Saturday, November 30, 2013

Psycho Girl

My producer, Brian Preston, wrote and recorded this song. He stumbled across it recently and said that it reminded him of my situation with my internet stalker. I found it amusing. So, I decided to post it and share it with everyone.

Friday, November 29, 2013

Goodreads: Meet Your Next Stalker (The Cover)

So while it might not be until around Spring 2014 when I might get to release the book, "Goodreads: Meet Your Next Stalker", at least I have the cover ready. (Thanks to author, Rick Carufel, who designed it.)

Great job, Rick. 

I'll keep everyone updated to the progress of the book. 

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Goodreads: Meet Your Next Stalker

Recently I announced in the comments section of one of my posts that I had decided to start writing a new book for release called, "Goodreads: Meet Your Next Stalker". While a majority of this book is complete, I have decided to take a break from it to concentrate on a few other projects that I have going on at the moment.

The book is going to cover my personal experience on Goodreads from beginning to end and will go into some details about my stalker(s) and online relationship. It will also cover my attack.  I will hold nothing back.

Here's the thing, I am still contemplating how I will make this book available. I have considered making it into an E-book, however, the more I think about it, the more I like the "paperback" idea.

I'm not sure if I will actually "sale" it, but probably make it available through giveaways and promotions. While I work this out, I will keep everyone abreast as I go along.

There is also another option on the table that I have been discussing with another author. To add my story to this other authors book that is being written in regards to the stalker situation. To combine our stories into one book.

So while we hash out all the details, just know that this "tell all" book is in the works, and I shall let you all know when it is done and how you will be able to get your hands on it.

Monday, November 18, 2013

Rick Carufel Leads The Way

Thanks to the hefty response of authors and readers alike, and to author Rick Carufel leading the way, the bully book, "Off Topic: The Story Of An Internet Revolt" has been taken down by Lulu.

As many of you are aware, this book the bullies collaborated on mentioned several authors and painted them in a negative light, being somewhat accusatory and demeaning, and was riddled with inconsistencies if not, outright lies. After a barrage of complaints regarding its questionable content, it was finally removed.

This is the kind of action we all need to take when the situation calls for it. The bullies continue to attack many people, most notably, authors. They have gotten away with it for so long on Goodreads and have now taken their hate to "Bullylikes", that perhaps they thought they could write a hate book to boot, but the plan they put together was thwarted by the active participation of those who stand against internet cyber bullying, and for that, many thanks goes out to all of you involved, most notably, author Rick Carufel who spearheaded this campaign.

I am also very impressed with Lulu's decisive response once they realized what the bullies had done. I appreciate them taking the time to listen to those who responded, and hope they actually read the book for themselves to get a better understanding of what these bullies did, and continue to try and do to indie authors, which is of course, to ruin their reputations for the sole purpose of ruining their book sales and careers.

Strike one up for the good guys!

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

Things We Learned Today:

* The bully revolt has been thwarted

* Lulu enforces their ToS (unlike Goodreads / Amazon)

Friday, November 15, 2013

Steve Sckenda: Bully Hypocrisy

This post might be considered a follow up post for "Internet Revolt? Hardly!". I say this because in this post, we get to see a review of the bully book, "Off Topic: The Story Of An Internet Revolt". This review was a 5-star review by a bully supporter, Steve Sckenda, albeit, an anonymous supporter - until now.

I'm glad I stumbled onto this because this review, or should I say, the comments that follow it, showcases clearly the hypocrisy that dwells inside of Bully Nation.

The bullies, and their supporters, have been clamoring for such a long time about "freedom of speech" and their right to attack authors as they see fit in book reviews. They even defend themselves when they attack authors in the comments of those book reviews. There has even been documentation of the bullies going into other people's book reviews and attacking them not only just on this blog, but plenty more on STGRB. Especially if the book being reviewed is written by any author on their "shit-list". The bullies continue to gripe that this is them exercising "free speech".

The bullies have also made claims that anyone who gives an author on their "shit-list" five stars on their books, that it's a friend or family member, and in the minds of these bullies, it's not a "real" rating or review. Their theory is, if they don't like that author then nobody else should like that author. (It's that entitlement mentality kicking in)

But here today, we have a reversal of sorts. The bullies got together and wrote themselves a book, and now, it is open for public scrutiny. (And according to the bullies, so are they and their behavior now on trial, officially!)

What has been their response to their new book, which is filled with inaccuracies, and lies, being rated and reviewed? Well, just as expected actually. They aren't taking to kind to "negative" reviews or one star ratings. Kind of ironic, isn't it? But we're not here to see that type of hypocrisy from them (or maybe we are) but more so, their reaction to a five star review given by Steve Sckenda, and some negative comments to that review.

As I mentioned plenty of times, if anyone does not agree with these bullies in any way shape or form, even if it's done respectively, they really get offended. (And they say us REAL authors have thin skin) Trust me, these bullies have even more thin skin than any author they have ever attacked. In fact, one might say they have absolutely "no skin" at all.

Let's take a look at Steve's review, shall we?

It's okay if Steve thinks this "book of whine" was succinctly argued, even if he is wrong about that because in the book, as I mentioned in my post "Internet Revolt? Hardly!", the bullies actually contradict themselves when they say they are all about reviewing books (despite evidence clearly showing through the past two years of them bashing authors) then later in the book they say that Goodreads has taken the "fun" out of bashing authors with their new enforcement policy. Okay, we'll overlook the fact that Steve failed to see that in the book. But here's the thing, we can't go to his review and say that because otherwise, that would be "bullying" as according to him and the bullies. 


Think I'm kidding? Then look at the screenshots. 

Yes, poor Steve got "bombarded" by a few comments that disputed his findings in a book written by some bullies. Now, if you were to go by this comment alone, you would think that people were raiding his comment section (like it's been documented many times that the bullies do) and was called every name under the sun. And this hurt Steve's precious feelings. 

Well, get a grip you all, that's not exactly the case. What hurt his precious feelings was that someone with a different view of the book came in and questioned his findings from the book. You know, a few people at most was using Goodreads the way it was intended to be used. They went for a BOOK DEBATE! And a friendly one at that. Unlike the mannerism of the bullies when they invade people's book reviews of authors that are on the bullies shit-list. Their "debates" consist of calling people fucktards and such. Yeah, I know, we have seen the screenshots before. 

What I find amusing is, when the bullies do it, it's them exercising free speech, but when it's done to them, it's bullying. (And offensive) Then again, the bullies think anyone with a different opinion than theirs is offensive, and bullying. Yet, it's perfectly okay for them to do it. 

Before we get to the good parts, let's see how some of the bullies respond to poor Steve's hurt feelings, shall we? 

First of, Lisa, it's "Here, here!" not "Hear, hear!" - By I digress. Do you see how they are now saying about people who hold a different opinion and express that on Steve's review? You would think he just got "attacked" and or "bullied", right? And what to make of Mark's response to what horrible thing David said? Well, let's check it out, shall we? Let's see David's "typical condescending jackassery", okay? (And we will also see a comment by Jason who has witnessed this "brutal" attack against bully sympathizer, Steve Sckenda.

You see, David was responding to something Steve said in his review, comparing Goodreads to Nazi's like they do in the book. (I mentioned that in my post, "Internet Revolt? Hardly!", didn't I? And didn't I present screenshots of not only what was said in the book about such comparison, but I also showed other screenshots of other bullies doing the same in that post and other posts in the past? I'm pretty sure I did. And because of this, what David said, he was "bullying" poor Steve. Well boo-frigity-hoo, Scuba Steve.

And Jason makes a valid point, he asks if whether or not he has any right to question Steve's review where Steve alleges "corporate attack on reviewers". Since we all know that reviews are public, and some of the intent behind them is so people can "politely" debate their views and opinions, as alleged by the bullies themselves when they wish to defend their right to attack authors in comments and reviews, Jason is at least politely asking the question. The answer to his question is a resounding yes! However, apparently, in the minds of the bullies, the answer is a "hell no"! You see, to have that entitlement, Jason, you have to be a bully. Since you are not a bully, nor David, you have no right to comment on anyone's review of a book. (Getting the picture here?)

Then "Nandakishore" jumps in with bully logic. Check it out. 

Yes, yes! "Nandakishore", you figured it out! You broke the biggest conspiracy theory story of the century since, since, since it was discovered in the early 1990's that Double Stuff Oreo's really weren't "double stuffed" but actually, "one and a half times stuffed"! Great job. 

Okay, I am being sarcastic, but seriously, what "Nandakishore" says is honestly what the bullies believe, that Goodreads, along with Amazon, have joined "forces" with the "blog that shan't be named". (STGRB)

I guess all the times the bullies said that STGRB wasn't relevant, they were lying about that too. As it turns out, they are relevant. They have teamed up with the mighty Amazon / Goodreads for the sole purpose of eliminating "free speech" across the land. (That land being Goodreads, not an actual country as the bullies would have you believe) And yes, they have legalized "censorship" too! 

The bastards!

Then "Nandakishore" finishes up her "story of the century" with declaring that Goodreads has become a "book promotion" site and are "happy to see serious reviewers" leave. (And finalizes it with the old "Viva la Revolutione!" 

First of all, "Nandakishore", Goodreads has always been a "book - and author - promotion site. Otis Chandler has mentioned this often in interviews. So no, they didn't "just" decide "recently" to make it into that, it's always been that.

Fighting the urge to roll, my, eyes. 

And secondly, "serious reviewers" leaving? I think not. More like, "serious bullies" are leaving the site. (And I don't even know what the freak to say about her "Viva la Revolutione!" remark, so I'm just gonna roll them eyes after all and move on.)

Then something interesting catches my rolling eyes. In this next screenshot, have we stumbled onto one of the bullies who contributed to this bully book of lies? Check it out. 

Steve apparently knows that Manny is a contributor. Or did my rolling eyes deceive me? Steve is obviously thanking Manny for all his hard work (at lying) he put into the book. I know Manny isn't a "notoriously" well known bully, but he is a bully. Maybe Steve wasn't sitting so far on the sidelines as he would have many believe. (No pun intended) 

But back to the "thin" skin of the bullies. In regards to those earlier nasty comments which poor Steve got "bombarded" with? Well, Jason offers up an explanation. 

Well said, Jason. Well said. 

How do the bullies respond to Jason? See for yourself.

That last one by "Stephanie" shows how fast these bullies come to the aide of their bully friends. Almost as fast as they attack authors. Well, maybe not THAT fast. Then "Lisa" moans and groans of days past and long forgotten. Check it out. (And Jason's response)

You see, the dumb part of "Lisa's" comment was: "I come here to talk about books with my friends and other members. Please, let's be kind." and "That's not delicate flower stuff happening, but decent, mature behavior. Talking about a book is different than talking about a reviewer. Goodreads is supposed to be a community." * CoughWTFcough*

Did my eyes just read correctly? A bully actually said that? That talking about a BOOK is different than talking about a REVIEWER? ..... And yet ..... talking about a book isn't different than talking about an author? Or talking about a reviewer isn't different than talking about an author?

Is it me, or do I need to take my crazy pills? O_o

Yes folks, a BULLY said THAT! (You read it here first)

Oh, and the community part too? A community (of bullies) who attack authors or a community who discusses books? And if it's the latter, then isn't that what Jason (and David) is doing? Or trying to do? But what they get in response is poor Steve crying over how offended he is with 'different" views and opinions than his own? And being told to go away because this review isn't up for discussion? 

I have to now question Jason's hypothesis that "this isn't Sesame Street". From where I am standing, it would appear that the bullies really are kids. (Or is the more PC thing to say here is "children"?) Either way, where the bullies are concerned, anyone who disagrees with them, or challenges them, are nothing more than "Oscar The Grouch". 

Then comes some more bully tactics. When all else fails, call them trolls! (Just like "Laima" does.)

Jason will not take it sitting down. (Okay, he's probably sitting down at his keyboard, but you know what I meant)

Of course, when Jason asks "Delores" to show him where he "attacks" Steve, which is what "Delores" claimed, and Jason even supplies a link for her to make it easier, poor old "Delores" has no comeback. (Where have we seen this before? You know, when a bully makes an outrageous claim or lie and then gets the chance to "back it up" with evidence, and they fail to do so?) Me! You have seen me do it. Me is the answer that I was looking for. I also would have accepted STGRB.

I have called out many of the bullies for their lies and accusations and any evidence they have to support their claims, and to date - none have actually provided such. 

Then Ed has some wise words for Steve. 

Then Cynthia has some wise words for us all.

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

Things We Learned Today:

* The bullies can't take their own medicine

* To disagree with the bullies is to be a bully in their mind

* Manny was one of the bullies who contributed to the "Bully Book"

* Hypocrisy grows in the bully garden like marijuana grows in my brothers garden

* The above statement would be funnier if you knew my brother

* My brother grows it for recreational purposes only - so back off FEDS!

* The above comment would be funnier if you knew my relationship with the FEDS

* This "Things We Learned Today" segment has really gotten off track

* It's okay to attack authors through book reviews, but not reviewers in reviews

* The above statement was - WTF? O_O

* Carroll called the bully book a "book of whine"

* The above statement would be funnier if I spelled it "wine"

* Carroll will, at times, fight the urge to roll his eyes

* The bullies can dish it out, but they can't take it

* Carroll said - "Scuba Steve"

* Carroll learned that Lisa was correct. It is "Hear, hear" and not "Here, here"

* Numb-nuts

* Carroll called himself "numb-nuts", but in an endearing manner

* Carroll isn't afraid of being wrong sometimes



Thursday, November 14, 2013

Internet Revolt? Hardly!

Okay, so there's this new "book" being passed around currently by the Goodreads bullies. It's called, "Off Topic: The Story Of An Internet Revolt".  O_O Please. An internet revolt? I don't think so. More like a "Bully Revolt". This book was put together by multiple Goodreads bullies, so right there, you already know what to expect, right? Well, the book doesn't disappoint.

I read this book, or as much as I could before I realized, I've read it somewhere before. Now, consider this post something of my review.

It was fairly well written, but you know when you read a book, and the author(s) start inserting all of these intelligent sounding words, and you get to a point and say, "This author(s) is TRYING too hard to sound intelligent, yet, the topic itself is somewhat stupid?

Yeah, this is one of those books, and the bullies are rating it up too.

We get it, you have a thesaurus on hand, and or a word doc dictionary. Now, having said that, it is readable ... to a point. It's fairly clear in it's message, and one can tell that a limited amount of time was put into it, but here's the thing, that doesn't always equate to a well written book. (Or factual)

The biggest problem with this book is, it's nothing we all haven't heard before coming from the Goodreads bullies. It's the same "We're being censored" shit they have been spewing ever since Goodreads decided to change, and maybe to some extent, start enforcing their ToS. 

This book is nothing more than the bullies coming together (nothing new there) and taking from their hate blogs, hate author reviews, and their hate comments they leave behind on Goodreads, and putting it all together in one place. 

Reading this book will save valuable time from roaming the internet.

It's the same dribble they spew for free. 

You will also find some misrepresentations of the truth. (Nothing new there, either.) There is more spin city, oddball assumptions and as usual, some outright lies. To start, here is a shot of page 43, where they make the claim that Goodreads wants to remove, "without warning", any review that doesn't actually talk about the book. 

First of all, isn't that what a book review is? A review that talks about the book? So, armed with this knowledge, wouldn't it be feasible to remove a book review that doesn't talk about the book? In fact, if the book review (which is what it's actually called) doesn't talk about the book, then guess what? It's not actually a book review, is it? My big question is, why can't these bullies realize this? I would compare this to going to say, McDonald's website where they allow you to review the "Big Mac" but instead, you talk about "The Whopper". Or closer yet, you talk about the person who made your "Big Mac". You know, something like: "I hated my Big Mac because the person who made it is a jerk. He's a homophobic prick who doesn't know the difference between a sesame seed bun and special sauce." 

Or, maybe they just flat out lie and say: "The man who made my Big Mac is a pedophile and a racist."

Neither of which actually tells anyone if the Big Mac they ate was good or bad. 

And of course, if the McDonald's website deleted that Big Mac review because it didn't talk about the Big Mac, but instead, talked about the person who made it, then the bullies would cry, "Censorship!" 

It's book review, people, not an author review. It says right on the site when you click on it that it's a book review. If it were to say "author review", then you would be in business. 

Or am I missing something here?

The truth is, yes, at first they did start to delete those shelves and reviews without warning, but what these bullies refuse to mention is, they quickly halted that process and began sending warnings to them regarding their "author attacks" not being "book reviews". 

They also mention in the book how ridiculous and unprofessional it is for Goodreads to make these changes to their ToS. I guess it's no more ridiculous than writing an author review where a book review is supposed to be? O_o

Then they come clean with the truth, and mention how Goodreads is "taking away the fun from the site" by no longer allowing them to attack authors instead of addressing the book. Can we see now where these bullies stand? It's not about reviews, but more so, their self entitlement to attack people, namely authors. Attacking authors has nothing to do with book reviews, and apparently, it's not fun to them to just write book reviews, they would rather attack authors because that's more fun!

Then they talk about Chairman Mao, a vile dictator who killed millions, and like they tried to do with Hitler, they attempt to make the comparison to Goodreads being like Chairman Mao. The thing is, Goodreads isn't killing anyone, last I checked. Just saying. Not to mention, Goodreads isn't even a country, it's a website! And a free one at that where these people who cry "Censorship!", can sign up for free! 

I'm going to roll my eyes now. 

But prior to page 43, you get to read on page 32 where they (the bullies who wrote this book) wonder why Goodreads would even protect authors they "banned" from the site. I compare this to, "Why can't I violate the rules and bully this person through their book(s)? They broke the rules and were banned."

Of course, they mention me as one of those people who got banned. Wait a tick! Didn't some of the bullies get banned too? Like, Angela Horn? I'm pretty sure she did. And furthermore, none of the bullies know why I got banned because no reason was ever given. The truth is, I got banned because the bullies overwhelmed the GR staff with fake and false complaints about me and lies. They also showed alleged emails I sent to their friend Jude Henderson which had nothing to do with my activities on Goodreads. The truth is, I didn't violate any of GR ToS. (And nobody can present evidence to show I did either) But if you listen to the bullies, you would think they KNOW everything. That's what they want you to believe. The fact is, they don't know shit. 

Then they ask the question, "Who even cares about these writers in the larger literary context?" - Hhhmm, see what I mean? Just because they don't care about these writer's, they naturally assume that nobody does. Yet, they care enough to attack them, stalk them, bully them, tweet about them, and even write about them in their book.

Then they make the assumption that all authors use sock puppets, and dox. When have I ever been caught using a sock puppet? .... The answer is NEVER! And when have you ever seen me dox anyone? ... Again, the answer is NEVER! Kind of like when they say I stalk people, and harass them, yet they never seem to show any evidence of it. 

Then they go on about how realistic they are, and intelligent they are that they understand enough to know that not everyone is going to like their book, should they ever decide to do so. Check it out.

Now, didn't we see earlier where they were complaining about attacking authors in book reviews? And because of this, didn't we establish that these people are not reviewing books, but rather, reviewing authors? And at the same time, didn't we read where they claim that by Goodreads refusing them to talk about authors in book reviews that Goodreads was no longer "fun"? 

This isn't about book reviews. It's about attacking authors. They also fail to mention in their "book" that I have never complained about a legitimate "bad" book review. The truth is, before the Goodreads bullies attacked me, I never received a "bad" book review. My complaints have always been about author attacks in book reviews.

Then they continue with their moans and groans that when Goodreads deletes an author attack, they call it censorship. (And compare Goodreads and authors to Chairman Mao and Adolf Hitler) 

I'm going to shake my head this time. (And maybe roll my eyes again)

Then they "recommend" authors to stop focusing on their personal attacks against them and start "honing" their craft, and fine tuning their "strategy", and to get over themselves already. Maybe the bullies should get over themselves already. What they fail to recognize is that by them attacking authors in book reviews and spreading lies, they are hindering these authors chances of obtaining a following. (I told you, this book is full of this crap and hypocrisy left and right)

Then they talk about how they are authors and they love negative reviews of their books. First of all, no author is going nuts over negative reviews, but rather, bully attacks. Secondly, this is a lie twice over because I have seen Angela Horn and other bully authors who have had people's accounts deleted because they gave them one stars. Doesn't sound like they can "take it" to me. 

You see, this is what I said in the opening, it's the same old spin they do on a regular basis. This has nothing to do with legitimate bad reviews. But they are trying to make it the issue. 

Then on page 94, they mention me again. (I must be relevant) To make one of their points, they use me as an "example" however, they completely fabricate the "example", take a look.

Yes, you read correctly. They say: "I find it hard to believe that Mr. Bryant has ever met "a random 16 year old girl who had a wooden leg and a parrot on her shoulder" who "suggested that I help her make some easy money by counting bald people." Then they say: "To be blunt, I believe he has fabricated this piquant detail."

First of all, I would be so lucky if any of the bullies would ever say this. The truth is, nobody ever did. I think it's ironic that they fabricated this piquant detail. The truth is, and I have numerous evidence on this blog that supports this next statement, that the bullies claim I have tried to meet 16 year old girls online. And that I am a pedophile. In none of the evidence I provide on this blog has any of the bullies mentioned a wooden leg, a parrot or that I was ever counting bald people. Like I said earlier, a book full of misrepresentation and outright lies. Spin city!

But hey! My name was mentioned three times in this book so, not bad for someone who nobody cares about, right? O_O

So yes, this is what they use to "demonstrate" the stuff they say in book reviews about authors instead of the truth: Like this:

Or they review the whole book based only on the "free" chapter on Amazon,like this bully sock puppet goober. 

And they call themselves readers? Yeah, readers of the first "free" chapters. LOL

Then, in true bully "self entitlement" fashion, in their book, they actually think they should be "catered" to and that Goodreads should work with them in a "compromise" to which both parties might be "satisfied". 

I'm gonna go ahead and roll my eyes one more time here. 

This kind of reminds me of the latest talks between USA and Iran nuclear capabilities. Goodreads being USA and the Goodreads bullies being the Iranians. 

Then, to top it off, these people actually have convinced themselves that they know what our long dead founding fathers of America would say about this new Goodreads policy. They write almost 20 pages. Take a look at the beginning of it. 

I know, right? Talk about self entitlement. But this is the way these bullies actually think. They truly believe they know EVERYTHING! And they are slinging around hypocrisy and lies like they are going out of style. 

Then they revert back to this whole "We're being censored" whine, and "free speech" crap.

Hey bullies, if I invite you to my house and give you a free place to stay, it's not censorship or free speech oppression if I ask you to not be rude or bully others. Then kick you out if you are rude and bully others. It's my house! Just like Goodreads is a free website and it belongs to Amazon. They get to make the rules and pick and choose which rules they enforce and to whom they enforce it upon. You get no so say in the matter. Just like at my house.

Then they go down that road again of the extreme and bizarre. They actually compare comments that state facts about the Jerry Sandusky case as their example for the lies they say about authors, including me. I mean, when you say Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile, you actually have a conviction from a court to support that claim, but when these people call me or any other author a pedophile, you haven't any evidence to support it. This is when you take a fact about Jerry Sandusky and turn it into a libelous comment / lie when you say it about me. One is a proven fact and the other is not. See the difference? of course you don't, that's why your stupid little bullies. 

Of course it's not "gossip" when you say it about Jerry Sandusky, but it is "gossip" when you say it about me. And there lies the problem. The bullies have misled everyone with their "book". They fail to tell the truth (as expected) and they spin every little thing. Didn't I tell you it was like reading one of their blogs or comments or even, book reviews?

These people are heartless, soulless, and just pure evil. I'll prove it yet again with this final screenshot of the day. It's a book shelf from a bully, "Anushka", who says "Dear author, klindly kill yourself". 

I know, right? Well, at least she said "kindly". 

These people wish others dead. How much more evidence do we need to see before we realize that these people are the vile of the vile? Maybe they will spin this too and say: "Anushka didn't mean the author to kill themselves, but that the author should just kill their career."

You can put all the icing you want on a turd. I bet when you bite into it, it's still going to taste like shit. 

Over all, this book is filled with misdirection, misinterpretation, spin, and outright lies. I can't recommend this book for anyone. When truth matters, you just can't simply trust the Goodreads bullies. They wouldn't know the truth if it crawled up their ass and died. The truth is, I think that's exactly what happened.

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

Things We Learned Today:

* The bullies collaborated on a book

* The bullies do what they do best in the book, and lie

* The bullies compare Goodreads to Chairman Mao

* Icing on a turd doesn't sound appealing at all!

* It's not censorship taking place on Goodreads, just rule enforcing

* Free speech doesn't apply for a website (only a country to its citizens)

* The bullies think they know what our founding fathers would think about their plight on GR?

* The bullies are rating their book "up" on Goodreads. (No shocker there)

* The bullies call their little uprising a "revolt" - LMAO

* Maybe nobody cares about the bullies? O_o

* Still can't get over eating shit with icing on it. Gross Carroll!

* The bullies still wish people dead

Friday, November 8, 2013

JennyJen into Beastiality?

Today I am going to do a fun post. A post that represents what the bullies like to do. To take something of no big deal and put a spin on it. You know, exaggerate a little just like the bullies. Perhaps with it, the bullies will get to see (and learn) how it feels to be scrutinized for absolutely no reason other than for our enjoyment. They do it to so many, so I doubt they will have any problem with this. Of course, when I said "learn" earlier, you know I was being sarcastic, right? I mean, it's a well known fact that bullies can't learn.

Nonetheless, we have learned a lot here at The Glass, and on STGRB, about notorious bully, JennyJen. (I should stop saying that word, "notorious". Truth is, all the bullies are "notorious". LOL)

So JennyJen is a "reader"? Okay, we'll play along. The question is, what does JennyJen like to read? But before we can look into that, we must first ask ourselves, what does JennyJen like? Well, according to her "Bullylikes" profile, she loves cats and dogs. Take a gander.

Well, isn't that sweet? But anyway, now to see what JennyJen likes to read. 

Holy crap, Rin Tin Tin, are my eyes seeing correctly? Her latest book read is WHAT???? 

And who recommended it to her? Grimlock? (Shoshana Bick) 

And who else might be interested in this book?

Holy man monkey! This is ...... wow!

Okay then, it appears JennyJen is going to read an erotic book about Bigfoot. Sounds kinky. But I think we all know what's coming here. (No pun intended) Bigfoot is going to have sex with female humans. On the other hand, maybe it is about a male Bigfoot getting his groove on with other female Bigfoot creatures. I shouldn't be jumping the gun here. Let's just check in with her next update. Shall we?

Okay, she warns us of sexual content. Then proceeds to quote a line from the book. Very graphic. But I am still in the dark about if this is between two Bigfoot creatures or, if this is a beastiality thing between a Bigfoot and a female human. I better wait to see her next update.

I see. It would appear that JennyJen is grossed out by the word "Honey". A sweet term of endearment people use to refer to their loved ones and what not. Of course, for all of us here at The Glass, this comes of no surprise, does it? But then we must ask the question, if JennyJen is grossed out over the word "honey", then what else grosses her out? Better still, what doesn't gross JennyJen out? Maybe we can uncover this little mystery in her next update. To better help us understand the answer to those two questions, perhaps we can look to the previous screenshot where she quoted a line from the book at 26%. And she quoted - "I licked the shaft from side to side and then lowered to eat a ball." - End of what she quoted. 

Hhhmm, licking shafts and eating balls? That doesn't gross her out? Yet the word "Honey" does gross her out? Now I am a bit confused. Just how kinky is this chick? Maybe we will find out in her next update. 

Holy sex fiend Batman! It is a book on beastiality! 

So, JennyJen, you like cats and ... gulp .... dogs? O_o

I see she's also into Sasquatch too. 

Double gulp!!

I should have known though, I mean, there is a girl on the cover. That was my first clue of what this book was probably all about. That combined with the title. But I do notice she doesn't complain about being grossed out by that scenario. Still, only the word "honey" is what grosses her out. Hey, JennyJen, what you got against bees? Next update please.

I see. And that doesn't gross her out? I'm feeling a bit nauseated myself. Do we really want to continue with this post? .... Sure, what the heck, we've come this far.

And I'm spent.

Cigarette please.

Gggrr baby, gggrr, yeah!

You're still not grossed out yet, JennyJen?

Okay then.

And you know what JennyJen? So am I. That was just ..... gross? O_O

But hey, if it turns you and Shoshana Bick on, then more power to you both. I hope you realize that beastiality is against the law in some countries, right? But hey, you know what? Whatever floats your boat. I may not know what you look like, but I do know what Shoshana Bick looks like and quite frankly, she would be so lucky to tag a handsome ape-like creature such as Bigfoot. But you two keep dreaming and aiming for the stars. Who knows, maybe the both of you will someday meet a Bigfoot that is into "your type". Then again, maybe even Bigfoot has evolved tastes also like the rest of the human population. 

Wait a tick, Bigfoot isn't human, is he?

Oh well, it's still fun to dream isn't it? After all, you know what they say, dreaming is for free. I guess when you get a date with one, you'll become famous for discovering the existence of the scientifically elusive beast. If you get one drunk enough, who knows, you might be the first human to give birth to a Sasquatch. Good luck with that. 

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

Things We Learned Today:

* JennyJen is into beastiality

* So is Shoshana Bick

* For JennyJen or Shoshana to get a date with a Sasquatch, they would first have to get him drunk

* Holy Batman reference!

* Holy Austin Powers reference too!

* Carroll said "man monkey"

* JennyJen is grossed out by the word "honey" but not by Bigfoot having sex with humans

* Carroll did a double gulp

* Carroll is spent

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Angela Horn Lies

If you ever want to know what a cyber stalker looks like, just Google Angela Horn. More on that later, meanwhile, let me show you some of how this monster lies and spins everything that comes out of her ass. (And when I say ass, I mean mouth.) For the most part, the following is a great example of how all of these bullies lie and spin everything.

On her "Bullylikes" blog, home of the Dawidiots, she tries to claim that STGRB threatens people with violence. Thi swould be shocking if it were true, but you will have to take a look at the screenshots first to see that what she posted, has absolutely no violent content what-so-ever.

Did you see it? Or should I say, did you not see it? In no way was there any threats of violence used against anyone. All that was said was, they wanted JennyJen (a notorious cyber bully) to kiss their ass. I guess when you ask someone to kiss your ass, it must be a form of violence. In that case, color me violent because Angela Horn, kiss my ass. Better yet, don't. I don't want your STD infested lips touching my skin so - just kiss your own ass.

Or maybe she took the phrase: "Your hours are numbered" as a violent threat. Good luck in getting that to hold up in a court of law. The truth is, nobody threatened anyone with violence here. Angela Horn is just a lying, brainless cyber bully who enjoys the drama of bullying people. This post clearly shows this. As for mother's pride? I can't speak for Athena, (Or can I? O_o) but I know my mother is very proud of me for standing up to the bullies like Angela Horn.

Now onto our next screenshots.

It would also appear that Angela Horn doesn't know what doxxing is. Thus, the reason why I referred to her as brainless in the previous paragraph. To prove this, take a look at what she also posted on her "Bullylikes" blog.

Did you see any doxxing on there? I know I sure didn't. You see, doxxing is actually when you post someone's home address, phone number, or other personal information like social security number, or perhaps the address where someone might work. Quite frankly, it's just not there. Besides that, the comment where it says she lives in Livermore was posted by "Anony Mouse", not Athena. So even if that were actually doc dropping, or doxxing, which it isn't, Athena wouldn't have been the one to actually have done it, "Annony Mouse" would have been the culprit. Brainless she is, indeed.

Noticing anything else so far? Well, keep reading. 

In this next screenshot, we see Angela Horn posting about how STGRB is "going out of business". But that isn't even the case. Athena merely explains that now that GR has shown some kind of effort in cracking down on the bullies, which was the original goal of STGRB to begin with, or that is what I was led to believe, Athena just doesn't see much of a need to cover the bully activities. Most in part because the bullies like Angela Horn, and their cyber criminal attacks, have pretty much been thwarted by GR. However, that still doesn't keep Angela from lying and spinning the situation. 

Did you notice the last part? About the skiing? I guess sin Angela's brainless skull, if you ski, then you must be Athena Parker. 

Now, keep in mind that in real life, Athena and Melissa are friends. They used to live next door to each other. (I guess that too equates to them being the same person. By that standard, my name is also Jim and John. Those are two fellows that live on my street of whom I am friends with. Or do they have to join Goodreads in order for them and me to be the same people? (Just trying to use bully rationale here.)

I myself enjoy the fine sport of skiing also, It looks like Angela Horn has cracked the case wide open! Congratulations numb-nuts, you caught me. I am everyone on STGRB, as well as Carroll Bryant, as well as Rick Carufel. I am also M.T. Dismuke. You got me. I surrender to your awesome powers of stupidity. Damn it! I would have gotten away with it to if it weren't for those meddling bullies. 

Now, have you seen a pattern here? Remember when I opened this post with "If you ever want to know what a cyber stalker looks like, just Google Angela Horn?"

Well, for someone who claims she isn't a cyber stalker or a bully, she sure does take a lot of screenshots of STGRB, doesn't she? Maybe Angela Horn is a hermaphrodite and secretly has a penis to go with that vagina because she sure does display publicly a huge woody for Athena and STGRB. 

Here is a question for you Angela, rhetorical I assure you, but how many times a day do you go and visit STGRB? 

With a non-stalker like Angela Horn hanging around, who needs a real one?

I'm Carroll Bryant, Athena Parker, Melissa, STGRB, Johnny B. Good, Rick Carufel, M.T. Dismuke ..... and this is The Looking Glass.  

Things We Learned Today:  

* Angela Horn lies

* Carroll has multiple personalities

* Angela Horn stalks STGRB and Athena

* Angela Horn doesn't know what doxxing is

* Angela Horn is secretly a hermaphrodite? O_O 

* Nobody threatened anyone

* Carroll made a Scooby reference

* Angela Horn isn't talented enough to kiss her own ass

* Carroll's mom is proud of him

* Seriously, Angela Horn has a penis? O_O

* Carroll has never had an STD and is damn sure not going to get his first one from Angela Horn

* Seriously though, a penis? O_o


Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Melissa Chesley: Author Unprofessional

So back in July of 2012, author Melissa Chesley of the blog, "Writings, Musings & Other Such Nonsense" decided to take it upon herself to write about yours truly. Are we going to have fun with this one.

First of all, we are talking about an author here who decided to bash another author. Worse than that, she does so by simply reading other posts. Other posts mind you that fail to show any evidence of their claims against me. She actually admits to this. Here are the posts she read. The first one she links to is gone. But it used to belong to a blog called "Dream Wish".

The next one she links to is of course, the famous (sarcasm) Rex Files. (Didn't I do a post on him already and debunk his claims? I'm pretty sure I did.)

The last one is a joke. She links to "Absolute Write Water Cooler". I showcased them in my "Internet Scams: Absolute Write" post recently. Remember?

So we know right from the get go, Melissa got some very bad information. Perhaps if she were more professional, she would have sought actual evidence of the lies she read. Instead, she writes this post. We'll take them one screenshot at a time so we can discuss it, okay?

First this. 

She starts off my crediting me with "single handedly" making indie publishing that much harder for indie authors (like herself) with my "lack of ethics and professional protocol". (Kind of like what she is doing by writing this post about me) RME and SMH

Then she states clearly: "Mind you, I'm going by other blog posts ..." 

Ahem. Really Melissa? That's your references? Other blog posts that fail to show any proof of their claims? And of all places, a scam website like "Absolute Write"? ... Okay, if you say so.


Then she goes on to say: (And get this) "Bloggers tend to be pretty good in gathering their facts."

Wait! Didn't she just say she got all of her information about me from other blogs? And the blogs she got this information on me from didn't present screenshots of their claims? How is that evidence? How is that proof? How is that THE FACTS?!

* SIGH *

You see, these are the kinds of people we're dealing with here. 

Unprofessional nit-wits.

Then she claims at the end of that screenshot "Once you are a little more informed, like me, you'll still see this as a bad thing. This guy did not act in a professional manner at all."

Well, you're right about that, Melissa. It is a bad thing. It's a bad thing you took stuff you read off the internet with no evidence to back it up as the gospel truth. And it's a bad thing you had to go and write about it to boot, contributing to bullying of a fellow author. And it's a bad thing you didn't get all of your facts straight. Or produce evidence to support these claims that you took as the gospel truth. 

Who is the unprofessional now? O_o

YOU ARE!!!!!!!!! 

But wait! There's more. Check this out. 

She says that authors behaving badly is a trend. Really Melissa? And reviewers behaving badly (like yourself) isn't a trend? Wait a tick, she ain't no stinking reviewer, she's an author! And she is behaving badly by writing about me. Oh, my God! She's right, authors behaving badly is a trend! 


Or was it? O_o

Then she says that badly behaving authors numbers are "rising" and those like her who have professionalism and integrity (like writing about me) struggle. 

Did it ever occur to you Melissa, and I'm just throwing it out there, that maybe the reason you are struggling is because you suck at writing? Or perhaps, just perhaps, you write about your fellow authors, calling them badly behaving without any evidence to support your jibberish? 

Something to think about, Miss Integrity. 

Then we get to the proof that this "fellow indie author" is crying out for people to not buy my books. Now I ask you, how is this "ethical" or "professional"? 

It isn't. And all of us with commonsense know this, don;t we? But here is what she says: "If people continue to buy Mr. Bryant's books, and his numbers continue to grow rapidly due to his now A.B.B. image, more authors are going to follow suit." - End of quote.

I can't believe it. I'm actually at a loss for words.


First of all, there has never been any evidence presented that I ever behaved badly. Secondly, my success has nothing to do with other authors standing up for themselves, Melissa. They stand up for themselves because they are being bullied by you and your friends. That's why they do it. It has nothing to do with me. I don't think. But hey, if me standing up for myself inspires other authors to do so, then great! But no, my success won't have anything to do with it. 

But isn't it great that another author is basically calling out to everyone to "not buy my books"? And haven't I and STGRB been saying that this is the real reason for these people to act this way in bullying authors? That it wasn't about reviews as they cry about? But more so about them killing careers and preventing book sales? 

I think we stumbled onto something here. 

Then she says "reviewers will stop reviewing". 

Um .... no, Melissa, they won't. Most in part because this isn't a war between authors and reviewers, it's a war between authors and bullies (Like you) who are not professional enough to do their homework or present evidence to support your "so called" facts. 

Moving on .....

Then she asks, what does this mean for writers? Reviewers? ... Well, a very good question Melissa, allow me to respond. 

It means nothing! Well, except that writers can still write despite bullies like you. And reviewers can still review despite bullies like you. So yeah, life goes on as normal as possible. It means nothing! Drama queen Jr. (Amanda Welling is drama queen Sr.)

Then she goes on to say this.

Yes, yes, if my perverse way of gaining readers works, then others will follow suit. Wait! What? Do you even know what my perverse ways of gaining readers is? I mean, other than what "you read". Well, I'll fill you in as to edumacate you some. My ways of gaining readers is to write books, be friendly, be respectful, I never complained about a bad review, never had a bad review until you and your bully friends attacked me, and oh, I don't do blog posts about people and call them "perverse" without getting all the facts. Something you might be able to learn from by the way. Just saying. 

I never spammed. I never approached people for interviews. I never engaged in gossip (like you) or rumors about people (like you) or spread lies about them (like you) or ever called for people to not buy other books from other authors. (Like you!)

Then again, if you were really professional, you would know this already. And while we're on the subject of professionalism, a real professional doesn't tell everyone they are a professional. Everyone will just know it. So .... you know .... something to dwell on in cold lonely moments. 

Then she says: "People hide behind the computer everyday spouting off things (like Melissa) they would never say to someone face to face. Seriously, I would like to meet with people face to face who bad mouthed me." (Like she does me) Then she wraps up by saying she would like to meet those people who bad mouthed her on the internet. 

Well, Melissa, so would I. Seeing how I never bad mouthed anyone who didn't bad mouth me first, I would love to meet them in real life and see what they have to say to my face. You are now added to that list. 

As for me, I never say anything on the internet to anyone that I wouldn't say to their face. Especially you. And by the way, I would love to see you use my head for a doorstep. Such tough talk from such a stupid bitch. Oh shit! Did I just bad mouth you? Now you can add me to your list. A dollar says I will call you a stupid bitch to your face. I would risk more money, but you're a failed writer so I figure you probably couldn't spare anymore than a dollar to begin with. Now that I'm thinking about it, fifty cents might be pushing it.

Shit! Did I just bad mouth you again? O_O

Oh, never mind, you then said: "Not really" ... ditto for me too. 

Then she says "maybe". Shit! Ditto for me too again. 

Then she says I need to be taught a lesson. Then she says the reviewers had every right to do what they did to me. Really Melissa? So I am guessing here that if they attacked you for no good reason like they attacked me, you would deserve it too? Okay, nice to know. And while we're on the subject, what exactly was their reason for attacking me? Because I made a post listing a few reviewers who lied to me and stole from me? Then I take it that you condone theft? .... Good to know. 

And what lesson exactly do I need to learn? 

Another dollar says that she probably doesn't even know. 

Shit! Now I am bankrupting her!

Bad Carz!

She is right about one thing, reviewers are vital to authors. But not bullies. You see, there is a difference. There are reviewers, then there are bullies. Two different things here we're talking about. 

She goes on. (Yawn)

The thing you have to remember here, Melissa, is that calling authors a pedophile in a review is not reviewing a book. Thought you might like to know this. 

I agree, most indie authors are probably pushy, but you also have to remember and take into account, they have to do their own marketing. You see, this is probably why we come off pushy. I'm sure you do it too. I never did. I mean, yeah, on my blog maybe and stuff, but I don't invade other people's space and push my work. 

Now let's look at some comments left on her blog about her post. 

Alex J. Cavanaugh says that my behavior was bad. Really Alex? How so? Nothing was ever proven about what these bullies wrote about my behavior. How was my behavior bad? What exactly did I do? 

Melissa responds asking "What was he thinking?" ... Well, what was I thinking about what, Melissa? What did I do? What do you think I did? I could ask the same of you. What were you thinking in writing this post? Or is it true that stupid people don't think? 

Felicia seems a bit upset that Melissa was referenced in the post. It would appear that Melissa did not get her permission before hand. A typical bully thing to do. It's that entitlement of theirs. 

Then Jamie Gibbs puts his stupidity on display with his asinine comment. He says I got "burned" (LOL) and turned to the internet to act like an idiot. Kind of like what he is doing with his comment. Okay "know it all" Jamie, how did I get burned? You mean, when the bullies "stole" my books with broken promises? Yeah, I got burned. But I didn't just "turn" to the internet. That took many months later when Jude stalked me on my shared blog when I decided to post that "list". SMH Numb-nuts.

Then he says I'm just an awful person. Not the people who stole from me mind you, but I'm an awful person. That dick weed doesn't even know me yet he takes it upon himself to judge me. Must be nice being holier than thou. 

In response to his last line, about trolling, you're right Jamie. But unfortunately, it;s probably your bullly friends who are doing all the trolling. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it. (And that is a scary thought indeed) Next comment please!

Carol Marrs Phipps says that she hopes all the kind and respectful authors out there can continue and overcome the damage I have caused. 

I am a kind and respectful author Carol so I hope you are right. Drop me a line sometime, you and Melissa, and I will teach you how to be a kind and respectful author. See how kind and respectful I am to offer up my services to you for free? 

You're welcome. 

Then Melissa kisses ass for her indiscretion. Or should I say, her self entitlement? Eh, either way, she kisses Felicia's ass now that she realizes her unprofessional action. 

Then she kisses her ass some more with her next post. Check it out.

Hey Melissa, where's my apology you unprofessional bitch?

Don't quit your day job. 

I want my two dollars! 

I'm Carroll Bryant "sole proprietor of 'Damage to the worlds indie writing careers' inc" .... And this is The Looking Glass.

Things We Learned Today:

* Carroll is responsible for turning the worlds indie writing upside down

* Melissa didn't fact check her information

* Melissa is not a professional writer

* Melissa is drama queen Jr.? Really Carz? Seriously? O_o

* Amanda Welling is drama queen Sr.

* Carroll is unprofessional for standing up for himself against the bullies

* Carroll face palmed again

* Melissa Chesley supports cyber bullying

* Melissa owes Carroll two bucks

* Melissa has a day job? O_O

* Bullies apologize to each other, but not to their victims

* Melissa got her blog title right. She does cater to other such nonsense

* There's still no evidence that Carroll did anything to anyone