The Lit Reactor

I said I wasn't going to do this post, and then I changed my mind. Call it me being me, I don't care, but I went back to this article posted by "Lit Reactor" called "No Sex On Goodreads, Please" which was written by one Dean Fetzer. It's an article in regards to (or in response of) my post "Goodreads: Or good Pedophilia?" that kick started this blog "The Looking Glass Of Carroll Bryant".

I confess I am slightly confused by this article. On the one hand, Dean appears to take the stance that he is against adults and minors sexually role-playing on the Goodreads website. That is a good thing. Then he also mentions me in passing saying that I might have a suggested 'sordid past' while using "The Rex Files" post as his reference.

Why does this confuse me?

Because we have already established that the post made on "The Rex Files" is severely flawed. I pointed that out in an earlier post. I guess Dean Fetzer missed that. But one must ask themselves, why did Dean use that "Rex Files" post as a reference in the first place? Could it be that Dean and Rex are buddies? 

Well, if they are, it doesn't show on Goodreads. While they both have profiles there, they are not listed in each others friends list.

Okay, so maybe they aren't friends. Who knows? But why would Dean not do his research on the subject of Carroll Bryant if he is going to mention Carroll Bryant? I guess Dean is the only one who can answer that. 

 

In his article, Dean gives credit to Goodreads for updating their ToS policy. Well, let's not jump too quickly on that bandwagon Dean, my recent post last month about Goodreads and sexual explicit role-playing between adults and minors "2 months later" shows that not all is well on the policy front. Sure, they have since put on a good dog and pony show in their efforts to "clean" it up, however, they still have a long way to go. Provided of course, that Goodreads is serious about enforcing their ToS - which all of us here at "The Looking Glass" knows that Goodreads fails big time at enforcing their ToS. Some may even question why Goodreads even has a ToS. A ToS is only as good as the enforcement behind it. Since Goodreads lacks in that area, well, you get the picture. 

So I suppose I will wander aimlessly about trying to decide if Dean Fetzer is pro Carroll Bryant or con? I imagine that in the long term, it doesn't really matter. However, I wish he would have consulted with me prior to listing the post on "The Rex Files" before referencing it. A responsible person never wants to reference lies. It simply makes one look .... irresponsible? 

On a good note: Dean did post a link to one of my books.

Now you can see why I am confused. He links a blog with a post of lies regarding me as a reference then posts a link to one of my books to counter it. 

Thanks?

I'm Carroll Bryant ... and this is The Looking Glass.

Things We Learned Today:

* Lit Reactor writer Dean Fetzer wrote an article about Carroll's Goodreads article

* Dean Fetzer referenced a blog post of lies about Carroll

* Dean Fetzer linked one of Carroll's books to his article

* Carroll is confused

* Carroll is always confused?