor judgement. It's a huge disservice to the integrity of the Herald. It's not how you handle people who threaten libel complaints -- especially when there is
absolutely no question of libel at stake!!!

So go ahead, be a happy ho on the Internets, groom Pixeleen for greatness, who in fact has only coddled and accommodated griefers instead of standing up for the freedom of reporters to report, and enjoy every bit of it. As you can enjoy as much robust criticism of your book when it comes out, for making it appear that you are muck-rakers standing for free speech, when in fact you are not standing by people you claimed to champion the right of free speech for, when it came to your own commercial interests.

Prokofy

On Lisae: We have often let the subjects of our stories respond with a story of their own. There's plenty of precedence for this in the Herald. Not a special case, sorry. And in fact, Lisae's story was hardly even a response, it was just a look at a related subject.

Also, writers aren't moderating their own stories' comments. They don't have that authority and never have. We may go that way in future. And we may announce it or we may not, that's kind of up to us.

You're welcome to write whatever you like, however. (I assume you're talking about a post on your own blog, since you've already said you're not going to post to the Herald.) A fairly large part of me would actually like to fire you, since you're kind of pissing me off at this point (not to mention wasting my time), but in the end I'd rather you just stayed and posted like everyone else.

Feel free to quote from any of my emails in your post, btw. In fact, reproduce the entire thread. If you don't want to take up the space in your post, though, I'll be happy to do it in the comments, if you like.

Good luck in your future endeavors,

Walker

Mark,

I think you'll see from this transcript of a chat July 11 that Pixeleen does indeed make the practice of removing comments, and urges me to do so as a solution to comment-fisking.

And you can see there are many other issues at stake, too. Like Pixeleen solving the problem of griefers not liking their coverage by letting them have their own stories to post on top of mine. Not other reporters, but comments' antagonists and the griefers themselves.

Prokofy

7/22/07 chatlog

[19:22] Prokofy Neva: I was going to use these pictures for a story on my blog about griefers griefing while the Lindens stand by and cave to griefers
[19:22] Prokofy Neva: but I should use it on a story about the Herald caving to griefers and porn threateners to force me out, that would be more appropriate
[19:22] Pixeleen Mistral: the Herald is not forcing you out
[19:22] Pixeleen Mistral: and it is not caving in to anything
[19:23] Prokofy Neva: Yes it is, yes you are
[19:23] Prokofy Neva: make up any story you like, but you cannot fool people on this one, it's clear what's happening
[19:23] Prokofy Neva: Your little friend Lisae doesn't like how her activity is covered, she is confused and conflicted about it; you befriend and coddle her, and give her the greenlight to harass me
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: Walker indulges her in her own story, like a child, the way you indulged Jessica and Jaynelle
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: neither of you stand for principles in editorials
[19:24] Pixeleen Mistral: then you ought to post all of the e-mails with walker so that people can make up their own minds
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: then Walker says everything has to be cleared for you
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: Don't hide behind Walker
[19:24] Pixeleen Mistral: I think Walker suggested that, right?
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: Oh, quite, I'll be doing that
[19:24] Pixeleen Mistral: have fun with it
[19:24] Prokofy Neva: yep, and those who care about the Herald and bother to read it may not be persuaded
[19:25] Prokofy Neva: but those who understand how juvenile and wimpy you are already stopped reading the Herald long ago and started other blogs
[19:25] Prokofy Neva: have fun with the kids!
[19:25] Pixeleen Mistral: whatever
[19:25] Prokofy Neva: I have kids of my own; I'm less sentimental about them
[19:26] Prokofy Neva: Publish an editorial saying you have fired Prokofy, like your editorial accepting Heartun's resignation
[19:26] Prokofy Neva: instead of wimping out
[19:26] Prokofy Neva: Even SLOG or Metaversed or Terra Nova have the contributors have posting rights Pixeleen
[19:26] Prokofy Neva: if you can't trust someone to come to you with a story, which in fact I did, then you shouldn't have them in your paper
[19:29] Pixeleen Mistral: the story I did edits on was fine - and you may recall you were happy that I hedged it a bit
[19:29] Prokofy Neva: yes, you will recall I went to seek your opinion on a controversial and evolving story.
[19:29] Prokofy Neva: Which you then let me hang out to dry on, went to spend hours with the subject behind my back, then said nothing for days
[19:29] Prokofy Neva: typical
[19:29] Prokofy Neva: promising an editorial that never materialized
[19:30] Pixeleen Mistral: its the excessive volume of stories that I had no say over that put you on your own
[19:30] Pixeleen Mistral: if you could stop posting for like 2 days I could get an editorial in
[19:30] Prokofy Neva: well I had posting privileges, and an understanding that only controversial stories should get review
[19:30] Prokofy Neva: bullshit
[19:30] Pixeleen Mistral: but you cannot stop posting
[19:30] Prokofy Neva: you put in crapola instead of that
[19:30] Prokofy Neva: being manipulative
[19:30] Prokofy Neva: no, the NEWS that Lisae has a MALL with 20,000 traffic can't wait
[19:30] Pixeleen Mistral: Prokofy - YOU are being manipulative
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: after she's defiantly suggested the link not be posted
[19:31] Pixeleen Mistral: like really really manipulative
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: no, I'm not allowing myself to be thrown
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: by some twat with porn who tries to play psychologist
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: sorry, but I don't do that
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: YOU couldn't publish that TRUTH
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: so I had to
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: YOU could have published that she had a fucking MALL
[19:31] Prokofy Neva: but you didn't
[19:31] Pixeleen Mistral: are you sure you have the truth?
[19:32] Prokofy Neva: that there is a mall with her porn in it with 20,000 traffic?
[19:32] Prokofy Neva: that she has an organized Internet site?
[19:32] Prokofy Neva: she may or may not be 18; who knows?
[19:32] Prokofy Neva: what the truth is inworld I can report on
[19:32] Prokofy Neva: traffic doesn't lie
[19:32] Pixeleen Mistral: well, I'm going to bed - but I hope you will consider writing for the herald in the future
[19:33] Prokofy Neva: No
[19:33] Prokofy Neva: writers have to have posting privileges
[19:33] Prokofy Neva: all of them
[19:33] Prokofy Neva: get more of them
[19:33] Second Life: User not online - message will be stored and delivered later.
[19:33] Prokofy Neva: but don't funnel them all through your sieve, it's not the free press anymore then.
[19:33] Second Life: User not online - message will be stored and delivered

Comments

[Walker Spaight]

That's all completely accurate -- except for the chat log. That may be accurate too, but it's not the one you emailed to me. This is:

Mark,

I think you'll see from this transcript of a chat July 11 that Pixeleen
does indeed make the practice of removing comments, and urges me to do
so as a solution to comment-fisking.

And you can see there are many other issues at stake, too. Like
Pixeleen solving the problem of griefers not liking their coverage by
letting them have their own stories to post on top of mine. Not other
reporters, but comments' antagonists and the griefers themselves.

Prokofy

Prokofy Neva: Um, Curious writing a story on the economy tanking that I
said I'd do??? That we discussed? Huh? What's up with that. The only
reason I posted on my own blog recently on these same issues is so as
not to um "step on" all you lovely ladies' pretty articles like Jessica
and Janelle. Curious is a twit. I feel the Herald is really suffering
lately, quality wise. And it's not because I'm driven to
comment-fisking or obsessive articles -- which is merely a response to
YOUR printing onesided articles. It's because you keep posting tripe
from brainless idiots. There's no editorial selectivity.

Prokofy Neva: I mean WTF? Curious is too stupid to grasp that people
can rent islands, and therefore there can be more rentals/people/land
business even if premiums are down

Prokofy Neva: You ONLY did it to have a byline of someone who wouldn't
get hate mail -- but did you ever consider that the hate comments come
because nobody shuts them off or stands up to them? Curious could say
the same thing and not have 1/10th of the hate male.

Prokofy Neva: I was recently offered other media projects, I held them
off thinking, oh, of course I must remain with the Herald, the Herald
is the most vital press outlet of SL! But if it has this petty
bullshit, ill-conceived and capricious editorial policy like "let's
balance the saddlebags left and right, shall we?' and "let's thin out
Prokofy's byline and step on every post he puts up," shall we, what is
really the point?

Pixeleen Mistral: ok, now I can look at your IMs
Pixeleen Mistral: let's see

Prokofy Neva: um, i'm seriously getting annoyed at what can only be
called um what's the word I should use?
Prokofy Neva: underhanded cuny behaviour -- does that about sum it up?
Prokofy Neva: erm *cunty
Prokofy Neva: underhanded cunty behaviour, deliberately provocative,
annoying, mean-spirited
Prokofy Neva: and that's just petty -- if you don't want me to post at
the Herald and you want to havey our own little controlled fiefdom with
your um "balanced" take on SL, I don't have to post there

Pixeleen Mistral: Prokofy _ I asked for an economy story 2 weeks ago
Pixeleen Mistral: I got tired of waiting

Prokofy Neva: Um, I had one BITCH
Prokofy Neva: that is fucking LAME
Prokofy Neva: I posted most of it ON MY OWN BLOG
Prokofy Neva: WHY?
Prokofy Neva: because you have tied up the Herald with post after post
about Woodbury!
Prokofy Neva: without consulting me
Prokofy Neva: you didn't say "Oh, let's run that economy story now"
Prokofy Neva: that is fucking A LIE

Pixeleen Mistral: maybe if you spent more time polishing your stories
and less time spammning the comments?

Prokofy Neva: Um, my stories are polished? it appeared on my blog?
Prokofy Neva: and fuck you, P.S.
Prokofy Neva: I don't spam comments
Prokofy Neva: I respond to YOUR FUCKING OBSESSIVE POSTING AGTAINST ME
OF OTHER STORIES
Prokofy Neva: You bear EVERY bit of blame for woodbury obsession, not me
Prokofy Neva: You posted MORE stories than me
Prokofy Neva: I posted ONE and left it alone
Prokofy Neva: YOU persisted with it after that, not me
Prokofy Neva: and persisted tendentiously, biased, and without
consultation on the facts
Prokofy Neva: I wouldn't have to post long chat logs if you PAID
ATTENTION to me when I told you I had more info on it
Prokofy Neva: If you would get off your ass and take AN EDITORIAL
POSITION we wouldn't have these spamming griefing comments that I feel
called on to answer now would we?

Pixeleen Mistral: I'd be able to take an editorial position is you
would stop spamming the comments

Prokofy Neva: Um, that's totally lame
Prokofy Neva: you are chicken and trying to look good

Pixeleen Mistral: every time I want to write an Op/Ed piece you muddy
the waters

Prokofy Neva: so you can keep uup your streeet cred and go to w-hat
bday parties and look cool
Prokofy Neva: um, that's bullshit
Prokofy Neva: you could have writte ONE PIECE that would have been 20
times better than this twat Jessica
Prokofy Neva: seriously
Prokofy Neva: it's really lame and retarded
Prokofy Neva: I don't spam comments, I defend myself since um cough
nobody else does

Pixeleen Mistral: I could write a better piece yes, but I am kinda busy
in RL

Prokofy Neva: Have you ever written an editorial in your life?
Prokofy Neva: well then don't edit the newspaper?
Prokofy Neva: find someone else
Prokofy Neva: you don't get to play "the real life card"
Prokofy Neva: we all have real life
Prokofy Neva: we all have jobs, you are not special

Pixeleen Mistral: I'd like to think I'm special

Prokofy Neva: um that's the root of your problem seriously

Pixeleen Mistral: but maybe I'm not
Prokofy Neva: it takes 10 minutes to write an editorial in defense of
your own reporters
Prokofy Neva: something you have never done
Prokofy Neva: which should have been done ages ago
Prokofy Neva: so that every two-bit asshole kid doesn't grief me for
YOUR captions
Prokofy Neva: YOUR captions
Prokofy Neva: YOUR story
Prokofy Neva: NOT my story
Prokofy Neva: the nerve of saying you "waited 2 weeks for an economic
story" that's utter bullshit

Pixeleen Mistral: I would be able to write that editorial if you would
ever shut up for 2 days in the comments

Prokofy Neva: I had one on my blog last week jeez
Prokofy Neva: that's lame Pixeleen

Pixeleen Mistral: but since you have to hit back hard all the time

Prokofy Neva: write the editorial, and the comments will shush

Pixeleen Mistral: you can defend yourself

Prokofy Neva: it's because you can't do that they keep up
Prokofy Neva: they keep up, I fight back

Pixeleen Mistral: if you would stop fighting back all the time you
would have more allies

Prokofy Neva: if you can manage to get out of your liberal haze on this
for five minutes and explain what's really going on
Prokofy Neva: then it will dry up, I assure you
Prokofy Neva: No, that's not the case
Prokofy Neva: you have never done an editorial in your life

Pixeleen Mistral: yes, that is the case

Prokofy Neva: nor has Uri
Prokofy Neva: and watch, I could wait 2 7 14 days and nothing will
appear now but more Jessica thumbsuckers and Curious bedwetters
Prokofy Neva: it's really dragging the Herald down
Prokofy Neva: allowing people like that to make opeds out of their comments
Prokofy Neva: I would never have to publish chat logs or oped myself if
YOU did not do that
Prokofy Neva: YOU are responsible
Prokofy Neva: YOU have overdosed on this story NOT ME
Prokofy Neva: and overdosed in a shockingly biased way

Pixeleen Mistral: really? I did?

Prokofy Neva: that's really disturbing
Prokofy Neva: You were the one who has written all the stories after
Griefer U
Prokofy Neva: duh
Prokofy Neva: and biased, and one-sided
Prokofy Neva: and then letting the propagandist talk
Prokofy Neva: with no editorial to follow
Prokofy Neva: and letting people literally come and crash my sims, and
laugh along with them
Prokofy Neva: it's an outrage
Prokofy Neva: are you really that vain?

Pixeleen Mistral: I don't think so

Prokofy Neva: Um, if you weren't so considerate about "how you look"
Prokofy Neva: you would have had at least a *comment* saying -- knock
it off, you are goofs, you crashed the sim, go home
Prokofy Neva: but you can't even do the basics
Prokofy Neva: instead you let an entire sick mob stomp me with no defense
Prokofy Neva: and then have the nerve to bitch that I "spam comments"
Prokofy Neva: like I'm supposed to just sit still
Prokofy Neva: fucking shit
Prokofy Neva: my God
Prokofy Neva: what a tendentious ridiculous piece this is from Curious
Prokofy Neva: ?
Prokofy Neva: is this what you yourself believe?

Pixeleen Mistral: I ran what I had for stories

Pixeleen Mistral: I assume you will tear it to shreds in the comments

Prokofy Neva: "In short, the people relying on the economy to pay
real-life bills (including tier) are going to lose big time. What about
the rest of us? Those of us, like myself, that are in Second Life for
the fun of it are going to get the opportunity to win and win big. "
Prokofy Neva: empty-headed class warfare
Prokofy Neva: very impressive Pixeleen

Pixeleen Mistral: I imagine there will be a few comments on that one

Prokofy Neva: um isn't that interesting
Prokofy Neva: you "expect me to tear it to shreds in the comments"
Prokofy Neva: like that's a built in fixer?
Prokofy Neva: like you didn't just say "stop spamming the comments"
Prokofy Neva: ridiculous

Pixeleen Mistral: I don't think you can keep from spamming the comments
Pixeleen Mistral: what I wish is that you would limit yourself to two
comments per story

Prokofy Neva: oh go to hell

Pixeleen Mistral: and spend time on writing good stories

Prokofy Neva: there is no SPACE for good stories

Pixeleen Mistral: instead of trying to bury all other opinions

Prokofy Neva: they are filled with a) naked girls b) dumb war stories
c) Uri's show-off pieces d) your obessions on biased coverage of Woodbury

Pixeleen Mistral: there is plenty of space for good stories
Pixeleen Mistral: but you'll have to give up waging stupid word-wars
with idiots in the comment section to write them

Prokofy Neva: I think I'd rather write stories for people who can
appreciate them, and protect me when I'm harassed and even have my sims
crashed over them.
Prokofy Neva: That would be in order.
Prokofy Neva: No, Pixeleen, YOU'd have to give up writing DUMBASS
articles your self
Prokofy Neva: and letting DUMBASS twats post DUMBASS articles TOO
Prokofy Neva: THEN I don't have to spam comments as you put it

Pixeleen Mistral: I let you post

Prokofy Neva: then I don't have to protect myself
Prokofy Neva: from someone posting a tendentious fake event calling for
me to be fired from the Herald
Prokofy Neva: without a single editorial comment
Prokofy Neva: not a one
Prokofy Neva: and you ask why I fight back
Prokofy Neva: SHAME ON YOU
Prokofy Neva: SHAME

Pixeleen Mistral: Uri and Walker didn't comment either
Pixeleen Mistral: I wonder why?

Prokofy Neva: SHAME ON ALL OF YOU
Prokofy Neva: because they are pussies
Prokofy Neva: all of you are
Prokofy Neva: the Herald always wants to look cool and be down with the
griefers
Prokofy Neva: that's always been the case
Prokofy Neva: so be down with the griefers
Prokofy Neva: that's fine

Pixeleen Mistral: why can't the Lindens protect your sims from being
crashed?
Pixeleen Mistral: why didn't they ban Tizzers?
Pixeleen Mistral: IF we can trust to all seeing all knowing Lindens,
then why is it that they allow this stuff to continue?
Pixeleen Mistral: I'm sorry - but my Op/Ed would be a bit more nuanced
than - someone crashed a sim - hang 'em high

Prokofy Neva: Pixeleen
Prokofy Neva: can you GRASP that they don't have anythying on Tizzers
because she is part of a CUNNING CONSPIRACY
Prokofy Neva: that this isn't just some wierdass shit from me
Prokofy Neva: but because it IS THE CASE
Prokofy Neva: that's how b/tards are
Prokofy Neva: they are banned in some countries
Prokofy Neva: elsewhere they can't be on free speech grounds

Pixeleen Mistral: why don't the lindens deal with the people behind the
conspiracy?

Prokofy Neva: they push the limits, the grief, they harass

Pixeleen Mistral: why don't the Lindens ban them?

Prokofy Neva: Tizzers directs people on Yahoo Messenger and Skype, not
inworld where there are records
Prokofy Neva: she uses all the same techniques of the SSG

Pixeleen Mistral: its not some sim that is the problem - its the people

Prokofy Neva: they linked me to their skypenetwork once and I saw it all
Prokofy Neva: well you can't arrest Karadzich and bin Ladn, they are
too cunning, you only get at their footsoldiers
Prokofy Neva: if you think Tizzers being at large is proof of
innocence, then you are more brainless than I could have imagined
Prokofy Neva: ask Khamon, who came to my sim to witness the whole thing
Prokofy Neva: I found him online and TP'd him in -- I tried to get Onders
Prokofy Neva: becaue I knew once someone saw how it goes down, they'd
get it
Prokofy Neva: tenant after tenant -- strangers -- IM me and say
Prokofy Neva: "Who is this Tizzers? she's hovering over my land"
Prokofy Neva: then 15 minutes later
Prokofy Neva: "Hey, I think she's gotten these people to shoot at me
and call me names, I'm a furry"
Prokofy Neva: now why does that happen over and over again
Prokofy Neva: beacuse it's deliberate, planned, systematic, not a goof

Pixeleen Mistral: isn't there something fundamentally wrong is you
build a synthetic world and cannot deal with the criminals at all?
Pixeleen Mistral: why can't this synthetic world be constructed to deal
with this problem?
Pixeleen Mistral: its planned and systematic, the Lindens log all chat
and know who everyone is - so why do we still have this problem?
Pixeleen Mistral: you are getting distracted by the symptoms - I'm
looking at root causes

Prokofy Neva: No Pixeleen
Prokofy Neva: you are full of shit
Prokofy Neva: I live the root causes
Prokofy Neva: I see it constantly
Prokofy Neva: you don't have 1/100th of the field experience with these
peoples that I do
Prokofy Neva: the Lindens are in on it too
Prokofy Neva: the griefers are in libsecondlife which they wish to
encourage

Pixeleen Mistral: we are not going to agree on the guilt by association
thing - I have been on the wrong side of that one too many times

Prokofy Neva: they made a strategic decision to encourage griefers to
bug hunt and help on open source
Prokofy Neva: maybe your sim needs more crashing
Prokofy Neva: that would concentrate the mind wonderfully
Prokofy Neva: Tizzers is NOT a victim of guilt by association
Prokofy Neva: she is a manipulator of that liberal value merely
Prokofy Neva: Janelle, Jim Schack -- all the same

Pixeleen Mistral: the root cause of this is Linden greed - and the
completely unverified accounts

Prokofy Neva: these are serial, hands-on killers
Prokofy Neva: no, these people often are verified
Prokofy Neva: my own police blotter shows unverifieds aren't a majority
Prokofy Neva: greed for money doesn't explain unpaid accounts for free

Pixeleen Mistral: right, they use unverified accounts for most of their
dirty work

Prokofy Neva: You just said you are on the wrong side of guilt by
association

Pixeleen Mistral: greed does explain it - the lindens had to get the
numbers up

Prokofy Neva: and yet you ask why the Lindens won't act against groups????

Pixeleen Mistral: and this game is weak

Prokofy Neva: what the fuck
Prokofy Neva: and don't get philosophical on me
Prokofy Neva: you are being a twit over this
Prokofy Neva: do you ACTUALLY think these people are innocent students?
Prokofy Neva: are you nuts??
Prokofy Neva: you need to get inworld more often

Pixeleen Mistral: those are guilty students, actually

Prokofy Neva: and on what grounds did you determine that?
Prokofy Neva: and if you could, where's the editorial, huh?

Pixeleen Mistral: but the Lindens don't care if they crash sims

Prokofy Neva: well then write that

Pixeleen Mistral: if the lindens cared it would not happen

Prokofy Neva: but you are too chicken
Prokofy Neva: and had you written that 2 weeks ago, they'd be chastened
and they'd fuss a day and then get lost
Prokofy Neva: when people in authority stand up to them, they wilt
Prokofy Neva: but no one ever does
Prokofy Neva: they stop bothering ME when I stand up to them
Prokofy Neva: the incidents from them are very much reduced from 1 year ago
Prokofy Neva: the tub girl used to be like my wall paper; now it has
not been used for a year

Pixeleen Mistral: btw - I'll be talking to angel fluffy soon
Pixeleen Mistral: that ought to be interesting
Pixeleen Mistral: like turning a rock over

Prokofy Neva: um, Im' sure you'll get along famously
Prokofy Neva: you two should hit it off well
Prokofy Neva: just ike you and Eddie Clift
Pixeleen Mistral: I hope so - that is usually how I get my best interviews

Prokofy Neva: flatter him, get him to talk, publish it, and then
pretend that's journalism
Prokofy Neva: right, yeah
Prokofy Neva: with out morals
Prokofy Neva: ok, Pixeleen, enjoy your celebration of furry capture rape!
Prokofy Neva: that sounds like just your thing

Pixeleen Mistral: well punching people you want to talk in the nose
doesn't work that well

Prokofy Neva: Angel deserves not just a punch, but a dire strangulation
Prokofy Neva: It's serious evil.

Pixeleen Mistral: agreed

Prokofy Neva: Again, you have no experience
Prokofy Neva: no you don't agree if you are about to go suck his dick
to get an interview
Prokofy Neva: bleh
Prokofy Neva: I'm unimpressed
Prokofy Neva: the Herald has never had morals
Prokofy Neva: it's disgusting really
Prokofy Neva: I don't feel at home there

Pixeleen Mistral: its a tabloid, prokofy
Prokofy Neva: I'll be looking for another home.
Prokofy Neva: Bye.

Pixeleen Mistral: keep the faith
Prokofy Neva: Go fuck yourself sideways

[Prokofy Neva]

It *is* the one I mailed you, Walker, I don't know what sort of game you're playing. It just got cut off. I sent you two, and didn't get all of it sent, apparently, that's all. I just looked in the sent queue and saw that it wasn't all there, it was too long.

And I figured if anyone wanted to see it, they'd ask for it.

Glad you published it in the comments! I'd have been happy to as well. It's an important part of the story, and helps put it all in perspective, if you ask me. I just don't always like to wear out even my long-suffering readers : )

[Prokofy Neva]

By the way, because people often enter into a hall of mirrors at times like this, it's useful to publish an actual LIST OF ARTICLES.

There is this very widespread, distorted picture even among Herald editors, that I was "filling up the Herald" with stories about griefers.

The reality of what's actually posted in STORIES belies this fake claim. It's what happens when *comments* to stories run into the HUNDREDS that this perception occurs.

Look at how interesting in fact the list is:

STORIES CRITICAL OF GRIEFERS

1. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/04/griefer_u.html
Griefer U Prokofy
2. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/when-the-music-.html
When the Music Stops, or When the Griefers Go Live
3. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/criminal-gangs-.html
Criminals Can't Ask for No Guilt
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/i-am-sure-tizze.html
4. Intlibber: I'm sure Tizzers is in on it and works for the prof"
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/attack-educatio.html
5. Attack--I Mean Educational Seminar on Ravenglass

CRITICALS NEUTRAL OR SUPPORTIVE OF GRIEFERS

1. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/woodbury-univer.html
Pixeleen Mistral Woodbury University Island Destroyed
2. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/06/superman-takes-.html
Superman Talks
3. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/outraged-sl-her.html
Outraged SL herald Readers Stage Protest Jessica Holyoke
4. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/woodbury-univ-1.html
Woodbury: University of Conspiracy?
5.
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/oped-should-we-.html
Should we all spy on each other Jessica Holyoke
6. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/06/alliance-navy-b.html
Pixeleen, Alliance Navy Base Becomes Furry Death Camp
7. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/06/sl-4th-birthday.html
Sl 4th Birthday Celebration -- Nobody Does it Better
8. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/06/the_justice_lea.html
The Justice League of Second Life peppermint fizz
9. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/interview-with-.html
Interview with Woodbury University's Edward Clift
Pixeleen Mistral

[Prokofy Neva]

Prokofy Neva: it's not "rising to the bait" Pixeleen
Prokofy Neva: that's where you are wrong
Prokofy Neva: it's earnest, helpful explanation
Prokofy Neva: if someone thinks I'm a lying fraud, I like to take on their concerns
Prokofy Neva: so let them come in threes, that might work
Prokofy Neva: it's also useful to have the anklebiters turn on you all for a change, because you don't get to feel what it's like
Prokofy Neva: and you think it's my fault
Prokofy Neva: Let somebody named Big Fitz and Little Fitz write to you and ask if your children are hungry
Prokofy Neva: I told my daughter that, she was actively upset
Pixeleen Mistral: you should see the comments I have been deleting
Prokofy Neva: I want YOU all to feel what that's like so you will stop blaming me
Prokofy Neva: well I don't delete them unless it's obvious child porn or racism
Prokofy Neva: and the Herald never explained its policy
Prokofy Neva: so really Uri needs to do that
Prokofy Neva: people really get5 annoyed when I tell them comments are moderated now
Prokofy Neva: they feel a violation of public trust
Pixeleen Mistral: they are free to run their own blogs
Prokofy Neva: a newspaper doesn't say that Pixeleen
Prokofy Neva: it's a newspaper, not a blog
Pixeleen Mistral: actually - one of my fav orite newspapers, the Economist hardly publishes comments at all
Pixeleen Mistral: its a HUGE deal to get published there
Prokofy Neva: old media
Pixeleen Mistral: I think we are well within our rights to pick and choose
Prokofy Neva: but nobody does that, least of all Uri
Prokofy Neva: so I'm going to batch them in threes
Pixeleen Mistral: I'm only throwing the horrid stuff that is all racial slurs and that sort of thing
Pixeleen Mistral: but batching things up in threes seems good - and ignoring the anonymous is wise
Pixeleen Mistral: but my dinner is ready and I'm going to turn off the computer and eat
Pixeleen Mistral: ttyl
-- End of Log ---
Pixeleen Mistral is offline.
Prokofy Neva: I think you probably need to have stuff like this done to you while you are sailing or trying to do something you like doing on your sim a few times for you to "get it" and to stop imagining that there's something wrong in confiscating the Woodbury sim, or that these people represent good-intentioned students and professors with only "a few bad eggs" and all the rest. Also, if you wish to fire me, you can do it the old-fashioned way through editorial discretion, not through crowd-sourcing opinions from griefers on alts, and putting kids who didn't pass the bar who are merely glorified griefers themselves to writing articles that in fact advocate suppression of freedom of speech that the Herald doesn't advocate.
Second Life: User not online - message will be stored and delivered later.
Prokofy Neva: In fact, it might even be a good idea for you and Walker to be left alone covering the griefers by yourself, so that you can no longer enjoy this arch sense of derisive cameraderie about me swinging at them with rhetoric about Leninism. I think the smile of condescension and derision would be wiped off your faces soon enough, as they always will turn on anyone who writes the truth about them -- that it's not creative, and not a few, and not innocent.
Second Life: User not online - message will be stored and delivered later.
Prokofy Neva: You are no different than Intlibber, really, imagining that you can keep these barbarians from going after *you* and whatever values you stand for, if only you can even superficially make common cause with them for the sake of going after an easy target like me.
Second Life: User not online - message will be stored and delivered later

[Prokofy Neva]

And I have to get a good laugh out of Mr. Professionial Blogger Mark Wallace publishing chatlogs like a common blinged out drama queen of SL. And a chatlog that he thinks is a "gotcha" that I would have published anyway ROFL -- it was just too long. If I seriously thought it was something "bad" would I be leaving it out here now? Of course not.

It only shows what wimps and liars they have been.

And imagine, that Mark writes me an email just now saying "You're toast, Prok" like he's "scoring".

Seriously, the era of these people has passed. It's time to get real journalists in RL media to cover SL, and give up on game reporters. Watch for this coming soon!

[Rhys Hutton]

"Seriously, the era of these people has passed."

I think you're stuck in that hall of mirrors you were describing above.

Inch by inch, you turn even those who were sympathetic to you against you.

Have fun, Robinson, and say hello to Friday for me!

Write when you get work!

[Prokofy Neva]

Rhys, the hall of mirrors is SL itself, and the recursive media covering it, usually for reasons to enhance their reputation or make a buck.

I don't suffer from the problem of needing to enhance my reputation or make a buck. If I did, I wouldn't be having this conversation.

I realize it's fashionable for people who don't write at all, don't stick their neck out, and only consumer other's written content, to come wag their finger -- or pile on gleefully with victory dances on the bones -- and say, oh, Prokofy you shoot yourself in the foot, oh, Prokofy, you are your own worst enemy, oh, Prokofy, if only you'd change just this, or just that, you'd be so much better.

It's like Pixeleen telling me to polish a story that in fact she knows was ready and could be published, and which we had discussed at an earlier and friendly time, when in fact she deliberately tells Curious to then write something on top of what I had done already. That sort of petty shit is deliberate, and crappy -- and I called it rightly. People who are secure and content with what they are doing in FL and SL don't have to do insecure little grabs at power like that.

People imagine that they can "set me straight" and "make something better of me". Oh, if only you would stop sniping in comments, or making personal insults, or rising to the bait in comments, why, you'd be a great writer.

I view these kinds of comments as so much "let the angels bear you up lest you dash your foot against a stone".

People always imagine it could be better if different -- that someone like me who does this kind of work as a vocation, out of interest and care, is going to be converted to someone who is calculating, looking over their shoulder, concerned what others thing, and able to burnish their reputation.

I always goggle at that thought-- that people actually think I'm going to a) buy their sniveling and petty concept of me "shooting myself in the foot" and b) change and contort to become some cramped groveller.

Huh?

No, I have to write by the light of my conscience. I find that sometimes when you do that, you happen to have a crowd at your back who think the same way. Other times you are very lonely in your conviction. It just comes with the territory.

And more and more critical coverage of the more sophisticated type unlike amateur game blogs will appear, and there will be more and more hope of a more realistic assessment of these issues.

SL can't exist as the domain of script kiddies and griefers and tabloid editors and tech talk writers forever.

[Prokofy Neva]

While we're publishing emails, here's a good one to look at from before all this:

From Walker, July 18th:

I wouldn't worry about this too much, I doubt TypePad will take any action. And if they do, we can just get it un-taken. Anyway, there's not much we can do about it; if she AR'd us to TypePad, then she AR'd us to TypePad.

And just for the record, Herald policy is for our writers to take the heat for their own stories, but with the newpaper's support. One owns one's own words, after all. It's not Pixeleen's problem if Lisae doesn't like the story. Heck, it's not even your problem. It's Lisae's problem, and if TypePad pulls the site, then it's me and Uri's problem. So I wouldn't think there's much to worry about here.

***

Hah! So much for Walker's ceasing to care and thinking it's Lisae's problem; all she had to do was squeeze his nuts a little harder and he was ready to have Pixeleen vet all the stories. And that's how bloggers live and die, and that's what's wrong with our world.

And here's my answer:

Walker,

1. There is nothing actionable in my story, or any of the comments, in terms of Typepad, that seems self-evident.

2. If Lisae's claim is that her privacy was violated, it's fake, as she spoke on the record to another blogger, Benjamin Noble/Duranske, at the same time as this story was covered before she spoke to the Herald, and
that's a matter of public record. He opted not to publish the story.

If she tells her story then in thousand-word comments later, she can't claim privacy concerns.

3. Sorry, but Pixeleen needs to share the love on this one. She went and spent hours befriending to, talking to, sympathizing, getting tours of, etc. Lisae Boucher and her art establishment in and around Blister. She helped edit the story, and provided later reporting of the updates of the story. Lisae is playing us off against each other and trying to
rally a posse not unlike the one that went after her, trying to make common cause with LL, Volunteers, and haters in general to exonerate herself and make me the scapegoat.

At one level it's never a problem if a reader doesn't like a story, and sure, writers should take responsibility. In this case, Pixeleen bears responsibility as participating in the story, not something she does on every story. She became heavily involved, and I do not want to be the one sent to the wall on a story *again* that in fact I had no dog hunting in, but merely covered because it was *news*.

(like the fire-bombing fraud story that was Pixeleen's story, which I
merely went to get a photograph for (!) and to which she put a caption -- that led to the last libel go-round of a nutter claiming libel blah blah (he was not even named and was indecipherable in the picture). I'm the one taking the rap for the "libel" inworld and out, and being
harassed inworld by these people -- and it's a story that I merely was a photo stringer for.

4. Hey, I'm tired of being harassed, and the editors need to have an editorial that does the following:

1. Explains to readers that the Herald now has a policy of moderating comments. This was never done! That's not right. It's breaking a long-time trust of readers. They must get an official word of what this means! They must!

Pixeleen thinks it means any author can delete anything. I find that horrific. I think we must explain a POLICY to readers that we all uphold, which is we remove overtly racist language and spam and overtly obscene material (like we've had from some of these child porn posers) but that we do not remove criticism. If Pixeleen wants to arbitrarily award to every poster the right to remove on a whim stuff "they find
nasty," we are in trouble. Uri has to weigh in on this, please, cc him as I don't know the new address.

2. Explains to readers that while they can hold demonstrations against reporters they don't like; burn them in effigy; crash their sims; firebomb them in world; hate on them in the comments, the Herald will go on publishing the news. Say it simply and eloquently, but do please
say it, because what we have now is most of you off on the yacht or
playing golf, with me in the trenches in the comments, and absolutely no defense. And when I don't get defense, I will bite back hard in the columns.

Pixeleen keeps telling me that if I don't rise to the bait in the
comments, I will get an editorial in defense of principles, and that
"space is needed".

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I realize an editorial is in the
works. It better be good. It better defend principles and not make sacrificial lambs of reporters.

Prokofy

My original email to him:

On 7/18/07, dyerbrookme@juno.com wrote:
> Mark, take a look towards the end of the comments here:
>
> http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/child-porn-raid.html
>
> Prokofy
>
> ---------- Forwarded Message ----------
> Pixeleen,
>
> Your friend Lisae of the "broadly offensive" art is now saying she is
> reporting to the host -- typepad.com -- for my story about the raid on
> her art. She is reporting the Herald for invasion of her privacy and
> libel (!). That's what happens when you try to cover the news in good
> faith AND stand up to bullies -- including the "victim" in comments.
>
> I've made it very clear that you approved this article. Why? Because
> you did, and because you befriended her and talked to her for a long
> time and added updates, and because I want you to stop making ME take
> the heat and the harassment for these stories. This is definitely
> something you CANNOT get away with ANY MORE doing.
>
> I refuse to be bullied and harassed over a story like this that I not
> only reported in good faith, but reported *in sympathy to her being
> hounded by volunteers* and checked with you, corrected with my own and
> your updates.
>
> She is trying to make much of the fact that her material was finally
> pronounced as "not broadly offensive" by Michael Linden in a private
> conversation, and trying to backdate this later development into saying
> therefore, the facts are wrong, and there should be no story and that
> it's even "libelous" to report it as a raid and a possible TOS offense
> -- merely reporting the concern about a TOS offense is therefore in her
> notion wrong and libelous.
>
> She's taking the Benjamin Duranske point of view -- no story, move along.
>
> I strenuosly disagree. There is a story; and one you aproved. And the
> story isn't about her, it's about witch-hunting by volunteers and the
> Lindens letting them do their dirty week.
>
> We have only her word for it about Michael Linden; no doubt he
> privately reassured her on the strength of his own private beliefs,
> because he doesn't have to take public responsibility for them -- there
> is no, and will not be, any official response on this.
>
> She actually thinks that whatever understanding she reaches with
> Michael Linden is a private affair, and we don't need to know about it,
> and that it can't be covered.
>
> Furthermore, she is now deciding the villains of the piece are me and
> the volunteers, and I should be fired, the story removed, and the
> volunteers disciplined. So very SL.
>
> As you know, I began by *asking you about this story* and covering it
> for the larger issues involved, and only had sympathy for this unknown
> person being hounded.
>
> As she blathered on and on in the comments, I had less sympathy because
> I think for the sake of fidelity to the truth, one has to keep asking
> her why she can't put out the art if she is so sure it's not
> actionable. She's bobbing and ducking on that and telling different
> stories (now saying in fact it's for sale elsewhere, but not explaining
> if it is the most objectionable painting or not).
>
> Prokofy

[Rhys Hutton]

Blah Blah. It's the same material you regurgitate over and over and over.

You do not engage in what you believe to be "polemics".

You engage in abuse. Therefore, respect, even from your former "colleagues", is steadily eroding. I predicted that this would happen eventually, a couple of summers ago.

You can make excuses until the (fat) cows come home, but it is your own fault that your avenues of communication are and will continue to be reduced.

You are wantonly abusive. You're no better than those you rail against because you believe in an eye for an eye. All that does is make both sides look like trogs and causes your salient points to be churned under in the avalanche of personal attacks and speculation about the nature of your opponents' real lives, among other "niceties".

You ARE shooting yourself in the foot and doing your "enemies" huge favors in the process.

Your life, and all that though...

[Prokofy Neva]

>You do not engage in what you believe to be "polemics".

You engage in abuse. Therefore, respect, even from your former "colleagues", is steadily eroding. I predicted that this would happen eventually, a couple of summers ago.

Well, good for you! You start a blog or a newspaper then. And I don't think people who shrink from griefers and porn stars and let their colleagues hang out to dry are honourable. No. And I think it's not abusive to call them on their timidity and their lack of balls.

The Herald should have done an editorial six months ago standing up to the griefers spamming them, announcing that all their spam and their most obscene/racist comments were going to be removed, and that they wouldn't tolerate intimidating of reporters. That should have happened -- ages ago. That it doesn't is typical of the self-obsessed and self-referential nature of people in SL concerned about "how they look" and not doing the right thing.

>You can make excuses until the (fat) cows come home, but it is your own fault that your avenues of communication are and will continue to be reduced.

I don't consider a cramped, vetted, pre-fabbed corral where you must engage in self-censorship to be "an avenue of communication". That you might consider it that is chilling, truly. If avenues of communication are only to be used by the cleansed and approved, that's scary.

>You are wantonly abusive. You're no better than those you rail against because you believe in an eye for an eye. All that does is make both sides look like trogs and causes your salient points to be churned under in the avalanche of personal attacks and speculation about the nature of your opponents' real lives, among other "niceties".

I hardly think that standing up to bullies and calling them on bullshit is wrong, when no one else stands up to them in the slightest way, and never crosses the street to defend me. I don't think it's "wantonly" abusive to point out some of the obvious things about these people constantly attacking me in comments -- that they are anonymous fucktards, for starters, and that they are wannabees with no lives or credentials just to cite one of many salient points that can be made about some of the worst ones.

I think it's wonderful that you have such tender sensititives about "avalanches of abuse". Then...you should have been more readily apparently ages ago when I was called a "big, gaping vagina" and all the rest of it on Second Citizen merely for criticizing this handful of people who are such mess-ups with SLCC, for example.

>You ARE shooting yourself in the foot and doing your "enemies" huge favors in the process.

No, I think it's all part of what has to be done for SL to grow up, to get out of the sectarianism and game journalism and fanboyz blogs into more real accountability.

I don't care if I have "enemies" among people who are raging fucktards, that's nuts. Anonymous ranters, kids who never held a job in their lives, middle-aged losers on the wrong side of sanity and stability. It's more than fine if I stand up to people like that.

>Your life, and all that though...

yes, I'm not here to please you.

People who want careers in journalism go to New York, or Tel Aviv, or Khartoum. They don't go to Second Life.

[Rhys Hutton]

You're missing my points.

I am not speaking solely about your relationship with with other herald staffers when I say you are an abusive person.

You just are. Regardless of any affiliations you have, you are, in general, an extremely abusive person. Unprovoked at times, so go sell your sob story about only fighting back to someone who was born yesterday.
Even when people are mostly agreeing with a comment you make, if they don't drink the Proktorade 100%, you are liable to rip them viciously, belittling what you imagine to be the state of their RL's, calling them names, making ageist comments -- that's not polemics and it's utter bullshit that you try to represent that behavior as such. I don't care much that you act like a trog towards griefers. You deserve each other, and I hope that ALL of you enjoy your time in your own self created hell. Again, you're missing the point. Too many people get caught in your crossfire, and it really serves you no good purpose. You call others junk yard dogs, but that's what you are, really. You go for the throat in the most vicious and unnecessary manner, and all that does is to reduce you to the likes of a griefer as well.

Now. Lest you try to speak for my position once again, let me be very clear: I am not against strong language at all times. I am no pansy nor a PC obsessed lefty. I believe that strong language can have a powerful impact IF USED JUDICIOUSLY. Your wanton use of strong language is anything but judicious, and it does affect how you are dealt with by others, even your colleagues.

I have a theory that you know you go and have gone too far, but that you just cannot openly admit because it would be showing a sign of weakness or some other pseudo-macho crap.

"I have come so far, I can't stop now.", type of thing.

In short, I am not buying the line that you are doing what you do for the community.

I think you do it all for yourself, because you are a very selfish person.

[Masami Kuramoto]

"You just are. Regardless of any affiliations you have, you are, in general, an extremely abusive person. Unprovoked at times, so go sell your sob story about only fighting back to someone who was born yesterday.
Even when people are mostly agreeing with a comment you make, if they don't drink the Proktorade 100%, you are liable to rip them viciously, belittling what you imagine to be the state of their RL's, calling them names, making ageist comments -- that's not polemics and it's utter bullshit that you try to represent that behavior as such. I don't care much that you act like a trog towards griefers. You deserve each other, and I hope that ALL of you enjoy your time in your own self created hell."

Thanks for saying what I wanted to say all along.

Though I'll add one more thing. A little sing-along for Prok:

Ding Dong. The with is dead. What witch? The crazy old cat lady witch!

Hey, she may not be dead, but at least she's out of the Herald. Maybe we'll see some quality writing now.

[Prokofy Neva]

>You're missing my points.

No, you're in a funnel, and a sect, called "Second Life," believing the memes.

>I am not speaking solely about your relationship with with other herald staffers when I say you are an abusive person.

>You just are. Regardless of any affiliations you have, you are, in general, an extremely abusive person. Unprovoked at times, so go sell your sob story about only fighting back to someone who was born yesterday.

I'm not an abusive person. The real story is that small groups of very concerted, determined people are abusive to me, and I fight back -- hard. I did it on the SL forums when I called the bias and unfairness there and in SL in genereal. I did it on Clickable Culture when I was stalked and goaded by a deranged, obsessive crank, whose posts should have been deleted by Tony Walsh, the owner, weeks before, when I made my request to have RL disclosure and personally-abusive remarks removed and/or threads closed. As an impotent liberal, he preferred to talk a free speech game but then simply ban 2 people he couldn't cope with. That's not "abuse," it's fighting against abusiveness and the record shows.

If you find that this long chatlog with Pixeleen seems "abusive" I think you need to zoom in a little closer and understand what might provoke such harash language.

o silence, and refusal to defend principles, and defend me specifically for months and months while people in the comments -- griefers who didn't like the articles about them -- spammed the Herald viciously and harassed and bullied me in particular

o articles posted provocatively and demonstratively over my few pieces to "balance" the coverage of griefing that in fact attempted to exonerate them and give them an undeserved platform

o deliberate posting of a story on the economy even when it was known I had one ready and could have posted it

o deliberately and provocatively allowing comment antagonizers suddenly to get op-ed pieces and air time as if this were "the norm" -- it's not.

In short, that's just some of the petty, vindictive behaviour that people who can't stand up for themselvs or for principles engage in. It's weak, and vicious.

I stand by my efforts to fight people in the comments, if you don't take a stand and battle that kind of shit as it happens, it closes off the freedom of the press -- and indeed it *is* closed off now because people posting comments can be triumphant in knowing that if a reporter files a critical story, all they have to do to get it reversed is bully and annoy the reporter in comments -- with as many as 160 comments after the story comes out --- spam the Herald comments section in general with racist or obscene speech, or demand and cajole and whine until they get their own op-ed piece.

It's a stunning lack of leadership -- stunning -- and it could have been avoided six months ago by an editorial defining the principles and condemning the attacks and pressuer and possibly even a decision to moderate the comments.

The Herald, in the name of free speech and trying to get at the story in the comments, has given a bully puppit to PN/v-5 and other assorted griefers to tell their story over and over again, which amounts to a pack of lies and claims "they didn't do it" even as they go out and do it again. It's completely discredited the Herald as a tabloid that, in order to keep its street cred, will pull its punches on the most egregious griefing and lying.

I find that a simply awful development, and if you don't jump up and down and scream over something like that, you just aren't doing your duty.

>Even when people are mostly agreeing with a comment you make, if they don't drink the Proktorade 100%, you are liable to rip them viciously, belittling what you imagine to be the state of their RL's,

I *never* take up anyone's RL ever, unless they have *first* used that tactic on me, and used it relentlessly, and used it over and over and over and over again in comments where no one else calls it or defends me.

So if I'm dealing with a particularly bad, chronic, and vicious stalker who has been 2 years harassing me on various forums, even using the power of the AOL blog to relativize and legitimize the calling of me at my home by a stalker (!), and I finally decide "the way to get rid of this person is to call her a fat cow, until she shuts up" -- then that's what it takes.

People selectively tuning in might have their tender young sensibilities *cough* ruffled, but they should follow it from the beginning.

People come to me with the stories they do and I've been able to tell them for one simple reason: they can see I'm not afraid, and not bullied, and that I fight back.

>calling them names, making ageist comments -- that's not polemics and it's utter bullshit that you try to represent that behavior as such.

I think that people making ageist comments to me first deserve such behavior right back at them, ultimately. Some may find this lowering oneself to their level; some may call it childish. I find that it concentrates the mind wonderfully, and often gets them to stop.

>I don't care much that you act like a trog towards griefers. You deserve each other, and I hope that ALL of you enjoy your time in your own self created hell. Again, you're missing the point. Too many people get caught in your crossfire, and it really serves you no good purpose. You call others junk yard dogs, but that's what you are, really. You go for the throat in the most vicious and unnecessary manner, and all that does is to reduce you to the likes of a griefer as well.

There's a small group of people that go after my throat in a very determined way, they *are* junkyard dogs, and it really is important to fight them. If you can come up with an example of someone who is *not* a junkyard dog and been tarred unfairly with this brush, please produce it!

>Now. Lest you try to speak for my position once again, let me be very clear: I am not against strong language at all times. I am no pansy nor a PC obsessed lefty. I believe that strong language can have a powerful impact IF USED JUDICIOUSLY.

And you're the judge of that? Sorry, but your controlling little mediocrity here doesn't impress. Start your own blog, or write on your own blog as you see fit.

>Your wanton use of strong language is anything but judicious, and it does affect how you are dealt with by others, even your colleagues.

Well, I think when somebody deliberately, provocatively steps on you by a) publishing an article on a topic you had already agreed to write on with them, by a weaker author who only opened herself up to challenges; b) publishing op-eds by griefers who didn't like their coverage c) assigning a story to a known antagonist about a demonstration calling for me to be fired; d) refusing to stand up in any commments or editorial -- producing nothing but silence; e) playing the RL card falsely to refuse to discuss things -- all of this and more is what you finally stand up, and rightly call *cunty* behaviour.

People who know me know that unlike Siggy Romulus, I rarely, rarely use this term, so when I do have to use it, it's for cause.

>I have a theory that you know you go and have gone too far, but that you just cannot openly admit because it would be showing a sign of weakness or some other pseudo-macho crap.

No, I don't feel that at all. People who are prepared to defend principles and defend me from wrongful attack understand that. The others are wimps.

>"I have come so far, I can't stop now.", type of thing.

No, I think again, you're in a parochial sandbox here, and you can't zoom out and see just how ridiculous, petty, childish, and stupid the SL scene is, and how much it deserves to be fought -- and fought by all kinds of methods.

Some might fight it by taking the higher road and simply ignoring it and writing about completely other things. I don't wish to do that. I don't care if I'm in the weeds on the lower road because I think it's important to fight these forces on their own terms, too.

I think you do it all for yourself, because you are a very selfish person.

I think you're an unhappy and jealous person that finds it intolerable that someone has notoriety and prominence -- call it fame or infamy, what you will -- that you don't have, and that irks you. You can only find some satisfaction for your sense of inadequacy and outrage that someone gets to do that by swiping at them.

When I google this name, I find only entries to this very blog, and 2-3 other chat forums or something -- absolutely nothing to show in the 7 Google hits.

Could that be what really bothers you?

[Prokofy Neva]

Ding Dong. The with is dead. What witch? The crazy old cat lady witch!

Hey, she may not be dead, but at least she's out of the Herald. Maybe we'll see some quality writing now.

Hey, Masami, thanks for piling on like a vicious little fucktard, that's very honourable of you!

There was nothing to stop "quality writing" from appearing at the Herald. "Quality writing" is not letting griefers and antagonizers write the pieces.

I think it's instructive to go to the archives, and read the last year of work. I'm proud of the stories I've written that have been among the best -- consistently. They've been researched material that is new, that often breaks the news or scoops the story and even gets picked up in the RL media.

It really contrasts with the steady diet of girlie pics, furry stories, and war legends that the Herald tries to serve up to be "popular".

Just look back over the last month, or go to the archives pages:

http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/archives.html

[Onder Skall]

Oh hell. Bloody hell.

Prok... lots to say, but I'll email ya, k? May take me a bit as I know I have to *really* think when I write you.

I will say this: all other issues aside, you get a wider audience at the Herald, and its an audience that needs to hear your message.

I'll approach the "yes, but" issues separately in email... after I've finished sorting through the comments here and thought on it a bit.

[Prokofy Neva]

Onder, we all need to outgrow the parochialism of the Herald, and it will be a painful, but necessary process.

You aspire to writing and really show a dedication to it. So you of all people should be publishing in the RL press, your own blog, and more sophisticated venues like Metaversed.

I'm quite pleased with how Metaversed is turning out. I myself am declining to post there now until it gets enough strength on its own, without turning the eyes to me in blame and comment-fisking, to deal with attacks on its freedom and integrity such as inevitably come from the likes of Ashcroft.

When Metaversed can demonstrate that it can defuse/debunk/trump people like Ashcroft, then it will be "Proksafe" ROFL like some things are "podsafe".

By that I mean that it has the largeness of vision and the intelligence to make short work of sectarians and griefers like that.

That means strong moderation, and that's a good thing. If the moderators delete 100 'DO YOU LIKE MUDDYKIPS' sort of Pool's closed posts and things like "Prokofy is a huge gaping vagina" -- then they'll be well on their way to success. And I imagine that they DO delete stuff like that.

The question is whether a place like Metaversed inevitably attracts the flotsam and jetsum if I post there, as many little fucktards want to cut their teeth on insulting me, sensing it's a circus.

If moderators can do simple things like keep out personal disclosure, personal attacks, raging trolling viciousness, then it's possible to post contrary or controversial views and have an interesting discussion. I personally am waiting to see if that's possible.

It really hasn't been possible any other place in the Slogo-sphere.

[Prokofy Neva]

Onder, and as for "getting a wider audience" -- I'm not here to do that. I don't need to play writer or establish a career. I need to write the truth about Second Life. It's a vocation, not a career. That may make for better or worse journalism, your mileage may vary.

this is what I mean by "lest you dash your foot" thinking. By that I mean the temptations of Christ. And this isn't to put myself into the Christ seat here, hardly, but more to get at the formulas for giving people temptations.

The devil asks Jesus to throw himself off the building and implies that if he really is the Son of God, he doesn't have to worry that his feet will dash against the stone, the angels will bear him up.

The thinking here is, if you really are a good journalist, then throw yourself off a building, i.e. go against your principles, the truth, what you know is right, and succumb to this blandishment to endanger your values, because popularity, more hittage -- the angels -- will bear you up.

And the answer is: no, you don't get to do tests like that.

Because I'm not willing to play the game of "let's have a journalistic career in SL, shall we?" because for me, it truly would be a dollhouse activity. If you can't fight back in the comments, and if people tell you gently -- or not so gently -- that you should shut up and "become more effective" and "think of how you look" and "what about your career and reaching a wider audience" then they haven't analyzed what's happening: nobody is standing up to people in the comments.

It's good to draw attention to that.

At Second Citizen, I spent a certain amount of time fighting the cesspool creatures there, but then I was more than done and simply left there, and yes, stopped reading it as a forums 'home' and only returned occasionally when I was under really frontal attack, to defend myself in a thread. I think I've started one thread there in the entire last year, about SLCC.

People can argue over what is more successful:

o my really pointed criticism of FlipperPAY and SLCC going back a year to "Get Rid of These People" and my sharp statements in defense on SL

o the musicians blog revealing their plaintive cry about feeling they were deceived which brought out a lot of unsavory details about the organizers

o the metaverse editorial and link to the musicians blog and a sophisticated challenge to SLCC coming from the business/technology community

Pondering that, depending on whether you are a community watcher, a musician, or a business sophisticated, the type of post, its demeanor, it's target, it's tone, might be more or less successful.

But trust me, without my really thorough and hands-on very in-your-face approach to really tackling the problems of this community from the ground up, I don't think there's a climate that makes the other pieces possible. I think you need all of them, and there has to be room and tolerance for all of them.

The business people may never come and click on my blog and discover Phreak Linden has a Linden and a failed wannabee Linden in it. They may never read the unsavoury history of FlipperPAY. They may certainly never linger in the weeds of he-said, she-said in the comments. But it's important for the public record nonetheless that I do this.

[Untameable Wildcat]

I will take issue with you on one thing.

You ARE abusive. In my first ever email to you (because I found your name on Wikipedia under a list of noteable residents) you were condescending to me, and when I posted here and in another location you were downright hostile, and abusive. You ignored things in my post you couldn't make anything out of, twisted things around you thought you could use, and abused me over them and anything you might have had a point of.

The way I look at this is that it's the reflection of a society that's become to litigious. The way YOU look at it is someone is trying to gag you. YOU. You personally. Not it's a reflection of society but that it's a personal attack on yourself. The tone of you post here is just that. "I won't post here any more because I should be able to say what I want and never be edited or censored, and because you've decided otherwise means you've obviously been subverted by the 'out to get me' element that's growing ever bigger."

When you post anywhere but your own blog, you're a guest there. You have a certain responsibility to your host to behave, and you no longer do this. You throw around insults, you annoy people and you get your hosts a bad name. That's no the way a guest should behave. You're even WORSE when they first intimate, then outright tell you you're a bad guest, so in the end they ban you.

And it's ALWAYS a cause for which you're right and everyone else, no matter who, is wrong for contesting it or getting in the way of it. "But it's important for the public record nonetheless that I do this" you right. What you REALLY mean is "It's important MY voice gets heard louder than anyone elses" and you've already admitted this attitude in saying you gleefully up the ante whenever anyone criticizes you. They push so you "push back".

Maybe it is a shame the Herald have put this in place. Maybe there's a reason for it. Maybe you're PART of the reason for it. Whatever the situation is, it's none of your business. The Herald belongs to someone else; if you go there you behave yourself as a guest, or you shouldn't go at all.

I had sympathy for you in the beginning, before you savaged me. No longer. And I don't write this because I think you'll care about my sympathy, I know you don't give a fig about it: I write it so that others know that I first found you wishing to extend the hand of friendship, not knowing about any feuds you had, totally neutral - and you bit my arm off, classified me with other people I'd never heard of and all but spat in my face.

If that's the way you're going to behave whenever anyone extends a hand of friendship, I'm not surprised you're where you are now. Take a good look at why, without allowing your normal "I'm right always, you're wrong always" attitude to taint your view.

You might learn something!

[Prokofy Neva]

Untameable, your writing to me *is abusive at the get-go*. It's beligerent, condescending, and harassing *to start with* -- and like begets life. Deal with it. Suck it up.

I'm not required to answer every little sectarian marvel you might come up with. I answer what I can answer, I can't spend my days thrown by 20-something asswipes in forums comments. I already spend too much time. If that's somehow failing in your standards for integrity, then make your own substantive articles and comments on your own blog. I've never seen anything substantive coming from you, and I can't take you seriously.

The idea that I was a "guest" at the Herald is belied by the Masthead which you can still see:
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/about.html#masthead

By phrasing the terms in the mode of the Catholic Church and such, they actually let on more than they realize, which is that it is a sect like any other sect in SL.
But the title there says "Staff Writer".

Now that Walker has said I am "toast" (rolls eyes -- he plays games too much), it will be interesting to see when he makes good on his word that people who don't post get removed from the masthead. So he's likely to chicken out, wimp that he is, and simply say nothing, and remove me -- but that *is* firing me, as much as writing an editorial -- which he really *should* do to explain how the hell the Herald, of all places, can be brought to its knees by an 18-year old porn seller. I marvel. It says much about the times we live in.

You were not extending any hand of friendship, but being the same trolling, provocative, beligerent whiner that anybody else who tries to hammer on me with inconsequentials and not substantive comments.

Here's a typical post -- May 31 -- that comes across, in that usual dipply but cunnig and superior SupportforHealing way, which says "I'm here to feign like I'm helping you, but let me put you in your place and let you know how superior I am."

People who do that get short, sharp slaps in the face, yes.

Especially when they carry water for Angel Fluffy, and call ME paranoid.

Here's your post:

"Just thought you might like to know, there's a taskbar add on and also a widget that reads the friends list either off the server or off the webpage, and this works even if the friend hasn't clicked the box to tell people when they were online.

If you added me as a friend, then made sure I couldn't see when you were online in the viewer, I could still see when you were online, with either the taskbar tool or the widget. There's nothing sinister here. It sounds very much to me like he's got a lot of Lindens on his friends list, and when he wants to find which are online he starts the taskbar program.

You come over quite paranoid in your post, considering that there are other ways to determine if people on your friendslist are online than relying on the viewer (which often doesn't work properly anyway)"

1. Everybody in the venues/rentals etc business knows about this widget. I'm not sure that Lindens haven't overridden it (they can do stuff like that) but let's pretend they haven't.

2. Your complete lack of curiosity about how it is that somebody is able to get come up with tons of Linden cards (the flattery, cajoling, persistent appearance at office hours to suck dick, etc. -- you are oblivious to all that).

3. Your unwillingness to realize that any dope can go on the Concierge List, type in "Linden" and pull up the Linden list THAT way.

4....none of which solves the REAL PROBLEM. which is knowing WHICH LINDENS are answering, not AFK, and ON DUTY to take care of griefers. They constantly play three-card monte with this.

So what Angel is suggesting is that HE HAS A SPECIAL LIST. Whether he got that by a) lots of cards he got through flattering them b) the widget c) his membership in Concierge is irrelevant. The point is, he is letting the list know that 1) he has more access than the average bear and 2) he'll let you have it if you suck up to him.

It's such an awful, sucky, sort of classic kind of brutal British boys' school sort of thing that anyone can see it. Ugh.

Except you. You have to come along with that most aggressive and brutal of philosophies, that warmed over Westernized Buddhism, and tell everyone in treacly tones that you're here to help and that you are superior and they are paranoid and a piece of shit and unenlightened about widgets.

Look in the mirror, dollface, and cut the crap.

[Brennan Planer]

So you don't work for the herald anymore?

It's sad that you couldn't have at least a half way convo with Pixeleen. She would have been wrong if you conducted yourself in a more serious manner but instead you just act like a crackhead needing a fix screaming "FUCK YOU FUCK YOURSELF SIDEWAYS".

Once you learn to conduct yourself in a more serious manner, people may take your stories more seriously. Don't bother replying to this either, because I already know what you're going to say just by reading your IM logs.

[Cocoanut Koala]

I don't think the griefers will turn on them, because I don't get the sense that they ever write the truth about them in the first place.

The SLH should have LONG AGO made serious statements about how they would not let their writers be intimidated.

They should have had an overriding principle that communicated solidarity among themselves, and a commitment to supporting their writers' coverage.

(I'm not very articulate today, but I suppose that kind of gets at what I mean.)

They should have taken a firm stand against the pn's and others who were almost pathetically obvious in their attempts to derail discussions, turn everything personal, and in general shout one of their writers down.

Instead, they've become wishy-washy, and basically thrown you - their most controversial writer - to the wolves.

The problem is, by letting the wolves storm the gate at you, it leaves themselves in much, much weaker position. So very much weaker.

The editorial you speak of was long-since overdue. Something that stated that it is okay to demonstrate against you, etc., but that the SLH will not be deterred from its coverage.

Where is the strength? The conviction for covering news?

Where is the old Uri who could keep a handle on the place, with a firm (and witty) grip that told griefers that no, this was not another venue they could overrun, turn into their own, and ruin?

----

And, as a side note, and an example, what WAS the story about Lisae's picture? What happened to that?

How did a story about her being overrun by people AR'ing her; the pictures in question; the side-issue of Csven's about how you should have called in the cops on the spot; and all that, turn into little nostalgic pieces by Lisae about nudity?

Something is very not right in there.

I understand that Pixeleen uses her charm and "neutrality" to get stories out of griefers, and to delve into the stories with depth the best way she knows how.

I do that, too, but hey, you don't have to go as far as Pixeleen does. In Pixeleen's case, due to her editorial judgment - such as suddenly putting Lisae on the payroll - any neutrality is actually sacrificed.

I greatly admire Pixeleen as a writer, but there is little strength in her editorial approach, and little strength in the judgment of the one who would "lead her on to greatness."

As a result, the real stories themselves are getting lost, buried, and horridly diluted, by people who should never have been given that power, both in terms of comments and in terms of additional stories.

-----

In sum, SLH needs to stop being wimps, and grow a pair.

coco

[Cocoanut Koala]

P.S. Reading on, for the record, I also don't think Prok should talk like that to Pixeleen. He knows I feel this way; has always known it.

[Prokofy Neva]

Brennan, "fuck you sideways" is all you can say to a person who is coldly, calculatingly, devicously, cunningly (clearly having had many side conversations behind your back) making utterly specious claims, tapping her foot like a bureaucrat remonstrating a peon, "I've been waiting for that piece on the economy."

It just speaks to a shocking lack of good faith that a person can deliberatley put in a lousy piece on the economy, knowing that a good one was in the works, and could be produced any time through *asking* and *agreeing* and *collegiality* rather than by cunning and sniping and trying to trip up.

The record shows 9 pieces on the griefers; it shows 4 pieces from me. It's not about the articles. Not at all. In fact, the articles on her side come from her unhappiness that it is being fought out in comments.

To which I can only say: don't like comments? Don't like excessive comments? Then stop judging the success of every Herald story by whether it reaches 100 comments, which is retarded. Then stop letting reporters be stomped to death in comments and make a goddamn collegial, supportive post once in awhile your own goddamn self.

When the editor herself writes copy on YOUR story without ANY consultation, and spins it AGAINST you -- even though she herself says in this chatlog "yes, the students are guilty" -- well, what can you do?

You have such a profound lack of good faith from someone purporting to be a "colleague" that it is hopeless.

This dialogue only illustrates the outcome of a process gone wrong: the failure of editors to edit, moderators to moderate. They are as much enemies of freedom when they do that as the actual anti-freedom forces.

Cocoanut, you wouldn't reach the point of talking to Pixeleen "like that" because you yourself wouldn't have endured the humiliations and bullshit evasiveness and general crappiness that I have endured. You don't write for the Herald? And I suggest that you would never offer -- because you know and I know it would be a step down for you.

And that's the bottom line -- the attempt to mix amateurs and professionals.

What do you think I'm to do, when there is a severe problem, as you put it, of SLH not "growing a pair"? when left-wing griefer-lubbin liberal Mark Wallace just watches them for "emergent behaviour"; when Pixeleen flirts and parties with them just to get pictures and copy; when Uri, if he tunes in and all, invites them over to trash the place and then tells them to write more articles about demonstrating against me?!

Frankly, Cocoanut, if you can't use the word "fuck you" after atrocious, bad, uncollegial behavior of that kind, when *can* you use it?

And if your editor says "We have a rule here at the Herald, no stepping on stories of others for 12 people, give them their moment" and you follow it after she has bitched that you stepped on her own tendentious story 8 hours after the fact, but then follow it the next time -- and she then posts some ridiculous tripe on top of your story you don't like five minutes after it's posted, isn't it time to use the term "cunty behaviour"? Oh, I think it is.

But see, you wouldn't have reached that point because you'd have been gone -- or never joined the circus in the first place.

Pixeleen hasn't done that much writing. She pleads busyness in RL, she pleads having to edit all the kidstuff sent in. I think she shouldn't be editing some of those stronger writers and letting them just post as is. The editing should come in *editorials* and should come in *comments* and should come in overarching pieces that help set tone and themes.

There is absolutely no solidarity at the Herald. Originally, I didn't let that bother me; you don't have to like people or feel solidarity with them to accomplish an important task. I would leave them a broad swathe of room for that.

But not when they begin to attack me themselves. Pixeleen should never be standing by while Heartun runs off to a) poach my story b) harass me and annoy me in the comments and c) incite the griefers again. That should be earning a reprimand from *her* not me. The fact that she stands smugly by, letting someone do her dirty work for her -- she evidently didn't like my long and detailed exposure of the corporate WAs --

In short, because Pixeleen couldn't edit me, and was evasive and insecure in telling me what she wanted, which would likely have been met with real resistance from me, she took to sniping, harassing by proxy, allowing me to be beat up. It's truly passive/aggressive trojan-like behaviour. And I can only: stop it, bitch, and if you don't want me to post here and want your own little fiefdom, fire me and stop playing these little cunty games where you set up griefers to knock on other people to harass me. It's wrong.

Walker claims he put Lisae on the payroll, so to speak, but trust me, that didn't happen without a side convo with Pixeleen.

Pixeleen went to visit them early on, spent hours with them, totally bonded and sympathized with them. She then joined with them in seeing me as the bad guy, which I really had to call on all of them as utter and arrant bullshit, as I covered Lisae's story sympathetically, putting the focus on Volunteers and LL.

Now you have the outrageous spectacle of this little twit knocking on me for disparaging Volunteers or Lindens. Only in Second Life!

You know, when I got my posting restored before, it wasn't due to Walker's or Pixeleen's good graces. Walker was rooting for the ESC and not me, obviously, he was angry at me and never got over it, and Pixeleen was sulking in part because when she stole my story a few times she didn't get away with it, I called her on it. That has been a frequent and core problem, BTW, that instead of letting me continue to cover a story I broke, like Griefer U, she would suddenly, out of left field, grab it and publish something without ANY consultation, so that she got no insider information available.

That was done out of petty spite and jealousy. When you lose the ability of people to consult you collegially, because they are putting over a poaching on you and jealous and spiteful, you cannot fix it.

The comments, in both the harassment of me in them (and other authors) and the retort I give them (and not only me) have seriously bothered Pixeleen because it's like people are marring her nicely waxed floor.

And I can only say: the comments are a fine Herald tradition; it's where the truth emerges; it's where everyone can tell their side; it's scared; don't touch it; don't get upset at it being many, being hard-hitting, and being filled with raging fucktards and me very methodically answering raging fucktards.

Because the answer is, if you don't like this, grow a pair, and have an editorial setting out a POSITION. But that couldn't happen because the witless and wimpy position of Pixeleen and Walker would be "Linden didn't follow due process with these people and shouldn't have taken the sim, and they should do better in pinpointing and removing individual terrorists".

Well, it's like the constant bleating of the hard left about Iran and Iraq. Sure, we all understand that. But...the terrorists are also backed by a country, and you haven't got a solution for THAT problem on the left now, do you? We don't think the right's solution is right, but hey, your concept of policing and pinpricks isn't robust enough to tackle this huge regional problem.

Neither Walker nor Pixeleen have their sims crashed, either, or get TP harassment and notecards and taunting and people standing on their heads. I do because I wrote 4 lousy articles -- 3 of which were necessitated by the nature and tone of the overwhelmingly pro-griefer copy in the 9 articles by the editor or her chosen antagonists of me.

When you reach that level of loss of trust, it's just not viable. I don't wish to post having such a person and such a system vet my copy with such ill will, petty sniping, cavilling, deliberate delays, fisking, etc. That's what it would be about.

[Cocoanut Koala]

I've reached that point, and I've used those words myself. (Still isn't good.)

As for the issue at hand, I agree with your analysis.

I thought it was shocking when Heartun said those things about a fellow SLH writer, and nothing further was stated from anyone about that.

I think - from all I can tell - that the SLH doesn't want to be any sort of real news place anymore.

coco

[Richie Waves]

Heh.. isn't the herald the "rag" that posts furry sex stories? ("my transformation" springs to mind) seriously.. what would you want your name associated with that crap for in the first place?