http://www.flickr.com/photos/violetblue/2684049606/

But after reading all this stealthy backtracking and euphemistic vagueness from BB’s staff, they have now taken on that unpalatable quality that seems to reek from the pores of Mel Gibson and Tom Cruise. That they are unconscionable and self-deluded enough to go on such a self-serving rant that you know defies reason and makes you think that, “when ever I read BB, I can’t put that whole VB thing past me and I can’t stand to read this knowing it’s possibly been tainted,” much like my aversion to watching Mel Gibson and Tom Cruise movies, it makes one wonder about intelligence, reason and the nature of vindictiveness and delusion.

I used to like watching with these two (good but tweaky) actors, but since that anti-Semitic rave and the Xenu-induced happy rant, I can’t stand to watch movies starring them. And therefore, I know my taste for reading “all things wonderful” has turned sour.

Here’s to hoping the matter is put to rest and the truth prevails.

Pathetic. History will record book burners in whatever guise they come in as morons unworthy of the pen.

FLICK THEM. Speed On, violet!

There clearly are power dynamics unique to the history between you, Xeni, and the rest of the BBers, plus all the other prominent bloggers who have weighed in. As you all have been “conversing” over the last decade, across multiple networks, now that larger BB and VB brands are involved, now that the MSM comes calling, now that blogger’s fan feel more co-dependent, protective, and at times, obsessive-neurotic, we’re definitely getting into interesting, weird uncharted territory.

Keep up the good work and love the Russkie’s photos.

L

PS: I thought the NYX piece at least did a good job of showing what a gray area the whole notion of “un-publishing” enters.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/07/14/radioheads-new-3dviz.html#comment-233086

as for me, i’ll just say that the BB’ers seem to be rather deliberate in their public response.

On the other hand, the biggest problem I’ve had with the way this was/is all being handled by BB and TNH is the rampant editting. I’ll disagree here with vml and say certainly, there are times to ethically unpublish material: open racism or off-topic posts, for example, should be regularly reamed out. Too many spam bots poison the wells of internet forums. Even saying “we don’t like Violet anymore, she knows why, and we’re removing all her stuff” would raise eyebrows and questions, but probably would have blown over in a weekend and never made it to print publications. BUT the thing that really got my goat at the end were the number of posts on BB that were being censored out based on the matter of disagreeing with their actions. You could watch it happen: I’d finish reading the current log, hit F5 to refresh, and see posts vanish. There were numerous re-posts of “I’ve commented three times and all three have been deleted!” during the debacle. It got pretty shady there as I left.

If they weren’t such champions of free speech and anti-censorship, again it would have blown over. But it seemed too hypocritical to continue receiving my (click-based ad) support.

I love your blog and until recently loved BB. I can’t imagine what kind of ethics allow an organisation to unpublish but they are not the kind that allow people like me to support them. They should understand, more than anyone, that writing is your, and their, life.

I’ll keep reading. Good luck from Oz.

that doesn’t make any sense.

still, there are a number of things you’re suggesting like that I’m selective linking, so if you feel I’m not including enough negative coverage about myself — and I’ve included plenty of unkind links in all three blog posts I’ve about it — then by all means, put them here in the comments. I have also been careful to state that there are tons of links, and I apologized for not including everyone.

and I think you will enjoy that very much, as you seem to leave no opportunity behind to include negative heresay about my character in your comments. such as, “your actions and/or personality render you ineligible for a directory of anything wonderful” and “they never, ever, want to have anything to do with you again” (in addition to your first comment). seems to me that whatever points you’re trying to make, they’d be a lot clearer without being laced with your bias against me.

kind of like how Boing Boing could have done this a lot cleaner without making it a character smear, whatever their reasons. I honestly wouldn’t give a fuck anymore if they hadn’t (and still) make this into an ugly, baseless — and as of yet, still unfounded — smear campaign.

oh, and it’s not ‘my’ Wikipedia page. it’s the Wikipedia page about me, and it often contains false information. recently, for a month, it said I live in Berkeley. trolls really love that page. if you have any questions for me, please do ask.

Btw, I DID read the AVN article linked to on your wikipedia page. I wasn’t referring to anything specific from there, and I mistakenly used the word “particulars” when “generalities” would probably have been more appropriate.

BB’s attempt at backpedaling was a major embarassment.

But, on the other hand, you keep popping up on favorite female bloggers list.

http://northxeast.com/general/nxe%E2%80%99s-fifty-most-influential-female-bloggers

Boing Boing Silently Ununpublishes A Few Violet Blue Posts

Ah, well. Folks who hate glass houses should stay off the web.

http://www.metafilter.com/72928/Boing-Boing-Finds-21st-Century-Trotsky#2181715

right now, all non-Xeni-authored-VB posts are back up except for one of Pesco’s and Cory’s ‘Josh Wolf’ post. very curious.

thank you, sincerely, to everyone who’s said nice, supportive and constructive things. it means a lot.

@ Brad Berens – the clarification helped immensely. I updated that part of the post and linked to your new post as well. I agree, I think the monetary aspects, or even the intention of monetary or ‘Google Juice’ used as a thing that can be given or taken away punitively definitely enters into the conversation here.

@ not_scottbot – thanks for that! I’m an outsider to the MeFi community, so I have to say those moderators deserve a beer. I’m impressed. I later spotted a couple comments from moderators in the thread where they essentially say they have no stake in the topic either way but sure think it’s interesting, and I thought that was really cool. I did a strikethrough correction and linked to your comment for clarity.

@ Christopher – wow, that’s an interesting piece of information. sex negativity didn’t even cross my mind. but now I realize how long it’s been since I’ve written about dildos, and I feel remiss. will fix.

@ will shetterly – a very positive comment. you know, I read a pleasant MeFi comment where everyone apologized and content was restored and everyone bandaged their wounds and went home. that was a nice thought. I’m still hoping they’ll cut me some slack, but that seems unlikely, so I’m not sure how I’m supposed to return the gesture. I understand that you and I likely see the trademark issue from different angles, and I appreciate your candor on this topic. however, I don’t see what my trademark, or lawsuit, have to do with this. I filed suit, and made the trademark application known in October last year, so even date-wise, it doesn’t add up. additionally, when Xeni and I were friends, she was deeply sympathetic and supportive of the distress it caused me personally and with public confusion in regard to having someone else using my brand name (and my name) for their business purposes. so that doesn’t add up, either. but, I do enjoy seeing your comments here and look forward to more time on your blog.

@ GDallimore – first of all, I’m wondering what your statements have to do with the Boing Boing deletions. do you know something I don’t? you’re making accusations without statements of verifiable fact, so what you say can be neither agreed with or refuted. I would really love to know what you mean by both sides not having much to be proud of. is there something I’m supposed to be ashamed of? if you have an argument, please state and substantiate the details, rather than vague hearsay. give me some facts, so that I can address them. I don’t see how the trademark case has unpleasant particulars, nor do I see that the ongoing Wikpiedia edit wars, which I am not a part of, are in any way embarrassing.

also, please read the facts about my trademark lawsuit here:
http://www.jurisnote.com/Cases/blue5370.htm

and let me add that if you’re going on what you’ve read in AVN about the case, I’d like to *gently suggest* that those two pieces were not fact checked.