# Box set scams on Passive Voice



## Rick Gualtieri

Nothing we haven't really discussed here, but I didn't see anyone share the link. Apologies if it has been. The originating site has a ton more stuff on it, although I have no idea on the veracity of it all.

Even so, I think it serves as a good reminder that we're all business owners and as such need to be mindful of protecting that business. Things like: being careful who we do business with, always being mindful of TOS, and never putting our businesses in a position where we can't get a refund for a service.

http://www.thepassivevoice.com/2017/04/the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig/


----------



## Not any more

Oh, my, and I know exactly who the article is talking about.  A whole bunch of Kboarders have had books in these sets.


----------



## Lydniz

There's some scary stuff going on these days.


----------



## Jena H

Okay, dumb question time:  what does "getting the letters" mean?  Does that have something to do with NYT list or USAToday list?  (See?  Those are letters.   )


----------



## JalexM

I know who they are talking about and there's alot of back and forth going on between certain author groups. This article only list one side and there is *a lot* of misinformation and biases going on. The organizer is doing nothing wrong and I stand by them. There's is a lot of facebook drama, misinformation, and jealousy going on here and in the article the article links to.
Don't trust a random blog that has the amount of angst in the last two paragraphs as that one did.


----------



## Not any more

Jena H said:


> Okay, dumb question time: what does "getting the letters" mean? Does that have something to do with NYT list or USAToday list? (See? Those are letters.  )


Those are the letters.


----------



## MyraScott

What's crazy is a friend of mine had Amazon threaten to close her account for gifting one book to a friend who, unrequested, then left a review.  The email from Amazon warned her they "don't tolerate authors trying to manipulate ranks." 

With a single gifted copy.

And yet a promo organizer buys a spot on the lists with thousands of gifted copies and claims to get a special call from an Amazon executives on Sunday telling her how much they love her and would never think of doing anything to hurt her? 

It makes not one bit of sense.  Not even a little.


----------



## JalexM

MyraScott said:


> What's crazy is a friend of mine had Amazon threaten to close her account for gifting one book to a friend who, unrequested, then left a review. The email from Amazon warned her they "don't tolerate authors trying to manipulate ranks."
> 
> With a single gifted copy.
> 
> And yet a promo organizer buys a spot on the lists with thousands of gifted copies and claims to get a special call from an Amazon executives on Sunday telling her how much they love her and would never think of doing anything to hurt her?
> 
> It makes not one bit of sense. Not even a little.


That's because she doesn't gift "thousands" like the article says.


----------



## MyraScott

JalexM said:


> That's because she doesn't gift "thousands" like the article says.


Oh, sorry. Are you in this compliation? I heard it was around 1500 but I don't have access to the actual numbers. How many was it?


----------



## Jena H

brkingsolver said:


> Those are the letters.


Thanks. Talking about "the letters" sounds like a grandiose way to refer to it. Why not just say "on the list"? And one of the comments in that article mentioned putting "the letters" on "my CV."


----------



## Not any more

Jena H said:


> Thanks. Talking about "the letters" sounds like a grandiose way to refer to it. Why not just say "on the list"? And one of the comments in that article mentioned putting "the letters" on "my CV."


You know, NYT, PhD, QED... It all sounds impressive.


----------



## JalexM

MyraScott said:


> Oh, sorry. Are you in this compliation? I heard it was around 1500 but I don't have access to the actual numbers. How many was it?


No, not this one.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

I have heard from people on both sides who I consider reputable. Some say it didn't happpen for the set they were in. Others say the opposite, that there is indeed gifting.  My guess is the truth is somewhere in between. Perhaps it doesn't happen for every box set, but in others who knows? Maybe preorders aren't what's hoped for, etc etc. But I have heard enough to make me think it is wise to spend my business dollars elsewhere. 

As for the jealousy argument. I call bs. There's tons of successful indies and marketers on these boards you barely hear a peep about with regards to anything negative. If someone is courting so much controversy, again it tells me perhaps my marketing dollars are best spent elsewhere.


----------



## JalexM

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I have heard from people on both sides who I consider reputable. Some say it didn't happpen for the set they were in. Others say the opposite, that there is indeed gifting. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between. Perhaps it doesn't happen for every box set, but in others who knows? Maybe preorders aren't what's hoped for, etc etc. But I have heard enough to make me think it is wise to spend my business dollars elsewhere.
> 
> As for the jealousy argument. I call bs. There's tons of successful indies and marketers on these boards you barely hear a peep about with regards to anything negative. If someone is courting so much controversy, again it tells me perhaps my marketing dollars are best spent elsewhere.


I've seen both sides and I can tell you that there is for a fact some jealously and malice involved. Not for everyone, but some based on their actions i saw before and after they began to have a problem with the organizer.


----------



## Lydniz

Rick Gualtieri said:


> As for the jealousy argument. I call bs. There's tons of successful indies and marketers on these boards you barely hear a peep about with regards to anything negative.


This is true. There are many successful authors who post on here KBoards, and I never hear anyone say a bad thing about them. In fact, I've noticed that most people (on KB at least) really appreciate what the successful authors have to contribute, and find them nothing but inspirational. If you ask me, most people have more sense or are too busy writing to waste time on jealousy.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I have heard from people on both sides who I consider reputable. Some say it didn't happpen for the set they were in. Others say the opposite, that there is indeed gifting. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between. Perhaps it doesn't happen for every box set, but in others who knows? Maybe preorders aren't what's hoped for, etc etc. But I have heard enough to make me think it is wise to spend my business dollars elsewhere.
> 
> As for the jealousy argument. I call bs. There's tons of successful indies and marketers on these boards you barely hear a peep about with regards to anything negative. If someone is courting so much controversy, again it tells me perhaps my marketing dollars are best spent elsewhere.


Pretty much this.

But there is enough info out there for people to make up their own minds if they think the risk is worth it. Worth what? I look at these USA Today Bestseller! people and their own books sell diddly squat, so, yanno... But hey, if that makes them happy. And they think it's worth the risk...

But what I cannot stand is the blackballing and bullying for no good reason at all.

I admit. I was stupid enough to sign up for one of these, because, Hey! Readers!

I asked one question "I have a clash of dates, can I possibly send to my list after the weekend?" for which I was banned, unfriended, and booted from the set.

I was lucky. I got my money back. I know some people who did not get featured and did not get their money back for doing things as simple as asking about aspects of the contract.

The product is to make lists. OK. The methods may or may not be questionable. That's up to you. Making a list gets you readers. It's an OK goal to shoot for. People do this with their own sets + Bookbub.

It's the lousy customer experience that gets me.


----------



## AllyWho

MyraScott said:


> Oh, sorry. Are you in this compliation? I heard it was around 1500 but I don't have access to the actual numbers. How many was it?


I've heard from a couple of people in different sets that the amount of copies gifted varies from 500 to 2,000 (depending on set obviously). It certainly does happen in huge numbers, there are loads of screen shots where she has stated that the 500, 1,000 or 2,000 goal of gifted copies has been reached. More disturbing is the math that doesn't add up. 2k buy in for 20 authors equals $40,000. Even if the organiser gifted 5,000 copies (which would be sufficient to hit the lists on low weeks) that still leaves $35,000...

With regard to gifting - Amazon doesn't care about it. Think of it from their point of view, you still have to buy a copy to gift it. There is talk that strictly speaking it is against TOS as "rank manipulation" but to counter that, Amazon even have a pop list now that shows the "top gifted" ebooks. So the more you gift, the better apparently 

Quit apart from that issue, it's the bullying that's hard to stomach. You have to question why a promoter needs to use fear and intimidation tactics to shut anyone down if they dare ask basic questions. Customers problems, complaints, issues and refunds are simply a part of doing business. It's very telling* how* a business deals with day to day issues. If a customer asks a questions or requires a refund and the business owner immediately throws up a smoke screen, screams victimisation, threatens lawyers and sends their followers to harass the customers, it really makes me wonder what are they hiding?


----------



## MyraScott

My point is that my friend gifted a SINGLE COPY and got a warning notice from Amazon that they don't tolerate rank manipulation.

ONE COPY.

It makes no sense.


----------



## lilywhite

JalexM said:


> Don't trust a random blog that has the amount of angst in the last two paragraphs as that one did.


Conversely, don't trust someone that has drama and angst with at least one new person every few days.

You say potato, I say ... well. I don't want to get moderated, so.


----------



## Northern pen

I usually avoid these topics as they tend to annoy me, but since I was in one of the boxed sets that this person runs I have first hand insight.


First off, that article is, as mentioned earlier, very one sided. I've also seen several facebook posts of similar comments, suggesting that they are a scam and she is ripping the authors off. And that simply isn't the case.

I was part of the Dark Humanity boxed set. I had a buy in of $500. I also added more in later. We had a very large and aggressive ad campaign. At it was very effective. We sold a shit tonne of books during the pre order period. Aside from the money spent on advertising, we also had our mailing lists at our disposal, which if I had to hazard a guess, combined for at least 200,000 readers. 

A lot of time and energy went into making that boxed set a success, we had a group of determined writers and maximized our efforts. We ended up reaching the top 10 (7 if I recall correctly) in all of the amazon store, and made both the USA today and New York Times lists. And that is an accomplishment I am proud of.

I've already made my investment back, and have one of my books in the hands of 30k+ new readers. I consider the entire venture a complete success. 

I've also heard comments about gifting and 'cheating'.  We were in contact with Amazon often during the process of releasing this book and gifting was never an issue. They were concerned about authors trying to double dip by having books in set that were already in KU. Which we dealt with.

I know there have been boxed set scams where authors have lost money by unscrupulous promoters. That is an unfortunate thing, and I feel bad for the authors who get ripped off. But I can say without doubt, not all boxed sets are scams, and the promoter that that article is alluding to is not out to rip anyone off.


----------



## Patty Jansen

MyraScott said:


> My point is that my friend gifted a SINGLE COPY and got a warning notice from Amazon that they don't tolerate rank manipulation.
> 
> ONE COPY.
> 
> It makes no sense.


Amazon is not known for making sense. Clearly, there are substantial risks involved in what they determine may or may not be "rank manipulation" or "review manipulation". They wield the hammer unevenly and suddenly.


----------



## Crystal_

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I have heard from people on both sides who I consider reputable. Some say it didn't happpen for the set they were in. Others say the opposite, that there is indeed gifting. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between. Perhaps it doesn't happen for every box set, but in others who knows? Maybe preorders aren't what's hoped for, etc etc. But I have heard enough to make me think it is wise to spend my business dollars elsewhere.
> 
> As for the jealousy argument. I call bs. There's tons of successful indies and marketers on these boards you barely hear a peep about with regards to anything negative. If someone is courting so much controversy, again it tells me perhaps my marketing dollars are best spent elsewhere.


I think most of us know the organizer the blog post is referring to. I don't have any experience with her personally, but having just been in a multi-author box set organized rather rag-tagly with one of the authors taking charge, I have to say that $500-2000 dollars is a perfectly reasonable buy in cost given how much most of these sets spend on advertising. It takes a lot of money to keep a preorder ranking for eight weeks.

As to gifting, I'm not a fan, but the people organizing my box set did decide to gift copies during launch week. A lot of copies. It's not the choice I would have made if it was up to me, but it's a very common practice.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Pretty sure gifting is against TOS and I'd sure be mad if anybody with whom I was in a boxed set was doing it. Sketchy as heck and risking your KDP account as i understand it. Everybody can do what they want, though, and everybody has their own moral scale and risk tolerance level. Personally, stuff like this is why I don't cross-promo. And yeah, I'm aware that some publishers also do shady stuff. 

I also know a number of authors who've been targeted as described in this article. I've found that lots of smoke over a long time generally means fire. Before I spent my money, I'd google any organizer or service provider, and I'd avoid if I found significant evidence of feuding and drama. There are bad actors in any industry. Buyer beware.


----------



## JalexM

Rosalind J said:


> Pretty sure gifting is against TOS


It isn't though, only in terms of manipulating rank.


----------



## wheart

DexyDoo said:


> Anyway, I usually stay out of this sort of thing, but I simply don't understand why people are calling it a scam.


Don't feel that way. It's good that you folks tell your side of the story. You have every right to defend yourselves and stick up for your integrity and reputation, and that of those who you feel have been painted unjustly.

Unless we've seen firsthand the actual dialogs taken place between the parties involved, we're only listening to hearsay.

It's never good when only one side of the story is being told. When both sides have their say, those of us on the sidelines can make a clearer assessment of who's making the better argument.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

JalexM said:


> It isn't though, only in terms of manipulating rank.


Huh? Isn't that the point?


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

I'm just trying to figure out where all that 'buy-in' money goes. No way are they spending that much on advertising. I'm not even sure it's possible to spend that much. There are only so many places to advertise. Gifting a couple thousand copies, at a cost of a couple thousand dollars? Okay, add that to a $2k ad spend and it still doesn't add up. I made the USA list with my own box set and it cost me less than $2k to get to #90, so I don't get it. Granted, I didn't 'gift' any copies, but still, those are some seriously skewed numbers. Especially if you're talking about huge box sets with 20 authors!


----------



## JalexM

Rosalind J said:


> Huh? Isn't that the point?


Not in the sets, when gifting happens, the sets are already high ranking, so gifting would have a minimum impact compared to if your book was in the five digits.


----------



## JalexM

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I'm just trying to figure out where all that 'buy-in' money goes. No way are they spending that much on advertising. I'm not even sure it's possible to spend that much. There are only so many places to advertise. Gifting a couple thousand copies, at a cost of a couple thousand dollars? Okay, add that to a $2k ad spend and it still doesn't add up. I made the USA list with my own box set and it cost me less than $2k to get to #90, so I don't get it. Granted, I didn't 'gift' any copies, but still, those are some seriously skewed numbers. Especially if you're talking about huge box sets with 20 authors!


It's not for one week.
The sets are on pre-order for three weeks. So, it's marketing over a large span of time. If you've ran a facebook ad over three months, the cost ad. Also as the ads go on, they become less effective, so I wouldn't be surprised if they put in more in the last month.


----------



## Northern pen

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I'm just trying to figure out where all that 'buy-in' money goes. No way are they spending that much on advertising. I'm not even sure it's possible to spend that much. There are only so many places to advertise. Gifting a couple thousand copies, at a cost of a couple thousand dollars? Okay, add that to a $2k ad spend and it still doesn't add up. I made the USA list with my own box set and it cost me less than $2k to get to #90, so I don't get it. Granted, I didn't 'gift' any copies, but still, those are some seriously skewed numbers. Especially if you're talking about huge box sets with 20 authors!


Spending enough to make USA today spending enough to make New York Times are two different beasts


----------



## Guest

No need to block out my name. This post is about me. I'm not afraid to say so because I have already proven through countless screenshots where the money goes and the results it gets before gifting. Sometimes I do encourage gifting when short on a platform to garner more attention there. I never break TOS and the venders know my authors sometimes gift. Sometimes not. I don't control how much they gift. It's their set. The buy in doesn't go to gifting so that is their call. The buy in goes to ads, which again, I have proven that not only does the money go there, but I often spend money out of my own pocket to advertise MORE because I am doing this to give back the author community (because they don't all seem to want to cause me stress). But I digress. Anyone be who wants to see screenshot evidence of the TRUTH can join the genrecrave marketing opportunities group on Facebook. They can call amazon and talk to amazon themselves. Make decisions for themselves without hearing from just one side (mine or anyone else's). As for me? I'm done. My daughter had surgery today and all I am getting every few minutes is "they're at it again" PMs to tell me about this. So to those well meaning individuals, thank you, but this is not a priority to me today and won't be any other day in the future. I won't keep re-posting the same screenshots that show the truth while the same people continue to omit those things from their "warning" posts. I welcome anyone to actually Join my group and decide for themselves based on screenshot evidence. And if it's not for them? I respect that, and we can go our separate ways. 

I intentionally made it known my daughter had surgery today just to see if this would be the day my haters decided to strike again - and because they did (because they chose THIS day - and will surely say they didn't know despite proving how agreesively they stalk everything I say) I now know that no amount of truth will change anything with them, and intents are malicious. So I'm done postin evidence of their lies and will allow those capable of independent thought to join my group, snoop for themselves, and get ALL the facts. Anyone who wants to buy into the propaganda may do so, as that is not the kind of person I wish to have a working relationship with anyway. I wish all authors the best, and will continue to lift other authors up who wish for me to do so. ✌🏻

Now excuse me, for I need to focus on my daughters surgery recovery and on not developing stress-induced preeclampsia during another pregnancy that could threaten the life of my unborn child. I realize those who don't know me have no reason to care how these lies and manipulative posts may affect children that have nothing to do with the situation, so I'm gonna be the adult here and say:

I'm done. Have at it. Say what you like. And those who want the truth can join the group mentioned earlier to see the hundreds of screenshots that SHOW exactly where buy in goes, see that some of my sets are free to get into and run out of my pocket, VERY FEW have the higher buy in, etc etc etc. Truth is there for those who want it. The rest can believe what they want. But I'm done repeating myself and reposting the same screenshots that conveniently get left out of these posts. 

PS: Yes, in the 250,000 industry connections I have made, I have upset a few people. In the instances where I was wrong, I apologized and made things right. That's all I can do. But I won't be upset that the minority of that 250,000 are on some kind is destruction mission. When I step back and look at the biggest epicure, it's easy to see what's going on here. And seeing that, it's way to see it's a waste of my time to post screenshots to people who will ignore them. If they wanted to know where the money went, they would join the group where Bose screenshots, and many other containing indisputable facts, are posted.


----------



## DexyDoo

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I'm just trying to figure out where all that 'buy-in' money goes. No way are they spending that much on advertising. I'm not even sure it's possible to spend that much. There are only so many places to advertise. Gifting a couple thousand copies, at a cost of a couple thousand dollars? Okay, add that to a $2k ad spend and it still doesn't add up. I made the USA list with my own box set and it cost me less than $2k to get to #90, so I don't get it. Granted, I didn't 'gift' any copies, but still, those are some seriously skewed numbers. Especially if you're talking about huge box sets with 20 authors!


I covered that in my post... The buy-in might sound high, but it all goes to marketing the set. The coordinator does NOT pocket the money. It pays for the cover, formatting, Bookbub ads, AMS ads, FB ads, Bargain Booksy, ENT, ILVN (and TONS of other newsletter ads - I can attest to that personally because I booked at least half of them for the set, and I was paid back from the marketing money within an hour or two each time).


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

DexyDoo said:


> I covered that in my post... The buy-in might sound high, but it all goes to marketing the set. The coordinator does NOT pocket the money. It pays for the cover, formatting, Bookbub ads, AMS ads, FB ads, Bargain Booksy, ENT, ILVN (and TONS of other newsletter ads - I can attest to that personally because I booked at least half of them for the set, and I was paid back from the marketing money within an hour or two each time).


I believe you. I just had no idea it cost that much to get on the NYT list. Definitely won't be putting that on my bucket list.


----------



## Northern pen

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I believe you. I just had no idea it cost that much to get on the NYT list. Definitely won't be putting that on my bucket list.


New York is hard. You have to get really high up to even be considered.

My set made list, and I am going to see a profit. So the upfront cost isn't that bad.


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

Robyn Wideman said:


> New York is hard. You have to get really high up to even be considered.
> 
> My set made list, and I am going to see a profit. So the upfront cost isn't that bad.


I'd heard NYT changed the rules this year. So it is still possible for indies to make the list with ebooks?


----------



## ShayneRutherford

JalexM said:


> Not in the sets, when gifting happens, the sets are already high ranking, so gifting would have a minimum impact compared to if your book was in the five digits.


Rank manipulation is rank manipulation, regardless of how high a rank you may have to start with.


----------



## Guest

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I'd heard NYT changed the rules this year. So it is still possible for indies to make the list with ebooks?


Dark Humanity made it AFTER the rule changes. The Facebook group has screenshots showing how many preorders they had. You can't gift a preorder. Honestly this whole thing is so ridiculous anymore since screenshots have been up for months and the people saying these brings have seen them and are knowingly not including them.

Feel free to contact Amazon directly and ask them if I manipulate ranks. They can see what I do I've already spoken to them, and they have already told me I'm not abusing the gifting feature. I can't control what everyone else does, but 1) gifting copies is explained directly in their TOS and 2) running blog tours where readers can win books, giving free copies for review or joining a mailing list, gifting copies to loyal readers, and running giveaways to increase exposure and create excitement for readers are all like thugs trad publishers have done for as long as I've been on the scene.

If unsure about anything, try the following:
- speak to a lawyer - not just people who play one on the internet or say their lawyer said something, but speak to your OWN lawyer YOURSELF 
- talk to amazon YOURSELF
- look for YOURSELF and SEE what actually happens, all the details, not taken out of contest and given a spin

I really don't understand why anyone would want to take anyone's word for anything - be it my word or the word of my haters - when they can simply just go look for themselves and make their own decision about things. And then they can run around saying they agree with this person or that person, by should still encourage others to also look for themselves.

What I don't understand is why anyone is telling others NOT to look for themselves and trying to control what they see and only allowing them to see certain things. Why are they not sharing screenshots of we're the money went? Why are they not sharing screenshots that show the actual terms of service about gifting? Why when this information is shared, do they delete it from their platform? Why are they against me telling people to talk to the own lawyers about things? Don't they want people to see for themselves where that money went? Don't they want people to talk to their own lawyers? Speak to amazon for themselves? Read amazons TOS? Why are these things being hidden?

Want to post a vague post about looking about for yourself as an author? How about advising authors to do this, instead of advising them to read half a story, leaving out some MAJOR facts, and hiding things like screenshots of Amazon TOS that have been shared?

I'm waiting for the day someone posts EVERYTHING. But that's not gonna happen because it doesn't fit their agenda. So be it. But hating people is not how I connect with there personally, so I can't continue to be sucked into this. Again, if anyone wants the screenshots, I they aren't hard to find. The person who posted this surely has them. Maybe he wants to share them too? Maybe he wants to share the screenshots that show exactly where the money goes? Or the screenshots of authors who have logged into my bookbub account and saw those adds being spent WHILE they were being spent? Maybe? Maybe? No? Why not?


----------



## JalexM

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I'd heard NYT changed the rules this year. So it is still possible for indies to make the list with ebooks?


They made the list after the change.
It's not a realistic goal anymore though, selling 20k + is hard even with thousands of dollars in marketing.


ShayneRutherford said:


> Rank manipulation is rank manipulation, regardless of how high a rank you may have to start with.


Obviously, Amazon thinks differently.


----------



## Not any more

Patty Jansen said:


> But what I cannot stand is the blackballing and bullying for no good reason at all.


Simply google STGRB and follow the links. SOP.

What blows me away are the people who think this is all being run with no profit. How naive can you be?


----------



## DexyDoo

brkingsolver said:


> Simply google STGRB and follow the links. SOP.
> 
> What blows me away are the people who think this is all being run with no profit. How naive can you be?


It's not (except for maybe affiliate link income), but who cares anyway? The amount of work the set coordinator does deserves to be paid for. I mean, do you work for free? I damn sure don't.


----------



## wheart

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> If they wanted to know where the money went, they would join the group where Bose screenshots, and many other containing indisputable facts, are posted.


Unfortunately I can't join Facebook groups , but I don't need to because I believe you and those who have posted in your defense. I've read enough of your posts in the past to get a feel of you and I don't get a sense that you're out to hurt or scam people. I've always seen your posts as just defending yourself from accusations and you do it honorably (without needing to put people down) in my eyes.

I do sense you are wanting to help people after gaining success yourself. That comes through clear for me from reading you.

I'm sure there are others who feel the same.

It's very hard to please everyone. And with most things, there are two sides to the story.

I always listen to my own mind and heart. Facts, proof, and the 'whole' story (not just one side of it) is what I base my opinions on.

I pray your daughter recovers well. And for your unborn child too. Take care, Rebecca.


----------



## Guest

wheart said:


> Unfortunately I can't join Facebook groups , but I don't need to because I believe you and those who have posted in your defense. I've read enough of your posts in the past to get a feel of you and I don't get a sense that you're out to hurt or scam people. I've always seen your posts as just defending yourself from accusations and you do it honorably (without needing to put people down) in my eyes.
> 
> I do sense you are wanting to help people after gaining success yourself. That comes through clear for me from reading you.
> 
> I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
> 
> It's very hard to please everyone. And with most things, there are two sides to the story.
> 
> I always listen to my own mind and heart. Facts, proof, and the 'whole' story (not just one side of it) is what I base my opinions on.
> 
> I pray your daughter recovers well. And for your unborn child too. Take care, Rebecca.


Thank you &#128151;&#128151;&#128151; I wish the best for everyone truly. Daughter is recovering well by the way. A little out of it from anesthesia, but she did really well


----------



## Guest

DexyDoo said:


> It's not (except for maybe affiliate link income), but who cares anyway? The amount of work the set coordinator does deserves to be paid for. I mean, do you work for free? I damn sure don't.


Thanks  genrecrave does well with the actual services we offer. Boxed sets are not offered as a service.. This is my way of paying it forward. While some may cause me stress, lots of people have supported my efforts over the years, and I wouldn't be where I am without their support. Even when I was extremely depressed and on the verge of homeless, they stuck by me AND helped me do a complete 180. That's why I give. There is one girl who ever did my sets but supported me during that time, and I donated $1000 to her husbands cancer recovery. Those who are paying attention know it's not unlike me to GIVE to others. Boxed sets is only one way I do that. There's one collection coming up soon that had no buy in, a SN I am covering all expenses out of pocket. I recently helped 3 authors with new releases - I bought them each $1500 worth of advertising. I have other authors yet who I mentor for free. Yes most boxed sets have buy in because I can't afford that much money every month to pay for ads out of pocket. But I have already shown where that money goes. Yes it sucks when people try to turn something good into something evil, but as I've said, we won't convince those people. They KNOW what they are doing. They KNOW they intentionally left out the screenshots that SHOW exactly where the money went. They KNOW people have logged into my accounts and seen what's going on in there first hand. Still they say the things they say. So it's not a matter of them knowing. Anyone who DOES want to know can easily see for themselves. It's that simple.

I've gotten it all since this started. Including death threats, which were reported to the police but which, TBH, in not too worried about. But once things get to the point that people feel safe joking about helpin to hide my body, my perspective on intentions changes quite a bit. And I'm not going to stop helping others because that is how I pay it forward. Yes, I've come close. I've more than once almost said I'm not doing this anymore. Because it SUCKS taking time and money from my life to help people and getting treated this way in response. It doesn't matter what they say they think - it doesn't change reality. And reality is im getting targeted while trying to help people, and all I get out of it is the satisfaction of helping others.

So why haven't I given up? Because every time I start to type that "I'm done offering boxed set pairs" I feel EXTREMELY selfish. I am doing this to help others, so if I quit because I'm "not getting anything out it" (except for grief) then that just feel wrong to me. It's as if I would be saying "well I don't benefit from this so screw your goals" and I just have not been able to bring myself to justifying that.

I don't plan to offer boxed sets forever. I never did. But I don't want to stop for selfish reasons. I don't want to say screw you to other authors just because a different set of authors is intentionally misleading the public. So this is where I am. In reality, I probably would have stopped by now otherwise. But with how things are, I can't justify it. Every time I try, I sound like I only care about myself and how the bullying affects me instead of also caring about paying it forward. And I don't like the part of me that thinks that way. giving up on paying it forward because I want people to leave me alone is not the answer - it's just a selfish excuse. So I persevere. I promised I would pay it forward - and I never said "unless I get bullied for doing so" - and I keep my promises. So I'm going to continue to pay it forward until *I* feel I have adequately shown appreciation to the peers who approach me with kindness, respect, and honesty.


----------



## CrazyHorze

The author of the post has deleted the post. I get a 404 message when I click the link.

Rebecca, I have never used your services, but when PayPal and Amazon tell you you are working within their TOS, that is what is important. Writers can say what they think the TOS means, but in the end it's PayPal and Amazon who decide. 

I also question the whole gifting is considered against Amazon TOS. On my book page on Amazon I have a nice little widget that says this: Amazon Giveaway allows you to run promotional giveaways in order to create buzz, reward your audience, and attract new followers and customers. Learn more about Amazon Giveaway. If Amazon put it there and tells me to give away books, what are we talking about?

As far as I'm concerned Rebecca you have valuable information to share and I hope you will come here often. You have friends.


----------



## cherita

So, the original article has been deleted and in fact the entire website is gone? Nor could I find a single cached page or image of this site, except for its mention on The Passive Voice. That doesn't necessarily mean anything, but... I do find it odd.


----------



## CrazyHorze

The person who wrote it is a KBoarder and also a service provider. When you write something like that message and the overwhelming reaction from writers is "What are you doing?" there is only one thing to do and that is delete the post, bury it and hope your credibility is not gone. It was a strange post though and most writers here know who wrote it. But that is here nor there. I'm happy it was deleted and now we can all have a nice weekend. And let's have a heart and say the writer did not know about Rebecca's daughter being ill and when she read that she decided to delete the post. That way we are all good people and no one wins and no one loses and we can all be happy.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

cherita said:


> So, the original article has been deleted and in fact the entire website is gone? Nor could I find a single cached page or image of this site, except for its mention on The Passive Voice. That doesn't necessarily mean anything, but... I do find it odd.


Hmm. There's lots of reasons a website can go down, but who knows? Speculation, obviously is just that. I mostly found it interesting that PV picked up in it.

Regardless, though I won't pretend to agree with the methods of everyone on this post, I will agree on one point: people should make up their own minds.

Do your research, talk to people, and - and this is what I will always caution no matter what you do - be careful with any new venture especially the moment money exchanges hands. Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, etc they all have protections in place. Know those protections and your rights. Outside of that, good luck in your writing venture.


----------



## Guest

I expect the passive voice blog will stay up. Maybe th  author of that site would like access to my group to get the screenshots the source they quoted is missing. As a long term follower of the passive voice, honestly, I was surprised by the lack of investigation put into the post (that is still up) and would have expected the author of that site to look into the plethora of screenshots available that show where the money goes. That is informstion suthors deserve to have, which is why I have always been transparent about that and have those screenshots posted showing how the money is spent, as well as people who have logged into my accounts and see first hand to verify on my behalf. Which is well above and beyond anything any one else has ever had to do to prove themselves. Just saying. I have gone above and beyond - and it's up to authors to do their due diligence and look at the facts if they truly want the truth. Anything else is spreading rumors, and there's not often a healthy or kind reason to perpetuate a rumor. Some who are perpetuating these rumors, knowing they are rumors, concern me, but instead of me spreading rumors about them, I figure in time their actions will speak more than my words ever could.


----------



## Abalone

Patty Jansen said:


> Pretty much this.
> 
> But there is enough info out there for people to make up their own minds if they think the risk is worth it. Worth what? I look at these USA Today Bestseller! people and their own books sell diddly squat, so, yanno... But hey, if that makes them happy. And they think it's worth the risk...
> 
> But what I cannot stand is the blackballing and bullying for no good reason at all.
> 
> I admit. I was stupid enough to sign up for one of these, because, Hey! Readers!
> 
> I asked one question "I have a clash of dates, can I possibly send to my list after the weekend?" for which I was banned, unfriended, and booted from the set.
> 
> I was lucky. I got my money back. I know some people who did not get featured and did not get their money back for doing things as simple as asking about aspects of the contract.
> 
> The product is to make lists. OK. The methods may or may not be questionable. That's up to you. Making a list gets you readers. It's an OK goal to shoot for. People do this with their own sets + Bookbub.
> 
> It's the lousy customer experience that gets me.


What the heck? What do they have against date farming?


----------



## Not any more

Abalone said:


> What the heck? What do they have against date farming?


Some people prefer figs. No accounting for tastes.


----------



## Guest

For those interested, there are also authors in the genrecrave marketing group that have posted their before boxed set solo title sales data and their after boxed set solo title sales data. Again, screenshots, instead of empty words. I think the truth speaks for itself - once someone takes the time to look at it. Then they should ask themselves: "Why did those who have this same information try to hide it from me?" Because I think that's the biggest question of all.


----------



## sela

My only comment is this:

If a traditional publisher buys 20,000 copies of a book and those books sit in a warehouse somewhere unread or in a dumpster behind the printers and the book hits the NYTs because of those bulk purchases, that is illegitimate, even if the NYTs allows it or looks the other way. It makes the accomplishment meaningless. It only means that the author or publisher had enough money to buy the letters. That says nothing about a book's desirability or quality or value. Just about the author's or publisher's willingness to buy something that should be awarded based on merit or actual sales.

A bestseller should be a best seller because it actually sells the best -- to actual readers who want to purchase it. Not via manipulation by people paid to purchase books or by bulk buying. 

Think of it -- it's just not ethical. It makes the designation of "bestseller" meaningless because the designation is based on a lie. In fact, it is worse because there may be true bestsellers that don't hit the list because they weren't able to out-compete the manipulated bestsellers who got there through bulk purchases. It makes the designation meaningless and unfair. It cheapens the whole business.

If an indie buys in bulk, it's the same thing. It's unethical and makes the whole business meaningless and unfair. 

It's not enough in terms of ethics or morality to say that everybody does it and so it's okay. That doesn't cut it when it comes to ethics. Nor does it make it ethical or moral to say that it's only business and the businesses involved don't penalize those who do it so it's okay. That means that an unethical act has been sanctioned. That's very sad. 

People have to live with themselves and be okay with the ethics of their actions. If they think it's fine to buy in bulk in order to hit a list and get a designation of bestseller, then they have to live with themselves. 

Where is John Locke today?

Every indie author should be thinking about how to improve their business and their craft. That means learning, learning, learning, practicing, practicing, and more practicing. There are no short cuts. There is only lots of work to improve and move to the next level. 

There's nothing wrong with box sets, or collaborations, or buying promotions that get your book in front of new readers who then choose to buy your book via their own free will. There's nothing wrong with wanting to hit a list, and have your book seen by lots of new readers. That should be your goal, 

But if you have to buy your own books in bulk in order to hit some number and get letters after your name, I question if that number and those letters are legitimate.


----------



## CrazyHorze

The reactions I see from writers on Facebook tell me Rebecca should be very happy with the Passive Voice article and the blog post. I knew about Rebecca and Genre Cave, but I had no idea what they were doing there. It was always hush hush. The blog post explains how she is creating USA Today and NYT bestsellers. I think she can expect a whole bunch of writers to join her FB groups and boxed sets. You can't buy this kind of internet buzz.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

CrazyHorze said:


> The reactions I see from writers on Facebook tell me Rebecca should be very happy with the Passive Voice article and the blog post. I knew about Rebecca and Genre Cave, but I had no idea what they were doing there. It was always hush hush. The blog post explains how she is creating USA Today and NYT bestsellers. I think she can expect a whole bunch of writers to join her FB groups and boxed sets. You can't buy this kind of internet buzz.


I don't know about that, and I've never had any business dealings with her, and neither do I write in that category, but I hear people talk about her all the time as someone who is ethically challenged, at best. The more ethical the writer, the more likely they are to say negative things about her tactics. I recommend staying away if ethics are at all important to you.


----------



## CrazyHorze

Isn't marketing always manipulating sales? If I don't have money for BookBub I won't sell as many books as someone who does have money for BookBub. So using money to get sales is always part of marketing. No, the buzz on Twitter and Facebook is that joining Rebecca's boxed sets is the new bees knees for indies. This blog post is a huge triumph for Rebecca. I think where she was a marginalized book marketer only yesterday, she's now being celebrated as a hero.


----------



## Abalone

brkingsolver said:


> Some people prefer figs. No accounting for tastes.


Shameful. They're good, too, but dates are as old as figs if not older.


----------



## Holly Dodd

To me it sounds like a lot of you don't realize how much it costs to make a list in marketing.

When the big indies are pushing to make JUST the USA today, they've spent tens of thousands in a -week-.

Meredith Wild spent 6-figures (yes, over 100,000) when she pushed her Hacker series.

A friend of mine put together a box set (Not Rebecca). Her budget that she spent: 30,000 (and she didn't make NYT). All out of her pocket because she didn't do a buy in.

I don't have 30,000 to spend on marketing. I don't even have 5,000 to spend. What I do have is $500, and being that I want the letters, I'm A-okay with doing it in a boxset.

Really, really research things before you begin questioning about "Why it costs so much" or "Where does the money go". Because honestly, it costs a ton.

_Edited to remove profanity. - Becca_


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> I don't know about that, and I've never had any business dealings with her, and neither do I write in that category, but I hear people talk about her all the time as someone who is ethically challenged, at best. The more ethical the writer, the more likely they are to say negative things about her tactics. I recommend staying away if ethics are at all important to you.


Weird, cause all the authors I personally know say the opposite.
I guess I'm unethical according to you, and so are all the other authors who sing her praise.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

CrazyHorze said:


> Isn't marketing always manipulating sales? If I don't have money for BookBub I won't sell as many books as someone who does have money for BookBub. So using money to get sales is always part of marketing. No, the buzz on Twitter and Facebook is that joining Rebecca's boxed sets is the new bees knees for indies. This blog post is a huge triumph for Rebecca. I think where she was a marginalized book marketer only yesterday, she's now being celebrated as a hero.


So you're saying that violating the terms of KU by shuffling books in and out of box sets, buying thousands of books to manipulate the ranks, and attacking anyone who disagrees with your tactics is all good because it's just "marketing."

Also, the accounts (and screenshots) of her attacking people who gave her bad reviews or wanted out because of shady behavior are legion. She doesn't like to be called out. So no, I don't think she likes it.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## sela

CrazyHorze said:


> Isn't marketing always manipulating sales? If I don't have money for BookBub I won't sell as many books as someone who does have money for BookBub. So using money to get sales is always part of marketing. No, the buzz on Twitter and Facebook is that joining Rebecca's boxed sets is the new bees knees for indies. This blog post is a huge triumph for Rebecca. I think where she was a marginalized book marketer only yesterday, she's now being celebrated as a hero.


Marketing is _influencing_ sales, not manipulating them. That's why there are laws around advertising.

There's a difference between paying to put your book in front of 50,000 potential customers and having them decide to buy your book and the sales leading to a NYTs bestseller designation and _buying_ 50,000 copies of a book yourself (or as a publisher) to get the NYTs bestseller designation.


----------



## AllyWho

MonkishScribe said:


> I recommend staying away if ethics are at all important to you.


Exactly. Everybody does business in a way that is consistent with their personal morals and beliefs. If you believe in being ethical, complying with retailer TOS, and you would rather have genuine readers than a short term artificial rank manipulation, stay away.

If you believe if its good enough for big publishers then indies can do it too and if there was anything dodgy then Amazon would have shut it down, you're not going to see a problem. I imagine there will be a long line of authors wanting to sign up to become the next USAT/NYT bestseller.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> Weird, cause all the authors I personally know say the opposite.


We apparently walk in different (ethical) circles.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> So you're saying that violating the terms of KU by shuffling books in and out of box sets, buying thousands of books to manipulate the ranks, and attacking anyone who disagrees with your tactics is all good because it's just "marketing."
> 
> Also, the accounts (and screenshots) of her attacking people who gave her bad reviews or wanted out because of shady behavior are legion. She doesn't like to be called out. So no, I don't think she likes it.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


She doesn't buy thousands of books to manipulate ranks. She doesn't voilate the terms of KU shuffling books in and out of book sets. You're spreading a lot of hearsay and yet you said never worked with her.
Nothing she does is unethical. Some of the author's who speak ill of her are the farthest from ethical. Others just get caught up in the lies.
There are a lot people claiming she violates this and that and never post enough proof to back it up.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

CrazyHorze said:


> Isn't marketing always manipulating sales? If I don't have money for BookBub I won't sell as many books as someone who does have money for BookBub. So using money to get sales is always part of marketing.


That's a very naive way of thinking. There have always been white hat tactics and black hat tactics. Just because you can spend money to do something does not make it right. Otherwise, the many KU pirates that amazon smacked down months back would have technically been in the right. There is a vast difference between, for example, creating an AMS ad and going into a group and offering to pay people to buy your book.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> She doesn't buy thousands of books to manipulate ranks. She doesn't voilate the terms of KU shuffling books in and out of book sets. You're spreading a lot of hearsay and yet you said never worked with her.
> Nothing she does is unethical. Some of the author's who speak ill of her are the farthest from ethical. Others just get caught up in the lies.
> There are a lot people claiming she violates this and that and never post enough proof to back it up.


I have seen screen shots of people who talk about having a certain number of copies they're required to gift before they are allowed into the set. And she absolutely does shuffle books in and out of sets. They go up sometimes claiming to sell KU books, and then shuffle out at the last minute so that what is shipped is something else so that she can be on different retailers. There have also been links inside to download books from third-party sites instead of having the books in the sets, even though they're listen on the cover. All of this is well documented.


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

Holly Dodd said:


> To me it sounds like a lot of you don't realize how much it costs to make a list in marketing.
> 
> When the big indies are pushing to make JUST the USA today, they've spent tens of thousands in a -week-.
> 
> Meredith Wild spent 6-figures (yes, over 100,000) when she pushed her Hacker series.
> 
> A friend of mine put together a box set (Not Rebecca). Her budget that she spent: 30,000 (and she didn't make NYT). All out of her pocket because she didn't do a buy in.
> 
> I don't have 30,000 to spend on marketing. I don't even have 5,000 to spend. What I do have is $500, and being that I want the letters, I'm A-okay with doing it in a boxset.
> 
> Really, really research things before you begin questioning about "Why it costs so much" or "Where does the money go". Because honestly, it costs a f*ckton.


I respect that everyone has the right to make their own business decisions. And for those have made the lists, kudos. I personally, was only speaking to my own experience with the USA list. I understand it costs a lot more than that to make the NYT times list, but I don't think it's accurate to say that it takes tens of thousands for a one week ad spend to make the USA list. It took me less than $2k to make the list on my own. Again, just my experience. I'm not calling anyone's ethics into question. I've never had personal experience with these box sets or any of the organizers.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Holly Dodd said:


> To me it sounds like a lot of you don't realize how much it costs to make a list in marketing.
> 
> When the big indies are pushing to make JUST the USA today, they've spent tens of thousands in a -week-.
> 
> Meredith Wild spent 6-figures (yes, over 100,000) when she pushed her Hacker series.
> 
> A friend of mine put together a box set (Not Rebecca). Her budget that she spent: 30,000 (and she didn't make NYT). All out of her pocket because she didn't do a buy in.
> 
> I don't have 30,000 to spend on marketing. I don't even have 5,000 to spend. What I do have is $500, and being that I want the letters, I'm A-okay with doing it in a boxset.
> 
> Really, really research things before you begin questioning about "Why it costs so much" or "Where does the money go". Because honestly, it costs a f*ckton.


I've almost always been in Select so I have no "letters" (just money), but I've had around 7.5k sales (not borrows) in a week a few times at a cost of $0-$400. And I'm not a "big indie." I don't think big indies spend tens of thousands or even thousands to hit lists.

Advertising is one thing. Buying your own book is another, and that's what gifting is. If you can't see the difference, then I guess you're all good here. If you're waffling, you may want to read Sela's post above. She pretty much nails it.

It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye. Or the ban hammer falls.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> I have seen screen shots of people who talk about having a certain number of copies they're required to gift before they are allowed into the set. And she absolutely does shuffle books in and out of sets. They go up sometimes claiming to sell KU books, and then shuffle out at the last minute so that what is shipped is something else so that she can be on different retailers. There have also been links inside to download books from third-party sites instead of having the books in the sets, even though they're listen on the cover. All of this is well documented.


You say they are well documented but where are they? 
Also strange is the web page with these claims are down now. 
Why would that happen? 

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## CrazyHorze

AliceW said:


> I imagine there will be a long line of authors wanting to sign up to become the next USAT/NYT bestseller.


Exactly! And only for 500 dollars. BookBub? I now laugh at BookBub! And I would not have known that Rebecca was this successful had this blog post not been written. All in all this day was a triumph for Rebecca and every writer is talking about her.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Cheryl Douglas said:


> I respect that everyone has the right to make their own business decisions. And for those have made the lists, kudos. I personally, was only speaking to my own experience with the USA list. I understand it costs a lot more than that to make the NYT times list, but I don't think it's accurate to say that it takes tens of thousands for a one week ad spend to make the USA list. It took me less than $2k to make the list on my own. Again, just my experience. I'm not calling anyone's ethics into question. I've never had personal experience with these box sets or any of the organizers.


I think there is a lot of timing around making the USA. It might be easier (cheaper) to do it during a certain month, maybe a certain sub-genre, and as a solo author box set. A lot of those who do push that sort of money also want to make the NYT, so that's why there is the higher spend. To try and do it and hope NYT doesn't vet the set out. You were very lucky to make it on $2k, and I would love to do that myself. But based on my own numbers, and my own marketing spend, it's never going to happen for me at that price point.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

CrazyHorze said:


> Exactly! And only for 500 dollars. BookBub? I now laugh at BookBub! And I would not have known that Rebecca was this successful had this blog post not been written. All in all this day was a triumph for Rebecca and every writer is talking about her.


It's all fun and games until Amazon decides to finally crack down on the ToS violations and shuts down your KDP account in a mass purge of people associated with bad actors.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> It's all fun and games until Amazon decides to finally crack down on the ToS violations and shuts down your KDP account in a mass purge of people associated with bad actors.


Strange that didn't happen to her. It's like she's not violating anything like some are saying.
I think people need to read up on the TOS again.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Rosalind J said:


> I've almost always been in Select so I have no "letters" (just money), but I've had around 7.5k sales (not borrows) in a week a few times at a cost of $0-$400. And I'm not a "big indie." I don't think big indies spend tens of thousands or even thousands to hit lists.
> 
> Advertising is one thing. Buying your own book is another, and that's what gifting is. If you can't see the difference, then I guess you're all good here. If you're waffling, you may want to read Sela's post above. She pretty much nails it.
> 
> It's all fun and games until somebody loses an eye. Or the ban hammer falls.


You also have a huge following. For those who are going the boxset route, they might not. I was watching JA Huss' videos (I love her). And she even said when she goes to make a list, she spends tens of thousands in a week when she's pushing to make a list. And there's also no gurantee that 7.5k will make the USA today. That's also just Amazon. Trying to tempt Nook and Itunes is a different animal all together, and you need them to make the list.

I'm not touching the "buying the own books" or gifting issue. That's a different animal. I honestly didn't realize (based on trial and error a friend did during a release) that gifting altered the rank. He said it didn't, so I don't have a horse in that race. If someone wants to gift, that's on them.


----------



## Guest

We don'tt buy our way into lists. I agree that's unethical. I understand some people are just repeating what they have heard. That's why I welcome people to join genrecrave marketing services and see the screenshots for themselves. 

I mean which is it? Am I pocketing the buy in? Or using it spend 500 hours a day to gift 20,000 copies? (That sounds expensive... makes you wonder how I have money to pay a cover designer, Formatter, and get the books listed on ad sites, huh?) I know it seems like I might be able to fit 500 hours of work into a day, but I've not yet been able to pull that off. There's a reason the rumors don't add up. And a reason that the screenshots that show my spending do 😜

But hey! You know what's super cool? Instead of rumors, people can actually join the FB group and see screenshots of advertising receipts, testimonies from people who have logged into my accounts an seen the ad spend first hand, and screenshots of preorder numbers (you can't gift a preorder). 

I get that people want to tear me down, but maybe pick something that doesn't hurt other authors in the process. I mean - at least go after a leg of my business that I actually profit on 😜


----------



## CrazyHorze

Cheryl Douglas said:


> It took me less than $2k to make the list on my own.


But how many sales does it take to get on the list?


----------



## AllyWho

CrazyHorze said:


> But how many sales does it take to get on the list?


It depends on the time of year. For USA Today it could be anywhere from 5,000 to 12,000 sold in a week (including at least 500 from a non-Amazon retailer).


----------



## Holly Dodd

CrazyHorze said:


> But how many sales does it take to get on the list?


It depends on the month/week. When pushing for it the aim is: 500 nook, 500 apple, 7k+ Amazon. That may get you, may not. To make NYT, 20,000+, and they've vetted off people who've sold 21k.

I am doing a wide run later on this year so I've been really researching everything on how to make a list.


----------



## CrazyHorze

Thank you Alice and Holly for the numbers.


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

CrazyHorze said:


> But how many sales does it take to get on the list?


It took me 8k, but that was in August.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Holly Dodd said:


> You also have a huge following. For those who are going the boxset route, they might not. I was watching JA Huss' videos (I love her). And she even said when she goes to make a list, she spends tens of thousands in a week when she's pushing to make a list. And there's also no gurantee that 7.5k will make the USA today. That's also just Amazon. Trying to tempt Nook and Itunes is a different animal all together, and you need them to make the list.
> 
> I'm not touching the "buying the own books" or gifting issue. That's a different animal. I honestly didn't realize (based on trial and error a friend did during a release) that gifting altered the rank. He said it didn't, so I don't have a horse in that race. If someone wants to gift, that's on them.


I realize my non-boosted numbers might not be enough to make a list. My point was that I'm not a big indie, and I can get those numbers. Big indies do much better.

My question is: in all seriousness, what good are these "letters" earned with thousands of dollars? Do they actually make anybody more money? In other words, does the fact of having this credential make you sell better afterwards, as opposed to somebody who got the letters because 10k people actually bought her (just her) book? It would seem to me that the letters would be more a consequence of popularity than a cause of it. I seem to see romance authors all the time with these letters, but they're not actually making much money. Which makes me wonder what the point is, if the exercise doesn't result in thousands of follow-up sales.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> But hey! You know what's super cool? Instead of rumors, people can actually join the FB group and see screenshots of advertising receipts, testimonies from people who have logged into my accounts an seen the ad spend first hand, and screenshots of preorder numbers (you can't gift a preorder).


So your launch strategy doesn't including the gifting of some specified number of copies? Are you declaring that all those people who said it does are wrong, or are you trying to split hairs between you buying gift copies and you requiring other people to gift them on behalf of the box set?

And why, if you're always on the up and up, are there just so many people who seem to have decided that you're operating in unethical space, to the point where you've had multiple public fights on Facebook, as well as blog posts, etc., all seeming to focus on your behavior. Are you telling me there are just that many jealous authors out there?


----------



## JalexM

Rosalind J said:


> I realize my non-boosted numbers might not be enough to make a list. My point was that I'm not a big indie, and I can get those numbers. Big indies do much better.
> 
> My question is: in all seriousness, what good are these "letters" earned with thousands of dollars? Do they actually make anybody more money? In other words, does the fact of having this credential make you sell better afterwards, as opposed to somebody who got the letters because 10k people actually bought her (just her) book? It would seem to me that the letters would be more a consequence of popularity than a cause of it. I seem to see romance authors all the time with these letters, but they're not actually making much money. Which makes me wonder what the point is, if the exercise doesn't result in thousands of follow-up sales.


It's all on how you use them. If you sit on your butt and do nothing, then it's useless. But if you build a marketing campaign around it, write a good enough book to keep the people who buy it, it can help boost your career. Of course, it isn't the instant fixer, but marketing wise, it is a very good thing to have.
Plus, with the thousands of sales, you should get some follow through if you wrote a good enough book.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

United Airlines dragged one person off the plane. Just one. And everyone agreed the company was in the wrong. 

I think businesses should have refund policies in place and conduct their business professionally. And I won't do business with any company where owner throws temper tantrums publicly. Because if she can post bogus emails she called the sheriff on this person, or actually with me she ordered everyone who was our shared friends on Facebook to pick a side, which was pretty comical, as I have never and will never do business with her companies, anyway, what she does to others online and public she can do to any one of you in bed with her. And the saddest part of all is none of you can leave. Literally the best advice I could give to people worried they were tangled up already and would get bad reviews on their books and publicly shamed, I told them to just flake out. Just say you're sick, don't deliver, be a pity case. It's the safest way to get out. That's the reality many of us veterans of Kboards have had to deal with.

The scariest part of all, despite her followers constantly saying this is libel or defamation is that the organizer isn't even real. She's a real person, but the name she does business as isn't real. So even if anything ever comes of any of this, nothing will stop her from opening up shop the next day as Mary Sue.


----------



## CrazyHorze

MonkishScribe said:


> So your launch strategy doesn't including the gifting of some specified number of copies? Are you declaring that all those people who said it does are wrong, or are you trying to split hairs between you buying gift copies and you requiring other people to gift them on behalf of the box set?
> 
> And why, if you're always on the up and up, are there just so many people who seem to have decided that you're operating in unethical space, to the point where you've had multiple public fights on Facebook, as well as blog posts, etc., all seeming to focus on your behavior. Are you telling me there are just that many jealous authors out there?


She said she's dealing with a sick child. Do you mind attacking her on some other day. That would be mighty ethical of you. Thank you.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Rosalind J said:


> I realize my non-boosted numbers might not be enough to make a list. My point was that I'm not a big indie, and I can get those numbers. Big indies do much better.
> 
> My question is: in all seriousness, what good are these "letters" earned with thousands of dollars? Do they actually make anybody more money? In other words, does the fact of having this credential make you sell better afterwards, as opposed to somebody who got the letters because 10k people actually bought her (just her) book? It would seem to me that the letters would be more a consequence of popularity than a cause of it. I seem to see romance authors all the time with these letters, but they're not actually making much money. Which makes me wonder what the point is, if the exercise doesn't result in thousands of follow-up sales.


I think it's all about dreams and goals. It's kind of like why people still chase the trade publish dream. To them, that is their goal, being part of one of the Big Five would make them feel as if they've made it. Even if it might not make financial sense to me.

I sell okay. Better than I even suspected, and I'm on my way to a six-figure year. But, I'm in KU, and I don't want to put my solo books out wide. Not yet at least, and maybe not ever. So, why not aim for one of my goals (letters) without sacrificing my income?

Do I expect to sell better? No, I'd love to, but that's not why I would do a letter-making boxset. It's just to satisfy a dream, and then move on and being like "Cool, i did that, I have letters." Even if nothing more happens because of it, it would make me happy.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> So your launch strategy doesn't including the gifting of some specified number of copies? Are you declaring that all those people who said it does are wrong, or are you trying to split hairs between you buying gift copies and you requiring other people to gift them on behalf of the box set?
> 
> And why, if you're always on the up and up, are there just so many people who seem to have decided that you're operating in unethical space, to the point where you've had multiple public fights on Facebook, as well as blog posts, etc., all seeming to focus on your behavior. Are you telling me there are just that many jealous authors out there?


Once again, those are all wrong. 
I would implore you to show prove that they are, or everything you're saying is hearsay.
I would know, since I was in a recent box set of hers and we were required to do nothing of the sort. I have the numbers we've sold, we know where the money has gone, but you know, let's just listen to baseless accusations.
Or just keep ignoring my post.


Elizabeth Ann West said:


> United Airlines dragged one person off the plane. Just one. And everyone agreed the company was in the wrong.
> 
> I think businesses should have refund policies in place and conduct their business professionally. And I won't do business with any company where owner throws temper tantrums publicly. Because if she can post bogus emails she called the sheriff on this person, or actually with me she ordered everyone who was our shared friends on Facebook to pick a side, which was pretty comical, as I have never and will never do business with her companies, anyway, what she does to others online and public she can do to any one of you in bed with her. And the saddest part of all is none of you can leave. Literally the best advice I could give to people worried they were tangled up already and would get bad reviews on their books and publicly shamed, I told them to just flake out. Just say you're sick, don't deliver, be a pity case. It's the safest way to get out. That's the reality many of us veterans of Kboards have had to deal with.
> 
> The scariest part of all, despite her followers constantly saying this is libel or defamation is that the organizer isn't even real. She's a real person, but the name she does business as isn't real. So even if anything ever comes of any of this, nothing will stop her from opening up shop the next day as Mary Sue.


Strangely enough, you can easily find her real name, her husbands name, her kids name, all on facebook, under the name she uses to run her company. But according to you, she's some random Mary Sue.


----------



## Not any more

Rosalind J said:


> My question is: in all seriousness, what good are these "letters" earned with thousands of dollars? Do they actually make anybody more money? In other words, does the fact of having this credential make you sell better afterwards, as opposed to somebody who got the letters because 10k people actually bought her (just her) book? It would seem to me that the letters would be more a consequence of popularity than a cause of it. I seem to see romance authors all the time with these letters, but they're not actually making much money. Which makes me wonder what the point is, if the exercise doesn't result in thousands of follow-up sales.


I've always thought it was funny to see an author tout themselves as a "best selling author" and then see their books' ranks in the sale-a-week range. It's ephemeral.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

CrazyHorze said:


> She said she's dealing with a sick child. Do you mind attacking her on some other day. That would be mighty ethical of you. Thank you.


Which has nothing to do with this conversation.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

CrazyHorze said:


> She said she's dealing with a sick child. Do you mind attacking her on some other day. That would be mighty ethical of you. Thank you.


I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Anyway, I'm typing this with my paws.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I didn't say that, I said who she does business AS. Yes, many people have her real name. 

Anyway, I said what I said because that was all I decided I could do to help. I've never worked with her, never will, I was harmed by own "organizer" type person early in my career. We "veterans" literally message each other "get out the popcorn..." when this stuff flares up about every other week.... I speak out on what I see, just the PUBLIC posts are enough to make any savvy person go "Wait, what?" And I speak out because unlike others, she can't claim I'm just a hater who didn't get a good promotion from her. Nope. It's just a spade being called a spade.

Now you will have to excuse me, I'm going to go make me a bowl.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> With all due respect, I don't know you, but I do know people who say they were required to gift a certain number of copies. Maybe you didn't have to do that, or I suppose the people who said that might have been lying, but that seems unlikely to me.


Anything is certain on the internet.


----------



## Holly Dodd

MonkishScribe said:


> With all due respect, I don't know you, but I do know people who say they were required to gift a certain number of copies. Maybe you didn't have to do that, or I suppose the people who said that might have been lying, but that seems unlikely to me.


You're stuck on this gifting thing. Do you realize the numbers don't add up? It takes over 8,000 books to make a list. What the hell are 100 copies or 500 copies going to really do if they don't have thousands of pre-orders/sales already?


----------



## JalexM

Holly Dodd said:


> You're stuck on this gifting thing. Do you realize the numbers don't add up? It takes over 8,000 books to make a list. What the hell are 100 copies or 500 copies going to really do if they don't have thousands of pre-orders/sales already?


And you can't gift preorders and you can only gift one at a time.
It would take a very long time to gift enough books to make any kind of list in release week.


----------



## AllyWho

Holly Dodd said:


> It takes over 8,000 books to make a list. What the hell are 100 copies or 500 copies going to really do if they don't have thousands of pre-orders/sales already?


Firstly it depends on the week, some people have hit the lists with a scant 5k in sales. Secondly we're talking gifting *thousands* of copies, not a couple of hundred. If you gift over 2,000 copies of a boxed set, that gets you nearly half way toward the 5k to hit a list in a quiet week.


----------



## Holly Dodd

JalexM said:


> And you can't gift preorders and you can only gift one at a time.
> It would take a very long time to gift enough books to make any kind of list.


Exactly! And you have to calculate the margin of people who might not accept the gift. The time cost is just staggering to me. Couple that with how many boxsets she runs, and it's not logical at all to me. You would need an army.


----------



## BlouBryant

sela said:


> Where is John Locke today?


I think Hobbes is winning this one.


----------



## Holly Dodd

AliceW said:


> Firstly it depends on the week, some people have hit the lists with a scant 5k in sales. Secondly we're talking gifting *thousands* of copies, not a couple of hundred. If you gift over 2,000 copies of a boxed set, that gets you nearly half way toward the 5k to hit a list in a quiet week.


I can't wrap my head around someone gifting -thousands- of copies in five days (maybe a week if they are really up on the deadline). Remember you can't gift pre-orders and it has to be one at a time. So 2,000 copies in 5 days. I just can not logically see that happening.

I really think the numbers you heard are an exaggeration if not an outright lie. That is me just looking in as an outsider and simple logic/math.


----------



## Not any more

Holly Dodd said:


> You're stuck on this gifting thing. Do you realize the numbers don't add up? It takes over 8,000 books to make a list. What the hell are 100 copies or 500 copies going to really do if they don't have thousands of pre-orders/sales already?


At $0.99 per book, $40,000 buys a lot of books. And yes, the amount I was asked for to buy into a boxed set was $2,000. I never could get a good answer as to how the money was going to be spent -- "advertising and promotion" -- and I bowed out.

And I'm getting really tired of people throwing the word "liar" around. I suggest you look up the words "defamation" and "libel" before using such words.


----------



## Holly Dodd

brkingsolver said:


> At $0.99 per book, $40,000 buys a lot of books. And yes, the amount I was asked for to buy into a boxed set was $2,000. I never could get a good answer as to how the money was going to be spent -- "advertising and promotion" -- and I bowed out.
> 
> And I'm getting really tired of people throwing the word "liar" around. I suggest you look up the words "defamation" and "libel" before using such words.


Where did I call anyone a liar? Have you ever run FB ads, bookbub ads, and AMS ads? Let alone booking promotions like I love vampires or Bargain Booksy? I have. $40,000 to make the NYT wouldn't even make me bat an eyelash.


----------



## CrazyHorze

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Which has nothing to do with this conversation.


I was talking to Monk, who was saying that people using her services were morally bankrupt (My words) and now he is attacking some woman somewhere whose child had surgery today and who is pregnant. This might sound strange to some here that are so heavily invested in this, but writers on Twitter and Facebook like her and me personally after reading the blog post I will be joining her Facebook group. She's a bit of a drill sergeant it seems, but she gets things done. Some are treating her like she is murdering people to get on the NYT bestsellers list. We should all just get over it. It's not that important, really. And some of the opinions spoken here are actually not God's truth, really. Let's all get over ourselves. It's not that important, really!


----------



## sela

Holly Dodd said:


> You're stuck on this gifting thing. Do you realize the numbers don't add up? It takes over 8,000 books to make a list. What the hell are 100 copies or 500 copies going to really do if they don't have thousands of pre-orders/sales already?


I sold 8,300+ books one week when I had a Bookbub without any promotion. None. Just the Bookbub 99c promotion of a single book. I missed the USAT by a couple hundred sales. Believe me, that couple hundred meant a _lot_.

Say someone else only sold 7,900 books that week but bought / gifted 500 copies to get to 8,400 copies and got on the USAT... Which of the two of us do you think deserved to be there?

It's unethical to buy/gift your own books to hit a list because those sales are not legitimate and shouldn't count. Just like it's unethical to pay click farms to bot-borrow books so you can hit the top 100 and/or get illegitimate page reads.

This should be a pretty easy ethical question to answer. That it isn't speaks to me of desperation and a desire for success -- or the appearance of success -- such that people are willing and able to close their eyes and plug their ears to unethical behaviour.

Bottom line: if a publisher gifts / buys several hundred or several thousand books in order to hit a list, they are not behaving ethically.


----------



## JalexM

brkingsolver said:


> At $0.99 per book, $40,000 buys a lot of books. And yes, the amount I was asked for to buy into a boxed set was $2,000. I never could get a good answer as to how the money was going to be spent -- "advertising and promotion" -- and I bowed out.
> 
> And I'm getting really tired of people throwing the word "liar" around. I suggest you look up the words "defamation" and "libel" before using such words.


The amount is off. Her sets are never more than 20 books. How are you getting 40000 dollars from 2 grand buy in? Out of all her sets, only one or two had that buy in amount, out of all the others, the buy in was 500 and less.
The 20k one was for a NYT run, unless I missed her posting one.
I can also show you where she spends the money if need be.


----------



## ......~......

sela said:


> I sold 8,300+ books one week when I had a Bookbub without any promotion. None. Just the Bookbub 99c promotion of a single book. I missed the USAT by a couple hundred sales. Believe me, that couple hundred meant a _lot_.


I've recently seen an author spamming a writer's Facebook group asking people to download their book on Apple, Kobo, etc. so they could make the USAT list. These are the kinds of people we're dealing with here. And I don't think that's ethical on any level, but that's just me.


----------



## Not any more

JalexM said:


> The amount is off. Her sets are never more than 20 books. How are you getting 40000 dollars from 2 grand buy in? Out of all her sets, only one or two had that buy in amount, out of all the others, the buy in was 500 and less.
> The 20k one was for a NYT run, unless I missed her posting one.
> I can also show you where she spends the money if need be.


Pull out your calculator and multiply 2,000 times 20. It's not that hard. I've watched you call everyone on this board a liar. Don't go there. I don't know what your stake is. Don't tell me what I know as a part of that FB group.


----------



## Holly Dodd

sela said:


> I sold 8,300+ books one week when I had a Bookbub without any promotion. None. Just the Bookbub 99c promotion of a single book. I missed the USAT by a couple hundred sales. Believe me, that couple hundred meant a _lot_.
> 
> Say someone else only sold 7,900 books that week but bought / gifted 500 copies to get to 8,400 copies and got on the USAT... Which of the two of us do you think deserved to be there?
> 
> It's unethical to buy/gift your own books to hit a list because those sales are not legitimate. Just like it's unethical to pay click farms to bot-borrow books so you can hit the top 100 and/or get illegitimate page reads.


Bookbub is the holy grail of marketing, so I can definitely see that happening. They take so few people, so congratulations for getting them to say yes and almost making it!

However, I'm not going to get into an ethics conversation or 'deserving' conversation. My stance: As long as it's not against TOS, people will do what they want. If Amazon didn't want people gifting, they wouldn't make it an option. Amazon is very much "act first, ask questions later". I believe if someone was abusing their TOS, they would be banned and would have been banned long ago, especially with how many people report her for supposed violations.

I can appreciate your stance, and I definitely see your point of view. However, I'm not going to demonize someone for using all the -legal- marketing tools at their disposal.

And I think that's what this points down to: ethics vs legal. Now I'm sounding like a lawyer.

We all make choices of how we want to do things and what we want to be known for. You don't do it. Someone else might.


----------



## CrazyHorze

sela said:


> Bottom line: if a publisher gifts / buys several hundred or several thousand books in order to hit a list, they are not behaving ethically.


A bestseller list is a marketing gimmick. Oscars are marketing gimmicks. That has nothing to do with ethics. All of us need to get over ourselves.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

CrazyHorze said:


> I was talking to Monk, who was saying that people using her services were morally bankrupt (My words) and now he is attacking some woman somewhere whose child had surgery today and who is pregnant. This might sound strange to some here that are so heavily invested in this, but writers on Twitter and Facebook like her and me personally after reading the blog post I will be joining her Facebook group. She's a bit of a drill sergeant it seems, but she gets things done. Some are treating her like she is murdering people to get on the NYT bestsellers list. We should all just get over it. It's not that important, really. And some of the opinions spoken here are actually not God's truth, really. Let's all get over ourselves. It's not that important, really!


Some interesting use of words there. I don't see anyone else equating this to talking about murder. One would think you're trying to paint her as a martyr.

And again, I say that has nothing to do with the conversation. We're talking ethics and business practices. Try to keep the histrionics out of it.


----------



## Holly Dodd

That NYT buy in is $40,000. Again, a friend who had a $30,000 solo budget (in no way, shape, or form affiliated with Rebecca and Genrecrave), had hired people who run ads for a living to guide her, had loads of giveaways, everything you could think of, and didn't make it. 

So, that price isn't unusual to me. Mileage varies based on so many different things. Yes, people can make it with less. But, if I was personally pushing for the NYT, I'd have probably more than that as my budget because I personally did the research, and talked to people who have done it, and attempted to it. 

I err on the side of caution. I would rather listen to the average ($30K plus) then the outlier (I did it with $2k).


----------



## JalexM

brkingsolver said:


> Pull out your calculator and multiply 2,000 times 20. It's not that hard. I've watched you call everyone on this board a liar. Don't go there. I don't know what your stake is. Don't tell me what I know as a part of that FB group.


My mistake on the amount part.
There's a lot of armchair lawyers and people think they know certain rules, when they in fact don't.
I wouldn't even had replied to you if I didn't mess up the math in my head, since you were speaking from your own experience and not what you _heard_ from other authors.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Holly Dodd

CrazyHorze said:


> A bestseller list is a marketing gimmick. Oscars are marketing gimmicks. That has nothing to do with ethics. All of us need to get over ourselves.


I agree. Hell, the NYT isn't even ABOUT best-selling anything. It's vetted. If you sell a lot you might impress them enough to get on the list, but there's no guarantee.


----------



## JalexM

Boyd said:


> 20x2000=40000


I've been staring at a program called blender for too long. Never try to rig and do math at the same time.
My stock trading buddies would be disappointed in me.


----------



## Guest

Jalex, to be fair, some of my sets do end up with more than 20 authors in it. It's not intentional, as I prefer a 20 person limit. But it happens, and I want to make sure everything here is presented factually.

To those defending me, you are wasting your breath. Those who are saying untrue things know what they are saying is not true. Those who don't know can simply join my group, see the screen shots, and see if it lines up what these people are claiming or not. Then they can go to Amazon reps, Amazon TOS pages, their lawyers, and whoever else they want to ask questions. But those people who are innocently getting dragged into this either need to...

1) Choose to see the information that's intentionally being withheld from them by some of the posters here. 
or
2) Choose to just go along with it, because it somehow the logic holes add up in their head and they don't care to see anything that might disprove what they want to believe.

EITHER IS FINE WITH ME. Why? Because I have no desire to a) help people who don't want me help or b) to work with anyone who mindlessly follows things when they COULD have all the facts IF they wanted them.  That is a choice for the individual to make. 

I've told them where to go if they want to see how the money is spent. That's up to them.

I've already said  - and this can ALSO be confirmed by joining the genrecrave marketing group - that not all of my sets have buy in. MOST are $500. Only twice did I do a higher buy in. Do I say where the money goes? I not only say it, I SHOW IT. there are screenshots in the group that have been up since January that literally show receipt for receipt where that money went. As well as people who LOGGED INTO MY ACCOUNT AND CONFIRMED THE ACCURACY OF IT ALL. 

So if someone wants to say I "don't say where the money goes" - they can say that.
If someone wants to see if that claim is true, or if that person is knowingly or accidentally misleading them, then they can join genrecrave marketing group and SEE for THEMSELVES the SCREENSHOTS that show every penny spent AND talk to the people who LOGGED INTO MY ACCOUNT and confirmed. (PS: Those screenshots also show that I provided that login before all this even started. I said "I want a witness that this money is being spent right" - so that part wasn't something I did after the fact, just to be clear.)

But again, it's all a moot point. I could dismantle everything said here, piece by piece by piece with screenshot evidence and irrefutable facts. But you know what? I've done that a DOZEN times now. And every time, they hide those parts of the conversation, or go away for a while and then come back and say the same things, pretending they didn't already see all the proof that shows they are lying. So why keep dismantling it over and over again? When people can just join the group and see for themselves? Instead of me posting the same things over and over again, if they REALLY want to know, they can go there and see it where I've already posted it. 

Everything else is rumors on their part and a waste of time on mine. (Yes, even making this post is a waste of time). but you know what has slowly but surely been happening? People ARE going to that group. And they ARE finding out the truth. And they ARE realizing that these people who claim to have "morals" apparently KNOWINGLY withholding information from them because it doesn't fit their narrative. And they they see that, there's one thing they all want to know: 

Which moral is it again that condones knowingly misleading people? I can't think of any, personally. The truth speaks for itself to anyone who is willing to see it. And to anyone who doesn't want the truth, well, what's the point in showing it to them?


----------



## Guest

Holly Dodd said:


> I agree. Hell, the NYT isn't even ABOUT best-selling anything. It's vetted. If you sell a lot you might impress them enough to get on the list, but there's no guarantee.


Correct. I've had sets that had NYT numbers (and didn't gift a single copy to create buzz!) and didn't make the list. And I've had sets that did make the list with about the same numbers. One set actually made it HIGHER with LESS numbers than another set that made a list. NYT is known to curate. If they don't think your writing is good enough to be there, they simply knock you off the list.


----------



## sela

Holly Dodd said:


> Bookbub is the holy grail of marketing, so I can definitely see that happening. They take so few people, so congratulations for getting them to say yes and almost making it!
> 
> However, I'm not going to get into an ethics conversation or 'deserving' conversation. My stance: As long as it's not against TOS, people will do what they want. If Amazon didn't want people gifting, they wouldn't make it an option. Amazon is very much "act first, ask questions later". I believe if someone was abusing their TOS, they would be banned and would have been banned long ago, especially with how many people report her for supposed violations.
> 
> I can appreciate your stance, and I definitely see your point of view. However, I'm not going to demonize someone for using all the -legal- marketing tools at their disposal.
> 
> And I think that's what this points down to: ethics vs legal. Now I'm sounding like a lawyer.
> 
> We all make choices of how we want to do things and what we want to be known for. You don't do it. Someone else might.


But you see, you are already getting in an ethical conversation when you say that "as long as its not against TOS..." As we have seen in the past, the TOS can be inadequate and people are always trying to find loopholes and quick fixes that push the boundaries of ethics in order to get ahead. It may be seen as okay, but we know it really isn't. What if I decided to buy 20,000 copies of my 99c book? Should my book beat out someone else whose book actually sold 20,000 copies to actual readers?

We can't avoid ethical questions in life. Every action has ethical implications. Every decision in which we have to choose to follow or bend or break rules is an ethical decision.

Someone wrote that the law is no substitute for morality and that right and wrong is a very different standard than legal and illegal.


----------



## Guest

Just going to throw it out there, that's it kind of hard for ANY of us to speak about the NYT aiming list. I've only run sign ups for one, and that one didn't run yet. And I had interest in a second, but haven't collected money or moved forward with it yet. Still considering who's interested in that. So harping on THAT set up, that NO ONE has seen in action yet, is a waste of time. It's literally 1 set out of dozens with that sign up...that hasn't run yet...so I just don't get it. It's like harping one thing proved to be malicious so the goal posts got moved to be about the NYT sets instead, to see if that will work better at swaying people to join the hate fest. 

If we want to talk to the $500 buy in sets I've already run, as I've said, there's screenshots that show how that money is spent. Anyone who wants to see it is welcome to join the group and see it for themselves. Many who are starting these rumors have already seen it and are aware, and there's a reason they didn't share those screenshots when trying to paint this misaligned, misleading, and purposefully deceitful picture. 

The screenshots disprove their narrative. Join the group and see for yourself. And then you can decide who isn't being ethical here.


----------



## CrazyHorze

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Some interesting use of words there. I don't see anyone else equating this to talking about murder. One would think you're trying to paint her as a martyr.
> 
> And again, I say that has nothing to do with the conversation. We're talking ethics and business practices. Try to keep the histrionics out of it.


You're talking about ethics? Look how you're talking to a woman whose daughter had surgery today and who is pregnant and who is a real living human being and you equate that with a fake, pro wresting belt marketing gimmick like a best seller list? Are we all out of our minds?


----------



## sela

CrazyHorze said:


> A bestseller list is a marketing gimmick. Oscars are marketing gimmicks. That has nothing to do with ethics. All of us need to get over ourselves.


I really can't believe this statement.

You're saying that it's all BS so if people cheat, it's of no consequence and shouldn't matter.

This is cynicism at its apex. It's nihilism. That's scary.


----------



## Guest

CrazyHorze said:


> You're talking about ethics? Look how you're talking to a woman whose daughter had surgery today and who is pregnant and who is a real living human being and you equate that with a fake, pro wresting belt marketing gimmick like a best seller list? Are we all out of our minds?


This was never really about ethics. That's just another word that can be used to persuade people to take their side instead of encouraging them to look at the facts and decide for themselves. "We're going to imply that if you don't agree with us, then you're unethical too." It's a bully tactic. Some people fall for it, some people see right through it. Others join the genrecrave marketing group and look at the screenshots so they can decide for themselves


----------



## Holly Dodd

sela said:


> But you see, you are already getting in an ethical conversation when you say that "as long as its not against TOS..." As we have seen in the past, the TOS can be inadequate and people are always trying to find loopholes and quick fixes that push the boundaries of ethics in order to get ahead. It may be seen as okay, but we know it really isn't. What if I decided to buy 20,000 copies of my 99c book? Should my book beat out someone else whose book actually sold 20,000 copies to actual readers?
> 
> We can't avoid ethical questions in life. Every action has ethical implications. Every decision in which we have to choose to follow or bend or break rules is an ethical decision.
> 
> Someone wrote that the law is no substitute for morality and that right and wrong is a very different standard than legal and illegal.


I am trying not to get into the ethical conversation. Because there are loopholes. Nothing is perfect. People will find a way to accomplish what they want and toe the line. Work smarter not harder, etc. That's just human nature.

Who am I to judge them, though? I try not to judge people, or what they do. Which is why I prefaced it the way I did. Ethics to me are very personal, where legal is black and white. So, I lean on the legal side because it should be cut and dry. Amazon is the final -legal- say in the gifting quandary. Not you. Not me. Just them. What we have are personal opinions.

I don't want to throw my personal beliefs at people, especially in a public way. That is just my personal preference.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

CrazyHorze said:


> The blog post explains how she is creating USA Today and NYT bestsellers.


If we stop and be truly honest with ourselves, we all know we're not talking about the participating authors being USA Today and NYT bestsellers, just the box-sets. No one gathers a team of twenty runners, does the Boston Marathon as a relay race where the baton gets passed along between them at each 1/20th segment, and then says _*I* completed the Boston Marathon!"_ 

Yet I see those authors proclaim that all the time on their covers. 

And I don't understand it, because it's not true. I'd like to see someone have the cojones to put on their cover _"1/20th of a USA Today Bestselling Author"_.

I think that kind of honesty would be nice...


----------



## sela

CrazyHorze said:


> You're talking about ethics? Look how you're talking to a woman whose daughter had surgery today and who is pregnant and who is a real living human being and you equate that with a fake, pro wresting belt marketing gimmick like a best seller list? Are we all out of our minds?


The woman with the daughter in surgery who is pregnant is on Writer's Cafe defending her business practices.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

CrazyHorze said:


> You're talking about ethics? Look how you're talking to a woman whose daughter had surgery today and who is pregnant and who is a real living human being and you equate that with a fake, pro wresting belt marketing gimmick like a best seller list? Are we all out of our minds?


And again. You're like a broken record. I don't wish anyone's children ill or them for that matter. I have kids of my own. But I'm not bringing them into this conversation because they have nothing to do with gifting books, making letters, box sets etc.


----------



## sela

Holly Dodd said:


> I am trying not to get into the ethical conversation. Because there are loopholes. Nothing is perfect. People will find a way to accomplish what they want and toe the line. Work smarter not harder, etc. That's just human nature.
> 
> Who am I to judge them, though? I try not to judge people, or what they do. Which is why I prefaced it the way I did. Ethics to me are very personal, where legal is black and white. So, I lean on the legal side because it should be cut and dry. Amazon is the final -legal- say in the gifting quandary. Not you. Not me. Just them. What we have are personal opinions.
> 
> I don't want to throw my personal beliefs at people, especially in a public way. That is just my personal preference.


I'm saying that you may try to avoid getting into an ethical conversation, but you do so by default by accepting or ignoring unethical behaviour.

*shrug*

Turning a blind eye is what allows a lot of bad behaviour continue to exist.


----------



## Holly Dodd

sela said:


> I really can't believe this statement.
> 
> You're saying that it's all BS so if people cheat, it's of no consequence and shouldn't matter.
> 
> This is cynicism at its apex. It's nihilism. That's scary.


I actually have a conversation about "cheating" a lot with a friend of mine. I personally -hate- those "publishers" who have a cadre of ghostwriters, and make thousands, tens of thousand, dollars a month churning out re-packaged ghostwritten novels. I hate it so much. But, is that cheating, or is that using a system/market that is offered to them?

This is the same thing: You think gifting is cheating. I 100% respect that. But, is it just using the system/marketing that is offered to them?

We have differences in opinions. No one is forcing -you- to do that. Stand your high ground. But, you can't force someone to do the same. That's where the line is here for me. People trying to force others to adhere to their definition of morality. Have a civilized discussion about ethics and morality, but try not to force it on someone else.


----------



## Holly Dodd

crow.bar.beer said:


> If we stop and be truly honest with ourselves, we all know we're not talking about the participating authors being USA Today and NYT bestsellers, just the box-sets. No one gathers a team of twenty runners, does the Boston Marathon as a relay race where the baton gets passed along between them at each 1/20th segment, and then says _*I* completed the Boston Marathon!"_
> 
> Yet I see those authors proclaim that all the time on their covers.
> 
> And I don't understand it, because it's not true. I'd like to see someone have the cojones to put on their cover _"1/20th of a USA Today Bestselling Author"_.
> 
> I think that kind of honesty would be nice...


I view it like an Olympic team or a sports team. Like Hockey. Every Hockey player gets a ring, gets to say they are Stanely Cup champions EVEN if they never played a second during the post season. Those 20 people helped each other to get there. Just like that team got them to the playoffs. Everyone deserves the accolades.


----------



## sela

Holly Dodd said:


> I actually have a conversation about "cheating" a lot with a friend of mine. I personally -hate- those "publishers" who have a cadre of ghostwriters, and make thousands, tens of thousand, dollars a month churning out re-packaged ghostwritten novels. I hate it so much. But, is that cheating, or is that using a system/market that is offered to them?
> 
> This is the same thing: You think gifting is cheating. I 100% respect that. But, is it just using the system/marketing that is offered to them?
> 
> We have differences in opinions. No one is forcing -you- to do that. Stand your high ground. But, you can't force someone to do the same. That's where the line is here for me. People trying to force others to adhere to their definition of morality. Have a civilized discussion about ethics and morality, but try not to force it on someone else.


People are merely voicing their opinions about a particular business practice which some see as being unethical and others see as BAU. No one is forcing anything on anyone. It may hurt to have one's behaviour labeled as unethical, but that's the risk we all run when we make ethical choices.


----------



## Holly Dodd

sela said:


> I'm saying that you may try to avoid getting into an ethical conversation, but you do so by default by accepting or ignoring unethical behaviour.
> 
> *shrug*
> 
> Turning a blind eye is what allows a lot of bad behaviour continue to exist.


You are trying to force *your* definition of ethics on other people. I don't agree with that. Regardless of my own personal beliefs.


----------



## sela

Holly Dodd said:


> You are trying to force *your* definition of ethics on other people. I don't agree with that. Regardless of my own personal beliefs.


Merely stating an opinion is not forcing anything. You have chosen to disagree with me. That means you have a choice and have not been forced to do anything.


----------



## Guest

To make things even easier, if you do join the marketing group and are having a hard time finding the posts, here's some quick reference links that might help.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1322972544443465/ < If you haven't seen nearly 300 screenshots showing receipts from how I spend buy in...then someone isn't showing you everything!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1465963406811044/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0cyxib3hlZCBzZXQsYm94IHNldCxib3hlZCxzZXRzLGJveCxzZXQ%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1461579860582732/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0cyxib3hlZCBzZXQsYm94ZWQsc2V0cyxzZXQ%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1450050785068973/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0LGJveCBzZXQsYm94ZWQsYm94LHNldA%3D%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1424205744320144/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0cyxib3hlZCBzZXQsYm94IHNldCxib3hlZCxzZXRzLGJveCxzZXQ%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1387829321291120/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0LGJveGVkLHNldA%3D%3D < Relevant to someone here who said something about her experience

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1473736586033726/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0LGJveGVkLHNldA%3D%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1465831436824241/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0LGJveCBzZXQsYm94ZWQsYm94LHNldA%3D%3D

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1390533131020739/?match=Ym94ZWQgc2V0cyxib3hlZCxzZXRz

Those are just a few, but it's a start. Feel free to join and dig deep  Some of the stuff you've seen online has been taken from there, so once you join for yourself, you'll get to see where they got the content, that they were aware about the stuff they didn't share with you, and then you can ask yourself why they didn't SHARE those vital pieces of information and evidence with you.

Join Group Here:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

Otherwise, I respect your choice to just go along with whatever  this is just for those who are curious and really want to know the truth. I'm sure some people will say "They looked and there's nothing there" so be ready to hear that. Then go and see for yourself. And after you do that - speak to Amazon for yourself. Speak to a lawyer for yourself. Heck, speak to the minister at your church if you want to, and have a conversation with them about ethics. This is your career, your life, your decision. You deserve to see for yourself, if for no other reason than to become aware if there is anyone who might be knowingly misleading you.

Those who aren't hiding anything from you should have nothing to worry about if you dive in and see for yourself, so I'm sure they will agree you should join and see the screenshots for yourself. Or they will try to tell you not to look at the screenshots...which in itself would be very telling.

I look forward to meeting more of you. there's been a lot of new faces today, so kudos to those taking knowledge into their own hands!

Take care


----------



## Holly Dodd

sela said:


> People are merely voicing their opinions about a particular business practice which some see as being unethical and others see as BAU. No one is forcing anything on anyone. It may hurt to have one's behaviour labeled as unethical, but that's the risk we all run when we make ethical choices.


I have no horse in this race. I just call it like I see it, and try to inject logic when things seem illogical to me. I was curious about this thread when it popped up, saw some very strong untruths, and sought to educate.


----------



## sela

Boyd said:


> That reminds me of my favorite Edmund Burke quote.


"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


----------



## JumpingShip

No comment on the ethics of what is going on as that has been covered. My thought is, what is the point of making lists if you know that real readers didn't go out and buy the book? Where is the fun in that? When I sell a book or get a new reader who contacts me, well, that's a great feeling and I wouldn't want to taint that.   Sure, I guess it can help market future books, but if everyone does it, pretty soon having NYT Bestseller won't have any meaning anymore. I will probably never make a list, but I have been in the top 20 on Amazon before. It was amazing. Maybe someday it'll happen again, and if it does, I want it to be through normal advertising methods. (well, tbh, it would be even better if I didn't have to advertise at all!    )


----------



## Guest

sela said:


> "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke


Which is exactly why people are here, letting others know "hey, there's people here who aren't giving you all the facts." The saw evil, came here, and are doing something because they are good people who want other good people to SEE THE TRUTH FOR THEMSELVES.

Knowingly misleading people is, IMO, a lie. And that is what is happening in a thread where so much is intentionally being left out because it will disprove the lies being told here. What will happen, and as been happening, is people see the evidence that people here are lying, and those people then look quite hypocritical to be talking about ethics.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

PS: We have almost 5300 in the group who have access to these screenshots. Feel free to join us


----------



## sela

Someone who wishes to remain anonymous asked me to post this on their behalf. I am only the conduit. I trust this person's opinion due to past performance on Boards and know that many of the rest of you would as well if you knew their identity. That said, I can't verify their claims. I leave that up to the reader. They want to post this info but don't want to risk the potential 1-star attacks and blackballing that has happened to others who have spoken out loud about issues raised in this thread.



> I've watched this organizer's boxes for more than a year now. I've seen the rules being skirted and outright broken.
> 
> 1) Books in the sets in KU during the time the sets were on pre-order. Boxes releasing wide with 4-6 books still in KU. Not theoretical. Screenshots don't lie. When caught by Amazon (with some outside help), she began not listing the actual names of the books in the boxes on Amazon to make it harder (but far from impossible) for anyone to report them.
> 
> 2) Forced price-matching by putting the sets on other sites for 99¢ knowing the sets would be oversized when released.
> 
> 3) When caught on the price-matching scheme, halving the box sets and putting 11 or 12 of the advertised 22 books on instafreebie with a link for readers to have to go to instafreebie to sideload the balance of the books.
> 
> 4) Currently, keeping the original box with 22 novels up on Amazon only for release week, then allowing authors to swap out full-length novels for novellas and short stories and calling that a 2nd Edition, even though it bears little to no resemblance to the box that was released and what hit the lists.
> 
> Let's think further about some of these:
> 
> 1) KU double-dipping -- ever wonder WHY Amazon started enforcing its rules for books to not only be exclusive to Amazon but to the publisher and re-emphasized exclusive meant for the preorder period too?
> 
> 2) Amazon has pulled down some of this organizer's boxes as well as others for this practice. What she and the others gamble on is that Amazon won't catch them within the first week of release. All they want to do is skate through Saturday for NYT listing or Sunday for USA Today. And if they can gift enough boxes and get enough presales during the preorder period to hit the lists with just a few days' sales added on, then if the boxes are taken down late in the week, the boxes can still make the list and they can republish at $2.99.
> 
> If Amazon catches the price-matching during the preorder lockdown period or early in the week and if there aren't enough preorders to guarantee a list, then they move to #3.
> 
> 3) Think about it. The box sets don't even have to physically have all the books in it. Half the authors making a list sometimes aren't even in the box set files being sold to the customer. Read that again. And again.
> 
> Now, I happened to be chatting with the person who runs the USA Today bestseller list program, and we spoke about this. She told me during the target week that all versions of a title are considered in the total sales figures, which might include hardback, paperback, ebook, screenplay versions, and so forth. If it has the same title, it gets included. And their contracts with the various vendors means USA Today counts exactly what their told to count, they don't make judgements. So she threw the burden back on Amazon for what they call/don't call an eligible version.
> 
> Other organizers who've attempted the instafreebie roll have had their books removed without recourse for republishing.
> 
> And while the box set on preorder will have the 22-book 3D box set visual without reference to the book titles the box contains, that cover will get swapped out with a generic 2D cover that lists neither titles nor authors, and often not even number of books to ensure customers can't complain no matter what winds up in the box set file they receive.
> 
> 4) In an attempt to circumvent the KU exclusivity and to yet continue to capitalize on the USA Today status and keep reviews and still be able to put the box sets into KU one week after release, the organizer now employs the book swap method.
> 
> While the organizer and all who take part in her sets, as well as the others coming up behind her, should be ashamed of their blatant attempts to circumvent the Amazon TOS and to manipulate rank and sales, Amazon also shares a good deal of that blame for allowing it to happen.
> 
> Lastly, here's what I propose. Since Amazon has seen fit to allow half of several 22-book box sets to be delivered via instafreebie and still allow them to list with USA Today, then let's see how many we can get away with! What about a 50-book box set?
> 
> Better yet, let's all publish a box set that has just ONE actual book file in it (our own book, of course), and then add the links to 99 other books that are all permafree. Since we're not actually publishing those 99 books, surely we don't need the rights to them. And if we don't mention the titles on the cover or the authors, we can simply tout the sets as the ultimate 100-book megaboxes for 99 cents. How many do you think we can pop up on the USA Today list? And how many will need to list before Amazon does something about it?


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Holly Dodd said:


> I view it like an Olympic team or a sports team. Like Hockey. Every Hockey player gets a ring, gets to say they are Stanely Cup champions EVEN if they never played a second during the post season. Those 20 people helped each other to get there. Just like that team got them to the playoffs. Everyone deserves the accolades.


What you say would be true if the individual author wasn't referring to themselves as a bestselling author in the singular. That's the self-deception evident in this.


----------



## JalexM

Another anonymous author. Shocking.


----------



## Guest

Motivationally speaking:

I have screenshots that show I don't profit on helping others make a bestseller list. Even if you believe that I must be gifting all of these copies, then that means for NO PROFIT I am spending how many hours gifting books? But then when you see the screen shots, you see I can't possibly be gifting thousands of copies, because I've already spent ALL the money on advertising. No matter how you look at it, according to the naysayers here, I'm either spending my time or my money (in reality it's both), to help other authors make a list...to what end? What is my motivation here? What's the punch line to this scam? According to those here, I'm an immoral scammer who helps other people make bestseller lists using methods that cost me time and money...but like...why? Why, supposedly, am I doing this?

It's SO circular. Because when I ask that, it's because "I make a lot of money pocketing the buy in of the sets" - except then it's "she only makes lists because she spends hours upon hours gifting copies that cost money" - So how can I be pocketing the money AND spending it gifting copies? AND paying for a cover designer, formatter, advertisements - and all those things people know exist even without looking at the screenshots in my group that show where the money is going. There is no end to this conversation because by time we get here, it's back to it being unethical, which just leads back to: then what is my motivation here, if I have nothing to gain? Which then goes back to I DO have something to gain. Which then goes back to apparently whatever I gain I am spending on gifting copies. It's like the song that never ends, and it doesn't add up.

AND THEN:

On the other hand, in the same group that most of these screenshots are being shared from, there's literally nearly 300 screenshots that show how money is spent that are NOT being shared on this post. It's not circular. It's linear. Money is paid. Money goes to this. X results result. My motivation to anyone in that group is CLEAR. The evidence speaks for itself. Again, there's a reason some people here don't want you to see ALL The screenshots. There's a reason they didn't show you the nearly 300 screenshots of how that money is spent. There's reason they didn't have a problem with ANY of these things until my sets REGULARLY started hitting lists.

What do I have to gain by doing the sets vs. What do they have to gain by trying to stop you from trusting someone who is helping other authors surpass them? So then, once we hit this point, it goes back to "ethics" again (more circular discussion) - but ethics coming from the fingertips of people who are knowingly withholding information from other authors and trying to dissuade them from looking at Amazon tOS for themselves, talking a lawyer for themselves, talking to Amazon for themselves, and seeing what goes on inside those groups for themselves.

In the end, there's only ONE way to know the truth. It's just up to people whether they want to know it.

See everything they screenshotted here PLUS all the things they didn't when you join genreCrAVE marketing group.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

Then decide for yourself.


----------



## Holly Dodd

crow.bar.beer said:


> What you say would be true if the individual author wasn't referring to themselves as a bestselling author in the singular. That's the self-deception evident in this.


Athletes still claim to be Olympic gold medalists even if it wasn't a solo effort. Honestly, it's all semantics. I don't mind boxset authors claiming the title they helped earn. Others do. That's your own preference. It doesn't harm me in any way if they want to run with the title they earned in the set. I don't even feel it dilutes the list, either. Yes, there are fricken dozens of USA/NYT authors I've never even heard of, and probably won't ever hear of again. But, they wanted it, they achieved their goals, so yay for them.


----------



## Jim Johnson

JalexM said:


> Another anonymous author. Shocking.


Come on, it's not anonymous. I think some of us know who that post is from. Or maybe I've hung around kboards and other writer forums too long. 

This is such a laughable hit piece, OP. You did the same on Facebook recently. It's great to get writers more informed, and I'm thrilled to see Rebecca here in this thread defending herself. I don't think I know another indie that's had as much [crap] thrown at her and it just slides right off.

I'd encourage any writer to read this thread carefully and if you have any questions, join the genreCrave groups on FB and get the answers for yourself and then leave the group if you don't like what you see. Don't rely on secondhand information thrown around by anonymous posters. Knowledge is power and you have the means to find it.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Holly Dodd said:


> Athletes still claim to be Olympic gold medalists even if it wasn't a solo effort. Honestly, it's all semantics. I don't mind boxset authors claiming the title they helped earn. Others do. That's your own preference. It doesn't harm me in any way if they want to run with the title they earned in the set. I don't even feel it dilutes the list, either. Yes, there are fricken dozens of USA/NYT authors I've never even heard of, and probably won't ever hear of again. But, they wanted it, they achieved their goals, so yay for them.


*USA Today Bestselling Coauthor* has an honest ring to it. So does Olympic gold comedalist, now that you mention it.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Holly Dodd said:


> yes, there are fricken dozens of USA/NYT authors I've never even heard of, and probably won't ever hear of again.


Shoot, this was true when I worked at Waldenbooks in the early 90s. Tradpub's churn created tons of pop-up bestsellers you've never heard from again. Doesn't make it right, but it did show me even back then that the bestseller lists were gamed.


----------



## AllyWho

CrazyHorze said:


> You're talking about ethics? Look how you're talking to a woman whose daughter had surgery today and who is pregnant and who is a real living human being and you equate that with a fake, pro wresting belt marketing gimmick like a best seller list?


I've not seen her give any consideration to the real life circumstances of the people she has sent her followers to bully and harass. It didn't matter if people have lost loved ones, were suffering depression, or received devastating health news. If the author dared complain, ask questions, or seek a refund they were named and shamed and her followers mobilised to hound, harass and 1-star their books. I've seen authors delete their Facebook accounts and give up because of the bullying. But sure, we'll make special consideration about real life circumstances for the instigator.


----------



## Holly Dodd

crow.bar.beer said:


> *USA Today Bestselling Coauthor* has an honest ring to it. So does Olympic gold comedalist, now that you mention it.


ROFL. Yes, that has a great honest ring to it. But it looks ugly as hell!


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> It isn't though, only in terms of manipulating rank.


This is a response I've heard before. What is the point of the gifting then? To get enough sales to get on a BS list? Um, it's not sales that get a book on the list, but a top 100 rank. Gifting hundreds of copies, to achieve the rank needed to get on a BS list, *IS* rank manipulation, pure and simple. Doing it to get on a list doesn't make it okay.


----------



## JalexM

Jim Johnson said:


> Come on, it's not anonymous. I think some of us know who that post is from. Or maybe I've hung around kboards and other writer forums too long.


 
It's almost a straight copy and paste.


crow.bar.beer said:


> *USA Today Bestselling Coauthor* has an honest ring to it. So does Olympic gold comedalist, now that you mention it.


I won't lie, I like the ring of that.


----------



## Jim Johnson

crow.bar.beer said:


> *USA Today Bestselling Coauthor* has an honest ring to it. So does Olympic gold comedalist, now that you mention it.


Emmy Awards for Best Ensembles is nice too.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Jim Johnson said:


> Shoot, this was true when I worked at Waldenbooks in the early 90s. Tradpub's churn created tons of pop-up bestsellers you've never heard from again. Doesn't make it right, but it did show me even back then that the bestseller lists were gamed.


Yes. Everyone has their own dreams, I'm not going to judge someone for achieving them in the way they can. Like I said earlier, I am not going to sacrifice my income just for a title that can be hacked/gamed. A lot of the authors in the box sets are exclusive to KU, and they might think the same thing. It's a lot of money to push out and maybe not get back. So, splitting that cost makes fiscal sense to me.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Wayne Stinnett said:


> This is a response I've heard before. What is the point of the gifting then? To get enough sales to get on a BS list? Um, it's not sales that get a book on the list, but a top 100 rank. Gifting hundreds of copies, to achieve the rank needed to get on a BS list, *IS* rank manipulation, pure and simple. Doing it to get on a list doesn't make it okay.


This confuses me. Rank means nothing. It is the sales that get the book on a list. Sometimes they go hand-in-hand, sure. But not all the time if they've had a ton of pre-orders. They can be sitting at like 1k Rank and still make the list because they have the pure sale numbers.


----------



## Guest

Actually, I always consider the people going after me, even when they go after me. Will I prove their lie is a lie? YES. But I ALWAYS ALWAYS AWLAYS will tell people NOT to go after them. I've even recommended books by people who were harassing me. Readers, on their own accord after seeing the way those people treated me, has said "I'm not reading their books anymore" and I've told them NOT to do that. I've told them those authors are talented and that maybe they are going through something and to not deprive themselves of great books. I share the truth NOT to hurt others but to protect my family, those who work with me, and myself. And anyone who has followed this from the beginning knows I have been consistent about that from day one. 

No matter HOW badly I am treated, no matter HOW many death threats I receive, no matter HOW many times I defend lies with truth, I ALWAYS want the best for others - even those hurting me - and I'm always willing to forgive and I always encourage my followers to be kind. And when I get carried away, as humans often do, I apologize. Because I know I'm not perfect. But I also know I want to help others, even those who hurt me. If anyone is ever suffering and thinks I can help, I don't care what they have done to me in the past, I will do anything I am ABLE to do to help them. And anyone who has followed me knows this is true. 

Yes, even you, Sela. Even RIGHT NOW. If you messaged me in private and said "I hate your guts still but I really need help and you're the only one who can help me" - and it was something I COULD help with - I would help you in a heartbeat. I mean, I can guess you probably wouldn't WANT my help, but my willingness to give it to you will always be there. 

You can say anything you want in the meantime, but if that day ever comes, it will still be true. I may not like how you treat me, but I value your life as a human being and want the best for you.


----------



## raminar_dixon

I don't really think gifting sales should be counting towards ranking or any lists.

But, like, that's just my opinion, man.


----------



## Holly Dodd

raminar_dixon said:


> I don't really think gifting sales should be counting towards ranking or any lists.
> 
> But, like, that's just my opinion, man.


I don't think they count towards rank, actually. I'm not 100% sure, but I swear someone I knew tried it out and their rank didn't change at all.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Holly Dodd said:


> Yes. Everyone has their own dreams, I'm not going to judge someone for achieving them in the way they can. Like I said earlier, I am not going to sacrifice my income just for a title that can be hacked/gamed. A lot of the authors in the box sets are exclusive to KU, and they might think the same thing. It's a lot of money to push out and maybe not get back. So, splitting that cost makes fiscal sense to me.


Agreed 100%. I don't care about hitting the lists but I joined one of the genreCrave box sets to learn all I could about marketing at a level beyond where I was at the time. The buy in wasn't much more than other master classes and workshops I've taken, and so far, it's been money well spent. And based on the pre-order numbers I've seen, we might make all our money back, which is win-win for me since I got my education and win-win for any of my fellow box-mates that wanted to check the box of their dreams.


----------



## Denise Grover Swank

Holly Dodd said:


> To me it sounds like a lot of you don't realize how much it costs to make a list in marketing.
> 
> When the big indies are pushing to make JUST the USA today, they've spent tens of thousands in a -week-.
> 
> Meredith Wild spent 6-figures (yes, over 100,000) when she pushed her Hacker series.
> 
> A friend of mine put together a box set (Not Rebecca). Her budget that she spent: 30,000 (and she didn't make NYT). All out of her pocket because she didn't do a buy in.
> 
> I don't have 30,000 to spend on marketing. I don't even have 5,000 to spend. What I do have is $500, and being that I want the letters, I'm A-okay with doing it in a boxset.
> 
> Really, really research things before you begin questioning about "Why it costs so much" or "Where does the money go". Because honestly, it costs a f*ckton.


My book TRAILER TRASH hit #38 on the USA Today list for it's debut last week. Guess how much money I spent on marketing?

$250 in Facebook post boosts
Approximately $100 in giveaways (Including priority mail shipping)

That's it. Unless you count the $250 I spend each month to maintain my newsletter subscriber list.

You know what I do? I write the best damn book I can so my readers want to read the next one. I engage with my readers on Facebook and I set up preorders as soon as I can.

I realize it's harder for new authors to find readers, but I have yet to get a substantial number of new readers from a multi author box set. They were way more work than they were worth.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Holly Dodd said:


> ROFL. Yes, that has a great honest ring to it. But it looks ugly as hell!


Yeah, that extra syllable really adds a few stink lines.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Holly Dodd said:


> This confuses me. Rank means nothing. It is the sales that get the book on a list. Sometimes they go hand-in-hand, sure. But not all the time if they've had a ton of pre-orders. They can be sitting at like 1k Rank and still make the list because they have the pure sale numbers.


Then you miss the point of what a BEST seller is. Or have been misled.

It's the top 100 selling books nothing more. You can't "be sitting at like 1K Rank" and be in the top 100. If there was a finite number required, let's say it's 1000 sales (or 10,000, doesn't matter), and 250 different individual books sell 1000 copies (or whatever) are all 250 books in the Top 100 Best Sellers?


----------



## Holly Dodd

Denise Grover Swank said:


> My book TRAILER TRASH hit #38 on the USA Today list for it's debut last week. Guess how much money I spent on marketing?
> 
> $250 in Facebook post boosts
> Approximately $100 in giveaways (Including priority mail shipping)
> 
> That's it. Unless you count the $250 I spend each month to maintain my newsletter subscriber list.
> 
> You know what I do? I write the best damn book I can so my readers want to read the next one. I engage with my readers on Facebook and I set up preorders as soon as I can.
> 
> I realize it's harder for new authors to find readers, but I have yet to get a substantial number of new readers from a multi author box set. They were way more work than they were worth.


You're a bit of a unicorn. You have a huge backlist and based on your monthly Nl spend a huge newsletter, and you're wide. While I'm surprised you were able to do it with such a small marketing spend, I can see how you did it too. Those numbers aren't for you! But for people like me who don't have a wide following.

Congratulations on making the list!


----------



## Becca Mills

Just starting to catch up with this thread, but have already heavily edited a couple recent posts for personal attacks and deleted some egging-on of such. No more of that, please.


----------



## 75814

CrazyHorze said:


> I was talking to Monk, who was saying that people using her services were morally bankrupt (My words) and now he is attacking some woman somewhere whose child had surgery today and who is pregnant.


I'm sorry, but what does this have to do with anything?

First off, I wasn't aware there was an international broadcast every time a person has a sick child or is pregnant. It's not our job to know that information nor is it in any way relevant to this discussion.

Second, regardless of what condition you're in, unethical business practices are still unethical. Being pregnant and having a sick child doesn't suddenly shield you from criticism of unethical business practices. If the United [expletive deleted]s who beat that guy to a pulp said, "you have to understand, my child was sick at the time," how many people would have said, "oh, well that changes everything"?



> Let's all get over ourselves. It's not that important, really!


Actually yeah, it is important. Not only does it make those "NYT/USAT best-selling author" titles completely meaningless, but it also reflects poorly on all indies as a result. Every time an indie behaves unethically, it reflects poorly on all of us. Doubly so when other indies rush to justify that unethical behavior.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather earn those letters than buy them.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Jim Johnson said:


> Agreed 100%. I don't care about hitting the lists but I joined one of the genreCrave box sets to learn all I could about marketing at a level beyond where I was at the time. The buy in wasn't much more than other master classes and workshops I've taken, and so far, it's been money well spent. And based on the pre-order numbers I've seen, we might make all our money back, which is win-win for me since I got my education and win-win for any of my fellow box-mates that wanted to check the box of their dreams.


I am all about the money. So, I don't care about the titles either perse, but I do want the letters and I don't want to spend a ton to do it. So will I be in a boxset at some point? You bet your ass!

Also, learning how people market wide would be so damn beneficial if I ever decide to slip out of KU and go wide. (I keep bouncing back and forth about it. I write to the KU market).

I look forward to seeing your shiny new letters!

_Edited for profanity. - Becca_


----------



## Holly Dodd

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Then you miss the point of what a BEST seller is. Or have been misled.
> 
> It's the top 100 selling books nothing more. You can't "be sitting at like 1K Rank" and be in the top 100. If there was a finite number required, let's say it's 1000 sales (or 10,000, doesn't matter), and 250 different individual books sell 1000 copies (or whatever) are all 250 books in the Top 100 Best Sellers?


You are missing what we are talking about. The USA today bestselling list requires 6-7k books sold. You can get those in pre-order. On Amazon, Pre-orders do not effect rank on release day. So yeah, if they have had a 3 month pre-order, and spread those 6k books out, they won't be in the top 100 on Amazon. More like top 300-500. (At this point I am not talking about Nook or Apple because I don't know how their lists/ranking works)

NYT isn't even a best selling list. It's curated. So, what are you talking about?


----------



## Guest

For those interested, this is what Amazon says about gifting:

*Gifting for Kindle*

"Customers can gift all titles available through KDP on Amazon.com, through wish lists or book detail pages. The only current exception is for titles that are not available in the country where the customer lives.

"Your royalties will be based on the price and royalty option selected at the time the Kindle gift was purchased. After the gift recipient downloads your title, your royalties will accrue, and the sale will show on your reports. A gift sale counts toward a sales rank only if it is redeemed within 24 hours by the recipient.

"You are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you like to help promote it. Be aware that gift recipients have the option of choosing a gift certificate instead. Also, as with all Kindle sales, gift recipients have the option to return the gift within 7 days of downloading. Learn more on the Amazon Help page, Give and Receive Kindle Devices and Books."

https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A2SPN65RHEW2G

If a reader doesn't actually want your book, they can get a gift card instead. If they claim a gift card, it doesn't count toward your rank OR book sales. So if you don't have a book readers want, I don't care WHAT you do, you're not gonna move enough copies. IF you have a book readers do want, there's nothing wrong with giving away free copies.

Most of the readers who get free copies from me have told me they are disabled and living on a fixed income and that the books I give them are the only joy they have. If that means I'm unethical, tell that to those readers, not to me. Because I don't feel bad about it. You literally CAN'T game the system with a book readers don't want, and that's fact - because you will NOT get credit toward sales or rank no matter how many copies you gift if the reader doesn't want it. And saying that only readers who can afford books deserve their sale to contribute toward USAT/NYT is classist IMO and not cool. But, you have the right to feel differently.

Most people against gifting don't know the actually terms of service (last time we tried to share with someone on FB, she delivered the TOS and link to the TOS about it...not sure why she wanted to hide the TOS from her followers, but hey, it's her timeline!) But the facts remain fact. It's not even just about TOS about this point, anyway. There's an ethics issue when people try to hide TOS from others, there's an ethics issue when someone says that readers on a fixed income who can't afford books shouldn't be given free books or that their "purchase" shouldn't count (because they COULD trade that in for the money if they didn't want the book). There's just so much information being completely ignored, and it's sad, because I know it's an effort to have a go at ME specifically, but it's hurting a LOT of people in the process - including readers.


----------



## jaehaerys

I honestly cannot believe this thread. Whatever happened to writing a great book, telling a great story and being organically rewarded for that by way of healthy sales and friendly word of mouth? All of these manipulation games and 'you need to spend x to hit this list', it's quite upsetting to be frank.

Here I am working hard to write the best stories I can, that I feel passionate about, and want to share and hopefully succeed with and instead of a marketplace full of ethical authors all trying to do the same I'm finding out that I'm forced to compete with gamers. 

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but man, it's a kick in the teeth to see what some people are saying in this thread and the contortions they're putting themselves through to excuse away their unethical behavior...all in the name of accomplishing something that they're not honestly earning.


----------



## sela

If I bought 50,000 copies of my books and gave them to people living on Skid Row, or orphans living in refugee camps and got the NYTs designation that way, it wouldn't make any difference. I would still have bought my way onto the NYTs bestsellers list.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> I honestly cannot believe this thread. Whatever happened to writing a great book, telling a great story and being organically rewarded for that by way of healthy sales and friendly word of mouth? All of these manipulation games and 'you need to spend x to hit this list', it's quite upsetting to be frank.
> 
> Here I am working hard to write the best stories I can, that I feel passionate about, and want to share and hopefully succeed with and instead of a marketplace full of ethical authors all trying to do the same I'm finding out that I'm forced to compete with gamers.
> 
> I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but man, it's a kick in the teeth to see what some people are saying in this thread and the contortions they're putting themselves through to excuse away their unethical behavior...all in the name of accomplishing something that they're not honestly earning.


How is spending money on marketing unethical?


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Once again, Sela nails it. I still don't "get" how achieving letters could possibly be personally meaningful unless you actually had x number of people buy YOUR book, but OK. In terms of success--any ad, any promo, any boxed set can at most get some eyes on your book. After that, it's on the book. 

And if some of the people who "bought" the book did so with gift cards or gift copies and never read your book--you haven't even got that shot. They aren't even reading your book. What use is that? Hundreds or thousands of dollars' worth? Does that work? I doubt it. 

I have my doubts in any case about how many readers actually get to your story if you're #9 or #14 or #19 out of 20 authors. I know cross-promo, like increasing your mailing list numbers by any means, is all the rage, but . . . I wonder. If you're awesome, maybe. But then, if you're awesome, something is probably going to work anyway.


----------



## 75814

sela said:


> If I bought 50,000 copies of my books and gave them to people living on Skid Row, or orphans living in refugee camps and got the NYTs designation that way, it wouldn't make any difference. I would still have bought my way onto the NYTs bestsellers list.


Exactly. If this was really about altruistically giving disabled people on fixed income some joy, you wouldn't be gifting them (which provides benefit to you)--you'd be giving them the books outright.



Holly Dodd said:


> How is spending money on marketing unethical?


Spending money on marketing isn't unethical. Spending money to artificially inflate sales rank is. This ain't rocket science.


----------



## Guest

Things Trad Publisher do or have done with "Household Name Authors" - including JK Rowling, Stephen King, Nora Roberts, you name it.

- Spend tens of thousands of dollars marketing their new releases
- Giveaway Advanced Reader Copies
- Cross promote with other authors 
- Some big name authors are even part of anthologies with other big name authors

I guess those authors don't deserve their letters either? I mean, I'M not saying that. Personally I think someone deserves what they earn. The authors in the sets aren't writing garbage, and I feel for them that anyone would insinuate that. I think maybe, just maybe, it's possible some have gotten swept up in the drama and have lost sight of all the people they are hurting in an effort to get to one person.

Several authors in my sets have been approached by big name agencies. I don't think they are garbage writers. I think they wanted to reach a lot of readers, invested in doing so, and did.

And def contracts to those who have made a list with little marketing budget. That rocks, and they totally deserve every success. I hope it continues for them <3


----------



## Holly Dodd

Rosalind J said:


> Once again, Sela nails it. I still don't "get" how achieving letters could possibly be personally meaningful unless you actually had x number of people buy YOUR book, but OK. In terms of success--any ad, any promo, any boxed set can at most get some eyes on your book. After that, it's on the book.
> 
> And if some of the people who "bought" the book did so with gift cards or gift copies and never read your book--you haven't even got that shot. They aren't even reading your book. What use is that? Hundreds or thousands of dollars' worth? Does that work? I doubt it.
> 
> I have my doubts in any case about how many readers actually get to your story if you're #9 or #14 or #19 out of 20 authors. I know cross-promo, like increasing your mailing list numbers by any means, is all the rage, but . . . I wonder. If you're awesome, maybe. But then, if you're awesome, something is probably going to work anyway.


All of this is assuming that is what is going on/happening. All we have are unverified rumors that people gifted enough copies to make a list. There's a lot of assumptions in this thread, unfortunately.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Perry Constantine said:


> Exactly. If this was really about altruistically giving disabled people on fixed income some joy, you wouldn't be gifting them (which provides benefit to you)--you'd be giving them the books outright.
> 
> Spending money on marketing isn't unethical. Spending money to artificially inflate sales rank is. This ain't rocket science.


I'm aware of that. However, he was grouping -all- marketing into the unethical category. I'm staying out of the gifting/unethical debate and wanted clarification.


----------



## Guest

sela said:


> If I bought 50,000 copies of my books and gave them to people living on Skid Row, or orphans living in refugee camps and got the NYTs designation that way, it wouldn't make any difference. I would still have bought my way onto the NYTs bestsellers list.


No one is gifting 50,000 copies. No one is gifting enough copies to affect rank. And I'd love to know how you will gift these books to those people, but if you can do it, you should. That would be awesome for those people to get books to read on... I guess we're gifting kindles to go with it? I'd love to help get books to people living in those situations, if that's possible. No list making necessary - just because everyone deserves books if they want them.

That said, if you are talking about gifting books to make a list, good luck with that. I don't see how that would even be possible. When I gift for purposes of drumming up excitement, it has very little impact on rank and doesn't do much to cut into the numbers needed for a bestseller list. And with NYT, they curate anyway - so even if somehow I cloned myself 5000 times to be able to give anyway 50,000 copies in such a short amount of time, they would just curate me off the list anyway.

There seems to be a lot of facts being ignored here, but hey, I guess I have my reasons for wanting authors to succeed, and other people have their reasons for ignoring reality. To each their own. Have an awesome night


----------



## Jim Johnson

Perry Constantine said:


> Spending money on marketing isn't unethical. Spending money to artificially inflate sales rank is. This ain't rocket science.


Spending money on advertising creates sales, and sales change ranking. I'm missing how that's artificial.


----------



## jaehaerys

Holly Dodd said:


> I'm aware of that. However, he was grouping -all- marketing into the unethical category. I'm staying out of the gifting/unethical debate and wanted clarification.


Then ask for clarification instead of saying I am grouping "all" marketing into the unethical category. Not my stance. Marketing is necessary, manipulation is not.


----------



## 75814

Jim Johnson said:


> Spending money on advertising creates sales, and sales change ranking. I'm missing how that's artificial.


When you buy advertising, you aren't guaranteed sales. What you're guaranteed is eyes on your books. You could spend $10K on advertising and still get zero sales. When you buy your own books in bulk to influence rank, that's artificial manipulation.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> There seems to be a lot of facts being ignored here, but hey, I guess I have my reasons for wanting authors to succeed, and other people have their reasons for ignoring reality. To each their own. Have an awesome night


If you want authors to succeed then encourage them to learn craft, write a great story and earn their success honestly.


----------



## sela

There is so much hair-splitting going on this thread.

If a publisher has to buy or gift copies of a book to hit a list, whether it's 50,000 or 5,000 or 500 copies, it's still buying books to hit a list. It's still defeating the purpose of a bestsellers list. 

That would be called a bestbuyers list.

Or biggestpockets list.

To have meaning, a bestseller list should be premised on being the best selling books in that time period. As in selling to actual readers. Who choose to buy that book because it is appealing to them.

Not because they are paid to buy it. Or because they are gifted it.

We all know what it's supposed to mean. We know that when the publisher buys those 50,000 copies or 500 copies and it is that which allows them to hit a list, that designation is illegitimate.

It really doesn't matter if the NYTs curates its list. That doesn't justify unethical behaviour.


----------



## Guest

Jim Johnson said:


> Spending money on advertising creates sales, and sales change ranking. I'm missing how that's artificial.


they will just keep moving the goal posts.

First it's that I pocket all the money, ignoring screenshots that show how the money is actually spent.

Then it's that I spend all the money gifting copies, ignoring how long that would take and that gifts only count as sales if that's how reader want to use the gift - not if they exchange for a gift card - and the fact that, considering that there are screenshots on how the money is spent, where is this money coming from to gift thousands of copies, that is somehow happening ALL the time, has been reported to Amazon, and Amazon isn't seeing it on their end.

Then, when that fails, it's that "It shouldn't take that much money and if you're good enough you will list without any marketing at all"

Then it's "It doesn't count if you did it with the help of other authors being in a set with you."

Then it's, "Well, anyone who doesn't agree with me is unethical, and I'm going to quote quotes about ethics while at the same time trying to hide facts from the people I'm intentionally misleading"

And then it just goes back to one of the previous points again.

(PS: Take a look at how the genrecrave marketing group numbers are growing. Despite the vocal few, the majority clearly want to learn the truth for themselves. And don't worry about me. I'm getting more support than I'm getting people buying into this or perpetuating things they know aren't true, and I won't be dissuaded from lifting others up. And think of it this way: if they are busy with me, that's some other author out there who they don't have the time to tear down. I'm taking one for the team and trusting those who don't have malicious intent will look in the group and see the screenshots of the truth. Those are the people I want to be connected with anyway!)


----------



## Guest

sela said:


> There is so much hair-splitting going on this thread.
> 
> If a publisher has to buy or gift copies of a book to hit a list, whether it's 50,000 or 5,000 or 500 copies, it's still buying books to hit a list. It's still defeating the purpose of a bestsellers list.
> 
> That would be called a bestbuyers list.
> 
> Or biggestpockets list.
> 
> To have meaning, a bestseller list should be premised on being the best selling books in that time period. As in selling to actual readers. Who choose to buy that book because it is appealing to them.
> 
> Not because they are paid to buy it. Or because they are gifted it.
> 
> We all know what it's supposed to mean. We know that when the publisher buys those 50,000 copies or 500 copies and it is that which allows them to hit a list, that designation is illegitimate.
> 
> It really doesn't matter if the NYTs curates its list. That doesn't justify unethical behaviour.


NOTHING justifies unethical behavior. There's a different between creating buzz using free books (same way even trad pubs do) and gifting your way onto a list (which NO ONE has said is ethical.) What's NOT ethical is saying someone who does the former is doing the latter when there's irrefutable evidence that that is not true. But hey, they can take your word for it, take my word for it, or:

1) Call Amazon
2) See screenshots of how those sales are gained for themselves: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> If you want authors to succeed then encourage them to learn craft, write a great story and earn their success honestly.


PLEASE join my group and see how much I do this. People literally beg me to "just teach me marketing" and time and time again (to their annoyance) I keep saying "No, you need to learn CRAFT *with* that marketing, and I won't teach them just the marketing. I tried recently to start a course like that and was only able to let in about 2-3 people. Take a look around and see for yourself. It actually pissed people off that I do this, but I'm super picky about authors learning craft and literally won't take their money if they don't agree to do so. It's ALL OVER THE PLACE in the marketing group.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

See for yourself  Or... don't. Your call. But you and I are SO on the same page about the importance of craft!


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Holly Dodd said:


> All of this is assuming that is what is going on/happening. All we have are unverified rumors that people gifted enough copies to make a list. There's a lot of assumptions in this thread, unfortunately.


Nope. All of that was general musing about how much it helps Author X to be in a giant boxed set.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> Then ask for clarification instead of saying I am grouping "all" marketing into the unethical category. Not my stance. Marketing is necessary, manipulation is not.


I did. Your words implied that anyone who doesn't make it big by word of mouth alone was unethical.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> When you buy advertising, you aren't guaranteed sales. What you're guaranteed is eyes on your books. You could spend $10K on advertising and still get zero sales. When you buy your own books in bulk to influence rank, that's artificial manipulation. You're too smart to play dumb like this, Jim.


First, the money is spent on advertising. Proof is in this group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

Second, gifting copies doesn't guarantee sales. Amazon's own website tells you as much. The reader doesn't have to claim the book. They can get a gift card instead. It doesn't count as a book sale or toward a bestseller list.

Third, the small number of copies that are SOMETIMES gifted - and not just by sets I run - are not enough to influence rank or sales even if readers DID claim and keep every copy.

Finally, see the first point again. Money is spent on advertising. Proof is in this group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/


----------



## Jim Johnson

Perry Constantine said:


> When you buy advertising, you aren't guaranteed sales. What you're guaranteed is eyes on your books. When you buy your own books in bulk to influence rank, that's artificial manipulation.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


But authors buying their own books isn't happening here.

Honestly, I can only speak to the box set I'm in. I haven't seen any of the authors state that they've bought their own book once, much less in bulk. I may have well missed any recent posts, though. I've been writing my ass off lately in between toddler care and day job.

What i have seen are a bunch of passionate writers busting their collective ass promoting the set. They're teaching me a hell of a lot about marketing to the extent that I feel guilty for riding their coattails with my piddly mailing list. I hope I can pay forward what I've learned someday.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## 75814

Jim Johnson said:


> But authors buying their own books isn't happening here.
> 
> Honestly, I can only speak to the box set I'm in. I haven't seen any of the authors state that they've bought their own book once, much less in bulk. I may have well missed any recent posts, though. I've been writing my ass off lately in between toddler care and day job.
> 
> What i have seen are a bunch of passionate writers busting their collective ass promoting the set. They're teaching me a hell of a lot about marketing to the extent that I feel guilty for riding their coattails with my piddly mailing list. I hope I can pay forward what I've learned someday.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


I'm not selectively ignoring, I'm considering the source of those comments. I know a lot of ethical authors and I'll take their word over others whose reputations are...let's say less than stellar.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Rosalind J said:


> Nope. All of that was general musing about how much it helps Author X to be in a giant boxed set.


I think it's personal. I agree that everyone wants to make the list by themselves without spending a lot of money. However, that requires having a pretty big wide audience. I am exclusively in KU. Right now, being in a boxset would help me achieve a goal. I don't have a problem being in the top 200. All of my books cracked the mid-3 figure ranks and that was at full price. My first book only just now fell out of the top 1,000 after 100 days. I'm on track for my first 6-figure year. By monetary guideposts, and rank, I'm a success.

Should I be penalized and denied my dream because I am strictly KU and don't want to go wide? That is my stance and perspective of the whole thing.


----------



## sela

Giving away free books is fine and dandy. I do it every day because I have permafree books. I've given away several hundred thousand books, in fact, since I started in 2012. 

I've gifted books to people as well, now and then. I offer ARCs. 

It's one thing to use free books as loss leaders for a series, or purchase a free Bookbub, or give them away for mailing list signups. It's another to use gift copies to count towards sales in a qualifying week so a book or boxed set can hit the NYTs. 

I am fine with running a giveaway and gifting copies during a promotion of a new release or sale but if the intent of the gifting is to make the right number on a particular retailer or make the right overall number, that's unethical.

If someone does, it's unethical, whether it's buying 50,000 copies of a print book or gifting 500 copies of an eBook.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Did this literally just turn into one big advertisement for potential clients to join her Facebook group?

Brava.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> Then ask for clarification instead of saying I am grouping "all" marketing into the unethical category. Not my stance. Marketing is necessary, manipulation is not.


Agreed. It sounds like we ALL agree that:

Marketing is good.
Gaming the system is bad.

Where we disagree:

Some of us think facts and truth are good, and spreading rumors is bad.
Some people think that's fine. Or at least, that's how it seems.

Now, as for whether or not gaming is actually going on, easy enough to find out when you join the group and see for yourself, instead of basing opinion on speculation and rumors.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

If you want to see facts and decide for yourself, you go here > https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

If you want to make opinions based on rumors that don't even attempt to hide their effort to mislead and hurt others, then don't go there, because you can't unsee the facts. And once you see them, you either have to choose to accept the truth, or you have to choose to be one of the people who pretends you didn't see it, while misleading others.

For those who care about ethics, I can't understand CHOOSING to mislead others. But I know my transparency can make people uncomfortable sometimes, so I get it if you don't want to see what's ACTUALLY going on for yourself.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## 75814

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Did this literally just turn into one big advertisement for potential clients to join her Facebook group?
> 
> Brava.


I noticed that the proof is in the FB group, which you have to join to see. And she also bragged about how the membership numbers have been going up.


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> NOTHING justifies unethical behavior. And there's a lot of that going on from you, too, so maybe put the stones down. There's a different between creating buzz using free books (same way even trad pubs do) and gifting your way onto a list (which NO ONE has said is ethical.) What's NOT ethical is saying someone who does the former is doing the latter when there's irrefutable evidence that that is not true. But hey, they can take your word for it, take my word for it, or:
> 
> 1) Call Amazon
> 2) See screenshots of how those sales are gained for themselves: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/
> 
> In the meantime, knowingly misleading people in the way you are is not cool. But it's not hurting anything, so if you need to do that with your life, go for it. Maybe you need that for reasons I don't understand.


Ethical is an individual author "creating buzz" for themselves with a great book that people choose to buy of their own volition.


----------



## Jim Johnson

dn8791 said:


> If you want authors to succeed then encourage them to learn craft, write a great story and earn their success honestly.


I'm guessing you didn't know she teaches a comprehensive master class on writing and marketing with more focus on craft than I've seen in a lot of other classes and workshops.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> I'm not selectively ignoring, I'm considering the source of those comments. I know a lot of ethical authors and I'll take their word over others whose reputations are...let's say less than stellar.


Then definitely DON'T join this group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/

If you want to take someone's word over seeing something for yourself and thinking for yourself, that is your right.

_Edited. Please, no more accusations of lying, Rebecca. Our forum decorum does not permit this. - Becca_


----------



## fallswriter

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Did this literally just turn into one big advertisement for potential clients to join her Facebook group?
> 
> Brava.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

In reading many of these posts, it's apparent many don't understand what the word ethics even means. Assume that gifting 1000 copies is in fact allowable under the TOS. It's spelled out in black and white, "You may gift 1000 copies of your book." Doing so isn't unethical. Unethical behavior is intentionally breaking a rule, be that sexual harassment in the workplace, or fart jokes at church. If there's a rule against it and you knowingly ignore the rule, you are unethical. An ethical person knows it isn't right to make an off-color remark to a female coworker about the tightness of her jeans. A moral person wouldn't.

The question then becomes, is buying your way onto one of the BS lists morally acceptable.

My last release, in a new and smaller series debuted at #118 on Amazon. The one before that, in a longer, more popular series, debuted at #96. Before that #183, then the 300s, and 700s, and so on. An email to my subscribers and a Facebook post, plus the new release email from BookBub and Amazon are the only things I use in all my launches. No paid advertising. Only those people who want to pay me for my work get to see it. Period. One day, I will be a New York Times Best Seller. Because people will buy and read my books. Am I jealous of those who took a short-cut? KindleSpy me and find your answer.

In any endeavor there are shortcuts. I once worked in construction and saw first-hand how shortcuts don't work. A ten story condo I was working in pancaked, killing five men and a sixth lost a leg, not diving through a doorway fast enough. There is a right and wrong way to do anything. The right way, and by that, I mean what will give a person like me the most personal satisfaction, the most pride in accomplishment, is to put their shoulder against the wheel and push with everything they have. Even if you come up short, you can hold your head high and say, "I did the best I could."

It is possible to become a top selling author and be an indie. A lot have done so and continue to do so. Starting a marathon, and jumping on the back of the camera motorcycle until it gets a hundred yards from the finish line, then jumping off and running across to garner your accolades can't feel very good. But, that's just the opinion of one man with a very narrow moral compass.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> Ethical is an individual author "creating buzz" for themselves with a great book that people choose to buy of their own volition.


Got it. You think cross promotion is unethical, but that doesn't apply to say Book Bub promoting your work for you, only if other authors promote work with you. Correct me if I understood that wrong. No one is getting books outside of their own volition, but if your concern is that it's not ethical to cross-promote or collaborate with other authors, then yeah, we're not going to see eye to eye on that, and I'll agree to disagree with you on that one.


----------



## 75814

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Then definitely DON'T join this group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/
> 
> If you want to take someone's word over seeing something for yourself and thinking for yourself, that is your right.
> 
> Anyone who wants to think for themselves, though, can totally go to that link and SEE the facts. But that may be hard for those who are being misled by authors who they think are ethical, but who are knowingly withholding information from them. I'd feel pretty gutted if I trusted someone like that and then joined a group and saw evidence that those people knew they were lying to me. Some may want to protect themselves from experiencing that feeling. As is their right and completely understandable.


To see that evidence I have to join the group. And you've already used the group's size to justify your actions. So I'd rather not contribute to that. You post that information on a website that can be accessed without joining, I'll gladly view it.

Until then, I'll pass.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Perry Constantine said:


> I noticed that the proof is in the FB group, which you have to join to see. And she also bragged about how the membership numbers have been going up.


Yeah her edited post with all of the links threw out 5300 and it has since been edited (I remember the number because my stupid memory is photographic, or eidetic). It's now 5265.

When she demanded everyone unfriend me or her a few months ago, I actually gained friends... ::shrug::

At this point I think enough has been put out there that people should make their own decisions. The risk is theirs to take or not. But no one can say now they did so out of ignorance of what was really hapepning behind the scenes whether you agree or don't agree, which wasn't the case just a year ago.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Perry Constantine said:


> I'm not selectively ignoring, I'm considering the source of those comments. I know a lot of ethical authors and I'll take their word over others whose reputations are...let's say less than stellar.


Rumors don't make things true, however. All it takes is one person with a vendetta to ruin someone's reputation, and people jumping on that bandwagon based on what they've heard. I believe what I see with my own two eyes. Everything else, even from my close personal friends, I take with a grain of salt.

It's kind of freeing to form my own opinion.


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> The question then becomes, is buying your way onto one of the BS lists morally acceptable.


It's not morally acceptable. but it's also not happening just because people say it is, so maybe one day we can discuss what actually is happening. 

In case anyone missed it, you can see for yourself what's actually happening here:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/


----------



## 75814

Holly Dodd said:


> Rumors don't make things true, however. All it takes is one person with a vendetta to ruin someone's reputation, and people jumping on that bandwagon based on what they've heard. I believe what I see with my own two eyes. Everything else, even from my close personal friends, I take with a grain of salt.
> 
> It's kind of freeing to form my own opinion.


I am forming my opinion. I'm judging people on the actions they've done and the way they've treated others. The authors I'm trusting have done far more for me than even my own family. So I find it hard to believe that they'd be doing this out of some petty vendetta, especially when many of them are even more successful.


----------



## JalexM

Perry Constantine said:


> To see that evidence I have to join the group. And you've already used the group's size to justify your actions. So I'd rather not contribute to that. You post that information on a website that can be accessed without joining, I'll gladly view it.
> 
> Until then, I'll pass.


It strange, when someone says here's proof in an easily accessible area, you decide to ignore it.
It's best to act on your own to learn things and not to lean on others.
Then, maybe you'll learn that the people you once looked up to aren't worth following.


----------



## jaehaerys

Holly Dodd said:


> Should I be penalized and denied my dream because I am strictly KU and don't want to go wide? That is my stance and perspective of the whole thing.


No one is guaranteed success, and until very lately I'd believed the cream were rising to the top, or at least that's how it should be. You're not penalized anything when you write a book, advertise it and hope it catches on with people. It's not a penalty if you don't succeed, it just means you have to evaluate your skill set and improve. Most of us dream of being a bestseller, but that dream doesn't give us license to engage in unethical practices as way of trying to force the dream to come true.

A wide readership is earned. Earning it means achieving it honestly, organically, ethically. Buying the dream is not the same thing as earning it.


----------



## 75814

JalexM said:


> It strange, when someone says here's proof in an easily accessible area, you decide to ignore it.
> It's best to act on your own to learn things and not to lean on others.


I just explained why. She's using the membership numbers as proof of support for her actions. By joining that group, I'd be contributing to that.

This is one of those ethics things. If she's so desperate to get this info out, it should be freely available on a website, not behind a membership link.


----------



## Guest

It said almost 5300, and it just tipped. anyone IN the group can see it's 5300 even now. (Yes, this thread DID turn into a huge advertisement for my group - apparently a lot of people want the facts - who knew?) I got a LOT of new joins today from people who want the truth. REPOSTING nearly 300 screenshots takes too much time, and I don't feel obligated to do that for people who are willfully ignoring the truth  

And yes, when I received DEATH THREATS a few months ago, I was advised to unfriend anyone who was friends with the person inciting the death threats. I did explain the reason for unfriending those people, that it wasn't personal, and that I would still be available to them if they needed anything - but for the safety of my family, the change needed to be made.

Some were pissed at me. Others understood. However anyone reacted, I don't hold it against them. But I did what I needed to do for my family.


----------



## JalexM

Perry Constantine said:


> I just explained why. She's using the membership numbers as proof of support for her actions. By joining that group, I'd be contributing to that.
> 
> This is one of those ethics things. If she's so desperate to get this info out, it should be freely available on a website, not being a membership link.


There are literally photos of how she spends the funds on her sets on the page. 297 photos in fact, all in one post for someone to click through.
You're using the number of the facebook page as a detractor. 
Also with authors who have been in her sets, including one you claim to respect, who have backed them up.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Did this literally just turn into one big advertisement for potential clients to join her Facebook group?
> 
> Brava.


Yeah, thank Rick for that.  Had he left this on his Facebook page, it probably wouldn't have blown up quite so much. Unintended consequences and all that. At least writers have more information to consider now, which is always a good thing.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> I just explained why. She's using the membership numbers as proof of support for her actions. By joining that group, I'd be contributing to that.
> 
> This is one of those ethics things. If she's so desperate to get this info out, it should be freely available on a website, not being a membership link.


Oh NO, you TOTALLY misunderstand. Some people in that group are just there to selectively screenshot things, not to support me. The group numbers isn't meant to say "here's proof of my support" - It's meant to say "A LOT of people have SEEN the evidence" - because a lot of people are pretending they haven't. this way when people join and see that evidence for themselves, they can be aware that this was something people knew about but CHOSE not to share with them.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## 75814

JalexM said:


> There are literally photos of how she spends the funds on her sets on the page. 297 photos in fact, all in one post for someone to click through.
> You're using the number of the facebook page as a detractor.


Which is behind a membership link and she uses the membership numbers as justification. So no, I'm not joining a group and giving her more ammo. Again, she can put the information on an open website and I'll gladly view it.

If she can't do that, then too bad, so sad, I'm sticking with the people who have never once let me down.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> Which is behind a membership link and she uses the membership numbers as justification. So no, I'm not joining a group and giving her more ammo. Again, she can put the information on an open website and I'll gladly view it.
> 
> If she can't do that, then too bad, so sad, I'm sticking with the people who have never once let me down.


See above post 

Part of the "truth" of those screenshots is that people you trusted were aware of them and mislead you. Seeing them IN THE GROUP is how you will realize that. Outside of that, I'm not RE-posting almost 300 screenshots every time someone decides to repeat something they KNOW is a lie. Anyone who CHOOSES to be willfully ignorant of the facts is not someone it's worth my time to prove myself to anyway. I've taken measures on my end to show my motivations, and now, other people's motivations are showing by how they choose to respond to that. And I'm cool to let it stand. I won't win over everyone - only those who want the truth. But those are the only people I care about winning over anyway


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> It's not morally acceptable. but it's also not happening just because people say it is, so maybe one day we can discuss what actually is happening.
> 
> In case anyone missed it, you can see for yourself what's actually happening here:
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/


Am I to understand from that statement, that none of the authors in any of those box sets paid money to be in it, with the hopes of getting "their letters?" Because a lot of people on here have already stated that they did exactly that.

By definition, that is "buying your letters."


----------



## JalexM

Perry Constantine said:


> Which is behind a membership link and she uses the membership numbers as justification. So no, I'm not joining a group and giving her more ammo. Again, she can put the information on an open website and I'll gladly view it.
> 
> If she can't do that, then too bad, so sad, I'm sticking with the people who have never once let me down.


Justification for what exactly?


----------



## Holly Dodd

Perry Constantine said:


> I am forming my opinion. I'm judging people on the actions they've done and the way they've treated others. The authors I'm trusting have done far more for me than even my own family. So I find it hard to believe that they'd be doing this out of some petty vendetta, especially when many of them are even more successful.


That is entirely your prerogative. From what I have seen, the people who complain loudest are filled with envy or a misplaced sense of loyalty. They can deny it all they want, but I watch and read a lot. No one is perfect, and I've seen a few of the biggest anti-Rebecca people do things that I found morally reprehensible and absolutely disgusting. Then turn around and act like the victim. It's appalling to me, and why I don't trust half the negative things I hear. Add on what I've seen with my own eyes, and it seems like gossip, exaggeration, and rumor mongering.

People talk to me because I don't judge. Unfortunately, even the best people can get themselves all twisted up without really exploring the true reasons they feel/believe something. Did that happen here? I don't know.

Have a good night!


----------



## jaehaerys

Jim Johnson said:


> I'm guessing you didn't know she teaches a comprehensive master class on writing and marketing with more focus on craft than I've seen in a lot of other classes and workshops.


Which proves what exactly? If teaching a master class on writing and focusing on craft were the entire story here this thread wouldn't exist.


----------



## 75814

Holly Dodd said:


> That is entirely your prerogative. From what I have seen, the people who complain loudest are filled with envy or a misplaced sense of loyalty. They can deny it all they want, but I watch and read a lot. No one is perfect, and I've seen a few of the biggest anti-Rebecca people do things that I found morally reprehensible and absolutely disgusting. Then turn around and act like the victim. It's appalling to me, and why I don't trust half the negative things I hear. Add on what I've seen with my own eyes, and it seems like gossip, exaggeration, and rumor mongering.
> 
> People talk to me because I don't judge. Unfortunately, even the best people can get themselves all twisted up without really exploring the true reasons they feel/believe something. Did that happen here? I don't know.
> 
> Have a good night!


I don't know who you're talking about, but it doesn't describe any of the people I've spoken to. Many of them don't even write in the same genre. They just know that unethical behavior hurts all of us and that's what irritates them.


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Am I to understand from that statement, that none of the authors in any of those box sets paid money to be in it, with the hopes of getting "their letters?" Because a lot of people on here have already stated that they did exactly that.
> 
> By definition, that is "buying your letters."


If you join my group, you can see for yourself that sets are 'list aiming' not list promising. that means we we spend advertising the way any big 5 publisher would if they were aiming to get a book on a bestseller list. The money is for marketing. If paying money for marketing and hoping that marketing will get you on a list is buying your letters, well, then I guess the goal posts just moved again, huh?


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> No one is guaranteed success, and until very lately I'd believed the cream were rising to the top, or at least that's how it should be. You're not penalized anything when you write a book, advertise it and hope it catches on with people. It's not a penalty if you don't succeed, it just means you have to evaluate your skill set and improve. Most of us dream of being a bestseller, but that dream doesn't give us license to engage in unethical practices as way of trying to force the dream to come true.
> 
> A wide readership is earned. Earning it means achieving it honestly, organically, ethically. Buying the dream is not the same thing as earning it.


It's not that cut and dry, not in romance. Wide romance is a different animal then KU romance based on three different reports I've analyzed. Even in KU there are different breakdowns. It's a different market. I don't want the wide audience, I like the KU audience cause that is what I write. It's a different Wordcount, different cover style, different price point, different tropes. So, my books would not be good wide. I know that, and it's why I cater to my audience.

So, that doesn't work for me here  Wide isn't the end-all answer for me. In KU I'm a smashing success, but KU can't be a NYT/USA best seller. Which is my point.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Am I to understand from that statement, that none of the authors in any of those box sets paid money to be in it, with the hopes of getting "their letters?" Because a lot of people on here have already stated that they did exactly that.
> 
> By definition, that is "buying your letters."


Chipping in for covers, formatting, and promotions isn't "buying your letters". Just like doing the same for a book in hopes of reaching the NYT/USA isn't "buying" your letters.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> If you join my group, you can see for yourself that sets are 'list aiming' not list promising. that means we we spend advertising the way any big 5 publisher would if they were aiming to get a book on a bestseller list. The money is for marketing. If paying money for marketing and hoping that marketing will get you on a list is buying your letters, well, then I guess the goal posts just moved again, huh?


Ah, I get it. You're just claiming the moral equivalence of the Big 5? Makes perfect sense now.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Perry Constantine said:


> I don't know who you're talking about, but it doesn't describe any of the people I've spoken to. Many of them don't even write in the same genre. They just know that unethical behavior hurts all of us and that's what irritates them.


There's that assumption that unethical behavior is being done when the person everyone is blasting says it's not happening. I've watched and seen that it isn't happening. But I'm not at her desk looking over her shoulder. Are they beside her watching her do this unethical behavior? Or are they just hearing about it from other sources? That's my problem with this particular bandwagon.


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Ah, I get it. You're just claiming the moral equivalence of the Big 5? Makes perfect sense now.


I have no idea what the morals are of people I haven't met. I only know what publishers standardly use for marketing (Click through ads, newsletter ads, ARC copies, etc) - industry standards. People clearly don't agree on whether those publishing standards are ethical or not. IMO, buying a book cover, paying for an editor, and spending money on marketing (which my screenshots show that's where the money goes with nothing left over for anything else), is not immoral. But you're free to disagree. My issue isn't with that. I'm cool for us to disagree. but let's disagree on what's actually happening, not on things that are being made up. Because the things being made up - I ALSO agree those things are unethical. If I didn't, then I wouldn't be inviting people to look at the truth to realize that's not what I'm doing. But if the marketing I AM doing (paid ads, great cover, etc) are in your opinion unethical or immoral, then that's another discussion, isn't it? But we can't get to that discussion if we're talking about something that's not really happening. Wishing you well, but if I disappear, it's because I just can't hang like I used to. I'm usually in bed by now.


----------



## jaehaerys

Holly Dodd said:


> It's not that cut and dry, not in romance. Wide romance is a different animal then KU romance based on three different reports I've analyzed. Even in KU there are different breakdowns. It's a different market. I don't want the wide audience, I like the KU audience cause that is what I write. It's a different Wordcount, different cover style, different price point, different tropes. So, my books would not be good wide. I know that, and it's why I cater to my audience.
> 
> So, that doesn't work for me here  Wide isn't the end-all answer for me. In KU I'm a smashing success, but KU can't be a NYT/USA best seller. Which is my point.


By 'wide audience' I mean, a lot of readers, regardless if you're in KU or not.

And if you've honestly earned your way to being a smashing success I think that's fantastic...not easy to do and it's something to be proud of. Obviously, if you're writing well and people love what you're doing then the NYT/USA lists will come, should you ever choose to venture outside of KU. My problem is those authors who are not acting honestly and are buying their way past the honest hard-workers who give it their all and do things above board.


----------



## Northern pen

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Am I to understand from that statement, that none of the authors in any of those box sets paid money to be in it, with the hopes of getting "their letters?" Because a lot of people on here have already stated that they did exactly that.
> 
> By definition, that is "buying your letters."


So let me get this straight. Because I paid to join a boxset it doesn't count? That is some straight up b.s.

Did I pay to join a box set. Yes.
That covered a professional cover, formatting and promotions.
I spent less to join the box set than I did on one of my normal releases. I did invest more later, but everything I paid extra made more money.
Did I do anything ethically or morally wrong. No.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> By 'wide audience' I mean, a lot of readers, regardless if you're in KU or not.
> 
> And if you've honestly earned your way to being a smashing success I think that's fantastic...not easy to do and it's something to be proud of. Obviously, if you're writing well and people love what you're doing then the NYT/USA lists will come, should you ever choose to venture outside of KU. My problem is those authors who are not acting honestly and are buying their way past the honest hard-workers who give it their all and do things above board.


Oh, I see! When I saw "wide audience" I assumed you meant WIDE and not just large.

My fans are rabid and I just started publishing in January. I've achieved goals I thought it would take years to accomplish in a very short amount of time, and I already spoke about how much money I made. So for me, yes I feel I am a smashing success. But, I also can see your POV that not everyone who does a box set is in the same boat as I am. I'm an outlier all across the board, and realize that, so I don't want to be hypocritcal and claim I deserve something over someone else who is working just as hard, but might not have put all the pieces together. I think I had luck, as well as fricken hard work, on my side. Where others might not have found that lucky factor.

On the flip side, there are people who do better than I, and their product is atrocious and I can't help but wonder "how". So, all told, that is why I am on the "yay boxset, yay letters" side of things.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> I have no idea what the morals are of people I haven't met. I only know what publishers standardly use for marketing (Click through ads, newsletter ads, ARC copies, etc) - industry standards. People clearly don't agree on whether those publishing standards are ethical or not. IMO, buying a book cover, paying for an editor, and spending money on marketing (which my screenshots show that's where the money goes with nothing left over for anything else), is not immoral. But you're free to disagree. My issue isn't with that. I'm cool for us to disagree. but let's disagree on what's actually happening, not on things that are being made up. Because the things being made up - I ALSO agree those things are unethical. If I didn't, then I wouldn't be inviting people to look at the truth to realize that's not what I'm doing. But if the marketing I AM doing (paid ads, great cover, etc) are in your opinion unethical or immoral, then that's another discussion, isn't it? But we can't get to that discussion if we're talking about something that's not really happening. Wishing you well, but if I disappear, it's because I just can't hang like I used to. I'm usually in bed by now.


I didn't say ethical. Please look up the definition of ethics and morals.

What I meant was, and I'll say it as clearly as I can, I don't see it as morally acceptable, to dangle a $.99 bait of 20 books, that 20 writers paid to have dangled, for the sole purpose of getting "letters."

It can be done simply by working hard, learning your craft, telling good stories and selling them to readers, in a consistent fashion.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Robyn Wideman said:


> So let me get this straight. Because I paid to join a boxset it doesn't count? That is some straight up b.s.
> 
> Did I pay to join a box set. Yes.
> That covered a professional cover, formatting and promotions.
> I spent less to join the box set than I did on one of my normal releases. I did invest more later, but everything I paid extra made more money.
> Did I do anything ethically or morally wrong. No.


I joined a box set to learn more about marketing from people way ahead of me. I spent less on the box set than I did on my first release that still hasn't earned out. Whether the box set hits a list means shit to me; it's not why I joined and I wouldn't use the letters on my books anyway, because I don't think it matters to readers.

If anyone thinks that was unethical of me, they are entitled to their opinion.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> My problem is those authors who are not acting honestly and are buying their way past the honest hard-workers who give it their all and do things above board.


Same here. I hate when people are dishonest and think that success should come from honest, above-board hard work. that's why my sets are run the way they do, and why I am transparent and provide proof of that *to anyone who wants the truth*

- but I already publicly shared all of this information outside of the group multiple times, and I'm done RE-posting the same things. Because it's telling if people choose to ignore facts and evidence and side with rumors. People either want the truth or they don't. I've done my share by posting it, and those who are truly acting from an ethical and moral place can choose to see the truth. Everyone else can just go on rumors. And that's fine by me


----------



## Holly Dodd

Wayne Stinnett said:


> I didn't say ethical. Please look up the definition of ethics and morals.
> 
> What I meant was, and I'll say it as clearly as I can, I don't see it as morally acceptable, to dangle a $.99 bait of 20 books, that 20 writers paid to have dangled, for the sole purpose of getting "letters."
> 
> It can be done simply by working hard, learning your craft, telling good stories and selling them to readers, in a consistent fashion.


Wendy (I think that was her name) spent $250 on promotional FB boosts and got her USA letters. Do you feel that was morally wrong of her to do and she doesn't deserve those letters? You have a newsletter if I'm not mistaken. That costs money to maintain. You've hired people to design covers. More money towards marketing. Wouldn't you be morally wrong in your own definition since you are using those to market your books?


----------



## CrazyHorze

sela said:


> If I bought 50,000 copies of my books and gave them to people living on Skid Row, or orphans living in refugee camps and got the NYTs designation that way, it wouldn't make any difference. I would still have bought my way onto the NYTs bestsellers list.


So what? You would have bought your way onto the biggest marketing platform that exists for writers, the bestsellers list. Because to a professional writer a best sellers list is a marketing tool. It's not some medal of honor. Readers should believe in the magic of the bestsellers list and the NYT spends countless amounts of dollars to make sure readers keep believing in the magic of the bestseller list. We are professionals. We cannot act like readers. Children believe in Santa Claus. Parents don't. It's like Oscar night, everybody in Hollywood knows who gets the Oscar. The one who spent the most to buy it. The actors are there to showcase themselves and find new roles and the filmmakers are there to showcase their movies and sell cinema tickets. None of these Hollywood types believes in the magic of the Oscars. It is the people who go to movies and who watch Oscar night unfold on their TV who should be mesmerized by the beauty and glitter of Oscar night. As far as I'm concerned you have sellers and you have customers. When it comes to books, we are the sellers and the readers are the customers. All this time there was this dark cloud hanging over Rebecca and no one was really saying what she was doing that was so wrong and that demanded that she be exiled and reviled. Whoever (wink, wink) wrote the blog post did all of us a great favor, because this conversation has made it clear what Rebecca is doing. This lady is using marketing gimmicks to get her writers onto the biggest marketing platform there is for writers, the best sellers lists. And writers who get on the best sellers list get visibility, get sales, get opportunities. That is what Rebecca is doing. She is helping writers reach the biggest marketing platform there is for writers. Writers should be be worshipping her like a saint. If you believe in the magic of the bestseller list like some rube, like some reader, I understand why you are talking about ethics. It's like Santa Claus. He doesn't exist, but the children think he does. As far as I'm concerned I don't believe in the magic of the bestseller list. I'm a professional. I'm a writer. The best seller list is just a marketing platform, but on the highest level. I'd like to thank the people on both sides. This discussion helped me form my opinion.


----------



## jaehaerys

Holly Dodd said:


> There's that assumption that unethical behavior is being done when the person everyone is blasting says it's not happening. I've watched and seen that it isn't happening. But I'm not at her desk looking over her shoulder. Are they beside her watching her do this unethical behavior? Or are they just hearing about it from other sources? That's my problem with this particular bandwagon.


If a service's very existence is predicated upon manipulation then you don't need to be privy to its details to discern as much, and it's not bandwagon-jumping to rightfully call out unethical practices when you see them. In fact, when it comes to the indie community, it would be a disservice to your fellow indies to NOT call out those unethical practices when you see them.


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> I didn't say ethical. Please look up the definition of ethics and morals.
> 
> What I meant was, and I'll say it as clearly as I can, I don't see it as morally acceptable, to dangle a $.99 bait of 20 books, that 20 writers paid to have dangled, for the sole purpose of getting "letters."
> 
> It can be done simply by working hard, learning your craft, telling good stories and selling them to readers, in a consistent fashion.


I spoke about morals too. I am speaking about morals AND ethics because people in this thread are talking about both 

So here's something to keep in mind, if you want to talk facts. There is no "sole purpose" of getting letters with my sets. My sets have a lot of purposes. Every set has one main aim with smaller goals. Sometimes the aim is to grow audience, sometimes to make money, and usually to make a list - but those really, all sets do all of those things, ideally. It's just about what is prioritized.

Now, if you think ANTHOLOGIES are immoral, that's totally your right to feel that way. I won't be offended. I'm certainly not the only authors who helps with them or participates in them, and who am I to say how you should feel about them? But as I said before, I'm happy to talk about where we disagree on *what's actually happening* - but being against something I'm not doing isn't an argument, since in those cases it sounds like we're actually on the same page, and your only issue is you were misled into thinking I did something I didn't. I'm sure there's plenty I actually AM doing that we can disagree about, though, such an you finding anthologies immoral where I don't. I'm fine to agree to disagree when it comes to things that actually are relevant to what I do. But it's silly to argue over something that I'm not doing, that there is evidence I'm not doing.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> If a service's very existence is predicated upon manipulation then you don't need to be privy to its details to discern as much, and it's not bandwagon-jumping to rightfully call out unethical practices when you see them. In fact, when it comes to the indie community, it would be a disservice to your fellow indies to NOT call out those unethical practices when you see them.


"If a service's very existence"
it's not a service

"is predicated upon manipulation"
there's no manipulation, and there's evidence of this fact

"then you don't need to be privy to its details to discern as much, and it's not bandwagon-jumping to rightfully call out unethical practices when you see them."
except you didn't see them. You heard about them from someone who is intentionally misleading you, when there is evidence that unethical practices aren't actually happening.

"In fact, when it comes to the indie community, it would be a disservice to your fellow indies to NOT call out those unethical practices when you see them."
Agreed. That's why people are calling out the unethical practices of this in this thread.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Jim Johnson said:


> Yeah, thank Rick for that.  Had he left this on his Facebook page, it probably wouldn't have blown up quite so much. Unintended consequences and all that. At least writers have more information to consider now, which is always a good thing.


Except this wasn't on my FB page. Maybe try reading the op. As for my FB page, I post there what I please, same as anyone else.

And oh well. Knowledge is power. If some read this and decide to go one way, that's fine. If they decide to go the other way that's fine too. It's a debate worth having rather than sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring potential issues.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> If a service's very existence is predicated upon manipulation then you don't need to be privy to its details to discern as much, and it's not bandwagon-jumping to rightfully call out unethical practices when you see them. In fact, when it comes to the indie community, it would be a disservice to your fellow indies to NOT call out those unethical practices when you see them.


There is the issue. She's already said none of that is going on! There is no manipulation. She is firmly on the ethical side of things. Half the people see it, and agree she isn't manipulating anything because they are actually part of the boxsets. The other half refuse to believe it and refuse to look at the screen shots, instead holding onto their beliefs based on "what they've heard". So yes. Definitely, call out those unethical practices! But! Don't keep propagating that rumor when they are refuted. Which is happening here.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Holly Dodd said:


> Wendy (I think that was her name) spent $250 on promotional FB boosts and got her USA letters. Do you feel that was morally wrong of her to do and she doesn't deserve those letters? You have a newsletter if I'm not mistaken. That costs money to maintain. You've hired people to design covers. More money towards marketing. Wouldn't you be morally wrong in your own definition since you are using those to market your books?


Her books, nor mine have twenty other books tacked onto the back, for the sole purpose of tempting readers with a stack of five cent books. Nor are they offered for $.99 other than the promotional advertising. I advertise to put my book in front of readers. And they buy them to the tune of $400,000 royalty this year. Trust me, you don't want to debate me on marketing concepts.


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Her books, nor mine have twenty other books tacked onto the back, for the sole purpose of tempting readers with a stack of five cent books. Nor are they offered for $.99 other than the promotional advertising. I advertise to put my book in front of readers. And they buy them to the tune of $400,000 royalty this year. Trust me, you don't want to debate me on marketing concepts.


I think that's awesome. It's working for you and you should keep at it! I'm super excited about your success and hope it continues for you. You're definitely following one of the many right ways to publish and I LOVE hearing from authors who are doing so well. Keep kicking butt!


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Same here. I hate when people are dishonest and think that success should come from honest, above-board hard work. that's why my sets are run the way they do, and why I am transparent and provide proof of that *to anyone who wants the truth*
> 
> - but I already publicly shared all of this information outside of the group multiple times, and I'm done RE-posting the same things. Because it's telling if people choose to ignore facts and evidence and side with rumors. People either want the truth or they don't. I've done my share by posting it, and those who are truly acting from an ethical and moral place can choose to see the truth. Everyone else can just go on rumors. And that's fine by me


For the sake of the thread, go ahead and post your "truth" here.


----------



## JalexM

dn8791 said:


> For the sake of the thread, go ahead and post your "truth" here.


Or just click on her facebook service page.
Or not.


----------



## Guest

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Except this wasn't on my FB page. Maybe try reading the op. As for my FB page, I post there what I please, same as anyone else.
> 
> And oh well. Knowledge is power. If some read this and decide to go one way, that's fine. If they decide to go the other way that's fine too. It's a debate worth having *rather than sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring potential issues*.


SO MUCH THIS!!! Rick and I both agree: Don't stick your head in the sand. Don't ignore potential issues. GET THE FACTS. It's very easy NOT to stick your head in the sand yet many CONTINUE to do this, on purpose! Or some know the truth and PRETEND their head is in the sand. Don't take anyone's word for it. See for yourself and decide for yourself. This is YOUR career and you deserve to think for yourself.


----------



## jaehaerys

Holly Dodd said:


> There is the issue. She's already said none of that is going on! There is no manipulation. She is firmly on the ethical side of things. Half the people see it, and agree she isn't manipulating anything because they are actually part of the boxsets. The other half refuse to believe it and refuse to look at the screen shots, instead holding onto their beliefs based on "what they've heard". So yes. Definitely, call out those unethical practices! But! Don't keep propagating that rumor when they are refuted. Which is happening here.


Question: why do the boxsets exist in the first place? Why are people buying their way into them? Are they looking for shortcuts?


----------



## Northern pen

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Her books, nor mine have twenty other books tacked onto the back, for the sole purpose of tempting readers with a stack of five cent books. Nor are they offered for $.99 other than the promotional advertising. I advertise to put my book in front of readers. And they buy them to the tune of $400,000 royalty this year. Trust me, you don't want to debate me on marketing concepts.


Are you suggesting your way is the only right way?

Tempting readers with five cent books... Because no one every gives away free books to as many people as they can to generate interest in their other books....


----------



## jaehaerys

JalexM said:


> Or just click on her facebook service page.
> Or not.


Or just post the "proof" here. Easily done.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> For the sake of the thread, go ahead and post your "truth" here.


Let's see. In January, I spend HOURS posting nearly 300 screenshots, were are already up for anyone who wants to see them.

Now the onus is on me to REPOST 300 screen shots, instead of people clicking a button that gives them access to that?

Nah. Anyone who would ask me to do that doesn't want the truth, so it'd be a waste of time. I'm only making the truth available to those who wish to seek it. That's enough for me. If some people never learn the truth because they choose not to, I'm okay with that 

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## JalexM

dn8791 said:


> Or just post the "proof" here. Easily done.


Or, you can save everyone time and just click one little mouse button.
But that will be too much work.


----------



## Holly Dodd

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Her books, nor mine have twenty other books tacked onto the back, for the sole purpose of tempting readers with a stack of five cent books. Nor are they offered for $.99 other than the promotional advertising. I advertise to put my book in front of readers. And they buy them to the tune of $400,000 royalty this year. Trust me, you don't want to debate me on marketing concepts.


Everyone has their own -goals-. You do not agree with what boxsets. That is 100% your prerogative. I think boxsets have their purpose. I advertise to put my books in front of readers as well HOWEVER, one of my personal dreams is to have my letters. But, I'm not going wide. And you can't make the lists without apple and nook reporting in. So yah, I'm going to dangle my bits out there and shake my ass to get them while heading towards the six-figure mark this year (and I've only been published since January)

So: Money? Check. Dream of getting letters? Check! For me, that's a win.


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> Question: why do the boxsets exist in the first place? Why are people buying their way into them? Are they looking for shortcuts?


Some people pay several hundred dollars to get a BookBub feature to promote a book of theirs for free so that they can reach thousands of new readers.

Some people, especially if they can't get a Bookbub, join a boxed set to promote a book of theirs where they will make a small profit (instead of giving it away completely for free) so that they can reach thousands of new readers that way.

Hope that answers your questions! I've done quite a few anthologies, even after getting my letters, so it's definitely not about that. But I'm picky who I work with. One of the ones I did recently was with Bryan Cohen - it was a fairytale anthology and a lot of fun to write for and great way to connect with new readers. While I've also been approved for book bub, I like to diversify my audience by using different marketing approaches to reach new readers


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> Or just post the "proof" here. Easily done.


I'll make a deal with you. Post 300 pictures DIRECTLY to this thread, so that people can see it without clicking a link. Then I'll pay someone (because I don't have time) to do the same for me and post all that info here for me as well. I mean, so you can show me how easily done posting 297 screenshots would be compared to clicking a link and a button.


----------



## Crystal_

Most people give away a few copies during release week. They might do a FB contest or they might buy copies for beta reader or friends.

If that isn't wrong, then giving away a bunch of copies to hungry readers isn't wrong.

I don't think giveaways should count to the list, but the issue isn't with people using giveaways. It's with the lists themselves. It's just like bonus books. I hate them, but I don't blame authors for using them. I blame Amazon for not making them against the rules.

And maybe not so much with the sanctimony about how many copies we can sell without a marketing budget. I write great books and I spend a lot on marketing. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## 75814

Or you could just make the group posts public so people don't have to join to see all this proof. But I guess that's too hard.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> Question: why do the boxsets exist in the first place? Why are people buying their way into them? Are they looking for shortcuts?


Everyone has their own reasons. I didn't want to spend a load of money and put my books wide to make it. For me it is a fiscal choice. So, I am joining a boxset. Is it a shortcut? I don't think so. To me, it's a group of people pooling resources to achieve a common goal.


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Let's see. In January, I spend HOURS posting nearly 300 screenshots, were are already up for anyone who wants to see them.
> 
> Now, to defend myself against straight lies, the onus is on me to REPOST 300 screen shots, instead of people clicking a button that gives them access to that?
> 
> Nah. Anyone who would ask me to do that doesn't want the truth, so it'd be a waste of time. I'm not out to prove myself to people who know they are lying. I'm only making the truth available to those who wish to seek it. That's enough for me. If some people never learn the truth because they choose not to, I'm okay with that


So, the only way someone can learn the "truth" of your business practices is if they join a group where driving up membership numbers furthers said business practices? Give me a break.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> Or you could just make the group posts public so people don't have to join to see all this proof. But I guess that's too hard.


From Facebook "Privacy changes are limited in groups with 5,000 members or more." My options are closed or secret. Not public. Sorry.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Lest anyone think I sent "the organizer" a death threat . . . when I posted publicly 2/19/17 that I would never work with Rebecca Hamilton, a friend of mine who is a former police officer made the joke "I don't know anything about this, but I have your back girlie. And you know I know how to hide the bodies. " all as completely separate comments. Funnily enough, I NEVER tagged "the organizer" in my post, she just up and decided the Rebecca Hamilton I was talking about was her. She picked up that shoe and put it on.

Why did I post what I did? Because for like the sixth time when I showed support for another author who felt defrauded a whole bunch PM'd me out of the woodwork. Some have thousands tied up... and can't walk away. I wasn't kidding when I said I have given the advice to flake out, to just get away.

There were calls in the private author groups that is run by "the organizer" that people said they reported the whole thread and comments to Facebook. It was so not even what she makes it out to be that Facebook did nothing. Nada. The company that shuts people down for too many links in PM etc. I didn't get put into Facebook jail. Nothing.

And you don't have to join a private group and out yourself on Facebook to see "my proof." I use my real name online and my professional Facebook is public.

So here you go . . . https://www.facebook.com/elizabethann.west.7/posts/1207835562658589

So there you go. And it's now 1:28 AM my time.


----------



## JalexM

dn8791 said:


> So, the only way someone can learn the "truth" of your business practices is if they join a group where driving up membership numbers furthers said business practices? Give me a break.


You can have it only one way. Don't be angry when the giver gives you answers, but you decide to not pass an easily cross-able line.


----------



## Holly Dodd

dn8791 said:


> So, the only way someone can learn the "truth" of your business practices is if they join a group where driving up membership numbers furthers said business practices? Give me a break.


Or, you can join, read it, and quit. Thereby negating any membership number boost for the five seconds it takes for you to pull up the posts.


----------



## Northern pen

Perry Constantine said:


> Or you could just make the group posts public so people don't have to join to see all this proof. But I guess that's too hard.


Or you could just join, since you obviously have an issue with the way other people do their business.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Holly Dodd said:


> There is the issue. She's already said none of that is going on! There is no manipulation. She is firmly on the ethical side of things. Half the people see it, and agree she isn't manipulating anything because they are actually part of the boxsets. The other half refuse to believe it and refuse to look at the screen shots, instead holding onto their beliefs based on "what they've heard". So yes. Definitely, call out those unethical practices! But! Don't keep propagating that rumor when they are refuted. Which is happening here.


I think you said you've been published since January?

I still consider myself pretty new as I first published 4-1/2 years ago. But boy, I've learned a lot in those years. And I wouldn't have called myself overly naive. I guess if I could go back and tell then-me a few things, one of them would be to be even more cautious. And to watch and listen before deciding. I feel fortunate in some ways that I didn't really learn about author groups or talk to anybody until I'd been published for almost a year and had sold 100k books. It meant that I could think, "Huh. That doesn't seem necessary/right/whatever" and not feel a sense of desperation.

Over the years, I've learned who sells consistently well on their own and is aboveboard and trusted by other bestselling authors (using that term loosely to mean authors who consistently earn six and seven figures). I still don't know a lot of the time, but at least I know who to listen to. It's a complicated industry, and many in it, whether that's Amazon or promotional sites or individual authors, have various agendas and public and private faces.

At a few months in? I'd advise caution. I'm being general because this advice IS general. I don't cross promote and I don't do list building stuff or participate much (don't go to conferences etc.). But I do know that reputation matters--the reputation of those you do business with and, especially, your own.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Robyn Wideman said:


> Are you suggesting your way is the only right way?


I thought I made it perfectly clear. I do what I see is morally right. Others have different morals. Hurray, rainbows and unicorns for everyone. If you and I don't share the same moral compass, that's fine by me. I follow my own.

I'll say it even clearer, so that nobody else can misconstrue my words. I find the whole idea of a $.99 box set of 20 books by 20 authors, who paid to be in it for the sole purpose of being able to say they are a NYT or USAT best seller an act of moral repugnance. Again, that's just me, one old Marine's opinion, based on my own moral compass.

I could probably pull out of KU, bundle all thirteen of my novels, price the box set at $.99 and hit both lists. But ya know what? None of my books would be best sellers. And I, me, a party of one, would know that.


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth, not that I think your friend was being funny (though I respect you do) that wasn't the death threat I was referring to. But I'm glad it gave you a giggle when your friend said that. Everyone deserves joy in their life.


----------



## 75814

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> From Facebook "Privacy changes are limited in groups with 5,000 members or more." My options are closed or secret. Not public. Sorry.


Then post it on a website. After all, this is your brand that's being threatened. If you have foolproof evidence of your innocence, you should make it freely available for everyone to see without the requirement to join your group.

And don't give me the "I don't have time" excuse. This thread is now eleven pages long. In all the time you've been repeating "join my group for proof," you could've easily done a bulk upload of all those images on a Wordpress post and been done with that.


----------



## ......~......

To me the main issue is not the box sets or manipulation or whatever because I'm not interested in box sets anyway. I was interested in a promo (genrecrave I think) until I actually saw some of the stuff that RH has posted here and on Facebook. I've seen her attacking other authors on Facebook, and I've also seen her co-authors and authors she works with behave in ways that I don't approve of. Posting stuff on Facebook, writing Amazon reviews defending each other while attacking other authors, etc. This all makes me leery of working with this person. If you're doing that stuff out in the open, what are you doing when no one's looking? Now even if it was proven that there's nothing fishy going on, I still wouldn't work with someone like that because obviously their ethics don't align with my own.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Guest

Wayne Stinnett said:


> I'll say it even clearer, so that nobody else can misconstrue my words. I find the whole idea of a $.99 box set of 20 books by 20 authors, who paid to be in it for the sole purpose of being able to say they are a NYT or USAT best seller an act of moral repugnance. Again, that's just me, one old Marine's opinion, based on my own moral compass.


Thankfully that's not the sole purpose. Some of the sets are never even posted wide because it's not even part of the purpose. But it's cool for you to hate the sets even if that's not the sole purpose. I don't think it's immoral, but it's definitely not for everyone.

Man, wouldn't it rock if we all put this much time into standing against other immoral acts, like rape, racism, sexism, etc? I'm totally ashamed to admit that I've spent more time this week defending against BS instead of trying to raise awareness and discussion in those TRULY immoral aspects of life. My friends need to get me back on track. Totally shameful :/


----------



## Holly Dodd

Rosalind J said:


> I think you said you've been published since January?
> 
> I still consider myself pretty new as I first published 4-1/2 years ago. But boy, I've learned a lot in those years. And I wouldn't have called myself overly naive. I guess if I could go back and tell them-me a few things, one of them would be to be even more cautious. And to watch and listen before deciding. I feel fortunate in some ways that I didn't really learn about author groups or talk to anybody until I'd been published for almost a year and sold 100k books. It meant that I could think, "Huh. That doesn't seem necessary/right/whatever" and not feel a sense of desperation.
> 
> Over the years, I've learned who sells consistently well and is aboveboard and trusted by other bestselling authors (using that term loosely to mean authors who consistently earn six and seven figures). I still don't know a lot of the time, but at least I know who to listen to. It's a complicated industry, and many in it, whether that's Amazon or promotional sites or individual authors, have various agendas and public and private faces.
> 
> At a few months in? I'd advise caution. I'm being general because this advice IS general. I don't cross promote and I don't do list building stuff or participate much (don't go to conferences etc.). But I do know that reputation matters--the reputation of those you do business with and, especially, your own.


I've been published since January. I've been on Kboards since 2011 (On this account too so you can verify my join date). I watch. I learn. I've seen Rebecca start at the bottom and work up to this tipping point. The market constantly changes. KU wasn't around back then. It was all erotica. etc, etc. I was around when Amanda Hocking was making waves. Just because I only hit the button, doesn't mean I haven't been in the background. I'm aware how things change. Right now, boxsets are yay. I'm okay with that.

As an edit: That also means I know who to emulate, who to listen to, and who to ignore. Who sells. And not to be impressed by 'best selling' claims. There are people who make so much money, and sell a lot, who you never hear about. And then there are those who seem like they should be selling a lot, but aren't.


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Some people pay several hundred dollars to get a BookBub feature to promote a book of theirs for free so that they can reach thousands of new readers.


Nothing wrong with that.



> Some people, especially if they can't get a Bookbub, join a boxed set to promote a book of theirs where they will make a small profit (instead of giving it away completely for free) so that they can reach thousands of new readers that way.


Not being able to get a Bookbub doesn't give anyone the excuse to engage in manipulative practices as some kind of 'even-up' over a perceived wrong. Not everyone can get a Bookbub, and if you can't, keep trying. At least with Bookbub you're promoting your own work, not throwing in with a stack of other books as way to game your rank and "get letters" that you didn't actually personally earn.


----------



## jaehaerys

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> I'll make a deal with you. Post 300 pictures DIRECTLY to this thread, so that people can see it without clicking a link. Then I'll pay someone (because I don't have time) to do the same for me and post all that info here for me as well. I mean, so you can show me how easily done posting 297 screenshots would be compared to clicking a link and a button.


Obscurantism as its finest.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> Then post it on a website. After all, this is your brand that's being threatened. If you have foolproof evidence of your innocence, you should make it freely available for everyone to see without the requirement to join your group.
> 
> And don't give me the "I don't have time" excuse. This thread is now eleven pages long. In all the time you've been repeating "join my group for proof," you could've easily done a bulk upload of all those images on a Wordpress post and been done with that.


I have already posted publicly in multiple places, and as I said - why would I defend my brand to people who are CHOOSING not to learn the truth. It doesn't matter WHERE I post it, people who don't want to know the truth are going to ignore. So the truth isn't for them. I shouldn't have to report the SAME evidence 100 times just for it to be posted in yet ANOTHER venue a week later, and aGAIN people to ignore the facts. That's why now I just say - join the group. This is how I can tell who really wants the truth and who wants and excuse to hold onto lies. It's how I weed out people's motivations. And right now, that's a great thing to be able to do


----------



## Guest

dn8791 said:


> Not being able to get a Bookbub doesn't give anyone the excuse to engage in manipulative practices as some kind of 'even-up' over a perceived wrong. Not everyone can get a Bookbub, and if you can't, keep trying. At least with Bookbub you're promoting your own work, not throwing in with a stack of other books as way to game your rank and "get letters" that you didn't actually personally earn.


Agreed. And that's why no one is engaging in manipulative practices here. Except maybe those here who know they are posting false information... But I mean, we can just keep saying I'm doing things I'm not doing. If you say it enough times, that makes it true.

Oh wait. That's not how this works.


----------



## 75814

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> I have already posted publicly in multiple places, and as I said - why would I defend my brand to people who are CHOOSING not to learn the truth. It doesn't matter WHERE I post it, people who don't want to know the truth are going to ignore. So the truth isn't for them. I shouldn't have to report the SAME evidence 100 times just for it to be posted in yet ANOTHER venue a week later, and aGAIN people to ignore the facts. That's why now I just say - join the group. This is how I can tell who really wants the truth and who wants and excuse to hold onto lies. It's how I weed out people's motivations. And right now, that's a great thing to be able to do


Here's a little tip from someone who does website work for a living.

When you post stuff on a website, you don't need to post the same evidence 100 times. You just need to post it one time, then share the link.

It's a real novel concept, I suggest you try it.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Why did I post what I did? Because for like the sixth time when I showed support for another author who felt defrauded a whole bunch PM'd me out of the woodwork. Some have thousands tied up... and can't walk away. I wasn't kidding when I said I have given the advice to flake out, to just get away.


I've gotten them too. Post something about a subject like this and get a bunch of off the record PMs. And of course, those are easy to dismiss from the other end because we won't share the names because that's not what anyone worth a damn would do to someone reaching out to show solidarity, but asking for anonymity because of fear of retribution. I can't even imagine doing that to someone. All we can do is share that it happens and let others judge for themselves


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Elizabeth, not that I think your friend was being funny (though I respect you do) that wasn't the death threat I was referring to. But I'm glad it gave you a giggle when your friend said that. Everyone deserves joy in their life.


So that's exactly what I mean. You said up thread the reason you said people HAD to choose to be friends with me or you on Facebook was because you got DEATH THREATS, and then I post free and clear for all to see, all that was said on MY thread, now you want to be like "Oh not that."

There is nothing to be gained from a conversation with you, you can't even keep things consistent for less than an hour on a KBoards thread. Yeah, you had to say "You can be friend with me or EAW but have to choose because I've had DEATH THREATS" and when you're called out on it, you're like oh no, that's not what I meant.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Thankfully that's not the sole purpose. Some of the sets are never even posted wide because it's not even part of the purpose. But it's cool for you to hate the sets even if that's not the sole purpose. I don't think it's immoral, but it's definitely not for everyone.


Maybe if I said it louder; "I'll say it even clearer, so that nobody else can misconstrue my words. I find the whole idea of a $.99 box set of 20 books by 20 authors, *who paid to be in it for the sole purpose of being able to say they are a NYT or USAT best seller* an act of moral repugnance. Again, that's just me, one old Marine's opinion, based on my own moral compass.

I don't care about any other sets. It's those that are being done just for the "letters."


----------



## JalexM

Perry Constantine said:


> Here's a little tip from someone who does website work for a living.
> 
> When you post stuff on a website, you don't need to post the same evidence 100 times. You just need to post it one time, then share the link.
> 
> It's a real novel concept, I suggest you try it.


She did post a link and she did share it. You just chose not to act on it.


----------



## 75814

JalexM said:


> She did post a link and she did share it. You just chose not to act on it.


We've been over this. Please refer to the previous posts.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Northern pen

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Maybe if I said it louder; "I'll say it even clearer, so that nobody else can misconstrue my words. I find the whole idea of a $.99 box set of 20 books by 20 authors, *who paid to be in it for the sole purpose of being able to say they are a NYT or USAT best seller* an act of moral repugnance. Again, that's just me, one old Marine's opinion, based on my own moral compass.
> 
> I don't care about any other sets. It's those that are being done just for the "letters."


So if I joined a set with the goal of expanding my market base, learning new marketing techniques and making money along with possibly making a list I am not morally repugnant?

YES. I'm in like flint.


----------



## Becca Mills

Posting has accelerated beyond my ability to keep up, so I'm going to lock this for a time in order to read. Also rather in need of a pee break. Ahem.

Please note: I am repeatedly removing explicit accusations of lying. Such accusations are not in keeping with KBoards's forum decorum, and members who keep making them will find themselves unable to post here. By all means, make claims and provide evidence for them (though Rebecca, I think I have your Fb group address memorized, at this point, so further mentions of it are probably not necessary). Members can decide for themselves whether apparent discrepancies are due to obfuscation, confusion, lying, or whatever else.

ETA: Okay, reopening this thread. This is an important matter, and there are strong feelings on all sides. Let's keep it as professional as possible.


----------



## Lydniz

Well, this has all been most enlightening.


----------



## BellaJames

I agree with everything *Sela* wrote, *Rosalind James* has made some great points in this thread and *Wayne Stinnett*.

I understand that having letters is important to some authors but why not focus on writing engaging books that people actually want to read and buy organically, promote them in an ethical way and work towards the NYT/USAT lists _gradually_. Is there hard evidence that having these letters suddenly gives you a sustained boost in sales or credibility?

I see NYT times bestselling author everywhere I look on Amazon and it has become less and less impressive.

With some of these romance box sets, there are authors included that I've never heard of before and I look at their ranks and reviews for their other books and they are often not that impressive.

As others have said, most of this thread looks like a big advertising thread for Rebecca's facebook page.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

I don't even care if people are shooting for the bestseller lists. Sure, saying USA Today Bestselling author means . . . well, let's just say if thousands of people have the credential, then it isn't worth all that much. But gaming KU by putting in books that are really links to Instafreebie titles, playing games with covers and content to evade KDP censors (who have repeatedly pulled down Rebecca Hamilton's box sets when they crossed lines), and especially bullying and harassing people who want out, is all behavior that crosses some very clear ethical lines for most writers.

Someday Amazon is going to do a crackdown. They're going to cast a net and drag a lot of bottom dwellers up to suffocate, gasping on deck, and we've seen in the past how these crackdowns pull in a lot of bycatch. Do you want this to be you?


----------



## Guest

I went out in my field where I grow my [expletives], and it was bare. Why should I care if someone hit the lists in a box set? Or if they beat the IRS? Or violate PayPal's TOS? Is it impacting me? No. Is it preventing or discouraging readers from buying my books? No. Is it just something to get worked up over? Yup!

_Edited to remove profanity. - Becca_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

This_Way_Down said:


> I went out in my field where I grow my [expletives], and it was bare. Why should I care if someone hit the lists in a box set? Or if they beat the IRS? Or violate PayPal's TOS? Is it impacting me? No. Is it preventing or discouraging readers from buying my books? No. Is it just something to get worked up over? Yup!
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


And that is precisely the attitude *anyone* gaming the system in any way hopes you'll have. So win for them, I suppose.

However, time and again, it has been proven that anytime the system is gamed in a significant way, Amazon responds by bringing a hammer down in some way or another, more often than not catching others who don't deserve it. None of us want to be the "indie police", but this is already a competitive enough industry without others running roughshod over the rules and making it more difficult for the rest.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Robyn Wideman said:


> So let me get this straight. Because I paid to join a boxset it doesn't count? That is some straight up b.s.


Yep, it doesn't count, not in the same way. 
But not because you paid to get in, rather because it's a multi-author box set.


----------



## MyraScott

Personally, if I was worried about my family, I think I'd stop deliberately stirring up drama then telling people they had to take my children into account when calling out my business practices.

*Anyone who puts their family first should actually put their family FIRST and not use them as a guilt tool when the going gets rough. * Own your business practices. Own your decisions. Your kids didn't make your decisions. Your family only becomes part of this discussion when you bring them into it. If your business impacts your family, the only person responsible for that is you.

I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.

As someone who has children and a business, I find this really horrifying. Children are not shields. Do not throw them under the bus because you have run out of justifications.


----------



## 75814

This_Way_Down said:


> I went out in my field where I grow my [expletives], and it was bare. Why should I care if someone hit the lists in a box set? Or if they beat the IRS? Or violate PayPal's TOS? Is it impacting me? No. Is it preventing or discouraging readers from buying my books? No. Is it just something to get worked up over? Yup!
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


As a straight, white man living in America, there are lots of things that don't personally affect me. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. Does that mean I should just ignore these problems and shrug whenever I see them? Of course not. Just because something bad doesn't affect you does not mean you should just ignore it.

But this kind of unethical behavior _can_ affect you. You're competing for things like Bookbub slots and Amazon ranking. If these box sets are beating you organically or through ethical marketing practices, great. But if they're taking slots you could have gotten or shoving your book down in the ranks because of unethical practices, that's a problem.

It also damages the credibility of self-publishing as a whole. There's a reason everyone cringes whenever an indie starts a flame war with a reviewer in the comments.

And as Rick said, it could also mean you get swept up in accidental punitive action. Go look at the thread about Amazon and the KU reads issue. How many people in there have been accidentally targeted by Amazon because of actions of scammers?


----------



## Guest

Rick Gualtieri said:


> And that is precisely the attitude *anyone* gaming the system in any way hopes you'll have. So win for them, I suppose.
> 
> However, time and again, it has been proven that anytime the system is gamed in a significant way, Amazon responds by bringing a hammer down in some way or another, more often than not catching others who don't deserve it. None of us want to be the "indie police", but this is already a competitive enough industry without others running roughshod over the rules and making it more difficult for the rest.


I suppose I could don my cape and hood and charge off to....where? Scams happen. Pearl clutching and screaming at the sky about it will not change a thing. I couldn't care less about the USA Today or the NYT lists. I've never made it, and I'm still clearing six figures several times over. So beat that with a stick. 
And not all box sets are scams. I've been in two. One was put together by Kevin J. Anderson and the other by a popular indie. In neither case did I pay a dime. In fact, I made several thousand dollars.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> As a straight, white man living in America, there are lots of things that don't personally affect me. Racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. Does that mean I should just ignore these problems and shrug whenever I see them? Of course not. Just because something bad doesn't affect you does not mean you should just ignore it.
> 
> But this kind of unethical behavior _can_ affect you. You're competing for things like Bookbub slots and Amazon ranking. If these box sets are beating you organically or through ethical marketing practices, great. But if they're taking slots you could have gotten or shoving your book down in the ranks because of unethical practices, that's a problem.
> 
> It also damages the credibility of self-publishing as a whole. There's a reason everyone cringes whenever an indie starts a flame war with a reviewer in the comments.
> 
> And as Rick said, it could also mean you get swept up in accidental punitive action. Go look at the thread about Amazon and the KU reads issue. How many people in there have been accidentally targeted by Amazon because of actions of scammers?


What damages indie is unedited crap people continuously put up for sale. As far as taking slots: Hey, they're outselling me. I can whine about it and cry foul, or I can work harder to sell more books. I'll choose the latter.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

This_Way_Down said:


> I suppose I could don my cape and hood and charge off to....where? Scams happen. Pearl clutching and screaming at the sky about it will not change a thing. I couldn't care less about the USA Today or the NYT lists. I've never made it, and I'm still clearing six figures several times over. So beat that with a stick.
> And not all box sets are scams. I've been in two. One was put together by Kevin J. Anderson and the other by a popular indie. In neither case did I pay a dime. In fact, I made several thousand dollars.


And, hey, that's fine. I don't care to drag anyone into this who doesn't want to be (albeit one could argue that posting at all = caring . But like I said, anyone gaming any system is going to be happy when people turn a blind eye.

As for box sets themselves, I agree. I never said they were bad. Have been in a few myself. This is more about discussing dirty deeds that may or may not go on behind the scenes than sets themselves.


----------



## Guest

Rick Gualtieri said:


> And, hey, that's fine. I don't care to drag anyone into this who doesn't want to be (albeit one could argue that posting at all = caring . But like I said, anyone gaming any system is going to be happy when people turn a blind eye.
> 
> As for box sets themselves, I agree. I never said they were bad. Have been in a few myself. This is more about discussing dirty deeds that may or may not go on behind the scenes than sets themselves.


The dirty deeds I see are scammers selling their very own "fool proof" methods and bulls%$t ad campaigns to the gullible. But there again, nothing I can do but be disgusted. As for my degree of caring...I should be working. But I needed a break. 
I was actually under the impression that USA Today and NYT stopped putting box sets on the list. I guess I was wrong. The fact is, I never look at it.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

This_Way_Down said:


> As for my degree of caring...I should be working. But I needed a break.


Then hopefully we provided a few pages of distraction.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

MyraScott said:


> I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.


Thank you, I was stunned earlier in the thread when someone suggested I shouldn't question Hamilton's questionable business practices because she has a sick child. I hadn't even seen that part of the thread at that point but was baffled. A pure ink squirt of a defense.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Robyn Wideman said:


> So if I joined a set with the goal of expanding my market base, learning new marketing techniques and making money along with possibly making a list I am not morally repugnant?
> 
> YES. I'm in like flint.


Dude, I even put it in big, bold letters. I actually combed through my post, deleting words and adding others, so that I couldn't be misunderstood. Every word in my post had meaning. How did you miss the word SOLE? You need to either read slower, enunciating each word clearly, or maybe have someone define what the words mean for you. 
SOLE - adjective 1. being the only one; only:

If you do something for multiple reasons, then none of them is the SOLE reason, and you are excluded. But, just for the sake of debate, how about telling me all the things you learned from your experience, about expanding your market base, the new marketing techniques you learned, and the scads of money you made along the way. If you truly want to learn the brutal, tough methods of becoming successful as a writer, perhaps you should follow the example of those who have actually done it, not those whose books are floundering, those who have willingly shared their experiences publicly, not those who hide behind the anonymity of private groups, those who actually published books on the subject, AFTER having become successful at writing novels. Oh look! There's one in my sig-line!

I got a PM from a member here, actually several. But, this one in particular hit the nail on the head. They mentioned how there are people out there, who will actually download a blank Harvard diploma, put their name on it, and hang it proudly over their mantel, bragging about their accomplishment. This whole massive box set idea to get a BS tag, just reeks of the same mindset.

I want it! I want it now!
That's child thinking. Adults learn to delay wants, to work hard to achieve them. Not make demands.


----------



## Anarchist

raminar_dixon said:


> But, like, that's just my opinion, man.


I'm just posting as a hat tip to Raminar.


----------



## WhatsHisName

MyraScott said:


> Personally, if I was worried about my family, I think I'd stop deliberately stirring up drama then telling people they had to take my children into account when calling out my business practices.
> 
> *Anyone who puts their family first should actually put their family FIRST and not use them as a guilt tool when the going gets rough. * Own your business practices. Own your decisions. Your kids didn't make your decisions. Your family only becomes part of this discussion when you bring them into it. If your business impacts your family, the only person responsible for that is you.
> 
> I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.
> 
> As someone who has children and a business, I find this really horrifying. Children are not shields. Do not throw them under the bus because you have run out of justifications.


+ 1,000,000

There are too many great quotes on this thread to list them all, but this one nails 'something' for me ... The ethics of a trading partner should ALWAYS be taken into account when doing business.

Thank you for another eye opening thread, and for keeping it civil. Long may KBoards continue.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

MyraScott said:


> Personally, if I was worried about my family, I think I'd stop deliberately stirring up drama then telling people they had to take my children into account when calling out my business practices.
> 
> *Anyone who puts their family first should actually put their family FIRST and not use them as a guilt tool when the going gets rough. * Own your business practices. Own your decisions. Your kids didn't make your decisions. Your family only becomes part of this discussion when you bring them into it. If your business impacts your family, the only person responsible for that is you.
> 
> I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.
> 
> As someone who has children and a business, I find this really horrifying. Children are not shields. Do not throw them under the bus because you have run out of justifications.


Thank you so much for this, Myra. It is not possible for me to upvote this enough.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

So what about this swapping of a boxset's content after release?


----------



## raminar_dixon

Anarchist said:


> I'm just posting as a hat tip to Raminar.


----------



## unkownwriter

Interesting thread, especially some of the responses, and not in a good way. I've lost respect for a couple of posters I once respected greatly, all in defense of someone who isn't worth it (oh, snap, am I going to get the named and shamed treatment?).

Everyone's ethics are their own. I do my best to avoid skirting ethical quagmires. Some don't. That's their problem. But things that might affect me? Like doing something that gets a set I'm in removed from Amazon? Yeah. That cost me money for something that oddly enough, Amazon was okay with. Until they weren't. That's how Amazon rolls, for those not familiar with their game.

That said, using children as a defense against being criticized? Over the top. Step away from the computer and take care of said offspring. Seriously.


----------



## Patty Jansen

At risk of being told "these are not the death threats you're looking for" I received some info, a few months back, that apparently I made a death threat.

Uhhhhhh. Thats the first I've heard of it.

Apart from telling the person "Pfft, whatever", back in August 2016, a comment which I've seen copied as if it was some outrageous reply across several Facebook groups, I've had zero interaction with this person.

Death threat?

I might have made a tasteless joke on my FB feed, that's it. I reserve the right to make tasteless jokes on my own FB feed.

I'd start ROTFLMAO but unfortunately several people I know were pressured to break off all contact with me or else.

I mean, seriously. Do I even have to comment on this? Which adult lets someone else bully them into who they can interact with?

Up to a certain point I'm with This_Way_Down and IDGAF about whether this is allowable under the Amazon TOC or not. Once people have been given the info, they're adults and can make up their own minds about risk and benefit. It's the emotional blackmail and bullying that gets me.


----------



## Jim Johnson

All I can say at this point is thank goodness Rick is here to keep a watchful eye over all of us. History has shown us that self-appointed police always work out well.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Jim Johnson said:


> All I can say at this point is thank goodness Rick is here to keep a watchful eye over all of us. History has shown us that self-appointed police always work out well.


Whistleblowers are often only judged harshly by those who would prefer they remain quiet.

Although nice try on once again trying to make this about me. You'll notice, though, mine is not the only voice speaking out against such things.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Whistleblowers are often only judged harshly by those who would prefer they remain quiet.
> 
> Although nice try on once again trying to make this about me. You'll notice, though, mine is not the only voice speaking out against such things.


I'm sure the indie world will be grateful for you and your posse. Good day to you.


----------



## MyraScott

Jim Johnson said:


> I'm sure the indie world will be grateful for you and your posse. Good day to you.


I am. Thanks, Rick! And thanks to The Passive Voice for always looking out for indie authors.

These things need to be discussed so that people go into these business arrangements with the full knowledge of what they are taking part in. As someone who's been in web marketing for a very long time, I've seen too many people who didn't ask the right questions end up with consequences they didn't anticipate.

Plenty of people find this specific type of marketing to be fair while others have objections... what you're paying for shouldn't be a mystery.


----------



## Not any more

"Nah. Anyone who would ask me to do that doesn't want the truth, so it'd be a waste of time. I'm only making the truth available to those who wish to seek it. That's enough for me. If some people never learn the truth because they choose not to, I'm okay with that "

Bookmarking this thread as research material for a future novel.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

OK, people.

If you're here for entertainment value, nothing I can do about that.  But this is a serious discussion about community concerns.  Posts that do not serve that discussion have been and will be removed.  More may be removed as the mod staff continues to monitor and review this thread.

Betsy
KB Admin


----------



## sela

Anarchist said:


> I'm just posting as a hat tip to Raminar.


The Dude always has the answer.


----------



## thesmallprint

Betsy the Quilter said:


> OK, people.
> 
> If you're here for entertainment value, nothing I can do about that. But this is a serious discussion about community concerns. Posts that do not serve that discussion have been and will be removed. More may be removed as the mod staff continues to monitor and review this thread.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Admin


I'm astounded the thread has been left open so long. It's an atom bomb to some campfires I've seen quickly doused. I prefer to see threads go on as long as possible (and I know moderating is perhaps the least enviable job on the internet) but if this is to be a new benchmark for thread-locking or not, then there won't be many that will be closed in the future.

If that is the case, all the better, but perhaps it's time for mods to rewrite the guidelines.


----------



## JumpingShip

Jim Johnson said:


> All I can say at this point is thank goodness Rick is here to keep a watchful eye over all of us. History has shown us that self-appointed police always work out well.


I never saw him trying to police anything. Bringing current practices out in the open for anyone to look at and decide for themselves if it is what they want to get into isn't policing. If the practice is legitimate, then there should be no worry about the method.

Also, as others have noted earlier, whether the practice is ethical or not can be debated until the cows come home, but I don't think anyone would condone bullying and name shaming. If even half of what I've read has happened to authors who drop out of a set is true, then shouldn't that behavior be made public so other authors can make an informed decision on whether they want to participate in that particular boxset?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

MyraScott said:


> I am. Thanks, Rick! And thanks to The Passive Voice for always looking out for indie authors.
> 
> These things need to be discussed so that people go into these business arrangements with the full knowledge of what they are taking part in. As someone who's been in web marketing for a very long time, I've seen too many people who didn't ask the right questions end up with consequences they didn't anticipate.
> 
> Plenty of people find this specific type of marketing to be fair while others have objections... what you're paying for shouldn't be a mystery.


I love this post so much I want to marry it.

As someone who has been mostly circumspect about my dealings with Rebecca--only to have her repeatedly blast me on Facebook, to book retailers, to online friends--I am grateful to those who are speaking up--especially when they, themselves, have not been personally affected. Had this thread been in existence back in August, I'd have saved myself a lot of money and aggravation. (Not to mention the time I've spent with lawyers!)

I'd like to draw an important distinction here about gifting copies. Gifting them is one thing, and anyone can make a decision what they are comfortable with. Incentivizing people to claim said gifted book (instead of converting it into a gift card) with an entry into a drawing for a higher denomination Amazon gift card is a whole other thing. (This is how GenreCrave's Book Blast works--there is a FB group with 5k+ plus people who do exactly that.) Similarly, promising to add money to the advertising budget of a box set in exchange for buying a copy of a solo title is verboten. (And really tacky.)

From Amazon on the topic:

"We encourage our authors to find creative and legitimate ways to promote their books. At the same time we work to prevent any manipulation of the Kindle platform and work hard to protect the revenues of our authors. With that in mind, reimbursing individual customers to manipulate sales rank isn't permitted."

Since the author is responsible for the tactics used by anyone you hire to promote your book, buyer beware. Amazon may not be cracking down now, but that doesn't mean they won't. I suspect that, like me, most who buy a blast have no idea how it works. But ignorance of the rules isn't usually a good defense against breaking them.

For anyone interested, someone just PM'd me that the post is back up: http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Jim Johnson said:


> All I can say at this point is thank goodness Rick is here to keep a watchful eye over all of us. History has shown us that self-appointed police always work out well.


I don't think "police" means what you think it does, Jim. Just because the light is turned off, doesn't mean the cockroaches aren't there. Rick's bringing light to an unsavory subject, especially one that is hidden behind closed doors, isn't policing. Policing, is kicking in the door and squashing the roaches.


----------



## Lydniz

ChristinaGarner said:


> As someone who has been mostly circumspect about my dealings with Rebecca--only to have her repeatedly blast me on Facebook, to book retailers, to online friends--I am grateful to those who are speaking up--especially when they, themselves, have not been personally affected. Had this thread been in existence back in August, I'd have saved myself a lot of money and aggravation. (Not to mention the time I've spent with lawyers!)


This is why this thread should be kept open. I'm not quite sure why some people seem so upset that it was started in the first place. I think we'd all like to know what we're getting into when we buy a service.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

ChristinaGarner said:


> Incentivizing people to claim said gifted book (instead of converting it into a gift card) with an entry into a drawing for a higher denomination Amazon gift card is a whole other thing. (This is how GenreCrave's Book Blast works--there is a FB group with 5k+ plus people who do exactly that.)


I posted another thread about actions such as that yesterday. When someone runs a drawing for a prize and requires some sort of paid entry, without an option to enter for free, it's an illegal lottery. I used to run online drawings at the various companies I worked for throughout my career, and believe me, there was no such thing as putting one up without first having a mountain of lawyers scrutinizing it. This is not an issue that states take lightly.

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250477.0.html


----------



## sela

I get that people don't like others to police their business. We're all grown-ups here and many of us are mavericks who prefer to do things ourselves, which is why we got into self publishing. 

This is a brave new world of publishing we're in. There's a lot that's different from the way things were done before. There's a steep learning curve to conceiving of, writing, editing, publishing, promoting and selling books in this new world. One of the biggest is how to get and keep our books visible because in the indie author world, after having a great product, visibility is everything. 

You need a great product. You need it to be visible to the customers who want to read it.

A great product means something that customers want to buy and read. Visibility means that it appears in front of said customers so they can buy and read it.

Because there's so much competition, people feel discouraged. How does little old me get my book in front of potential customers? 

Having a great cover, a great hooky blurb, great keywords, title, tagline, preview that hooks the reader, a hooky premise -- that's how you get your book -- at base -- in front of customers. Amazon has created an environment where those attributes are rewarded. The algorithms give your book the chance that every other book gets and whether it sinks or swims is up to the quality of the product and how in demand it is to customers.

You take care of those 7 things plus writing a book that delivers on the premise and you will get that chance. If you're in KU, you get extra visibility because it's a reward for being exclusive. 

Now, it's almost a given that you will do some paid promotion to get your book visibility -- on Amazon, Bookbub if you can get it, and others. Facebook ads. 

Boxed sets are a way to provide readers with a sample of the work of many different authors. They are a marketing tactic to introduce authors to new readers. It's like a loss leader. I have obtained new readers through my stint in boxed sets. The first one I was in also hit the USAT. I organized a couple others that didn't but that did well.

BUT the most important part of my success as an indie was writing the book that went into that boxed set. It was a bestseller on Amazon a year earlier, not because of the boxed set. It was the #2 indie book for that qualifying week six months before I went into the boxed set. So that first boxed set I was in that hit the USAT was simply more visibility. It wasn't what made my book visible or me as an author visible. That USAT designation did not make my career. I got Bookbubs before I got the USAT. The USAT gave me other things that were valuable -- like a relationship with top indies in my genre who were NYTs and USAT bestsellers on their own merits. It taught me about organizing a boxed set and what went into it.

Those are valuable things. But they did not make me a success.

Now, I totally respect Wayne Stinnet. You can't go wrong listening to his advice or reading his books. He's proven himself in this biz. However, he is a Marine.  They're the toughest SOBs around and they can do things the hard way (they would say the right way) because a lot of what they do is the hardest stuff around. 

BUT I disagree with him that it's not okay to enter a boxed set just to hit a list. That's okay. I can disagree with people I respect and still respect them. 

The WHY doesn't matter to me as much as the HOW.

If you think it's going to help you get a Bookbub promo to get letters, fine. It likely will, but great reviews and great rank and a great genre appropriate cover will do that better. If you want to work with other authors and learn how to do promotions, fine. You can do that without entering a boxed set, paying thousands of dollars and using shady tactics that bend TOS or break TOS to do so.

What matters is HOW you do things. Are you bending rules and TOS? Are you finding loopholes that break the spirit of the law if not the letter? Are you breaking TOS or abusing them? Are you buying your way onto the list plain and simple? Is what you're doing scammy? Are you doing things that you don't want others to know? Is your leader enforcing secrecy rules? Are they using black hat tactics to get rank and sales? Are you participating in a blackballing of someone at the behest of your Beloved Leader? 

How you treat people matters. How you behave personally matters. 

We're a community. We have every right to discuss the ethics of people in our community, especially those who have clouds of smoke around them and are constantly involved in dramas about their behaviour because their reputations affect us all.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I posted another thread about actions such as that yesterday. When someone runs a drawing for a prize and requires some sort of paid entry, without an option to enter for free, it's an illegal lottery. I used to run online drawings at the various companies I worked for throughout my career, and believe me, there was no such thing as putting one up without first having a mountain of lawyers scrutinizing it. This is not an issue that states take lightly.
> 
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250477.0.html


The difference here might be that in this case, a purchase isn't necessary to enter. What's necessary is to claim a free book. Still a violation of Amazon's rules, but not sure about law.


----------



## Findaway

ChristinaGarner said:


> Similarly, promising to add money to the advertising budget of a box set in exchange for buying a copy of a solo title is verboten. (And really tacky.)


Could you explain what you mean by this? Are people in the box sets buying other books that are being promoted and the money is given back?


----------



## JalexM

Findaway said:


> Could you explain what you mean by this? Are people in the box sets buying other books that are being promoted and the money is given back?


No, that is not true.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Findaway said:


> Could you explain what you mean by this? Are people in the box sets buying other books that are being promoted and the money is given back?


When Rebecca was launching a recent solo title, she posted in each of the box set groups (believe there were 12+ at the time) that anyone who bought at .99 would have $1 added to the advertising budget of that set. Many people posted copies of receipts from multiple retailers b/c they were getting the money back in the form of advertising. It was a back door way to buy copies of her own book.

ETA that since there is no profit involved here, it seems strictly an effort to affect rank, which as we know, is not allowed.


----------



## Cheryl Douglas

brkingsolver said:


> I've always thought it was funny to see an author tout themselves as a "best selling author" and then see their books' ranks in the sale-a-week range. It's ephemeral.


I've heard this comment quite a bit in this thread and others. I just wanted to speak to my own experience because you may only be seeing a small piece of the puzzle if you're using Kindle Spy or checking random book rankings on Amazon.

Speaking from personal experience, did the letters help me sell more? Not necessarily. But I'd been making six figures a year every year before I made the list. For many, like me, Amazon only represents one piece of the pie. If I break it down, with 45 books out, I may only sell a copy or two of each at Amazon every day, I'm not sure. My rankings probably wouldn't be stellar for any one book. Still, it adds up because I sell those same 45+ books every day at both B&N and iBooks. Plus another 10-15 at Kobo. I will never be a runaway bestseller. My readers are probably the only ones who will ever know my name. Hitting the USA Today list was just another thing I could cross off my bucket list. Now I'm moving on.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

And that's another GREAT distinction ChristinaGarner . . . .

It's very tempting when someone who sells more than you or has a bigger name than you tells you in a private group something is just how it's always done. They encourage the behavior. They demand the gifting with a bigger giveaway to turn in the receipts by midnight etc..... and when they DO this stuff, take NOTICE when they themselves are no longer doing something. 

More than once I have seen "the organizer" postings from a private group that say "Gift the copies and make sure they show proof" but then when it's called out hide behind "I can't control what other authors do or do not do." 

Know when you are the one being set up to be thrown under the bus if the wheels start coming off . . .

As to the corollaries between current indie practices and trad pub, one literally has nothing to do with the other. If you are so big as Random House or HarperCollins and you can totally DEAL WITH it if Amazon shuts you down, then by all means, have at marketing and promoting however you can move your books, with no thought to how your actions might make the ecosystem harder for you and others down the line or what consequences may come. If you have a stable full of lawyers to go toe-to-toe with Amazon when they decide arbitrarily you have violated something, then yeah, you can totally push the rules and guidelines to the brink. 

Completely separate from that, and what I think is the bigger warning than anything at all, if you submit a manuscript to Random House and later pull the submission or the contract falls through, Random House doesn't go to forums and social media to say YOU cost them all kinds of money and you are making them stressed out and being mean and attacking them.  So that's really where for me, all of the comparisons to "well trad pub does this too," fall flat. 

And I really hope USAToday's staff are intrigued there are people who boast they can sell you a spot on that list in a boxed set for $500-$2,000. Because like it's pointed out, if everyone is a bestseller, no one is a bestseller.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

sela said:


> The WHY doesn't matter to me as much as the HOW.
> 
> If you think it's going to help you get a Bookbub promo to get letters, fine. It likely will, but great reviews and great rank and a great genre appropriate cover will do that better. If you want to work with other authors and learn how to do promotions, fine. You can do that without entering a boxed set, paying thousands of dollars and using shady tactics that bend TOS or break TOS to do so.
> 
> What matters is HOW you do things. Are you bending rules and TOS? Are you finding loopholes that break the spirit of the law if not the letter? Are you breaking TOS or abusing them? Are you buying your way onto the list plain and simple? Is what you're doing scammy? Are you doing things that you don't want others to know? Is your leader enforcing secrecy rules? Are they using black hat tactics to get rank and sales? Are you participating in a blackballing of someone at the behest of your Beloved Leader?
> 
> How you treat people matters. How you behave personally matters.
> 
> We're a community. We have every right to discuss the ethics of people in our community, especially those who have clouds of smoke around them and are constantly involved in dramas about their behaviour because their reputations affect us all.


100% agreed. A few folks have tried to turn this into a "stop saying all box sets are bad" argument. That couldn't be further from the truth. I very much applaud any author who's gotten their letters through hard work, whether it's on their own or in a set. Perfectly cool with that.

But there are lines between white hat and black hat. For instance: "I need some sales on iBooks. I'd appreciate anyone who bought it there" = fine in my book. "I need some sales in iBooks. If you do so, and show me the receipt, I'll give you XYZ in return" = a definite crossing of that line to me.

And for those answering that who cares about a few potentially shady sales compared to thousands of legit ones, even one gamed sale is still gaming the system, potentially pushing out someone who otherwise would have earned that spot.

ps: just to add, I have no issue with anyone who joins something, thinking it's legit, finds out later there was shady stuff going on, then decides to not do business with that entity again. I'm not going to fault someone for that. I'm also not going to fault anyone who has legitimately had a good experience with a business, witnessed no shenanigans, and decides to continue working with someone.

Witnessing the bad stuff, then going back for seconds or thirds, that's an entirely different story in my book, though. In short, I mostly have issues with anyone who is well aware of nasty stuff going on and simply doesn't care, ignoring the means for the end.


----------



## CassieL

J.A. Sutherland said:


> So what about this swapping of a boxset's content after release?


Was definitely done on at least one box set and Rebecca even admitted so on another Kboards thread a while back when it came up in a discussion.

And, for those demanding proof, she had posted in her FB account screen shots of a conversation with an author from December 2016 who wanted out of one of the boxes where she very clearly discussed this whole version 1 vs. version 2 of the box set and swapping out content, so it's not in doubt that it was a plan or that she gave that author a hard time for not being comfortable with it. And then in that recent Kboards thread she admitted it was actually done with at least one box set where it wasn't even published as a new version. (I think more recently she is publishing them as new versions at least, but that still links reviews and as someone mentioned upthread the bestseller status.)


----------



## JalexM

ChristinaGarner said:


> When Rebecca was launching a recent solo title, she posted in each of the box set groups (believe there were 12+ at the time) that anyone who bought at .99 would have $1 added to the advertising budget of that set. Many people posted copies of receipts from multiple retailers b/c they were getting the money back in the form of advertising. It was a back door way to buy copies of her own book.
> 
> ETA that since there is no profit involved here, it seems strictly an effort to affect rank, which as we know, is not allowed.


Strange, I was in one of those groups, yet, she never posted anything of the sort.

A lot of rumors going around.


----------



## Silly Writer

JalexM said:


> Strange, I was in one of those groups, yet, she never posted anything of the sort.
> 
> A lot of rumors going around.


A lot of these rumors are supported in the blog post that just went back up (linked from PV). Would you care to comment on those? Just trying to get a clear picture here, and no one seems to be denying nor defending those screenshots.

Inquiring minds want to know.

http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html


----------



## MyraScott

Hey mods-

I'm looking for a post where someone said it was immoral to be in box sets because they are too easy to sell.  Rebecca said it was here last night, but I can't find it.  Can you let me know if it was deleted?

Thanks!


----------



## WHDean

This seems like the perfect time to announce my new boxed set marketing business. It works like this:

You send me as many paper copies as you can of one of your books, a digital copy of your cover, and a modest fee. I make up boxes with split covers, "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone and Your Title, Anthology" by "J. K. Rowling and Your Name." Then I give the boxes to my friend in Amazon's distribution centre. When someone orders a paper copy of Rowling's book, he boxes your book in with hers and ships it out. Simple as that!

This is way better than any other boxed set ideas. Not only can you claim to be a "New York Times bestselling author," you can also claim to be "co-author with J. K. Rowling" on the anthology!

If you're worried about the ethics, stop worrying right now. Who's harmed by getting a free book? No one! And nothing in Amazon's TOS says "you can't use a warehouse guy to stuff your book into a boxed set with Rowling" or anything like that--I double-checked. As for me and my warehouse guy, well, if giving away free books for the enjoyment of others is a crime, we plead guilty as charged!

Sing up now!


----------



## ChristinaGarner

JalexM said:


> Strange, I was in one of those groups, yet, she never posted anything of the sort.
> 
> A lot of rumors going around.


Not a rumor--fact.

Mods--is posting screenshots acceptable here if they weren't PMs?


----------



## JalexM

Silly Writer said:


> A lot of these rumors are supported in the blog post that just went back up (linked from PV). Would you care to comment on those? Just trying to get a clear picture here, and no one seems to be denying nor defending those screenshots.
> 
> Inquiring minds want to know.
> 
> http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html


I commented on them earlier in the thread, near the first few pages.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Joseph Bradshire said:


> One wonders what's more likely.
> 
> Getting your account banned or breaking even.


Amazon works in mysterious ways. Trying to understand that is sometimes maddening. One can skirt the rules for years and get away with it. Or one transgression can get you banned for life. Trying to lay odds on that is like betting if the weather tomorrow will consist of waffles or leprechauns.


----------



## Silly Writer

JalexM said:


> I commented on them earlier in the thread, near the first few pages.


I went to your profile and read your posts. I see where you mention "baseless accusations" but that's all I can find that may defend or deny the screenshots posted. If that's the response you're referring to, then I have to argue the word 'baseless.' They're not baseless if there are screenshots to validate the claims; which there are. True? 

On the other hand, if the proof-of-innocence screenshots you keep alluding to in the private FB group would negate/explain the accusatory-screenshots from the Passive Voice link, why not post them like this person did? Easily clickable without having to join a group to see them?


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Jim Johnson said:


> I'm sure the indie world will be grateful for you and your posse. Good day to you.


I don't know Rick, other than what I've seen on KB over the years, but yes, I'll agree with you. I'm grateful, and my estimation of him has gone up as a result of this thread. My opinions on other posters have also changed, some for the better, some for the worse.


----------



## JalexM

Silly Writer said:


> I went to your profile and read your posts. I see where you mention "baseless accusations" but that's all I can find that may defend or deny the screenshots posted. If that's the response you're referring to, then I have to argue the word 'baseless.' They're not baseless if there are screenshots to validate the claims; which there are. True?
> 
> On the other hand, if the proof-of-innocence screenshots you keep alluding to in the private FB group would negate/explain the accusatory-screenshots from the Passive Voice link, why not post them like this person did? Easily clickable without having to join a group to see them?


You can join the group and then leave. It's that simple.
Do I really need to post 297 photos just for your convenience?
The answers are there for you.


----------



## Not any more

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Amazon works in mysterious ways. Trying to understand that is sometimes maddening. One can skirt the rules for years and get away with it. Or one transgression can get you banned for life. Trying to lay odds on that is like betting if the weather tomorrow will consist of waffles or leprechauns.


I remember getting an email saying one of my books had "inappropriate content" and would be removed from the store until I fixed it. Turned out to be something in the ToC they didn't like. Book had been there for years. Fixed the same thing in seven other books as a precaution. Someone asked once why some of my covers were different size from others. Answer: changing Amazon requirements over the years.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Joseph Bradshire said:


> One wonders what's more likely.
> 
> Getting your account banned or breaking even.


Uncle Joe, you almost made me spit out my coffee...


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> You can join the group and then leave. It's that simple.
> Do I really need to post 297 photos just for your convenience?
> The answers are there for you.


Yes, the answers _are_ there. Whereas from you all I see is your continued assertion that nothing is wrong, that people who make accusations are liars, etc. Meanwhile, multiple people have pointed out their experiences, and there are screenshots of troubling behavior in the article linked to from the OP.


----------



## Not any more

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Uncle Joe, you almost made me spit out my coffee...


Is that an accusation against those of us who drink tea? I absolutely defend the ethics of tea drinkers and our right to laugh at his post, too.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Silly Writer said:


> On the other hand, if the proof-of-innocence screenshots you keep alluding to in the private FB group would negate/explain the accusatory-screenshots from the Passive Voice link, why not post them like this person did? Easily clickable without having to join a group to see them?


The 300 screenshots are of her BB ads page. The problem with them (and if I had copies I'd happily post them to illustrate the point) is that they don't prove anything except possibly how much she spends. I don't recall there being individual shots of the BB ads page that shows exactly which book is being advertised. Instead it was rows of ads with the amount spent. The problem with that is that you can NAME an ad anything. One could call an ad "___box set ad #1" and instead advertise their own book.

I'm not saying she did this--I have no way of knowing. I'm just saying the "proof" doesn't actually prove what she says it does.

ETA that even if those shots did prove what she says they do, they don't disprove any of the other allegations.


----------



## MyraScott

This is the post I'm looking for. I haven't seen any posts where anyone says being in a multi-author box set is immoral, but it looks like some things were moderated. This sounds crazy, but there's no point arguing it if no one really said it... can you let me know if someone actually posted that box sets are immoral because they are too easy to sell?

Thanks


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Wayne clearly doesn't think much of them, but RH saying this is a smokescreen. People are saying that her particular way of playing the box set game is filled with dubious end runs around Amazon's ToS, bullying, and other unethical behavior. It has nothing to do with the legitimacy of box sets in general.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> Yes, the answers _are_ there. Whereas from you all I see is your continued assertion that nothing is wrong, that people who make accusations are liars, etc. Meanwhile, multiple people have pointed out their experiences, and there are screenshots of troubling behavior in the article linked to from the OP.


I call a spade a spade.
Whenever I ask for people to post proof, they never do, nor do I call out or reply to people who had a personal experience with her, like Patty and a few others. I'm posting from my experiences while you post from allegations. 
What have you've one with her? What experience do you have with her?
Do you really believe every allegation that someone claims? When in fact, I am part of the group people are making baseless claims about and in my personal experience, of _actually_ being apart of the groups those people are wrong?
I can show you every post in the set I was a part of that allegedly bought thousands of giveaways to hit the list, I can show you every one of Rebecca's post in the group where she is allegedly forcing us to buy her books for other sets.
Yet, strangely enough, there aren't any of those kind of post.
I'm telling you that every single accusation was wrong, from my own personal experience, from my very own eyes and you're going to question my claims when I say they aren't true, just because you heard someone else say something different?
Am I a [redacted] liar? Because that's what you yourself is claiming of me.
Who is in the wrong here? 
The people who's actually been in her sets til the end, or the people who are just spreading what they heard?
Don't be a lemming and jump off the cliff with the leader.
There's a lot of dancing around in this thread.


_edited -- profanity not necessary, thanks -- Ann_


----------



## JalexM

MyraScott said:


> This is the post I'm looking for. I haven't seen any posts where anyone says being in a multi-author box set is immoral, but it looks like some things were moderated. This sounds crazy, but there's no point arguing it if no one really said it... can you let me know if someone actually posted that box sets are immoral because they are too easy to sell?
> 
> Thanks


There are a lot of post in the middle of this thread from Sela, Wayne and a few others claiming that they are straight up immoral. Find the second to last mod post and start going back from there.
This thread has been going from allegation from allegation at break neck speeds.


----------



## Anarchist

brkingsolver said:


> Is that an accusation against those of us who drink tea? I absolutely defend the ethics of tea drinkers and our right to laugh at his post, too.


This is, by far, the most jarring post in this thread.

Why drink tea when you can enjoy the savory delights of espresso?!


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> I call a spade a spade.
> Whenever I ask for people to post proof, they never do, nor do I call out or reply to people who had a personal experience with her, like Patty and a few others. I'm posting from my experiences while you post from allegations.


There is a web page with screen shot after screen shot of people being bullied, thousands of gift copies being sent out, specific needs mentioned to hit one retailer or another, etc., etc., etc. Here it is again:

http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html

Did you:

1. Lose the link?
2. Not read it?
3. Read it and think that it's all faked?
4. Read it and really not see any unethical behavior here


----------



## ChristinaGarner

I'm posting from experience too, Jalex, and nothing I've said is baseless.


----------



## MyraScott

MonkishScribe said:


> People are saying that her particular way of playing the box set game is filled with dubious end runs around Amazon's ToS, bullying, and other unethical behavior. It has nothing to do with the legitimacy of box sets in general.


That's what I thought- that the problem was uploading half the actual content and getting the rest through instafreebie and requiring people to find others to download gift copies and using box marketing to sell the orgainizer's own books and so on.

I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss something. There's nothing wrong with multi-author box sets, as far as I know. And no one seems to be saying there is anything wrong with them, just that some of the ways they are being marketed are not immoral, but possibly illegal, like the receipts-for-lottery thing.

In case anyone did actually say that, I would argue that box sets definitely aren't immoral and they aren't really an easy sell. (Ask anyone who's organized one!)


----------



## MonkeyScribe

ChristinaGarner said:


> I'm posting from experience too, Jalex, and nothing I've said is baseless.


It's almost like there's a second definition of the word "baseless" that I don't know about.


----------



## MyraScott

JalexM said:


> There are a lot of post in the middle of this thread from Sela, Wayne and a few others claiming that they are straight up immoral. Find the second to last mod post and start going back from there.
> This thread has been going from allegation from allegation at break neck speeds.


Thanks! Do you mind quoting them? I still can't find them.


----------



## JalexM

ChristinaGarner said:


> I'm posting from experience too, Jalex, and nothing I've said is baseless.


That's why I only questioned you on the book for book thing, and not the other things. You said it was recent but how recent? This year? Because in the set I was in, she did nothing of the sort.



MonkishScribe said:


> It's almost like there's a second definition of the word "baseless" that I don't know about.


You claimed different things then her. You're allegations are still baseless. 
You have a habit of reading only what you want to see.


----------



## Anarchist

Boyd said:


> What absolutely terrified me, was that people dunked their biscuits in their tea... then to find out biscuits are cookies. I've been using milk for years... ACK!


That's practically criminal. There oughta be a law.


----------



## JalexM

MyraScott said:


> Thanks! Do you mind quoting them? I still can't find them.


I don't have time to go through the thread, but it starts around page 7 I believe.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> I don't have time to go through the thread, but it starts around page 7 I believe.


You don't have time to go through the thread, and you apparently don't have time to look at all the screenshots of sketchy and downright unethical behavior on the link in the OP, either. So why are you so confident in your assertion that we should all just move along, nothing to see here?


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> There are a lot of post in the middle of this thread from Sela, Wayne and a few others claiming that they are straight up immoral. Find the second to last mod post and start going back from there.
> This thread has been going from allegation from allegation at break neck speeds.


Sheesh, read ALL the words, dude. I copied and pasted it like three times, never edited it, bold-faced and upsized the words for clarity. One repetition of what I said about the morality of this game is at the top of page 12, the mods haven't deleted it. It's not about box sets ebing immoral, it's not about Hamilton being immoral, it's not about being a BS artist is immoral.

Buying your way onto a list that recognizes the best, is immoral. Earn it, don't buy it. And again, that's only MY opinion of what I see as the line between morality and immorality. YMMV, but substitute morality for mileage.


----------



## LadyG

JalexM said:


> That's why I only questioned you on the book for book thing, and not the other things. You said it was recent but how recent? This year? Because in the set I was in, she did nothing of the sort.


So you've done ONE box set with her, and that makes you both an expert and her biggest defender? Something's not right here.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

JalexM said:


> That's why I only questioned you on the book for book thing, and not the other things. You said it was recent but how recent? This year? Because in the set I was in, she did nothing of the sort.


Three $500 box sets and a $2,000 collection in the past nine months. Plus countless giveaways, NL building services, etc. I assume that counts as direct experience.

Just to be clear, I didn't claim book for book--I said she offered to add money to the advertising budget of box sets in exchange for participants of the sets buying copies of her solo title.

The mods haven't cracked down on the posting of screen shots so I'll happily do the same, although I don't have a photo bucket account, etc., and have no idea how else to post them. It probably won't be until later in the day.

Editing to say if anyone else who does have a quick way to post screenshots is willing to do so sooner, I'll happy supply them to you.


----------



## jaehaerys

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Buying your way onto a list that recognizes the best, is immoral. Earn it, don't buy it.


1000% this.


----------



## MyraScott

JalexM said:


> I don't have time to go through the thread, but it starts around page 7 I believe.


I've read them multiple times. I do not see anyone saying participating in a multi-author box set is immoral. If you can't find them either, I'm going with "no one said that."


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> You don't have time to go through the thread, and you apparently don't have time to look at all the screenshots of sketchy and downright unethical behavior on the link in the OP, either. So why are you so confident in your assertion that we should all just move along, nothing to see here?


I already looked through it and gave my answer to you. I'm not going to baby you through it.
Just because you decide to ignore it is your problem.


LadyG said:


> So you've done ONE box set with her, and that makes you both an expert and her biggest defender? Something's not right here.


What's not right exactly? Spell it out.



ChristinaGarner said:


> Three $500 box sets and a $2,000 collection in the past nine months. Plus countless giveaways, NL building services, etc. I assume that counts as direct experience.
> 
> Just to be clear, I didn't claim book for book--I said she offered to add money to the advertising budget of box sets in exchange for participants of the sets buying copies of her solo title.
> 
> The mods haven't cracked down on the posting of screen shots so I'll happily do the same, although I don't have a photo bucket account, etc., and have no idea how else to post them. It probably won't be until later in the day.
> 
> Editing to say if anyone else who does have a quick way to post screenshots is willing to do so sooner, I'll happy supply them to you.


Got it, I understand.
Personally, I don't think that's morally wrong or against the TOS. But if you do, then that's fine with me. I won't argue it.


MyraScott said:


> I've read them multiple times. I do not see anyone saying participating in a multi-author box set is immoral. If you can't find them either, I'm going with "no one said that."


It's literally a post above you.
Apparently spending money on marketing is bad.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

ChristinaGarner said:


> Editing to say if anyone else who does have a quick way to post screenshots is willing to do so sooner, I'll happy supply them to you.


I'm techno-challenged, so if I need to post a picture on here, I first post it on Facebook, with the post set to "me only", then click view image, and copy and paste the link to the image. Works every time, but I often forget to turn off "me only" and wonder why I don't get any feedback on subsequent Facebook posts.


----------



## Evenstar

I would like to thank the mods for not shutting this post down. It is actually very informative for a lot of people, who I'm sure are not commenting simply because, like me, they have no personal experience of any of it to draw upon.

I would like to ask a question if I may and get an answer from someone actually involved in the sets, even if just briefly; perhaps JalexM would be good enough to confirm his experience on this topic too.

Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true?  Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> It's literally a post above you.
> Apparently spending money on marketing is bad.


Oh, you mean the post where he does not say that very thing?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I just want to say I think this thread is very valuable and many of us have wished for the truth to come out for a long time. I will encourage members of Kboards to keep calm and don't take the bait on name calling because it often gets threads locked and shut down and then they die into the ether. Another pattern that has happened in the past with other threads like this have happened is certain people purposely try to get more name calling and nastiness to happen so the thread gets locked and closed.

And thank you to the mods here, I know this isn't an easy job to let both sides have their say, but also protect Kboards itself. 

And for the record, I drink coffee, tea, and espresso. And this little author Momma has to get to work, because I also have health problems, a child on the autistic spectrum who I homeschool, a military husband, and more tasks to get done than time. I don't cut myself any slack, and I don't expect others to do so either. CHEERS! And Happy Weekend everyone.


----------



## Lydniz

Evenstar said:


> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


The screenshots on the website seem to indicate that's the case.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Evenstar said:


> I would like to ask a question if I may and get an answer from someone actually involved in the sets, even if just briefly; perhaps JalexM would be good enough to confirm his experience on this topic too.
> 
> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


There's a screen capture on the initial link, with Hamilton's response the part on the bottom:


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Evenstar said:


> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


I can confirm this is true. She says it's b/c she makes no profit. However, she had me pay that way even for the $2,000 collection even though the contract clearly states part of the money goes toward her coaching services. She claims PayPal has no issue with this. They've vehemently told me otherwise.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> Got it, I understand.
> Personally, I don't think that's morally wrong or against the TOS. But if you do, then that's fine with me. I won't argue it.


Jalex, you do realize that you just told Christina that you have lower moral standards than she does. Or did you mean that you have a more enlightened idea of what morality is? I think the former, as Christina's notion of morality seems to be more closely aligned with my own.


----------



## Becca Mills

MyraScott said:


> Thanks! Do you mind quoting them? I still can't find them.


My *guess* is that Rebecca's referring to Wayne's posts, Myra. I don't remember deleting any posts claiming boxed sets are inherently immoral, but I'm not able to double-check that from my phone.

In response to another question, the mods will have to discuss the posting of screenshots. As two of us are out and about at the moment, that's going to take some time. My initial impulse is that any third party's identifying info should certainly be redacted, but we may well want to restrict such posting beyond that, once we can discuss it.


----------



## JalexM

Evenstar said:


> I would like to thank the mods for not shutting this post down. It is actually very informative for a lot of people, who I'm sure are not commenting simply because, like me, they have no personal experience of any of it to draw upon.
> 
> I would like to ask a question if I may and get an answer from someone actually involved in the sets, even if just briefly; perhaps JalexM would be good enough to confirm his experience on this topic too.
> 
> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


She does do that. At least for the buy in's, I don't remember for her other services(Her book blast are awesome and drama free, ha). She has claimed that she has talked to paypal about it and they were fine with it since she doesn't get paid from the buy in. But, that's based on if you believe her or not. I do, but if you don't, then I can see that being a detractor.


MonkishScribe said:


> Oh, you mean the post where he does not say that very thing?


Where do you think the money for buy in goes?
To new shoes?


----------



## Jim Johnson

Evenstar said:


> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


I paid the buy in for my box set through the business services option. Because my writing is a business. I can't speak for the other members in the box set with me as to how they paid. I can say no one in our box set was required to pay using the friends and family option. I haven't looked at the Paypal TOS in a while, but I suspect doing so isn't permitted. I don't remember if anyone was asked to--I didn't monitor the facebook group that closely. *shrug*


----------



## jaehaerys

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I just want to say I think this thread is very valuable and many of us have wished for the truth to come out for a long time. I will encourage members of Kboards to keep calm and don't take the bait on name calling because it often gets threads locked and shut down and then they die into the ether. Another pattern that has happened in the past with other threads like this have happened is certain people purposely try to get more name calling and nastiness to happen so the thread gets locked and closed.
> 
> And thank you to the mods here, I know this isn't an easy job to let both sides have their say, but also protect Kboards itself.
> 
> And for the record, I drink coffee, tea, and espresso. And this little author Momma has to get to work, because I also have health problems, a child on the autistic spectrum who I homeschool, a military husband, and more tasks to get done than time. I don't cut myself any slack, and I don't expect others to do so either. CHEERS! And Happy Weekend everyone.


I agree, I'm glad the mods have kept it open because this is an important topic that effects most if not all of the indie community.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Jim Johnson said:


> I paid the buy in for my box set through the business services option. Because my writing is a business. I can't speak for the other members in the box set with me as to how they paid. I can say no one was required or asked to pay using the friends and family option. I haven't looked at the Paypal TOS in a while, but I suspect doing so isn't permitted.


Did you incur the PayPal fees? B/c I was told expressly that if I paid via the services option I needed to pay those fees which is also a violation of PayPal's TOS.


----------



## JalexM

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Jalex, you do realize that you just told Christina that you have lower moral standards than she does. Or did you mean that you have a more enlightened idea of what morality is? I think the former, as Christina's notion of morality seems to be more closely aligned with my own.


Who knew that you were the moral compass that all should strive for.
I don't care if you think certain things are morally wrong. But don't dare claim that you are morally superior to me.


----------



## Jim Johnson

ChristinaGarner said:


> Did you incur the PayPal fees? B/c I was told expressly that if I paid via the services option I needed to pay those fees which is also a violation of PayPal's TOS.


Nope, no fees for me. I pay fees on international business transactions, but not domestic.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Jalex, you do realize that you just told Christina that you have lower moral standards than she does. Or did you mean that you have a more enlightened idea of what morality is? I think the former, as Christina's notion of morality seems to be more closely aligned with my own.


Also, it's not about what anyone thinks violates Amazon's TOS, it's what THEY think does. Whether they exercise a punitive option is at their discretion, but this is likely viewed as rank manipulation--why else pay someone back to buy your own book?? (To up your rank/visibility, that's why.)


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> Where do you think the money for buy in goes?
> To new shoes?


Do the math, man! She makes a profit. Whether she spends it on shoes or childcare is immaterial.

_Edited by Becca, who can't remember the code for wee type. _


----------



## Jake Kerr

> It's literally a post above you.
> Apparently spending money on marketing is bad.


When someone says "*this type* of marketing is bad" and you say "they said spending money on marketing is bad," you are misrepresenting the content of their statement.

What boggles my mind is that I had to literally scroll up like two inches to see what a total misrepresentation you made.

ETA: clarified second quote to be more in line with original comment.


----------



## JalexM

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Do the math, man! She makes a profit. Whether she spends it on shoes or childcare is immaterial. Saying she doesn't is like saying a calculator lies.


Do it for me. How exactly is she making a profit?
Do you have her expense report?


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> But don't dare claim that you are morally superior to me.


I didn't. You did.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

ChristinaGarner said:


> I can confirm this is true. She says it's b/c she makes no profit. However, she had me pay that way even for the $2,000 collection even though the contract clearly states part of the money goes toward her coaching services. She claims PayPal has no issue with this. They've vehemently told me otherwise.


I don't claim to be a Paypal expert, but doing it this way doesn't it:

1) negate the 2-3% charge that Paypal charges for money transfers 
2) makes it more difficult to dispute / issue a chargeback.

From Paypal's website:

If you're making a purchase, there are 2 payment types:

Goods - Select this payment type when you're paying for something that you didn't buy on eBay.
Services - Use this payment type when your purchase is not a product but a service (for example, work performed for you by someone else)
When you make a purchase, the seller pays a small fee to receive your money.

If you're sending a personal payment, payment types include:

Gift - Select this payment type when you're sending money as a gift for a birthday or other special occasion.

You can make a personal payment to anyone in the U.S. for free. There is a small charge for payments made with a debit or credit card.

Nothing about chargebacks on this page, though.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Jim Johnson said:


> Nope, no fees for me. I pay fees on international business transactions, but not domestic.


Incur was the wrong word--I mean to say I was told by Rebecca that if I used the services option I would need to add $16 to my payment to cover her merchant fees.(TOS violation) It's a way around PayPal's buyer protections.

It was on the sign up form we both used for the Spellbound box set. Sounds like you were allowed to ignore that directive.


----------



## JalexM

Wayne Stinnett said:


> I didn't. You did.


No I didn't. I said we had different Morals on the issue. You straight up said I had lower moral standards.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> I don't claim to be a Paypal expert, but doing it this way doesn't it:
> 
> 1) negate the 2-3% charge that Paypal charges for money transfers
> 2) makes it more difficult to dispute / issue a chargeback.
> 
> From Paypal's website:
> 
> If you're making a purchase, there are 2 payment types:
> 
> Goods - Select this payment type when you're paying for something that you didn't buy on eBay.
> Services - Use this payment type when your purchase is not a product but a service (for example, work performed for you by someone else)
> When you make a purchase, the seller pays a small fee to receive your money.
> 
> If you're sending a personal payment, payment types include:
> 
> Gift - Select this payment type when you're sending money as a gift for a birthday or other special occasion.
> 
> You can make a personal payment to anyone in the U.S. for free. There is a small charge for payments made with a debit or credit card.
> 
> Nothing about chargebacks on this page, though.


You can in fact, make a claim on gifts, it doesn't make it harder to get back either.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

JalexM said:


> Do it for me. How exactly is she making a profit?
> Do you have her expense report?


She's just doing all of this out of the goodness of her heart. Bless her, man, who could ever doubt that? 40,000 grand for a 20 book (sorta) box set, but hey, it all goes into marketing, every last penny. And those people who say that she told them part of it goes for a nebulous "coaching" fee are just bitter haters.


----------



## JalexM

MonkishScribe said:


> She's just doing all of this out of the goodness of her heart. Bless her, man, who could ever doubt that? 40,000 grand for a 20 book (sorta) box set, but hey, it all goes into marketing, every last penny. And those people who say that she told them part of it goes for a nebulous "coaching" fee are just bitter haters.


Strange, she never had a set that was worth 40000 grand that has gone out yet.
Does it feel good to just say things and not have any proof to back it up?


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

JalexM said:


> You can in fact, make a claim on gifts, it doesn't make it harder to get back either.


Fair enough. I don't send too many "gifts" so I haven't run into it much.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

JalexM said:


> You can in fact, make a claim on gifts, it doesn't make it harder to get back either.


This is 100% untrue. You cannot dispute them via PayPal, you must go to your bank. Banks have different standards, time frames, etc., and getting money back is more difficult.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> Do it for me. How exactly is she making a profit?
> Do you have her expense report?


$500 buy in X 20 writers = $10,000.
Cover - $100
Formatting - $1000
Ads for a week - $2000
Gift copies - $1000

Profit - $5900

Am I missing some expenses? I've never done one of these, but I've published one or two books and successfully marketed thim. Just a bit. I think the formatting cost may be high.


----------



## Jake Kerr

> Do it for me. How exactly is she making a profit?
> Do you have her expense report?


Well, if her marketing actually worked, she wouldn't have to have an army of people buy the books to get on the list.


----------



## Not any more

Evenstar said:


> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


Yes, this is true. She's not the only one who does this. I had another promo service ask for this and had a different price for their services if you paid using business services. The "I'm doing this as a favor" shtick will go about 2 minutes if she's ever audited by IRS, but that's none of my business.


----------



## JalexM

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Fair enough. I don't send too many "gifts" so I haven't run into it much.


To be fair, I feel a little iffy about the gifting part, but she has never lead me astray before.


ChristinaGarner said:


> This is 100% untrue. You cannot dispute them via PayPal, you must go to your bank. Banks have different standards, time frames, etc., and getting money back is more difficult.


I filed and won a claim before for gifting. A google search would show others have as well.
You just don't get the typical amount of protection. You have to argue harder for your dispute.


----------



## Jim Johnson

ChristinaGarner said:


> Incur was the wrong word--I mean to say I was told by Rebecca that if I used the services option I would need to add $16 to my payment to cover her merchant fees.(TOS violation) It's a way around PayPal's buyer protections.
> 
> It was on the sign up form we both used for the Spellbound box set. Sounds like you were allowed to ignore that directive.


Honestly, I don't remember. I looked at my expense sheet from last year and I see the $500 payment for Spellbound. Sue me--I have a toddler. I can't remember what I had for breakfast much less what I paid for a buy-in last, what, August?


----------



## jaehaerys

brkingsolver said:


> Yes, this is true. She's not the only one who does this. I had another promo service ask for this and had a different price for their services if you paid using business services. The "I'm doing this as a favor" shtick will go about 2 minutes if she's ever audited by IRS, but that's none of my business.


Having only learned about practices like this from this thread, it makes me wonder if you peel back the indie self-pub layers just how much rot you're going to find. It's alarming, frustrating and heartbreaking all at the same time.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

ChristinaGarner said:


> This is 100% untrue. You cannot dispute them via PayPal, you must go to your bank. Banks have different standards, time frames, etc., and getting money back is more difficult.


Visa and Mastercard will always allow chargebacks, or an attempt at them. Banks can be iffy, depending on how it was done. Thanks for the clarification!


----------



## Jake Kerr

> To be fair, I feel a little iffy about the gifting part, but she has never lead me astray before.


Well, seeing as the gifting part is pretty much the only way to get on the best seller list without actually, you know, having enough fans to buy your books, then you're feeling iffy about the entire thing.


----------



## JalexM

Wayne Stinnett said:


> $500 buy in X 20 writers = $10,000.
> Cover - $100
> Formatting - $1000
> Ads for a week - $2000
> Gift copies - $1000
> 
> Profit - $5900
> 
> Am I missing some expenses? I've never done one of these, but I've published one or two books and successfully marketed thim. Just a bit. I think the formatting cost may be high.


You do know that her sets are on preorder for three months, so the ad spend isn't just for one week, it's spread out.
She doesn't give a thousand dollars worth of copies.
If there are any gifts, they all come from the authors personal pockets and it's not in the thousands.
If we go by your budgeting and fit it within the real constraints, then she would be in the red.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

JalexM said:


> Personally, I don't think that's morally wrong or against the TOS. But if you do, then that's fine with me. I won't argue it.


If viewpoints on morality differ, one has to be a lower standard than the other, correct? You said you don't think something's morally wrong, and Christina said she thought it did. Two different levels of morality. One has to be lower. Are you saying your morals are higher than hers? Cause, you know, it didn't sound that way.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Visa and Mastercard will always allow chargebacks, or an attempt at them. Banks can be iffy, depending on how it was done. Thanks for the clarification!


Iffy is exactly the right word. If the money was gifted directly from your bank, the only recourse is through your own bank, period.


----------



## jaehaerys

JalexM said:


> You do know that her sets are on preorder for three months, so the ad spend isn't just for one week, it's spread out.
> She doesn't give a thousand dollars worth of copies.
> If there are any gifts, they all come from the authors personal pockets and it's not in the thousands.
> If we go by your budgeting and fit it within the real constraints, then she would be in the red.


But why is the gifting done at all?


----------



## Stewart Matthews

dn8791 said:


> But why is the gifting done at all?


PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

dn8791 said:


> But why is the gifting done at all?


I think there's some conflation on gifting. One is talking about PayPal, the other about books.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## JalexM

jakedfw said:


> Well, seeing as the gifting part is pretty much the only way to get on the best seller list without actually, you know, having enough fans to buy your books, then you're feeling iffy about the entire thing.


You do know I was posting about paypal and not actually gifting books right?

If you read some more you learn that the money goes toward advertising on Bookbub and other venues. Any book gifting are done from the authors own pockets and isn't in the thousands. 


Wayne Stinnett said:


> If viewpoints on morality differ, one has to be a lower standard than the other, correct? You said you don't think something's morally wrong, and Christina said she thought it did. Two different levels of morality. One has to be lower. Are you saying your morals are higher than hers? Cause, you know, it didn't sound that way.


You're arguing levels, I'm arguing views.
Just because a viewpoint is different doesn't make the standards any different.
You're arguing for arguing sakes.
Like me, I don't believe in a God, but a lot of people do. That doesn't any person more right or wrong their views, just different.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## MyraScott

dn8791 said:


> But why is the gifting done at all?


Basically, it's buying your way up the Amazon ranks and into the USAT lists. All those "sales" of the book are actually just paid purchases by the promoter, redeemed by people who have been given gift money to buy them.

If you took $10000, put your book up at $.99 and gifted 10000 copies of the book (with warnings that they must download the book by midnight), you could buy your way onto the list and you become a USA Today Bestselling author. And your book would rank really high in the Amazon store.


----------



## Becca Mills

Jalex and Wayne, time to put the lower/higher morality issue to rest.


----------



## JalexM

MyraScott said:


> Basically, it's buying your way up the Amazon ranks and into the USAT lists. All those "sales" of the book are actually just paid purchases by the promoter, redeemed by people who have been given gift money to buy them.
> 
> If you took $10000, put your book up at $.99 and gifted 10000 copies of the book (with warnings that they must download the book by midnight), you could buy your way onto the list and you become a USA Today Bestselling author. And your book would rank really high in the Amazon store.


The box set I was in have over 5000 sales before it went off preorder.
5000.
At the end of the first week, we had around 6500 sale in total.
For people arguing rules and TOS's, they should know that you can *not* gift a preorder.
So, where is this magically number of gifting 10k copies is coming from?


----------



## MyraScott

JalexM said:


> The box set I was in have over 5000 sales before it went off preorder.
> 5000.
> At the end of the first week, we had around 6500 sale in total.
> For people arguing rules and TOS's, they should know that you can *not* gift a preorder.
> So, where is this magically number of gifting 10k copies is coming from?


Chill, dude. That was an example, not an accusation.







Here, have a beer on me.


----------



## Becca Mills

I've locked the thread temporarily so all mods have a chance to catch up.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

The forum's owner and staff have now had a chance to fully review this thread and associated correspondence, so we're reopening it for posting. Thanks for your patience.

Going forward, we ask that new posts in this thread be focused very specifically on the issues raised in the OP. This is not the place for larger discussions of the value of boxed sets or "letters." We also ask that posts be strictly limited to offerings of new facts and evidence and analysis thereof. Such information will allow members to make up their minds on the issues. Information is harder to find when it's interspersed with off-topic material or personal arguments. Name-calling, snarkiness, and jabs will be deleted, and anyone posting such material will be barred from further participation in the thread. It is not the role of KB staff to adjudicate conflicts; it is our role to facilitate conversation by enforcing professional civility, and we will be doing that rigorously here.

We ask that screenshots of threads from Facebook and other sites NOT be added to this thread as within-post images. If you would like to post a link that leads to a site where screenshots appear (as the OP does), that is acceptable, but do not place "img" tags around the link.


Thanks, 
the KB Mod Team


----------



## Evenstar

Thank you for reopening this thread, there is an awful lot being discussed here that I would like to get to the bottom of and understand better


----------



## ChristinaGarner

I agree, it's a very important topic. Thanks to the mods and site owner for allowing it to stand.


----------



## sela

JalexM said:


> The box set I was in have over 5000 sales before it went off preorder.
> 5000.
> At the end of the first week, we had around 6500 sale in total.
> For people arguing rules and TOS's, they should know that you can *not* gift a preorder.
> So, where is this magically number of gifting 10k copies is coming from?


The issue is not whether there were 10,000 or 1,000 or 500 copies gifted to hit the NYTs list. The issue is using gift cards or gifting to make enough sales to hit the list.

Whether it's 500 or 5,000 or 50,000, it's the principle of the thing, not the number.

It's one thing to run a giveaway to publicize the release, and gift a few copies as a way to spread the word about a new release. That's a normal part of marketing. Free samples and all in Walmart.

It's an entirely different kettle of fish to buy gift cards or gift copies in bulk / large numbers that are intended to ensure the book or collection qualifies for USAT or NYTs.

That's not kosher. It's buying your way onto the list vs. getting the designation via actual customers/readers buying it out of their own free will.

The whole issue of a bestseller's list is to promote or inform people about what books are selling the best in a given week. It's supposed to say "These books are the best selling books this week."

It is not meant to say "These authors bought enough copies of their own books in order to be the top selling books this week."

If people can't see the difference, well, I got nothing.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Agreed, Sela. 

Also, incentivizing people to download the gifted book--by promising entry into a drawing for a gift card--is a TOS violation. (And, as was pointed out in another thread, possibly illegal in some states.) I've spoken with Amazon about it and it's considered rank manipulation. It's their discretion on whether they punish the TOS breach, but it is a breach, and they can drop the hammer anytime.

Beyond the possible consequences, people will have to decide for themselves if that tactic lines up with their integrity.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

When anybody you're thinking of doing business with is constantly in the midst of drama, with accusations constantly flying back and forth, remember: This business is all about reputation. You'll be known by the company you keep, and you'll also be in a bind if your scruples tell you to bow out but you'll be out big money/get named and shamed if you do. 

This stuff happens. But it sure as heck isn't true that "everybody does it" or "it's too hard to figure out Amazon's TOS." Really--it's not that hard to figure out the rules, and most authors follow them. Want to know why KDP cracked down on multi-author boxed sets in KU, though? A few organizers playing shell games. Doesn't make boxed sets themselves unethical or most organizers dishonest. But some are.


----------



## Guest

Evenstar said:


> Is it true about people being asked to buy in using Paypal's friends and family option rather than under business services? I find that rather concerning, why is no one discussing the huge ramifications of this? I can only assume it simply can't be true? Would really appreciate a straight answer on that.


I haven't worked with the organizer but a friend who has asked me to post this on their behalf as a response to your question, Evenstar.

"This is the exact language used when I was asked to pay for participation in the set: $500 if sending Friends and Family, $516 if in the US and sending as a services payment, if not in US and not sending as Friends and Family, please message for fees."


----------



## AllyWho

SummerNights said:


> "This is the exact language used when I was asked to pay for participation in the set: $500 if sending Friends and Family, $516 if in the US and sending as a services payment, if not in US and not sending as Friends and Family, please message for fees."


It's absolutely a *fact* that she asks for payment via F&F. It was the subject of a thread here (not sure how to dig it out?) where Rebecca herself *stated *she asked for payment as a gift/F&F because organising the boxed sets isn't a business service (despite the fact there are contracts etc). It is also a concern that there is a growing number of authors who pulled out of boxed set (for various reasons, because let's face it, life happens) and they now have no recourse to get their money back because it was paid via F&F.

http://insideindie.weebly.com/pay-pal-ff.html


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

SummerNights said:


> I haven't worked with the organizer but a friend who has asked me to post this on their behalf as a response to your question, Evenstar.
> 
> "This is the exact language used when I was asked to pay for participation in the set: $500 if sending Friends and Family, $516 if in the US and sending as a services payment, if not in US and not sending as Friends and Family, please message for fees."


Of equal concern is anyone spending > $600 via friends and family and whether 1099s were submitted at year end.


----------



## Not any more

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Of equal concern is anyone spending > $600 via friends and family and whether 1099s were submitted at year end.


Oh, piffle. IRS doesn't care about indie publishing. There's no money in it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Betsy the Quilter said:


> The forum's owner and staff have now had a chance to fully review this thread and associated correspondence, so we're reopening it for posting. Thanks for your patience.
> 
> *Going forward, we ask that new posts in this thread be focused very specifically on the issues raised in the OP. This is not the place for larger discussions of the value of boxed sets or "letters." We also ask that posts be strictly limited to offerings of new facts and evidence and analysis thereof.* Such information will allow members to make up their minds on the issues. Information is harder to find when it's interspersed with off-topic material or personal arguments. Name-calling, snarkiness, and jabs will be deleted, and anyone posting such material will be barred from further participation in the thread. It is not the role of KB staff to adjudicate conflicts; it is our role to facilitate conversation by enforcing professional civility, and we will be doing that rigorously here.
> 
> We ask that screenshots of threads from Facebook and other sites NOT be added to this thread as within-post images. If you would like to post a link that leads to a site where screenshots appear (as the OP does), that is acceptable, but do not place "img" tags around the link.
> 
> Thanks,
> the KB Mod Team


Let's try to keep posts pertinent, informative and specific lest important information for the community be lost, please...

Thanks!

Betsy


----------



## ChristinaGarner

AliceW said:


> It's absolutely a *fact* that she asks for payment via F&F. It was the subject of a thread here (not sure how to dig it out?) where Rebecca herself *stated *she asked for payment as a gift/F&F because organising the boxed sets isn't a business service (despite the fact there are contracts etc).


She did state that. However, the Charmed Legacy contract states that a portion of the money is for a year-long writing and marketing schedule and "coaching every step of the way."

Those are services which makes it a lot harder to claim to be just a pass-thru when the profit is in the contract. And yes, I was asked to pay F&F for that as well. I had never been asked to pay anyone that way and didn't know any better. For anyone else, I hope it's a huge red flag.


----------



## Becca Mills

Jane_Dough said:


> Not sure if anyone has been paying attention, but someone is updating that site. http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html
> 
> Things are getting interesting. Scroll down to the comment section. Wow.


That comment section contains some really distasteful remarks about authors I like and respect -- a good example of what our forum decorum prevents KB from becoming. 

Also, for the record, I possess ZERO cats.

_Nor do I. --Betsy_

_cats? What are cats? -- Ann_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

ChristinaGarner said:


> Those are services which makes it a lot harder to claim to be just a pass-thru when the profit is in the contract. And yes, I was asked to pay F&F for that as well. I had never been asked to pay anyone that way and didn't know any better. For anyone else, I hope it's a huge red flag.


Don't know if I've mentioned this before in the thread, but I think it's awesome that you and a few others have come forward and shared some of your experiences. I've heard too many stories via PM of fear of reprisals. My hope is that others are inspired by your example as well.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Don't know if I've mentioned this before in the thread, but I think it's awesome that you and a few others have come forward and shared some of your experiences. I've heard too many stories via PM of fear of reprisals. My hope is that others are inspired by your example as well.


Thanks, Rick. I thank all of the rest of you for speaking up when you have no skin in this game. I hope it will embolden others to come forward and share their experiences. I have no agenda other than providing the facts as I witnessed them. Others can decide how they want to proceed. For some that business model will be in alignment with their integrity. Others, not so much.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Of equal concern is anyone spending > $600 via friends and family and whether 1099s were submitted at year end.


You're totally right about this, and something easily overlooked. I want to ask how one does that when a tax ID is not provided but it might be too off topic. I'll consult the interwebs. But, not supplying a tax ID number could probably also be considered a red flag to watch out for.


----------



## wheart

For those who cancelled and wanted a refund, was there a 'no refund' policy written into the contract? Also, had you been told of what would be taking place with the project when you agreed to the contract?

If your answer is 'yes' and you agreed to the terms, then ...

For any author who joins these boxed sets, it's just as much a commitment to follow through with your obligation that was stated from the start to be a part of that program, as it is for the organizer to follow through with their end of the deal. 

If an author pulls out for reasons other than the organizer not following through with their commitment and not providing the service/product the author had paid for ... the organizer would be justified for not refunding especially if book formatting, book cover, scheduled ad setups/placements, etc. had already been in the works/taken place. 

Also there are many others involved who are affected with us breaking our commitment to the contract/project (ex: the other authors in the project, the book cover designer, the content designer/formatter, etc.), not only the organizer, especially if a certain budget was set for ad expenses and new expenses would be incurred since the book cover would need to be redone, reformatting the book's contents to take out the canceling author's story, etc.

Asking for a refund would be out of integrity if all the above had taken place (especially if it was stated in the contract and agreed to by signing that contract).

Again, there are always two sides to the story.

So I ask again for those who had asked for a refund, by your good conscience, do you feel that you were justified in asking for the refund? Did the organizer fail to deliver what they committed to?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

ChristinaGarner said:


> You're totally right about this, and something easily overlooked. I want to ask how one does that when a tax ID is not provided but it might be too off topic. I'll consult the interwebs. But, not supplying a tax ID number could probably also be considered a red flag to watch out for.


Not a tax professional here, but when you pay via PayPal you do not have to send a 1099misc, that's covered in that instruction. However, paying via Family and Friends which wouldn't be captured for a 1099k (the over $20,000 and 200 transactions a year) would complicate things. I would be very leery of paying for business expenses in such a way in case I was audited. How do I prove the expenses really we're for a boxed set marketing endeavor vs. not just me helping an author friend out? I would be worried if I claimed money I sent via Family and Friends as a business expenses and I was audited and the IRS asked that other person, if they lie and say it was a personal loan or something, then I would be possibly viewed as guilty of being fraudulent on my taxes and I reported it! That's why business should go through official business channels. Friends and family should be just that, expenses not related to business.

Also, I think too the insistence that preorders can't be gifted is rather insulting to those of us who have seen the turn in you receipt for the .99 book you bought for a bigger giveaway. Rafflecopter has great resources about illegal lotteries and sweepstakes and giveaways and how you also have to worry about consideration meaning a readers time. You cannot require a bunch of tasks like a survey or turning in receipts to be grounds for entry to anything.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> For those who cancelled and wanted a refund, was there a 'no refund' policy written into the contract? Also, had you been told of what would be taking place with the project when you agreed to the contract?
> 
> If your answer is 'yes' and you agreed to the terms, then ...


This is a great question and one I'm happy to answer.

I was in 3 box sets and one collection. This thread is about box sets so I'll narrow my answer to that.

Here's how it works:

Rebecca Hamilton posts in her GenreCrave FB group about openings for a box set. Here's an example of the original terms for the Spellbound box set (this is before payment is sent):

1.	Close to 60k words
2.	Not free on any platform when the set is live
3.	Able to be wide for week 1 of release
4.	Able to be in Kindle Unlimited for 3 months, commencing after first week
5.	Young adult/New adult set, appropriate for all ages groups

There was a Google sign up form that required the transaction ID for the money sent. (Again, this is before the contract)

In my case, I never received a contract for the Spellbound set, however I did receive one for Myths and Legends, and I e-signed. Here's where the no refund policy goes awry.

We all know that in December two of Rebecca's sets got taken down by Amazon for violating the exclusivity rule. At the time she was adamant it was a new rule, however we also know it had been present in the terms since at least 9/30/16. (Possibly before, but my memory fails.) So, either she drafted contracts while ignorant of a standing rule or in defiance of it--you can decide for yourself.

She then posted we would either need to completely unpublish our works after the first week wide, swap out our full-length novel for something (anything--novella 5k short) else, or withdraw.

A month or so later, she said we would have to sign new contracts. The problem with that was, legally, we didn't need to sign them. All four attorneys I consulted agreed that

a) because the original contract had no language requiring signing a new contract
b) and because contract 2 (contrary to her claim) differed substantially from contract 1

the first contract was voidable and could be rescinded. Once that happens, both parties must be made whole. In this case, that would have required her to return my money, and that of anyone who opted not to sign the 2nd contract. She has refused to do so, erroneously claiming the no refund policy. However, it's not a refund.

For the two box sets I did not receive contracts for, the only terms I could be held to would be the ones upon sign up--ones she could no longer fulfill. Again, the money due back is not a refund. Also, regarding Spellbound, KU terms weren't the only thing that changed. It went from a set "appropriate for all ages" to allowing "super steamy." For YA authors like myself, that was a problem, even though we were soundly shut down. Still, it's a change in terms that was not agreed to by both parties. Unilaterally changing the terms of a contract is another way it becomes (legally) voidable.


----------



## ShayneRutherford

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Don't know if I've mentioned this before in the thread, but I think it's awesome that you and a few others have come forward and shared some of your experiences. I've heard too many stories via PM of fear of reprisals. My hope is that others are inspired by your example as well.


I agree totally with Rick, and want to say thanks for having the guts to come forward and share all that you have, Christina. <3


----------



## ChristinaGarner

ShayneRutherford said:


> I agree totally with Rick, and want to say thanks for having the guts to come forward and share all that you have, Christina. <3


Thanks, Shayne, very kind of you to say! I think we all saw "that post" and know what it's cost me, but enough is enough. <3


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I never knew that about the contracts changing Christina. That makes sense now when you think about Amazon's terms that specifically calls out they can change the terms at any time. Contracts between professionals that lacked that make sense that it would require newly agreed terms, and a cautionary tale for people who build businesses that hinge on the availability of other 3rd party businesses to speak with attorneys for their boilerplate contracts. That experience speaks to a lot of different parts of the indie world and is a great thing to share.


----------



## AllyWho

Mods - does the issue surrounding paying for services as Friends and Family need its own thread or can it be discussed here? 

There appears to be a twitter account tweeting screen shots and a discussion with PayPal about the F&F issue but I don't want to post a link and hijack this conversation, although it's kind of tied in as its how some authors are paying to opt in to a boxed set.


----------



## Not any more

Something people should keep in mind is that contracts are not necessarily binding. A contract involving any kind of illegal activity (not saying that is the case here) is null and void on its face. When you sign a contract that doesn't have every little thing spelled out so there is no argument about what things mean, you are opening yourself to a world of trouble.

If you do not have the money to have a contract vetted by a lawyer, then you don't have the money to sign the contract. It's as simple as that. The courts do not consider stupidity a valid defense.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

AliceW said:


> Mods - does the issue surrounding paying for services as Friends and Family need its own thread or can it be discussed here?
> 
> There appears to be a twitter account tweeting screen shots and a discussion with PayPal about the F&F issue but I don't want to post a link and hijack this conversation, although it's kind of tied in as its how some authors are paying to opt in to a boxed set.


Give us a sec to confer and agree.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

brkingsolver said:


> If you do not have the money to have a contract vetted by a lawyer, then you don't have the money to sign the contract. It's as simple as that. The courts do not consider stupidity a valid defense.


This is such a great point. If I'd not been so foolish, I'd have saved myself a world of hurt.


----------



## Nicholas Erik

ChristinaGarner said:


> I'd like to draw an important distinction here about gifting copies. Gifting them is one thing, and anyone can make a decision what they are comfortable with. Incentivizing people to claim said gifted book (instead of converting it into a gift card) with an entry into a drawing for a higher denomination Amazon gift card is a whole other thing. (This is how GenreCrave's Book Blast works--there is a FB group with 5k+ plus people who do exactly that.) Similarly, promising to add money to the advertising budget of a box set in exchange for buying a copy of a solo title is verboten. (And really tacky.)


This is a post back from around p.5/6 (probably p.10/11 for those with standard 25 posts per page settings). I understand that most people are discussing the box sets, but a lot of Kboarders use the Book Blast, too (and it's expensive). And as someone who has used the Book Blast/Mega Book Blast six times over the past year or so, this is extremely troubling.

Can you (or anyone else) expand on how the Book Blast works? Given its popularity, some extra insight would be great. I'm a little unclear as to what's happening with the gifting. The order page talks about how the method is secret (bolding mine):



> This is not a newsletter feature. *This is a direct marketing campaign. We have various segments of readers on social media who have signed up for us to send them a message if we find a book we think they might like*. Our book blast covers a send to the three best-fitting segments of readers we have. *We do not give out information about our readers or about our segments, as this is one of the most effective services for new releases and our secret business model*...Please note: There is no way to view a Book Blast because that is done via a direct marketing campaign.


This wording suggests, to me, posting in private Facebook groups, FB ads, maybe some Twitter/Pinterest/Instagram, whatever, stuff. E.g. the secret sauce is just marketing hype - fairly standard promotion, just access to the GenreCrave platform/readers. Whatever, fine - punch up and differentiate your services with great copy. But the gifting thing is an altogether different animal - and while, perhaps "secret" and unique, is _not_ what I signed up for at all.

To be 100% clear, Rebecca and her staff have always been fair and courteous to me, even rescheduling blasts/waiting on my book link until the wee hours of the morning. But if the Blasts are fueled by gifting, it makes the sales useless for sell-through/also-bought purposes (which is the main reason I booked them - since the upfront ROI has always been highly negative). Looking over the results from each run in light of Christina's post, the sales distribution make a lot more sense (e.g. _all_ in one day and then absolutely zero tail - like 150 to 3). I just had a Mega Blast on 4/29 (scheduled weeks before this whole thing broke) that fit this exact pattern. No other service just totally craters with a 95%+ drop.

Whether other authors want to play in the gray areas of the TOS isn't my concern. Everyone can choose the level of risk they're comfortable with. This behavior strikes me as something Amazon would raise an eyebrow at, but that doesn't matter - I'm not a lawyer or contract expert. However, I personally have _zero_ interest in risking my account for any reason - especially not for a promo service.

Nick


----------



## Randall Wood

AliceW said:


> Mods - does the issue surrounding paying for services as Friends and Family need its own thread or can it be discussed here?
> 
> There appears to be a twitter account tweeting screen shots and a discussion with PayPal about the F&F issue but I don't want to post a link and hijack this conversation, although it's kind of tied in as its how some authors are paying to opt in to a boxed set.


I'd say its more than kind-of tied to it. The same Paypal issues in the twitter feed are discussed at the same website that originated this thread. I see several red flags that connect with the current topic of contracts, payment, taxes and business ethics.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

AliceW said:


> Mods - does the issue surrounding paying for services as Friends and Family need its own thread or can it be discussed here?
> 
> There appears to be a twitter account tweeting screen shots and a discussion with PayPal about the F&F issue but I don't want to post a link and hijack this conversation, although it's kind of tied in as its how some authors are paying to opt in to a boxed set.





Randall Wood said:


> I'd say its more than kind-of tied to it. The same Paypal issues in the twitter feed are discussed at the same website that originated this thread. I see several red flags that connect with the current topic of contracts, payment, taxes and business ethics.


It depends on whether AliceW wants to have a broader discussion on the issues of using Family & Friends, separate from this thread or specifically wants to address the use of it in the instances described on Passive Voice. Alice?

Betsy


----------



## AllyWho

Nicholas Erik said:


> Can you (or anyone else) expand on how the Book Blast works? Given its popularity, some extra insight would be great. I'm a little unclear as to what's happening with the gifting.


My understanding is that the GenreCave promotions work in a couple of different ways. Disclaimer, I am not Rebecca, I don't run an author services business and I am relaying what I have heard or seen in the groups.

While Rebecca states she has a newsletter list of over 250,000 subscribers, they don't get notifications of GC promotions (which I find odd, but then I don't run a promotions service so maybe not using such a large newsletter list is common?). Instead there is a top secret group where GC promotions are posted. There is a reason KU titles are preferred, because many people in the secret group have KU subscriptions. Promoted KU titles are easy, group members are incentivised to download the promoted copy. Paste a screen shot that you have downloaded the book and go in the draw to win a prize (usually a gift voucher).
Non-KU/99 cent titles operate similar, but the promotion price is used to either gift a copy within the group (same deal, gift must be redeemed to affect authors rank, post a screen shot to enter the draw) or the organiser pays people to buy the book and reimburses in some way.

I have heard anecdotally (from grumbling authors) that for KU titles there is a rank spike (from the download) but very few pages read, since people download to enter a draw, not to actually read the book.

I no longer belong to those groups, maybe someone who does can provide more information/screen shots if required?


----------



## AllyWho

Betsy the Quilter said:


> It depends on whether AliceW wants to have a broader discussion on the issues of using Family & Friends, separate from this thread or specifically wants to address the use of it in the instances described on Passive Voice. Alice?


I think there is a much broader topic about using F&F to pay for a range of services and it might be a worthwhile discussion about when to use it, tax implications etc that is way past the scope of the boxed set issue. I'm happy to start a new topic to talk about F&F in general terms?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

In the last few days the whole family and friends thing is being talked about in a bunch of places and it has a lot of moving parts beyond just boxed sets. A separate thread might be best so even Ann of Arlington can point us in the direction of good resources.

_"Even Ann of Arlington?" . --Betsy_


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

AliceW said:


> I think there is a much broader topic about using F&F to pay for a range of services and it might be a worthwhile discussion about when to use it, tax implications etc that is way past the scope of the boxed set issue. I'm happy to start a new topic to talk about F&F in general terms?


That would be fine, thanks for checking.

Folks, this doesn't mean that the Paypal payment issues can't be discussed here in terms of how it was used in these box set contracts, but a broader discussion of how to use Paypal correctly as a consumer and provider is certainly a topic worth having a separate thread here. If it goes well and stays civil and informative, I could see it being a valuable resource.

Betsy


----------



## Not any more

AliceW said:


> My understanding is that the GenreCave promotions work in a couple of different ways. Disclaimer, I am not Rebecca, I don't run an author services business and I am relaying what I have heard or seen in the groups.
> 
> While Rebecca states she has a newsletter list of over 250,000 subscribers, they don't get notifications of GC promotions (which I find odd, but then I don't run a promotions service so maybe not using such a large newsletter list is common?). Instead there is a top secret group where GC promotions are posted. There is a reason KU titles are preferred, because many people in the secret group have KU subscriptions. Promoted KU titles are easy, group members are incentivised to download the promoted copy. Paste a screen shot that you have downloaded the book and go in the draw to win a prize (usually a gift voucher).
> Non-KU/99 cent titles operate similar, but the promotion price is used to either gift a copy within the group (same deal, gift must be redeemed to affect authors rank, post a screen shot to enter the draw) or the organiser pays people to buy the book and reimburses in some way.
> 
> I have heard anecdotally (from grumbling authors) that for KU titles there is a rank spike (from the download) but very few pages read, since people download to enter a draw, not to actually read the book.


This is how it works, but I was never told how the secret sauce inside her secret group worked. Whether I got KU downloads or not, I don't know. I didn't get any sales. I stacked promos and could see the buys from those. If I had known I was paying $300 for what amounts to a click farm, I never would have got involved.


----------



## MyraScott

Nicholas Erik said:


> This wording suggests, to me, posting in private Facebook groups, FB ads, maybe some Twitter/Pinterest/Instagram, whatever, stuff. E.g. the secret sauce is just marketing hype - fairly standard promotion, just access to the GenreCrave platform/readers. Whatever, fine - punch up and differentiate your services with great copy. But the gifting thing is an altogether different animal - and while, perhaps "secret" and unique, is _not_ what I signed up for at all.
> 
> To be 100% clear, Rebecca and her staff have always been fair and courteous to me, even rescheduling blasts/waiting on my book link until the wee hours of the morning. But if the Blasts are fueled by gifting, it makes the sales useless for sell-through/also-bought purposes (which is the main reason I booked them - since the upfront ROI has always been highly negative). Looking over the results from each run in light of Christina's post, the sales distribution make a lot more sense (e.g. _all_ in one day and then absolutely zero tail - like 150 to 3). I just had a Mega Blast on 4/29 (scheduled weeks before this whole thing broke) that fit this exact pattern. No other service just totally craters with a 95%+ drop.
> 
> Whether other authors want to play in the gray areas of the TOS isn't my concern. Everyone can choose the level of risk they're comfortable with. This behavior strikes me as something Amazon would raise an eyebrow at, but that doesn't matter - I'm not a lawyer or contract expert. However, I personally have _zero_ interest in risking my account for any reason - especially not for a promo service.
> 
> Nick


I believe those promotions are all about gifting and raffles, not about finding readers for your book. I don't use the service, but that is my understanding from people who do use it.

This might be interesting reading: https://www.docdroid.net/ZPzHGk5/she-tells-all-new-release-plan-for-twitter.pdf.html#page=4


----------



## jaehaerys

sela said:


> The issue is not whether there were 10,000 or 1,000 or 500 copies gifted to hit the NYTs list. The issue is using gift cards or gifting to make enough sales to hit the list.
> 
> Whether it's 500 or 5,000 or 50,000, it's the principle of the thing, not the number.
> 
> It's one thing to run a giveaway to publicize the release, and gift a few copies as a way to spread the word about a new release. That's a normal part of marketing. Free samples and all in Walmart.
> 
> It's an entirely different kettle of fish to buy gift cards or gift copies in bulk / large numbers that are intended to ensure the book or collection qualifies for USAT or NYTs.
> 
> That's not kosher. It's buying your way onto the list vs. getting the designation via actual customers/readers buying it out of their own free will.
> 
> The whole issue of a bestseller's list is to promote or inform people about what books are selling the best in a given week. It's supposed to say "These books are the best selling books this week."
> 
> It is not meant to say "These authors bought enough copies of their own books in order to be the top selling books this week."
> 
> If people can't see the difference, well, I got nothing.


I just wanted to say, well said, Sela - completely agree. For me, "the principle of the thing" is the crux of this issue.


----------



## Nicholas Erik

MyraScott said:


> I believe those promotions are all about gifting and raffles, not about finding readers for your book. I don't use the service, but that is my understanding from people who do use it.
> 
> This might be interesting reading: https://www.docdroid.net/ZPzHGk5/she-tells-all-new-release-plan-for-twitter.pdf.html#page=4





brkingsolver said:


> This is how it works, but I was never told how the secret sauce inside her secret group worked. Whether I got KU downloads or not, I don't know. I didn't get any sales. I stacked promos and could see the buys from those. If I had known I was paying $300 for what amounts to a click farm, I never would have got involved.





AliceW said:


> My understanding is that the GenreCave promotions work in a couple of different ways. Disclaimer, I am not Rebecca, I don't run an author services business and I am relaying what I have heard or seen in the groups.
> 
> While Rebecca states she has a newsletter list of over 250,000 subscribers, they don't get notifications of GC promotions (which I find odd, but then I don't run a promotions service so maybe not using such a large newsletter list is common?). Instead there is a top secret group where GC promotions are posted. There is a reason KU titles are preferred, because many people in the secret group have KU subscriptions. Promoted KU titles are easy, group members are incentivised to download the promoted copy. Paste a screen shot that you have downloaded the book and go in the draw to win a prize (usually a gift voucher).
> Non-KU/99 cent titles operate similar, but the promotion price is used to either gift a copy within the group (same deal, gift must be redeemed to affect authors rank, post a screen shot to enter the draw) or the organiser pays people to buy the book and reimburses in some way.
> 
> I have heard anecdotally (from grumbling authors) that for KU titles there is a rank spike (from the download) but very few pages read, since people download to enter a draw, not to actually read the book.
> 
> I no longer belong to those groups, maybe someone who does can provide more information/screen shots if required?


Thanks for the responses. I'm really at a loss for words. On the one hand, I now fully understand why the tail numbers looked off with the Book Blasts as I got more data. On the other hand, that's super lame to discover after spending $1,500+. The money is one thing, but I'm more concerned about unknowingly being associated with this type of gifting behavior. I am never using any of GenreCrave's services again.

To anyone who purchased a Book Blast based on my recommendation in my launch services thread, I sincerely apologize. Obviously I had no idea about the "secret" behind them, but that still sucks. That thread has been updated accordingly. Ridiculous.

Nick


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Nicholas Erik said:


> This is a post back from around p.5/6 (probably p.10/11 for those with standard 25 posts per page settings). I understand that most people are discussing the box sets, but a lot of Kboarders use the Book Blast, too (and it's expensive). And as someone who has used the Book Blast/Mega Book Blast six times over the past year or so, this is extremely troubling.
> 
> Can you (or anyone else) expand on how the Book Blast works?


Hi, Nick.

Yes, to my understanding, the Genre Crave Book Blast is about incentivizing readers to claim your book as a gift. (Which will then show to you as a sale.)

The process is outlined on the weebly site others have linked to in this thread but here's the basics:

There's a private FB group with about 5.6k people in it called Book Giveaways: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1627459970853706/ (there may be others; I don't know.)

Author pays $200+ for a Genre Crave Book Blast
On the day, the book is listed as free--available for claiming as a gift--and if they do, they'll be entered to win a gift card. (Rick is brought up that this is against the law in some states, just FYI.)
Obviously, the more "segments" you pay for your blast, the more money available to buy gifts, the bigger the impact on your rank.

So, you spend $200. She pays her assistant, say, $25 to handle the giveaway. (I'm guessing the amount--I don't know, I just know she has her assistant do them.) I've been told the gift card is also $25. (Haven't seen proof yet so can't say for sure). For your $200 you'll probably make about $35 in royalties, and b/c folks were incentivized to download the "gifted" book, many are likely not readers, which means little to no sell through.

I have had 2 blasts and neither led to follow up sales. And, like you said, the drop off is steep--b/c the "giveaway" only runs one day.

In her "tell all course" (excerpts are on the weebly site) she says this is her super secret way to sky rocket a launch and goes into detail about it.

The problem with offering this as a service is that anyone using the book blast is playing roulette with their Amazon account. I was told in no uncertain terms that they view this as rank manipulation and that the author is solely responsible for choosing providers that say w/in their TOS.


----------



## CABarrett

sela said:


> That's not kosher. It's buying your way onto the list vs. getting the designation via actual customers/readers buying it out of their own free will.
> 
> The whole issue of a bestseller's list is to promote or inform people about what books are selling the best in a given week. It's supposed to say "These books are the best selling books this week."
> 
> It is not meant to say "These authors bought enough copies of their own books in order to be the top selling books this week."
> 
> If people can't see the difference, well, I got nothing.


This reminds me of the 2013 scandal involving ResultsSource and the bestseller lists. No statement is intended about any of the book marketers currently under discussion (I don't have any knowledge other than this thread), but I thought it was interesting that this same argument has occurred about traditionally published print books.


----------



## wheart

ChristinaGarner said:


> There was a Google sign up form that required the transaction ID for the money sent. (Again, this is before the contract)


I would never send payment without getting the contract first. We never know if the contract may state things not discussed that we can't agree to.



ChristinaGarner said:


> In my case, I never received a contract for the Spellbound set, however I did receive one for Myths and Legends, and I e-signed. Here's where the no refund policy goes awry.
> 
> We all know that in December two of Rebecca's sets got taken down by Amazon for violating the exclusivity rule. At the time she was adamant it was a new rule, however we also know it had been present in the terms since at least 9/30/16. (Possibly before, but my memory fails.) So, either she drafted contracts while ignorant of a standing rule or in defiance of it--you can decide for yourself.


If it was present in the terms since September, why didn't anyone bring it up in the group? Did everyone else not know about this rule as well? If nobody knew about it, then it's plausible Rebecca was unaware of it too.

But this is where everyone needs to do their due diligence, and if you know that the project may be violating the TOS, the concerns need to be brought up so the organizer is made aware of them to ensure that the project is in line with the TOS. All concerns should be brought up in the Facebook group before anyone signs the contract.



ChristinaGarner said:


> She then posted we would either need to completely unpublish our works after the first week wide, swap out our full-length novel for something (anything--novella 5k short) else, or withdraw.


I'm assuming this was the solution that had to be put in place to fix the Amazon TOS issue? This wasn't something that subsequent boxed set projects went through since she (and all the other authors) should have already known what not to do, right?

And at that time, did she offer a refund to those who wanted to withdraw?



ChristinaGarner said:


> A month or so later, she said we would have to sign new contracts. The problem with that was, legally, we didn't need to sign them. All four attorneys I consulted agreed that
> 
> a) because the original contract had no language requiring signing a new contract
> b) and because contract 2 (contrary to her claim) differed substantially from contract 1
> 
> the first contract was voidable and could be rescinded. Once that happens, both parties must be made whole. In this case, that would have required her to return my money, and that of anyone who opted not to sign the 2nd contract. She has refused to do so, erroneously claiming the no refund policy. However, it's not a refund.


I would agree. If the second contract differed that much, you would have the right to refuse to sign it.



ChristinaGarner said:


> It went from a set "appropriate for all ages" to allowing "super steamy." For YA authors like myself, that was a problem, even though we were soundly shut down. Still, it's a change in terms that was not agreed to by both parties. Unilaterally changing the terms of a contract is another way it becomes (legally) voidable.


Oh my. That also I would agree with you on. If the original terms had changed that radically, your argument with not being given the service/product that was agreed to is sound.

I'm still unwilling to condemn Rebecca because I do feel her intention/motivation is to help people. I do feel she needs to re-evaluate the methods in which to provide these services to authors so that it's a win-win for everyone (the authors and herself) without crossing boundaries, even if Amazon's and PayPal's reps have deemed them to be okay, because as we all know, it's better to be safe than sorry.

Edited - I was writing this post and see there are tons more after Christine's, so I'll need to catch up


----------



## Pnjw

I'll just point out that the exclusivity rule has been the rule since the beginning of KDP-Select. This isn't and never was a new rule. You have never been able to have your book available on another vendor while it's been in KDP Select and that includes preorders.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

CABarrett said:


> This reminds me of the 2013 scandal involving ResultsSource and the bestseller lists. No statement is intended about any of the book marketers currently under discussion, but I thought it was interesting that this same argument has occurred about traditionally published print books.


I worry that examples from what trad pub books get away with though is dangerous because none of us have the muscle they do to protect them. We can't go toe to toe with Amazon if Amazon decides to close our account.

Some changes I have noticed since many of the gray hat tactics have been circulating in the last year plus from multiple organizers and promoters is that we are now responsible for the results of promotions we buy. That was never language I saw in emails from the Zon until just the last year or so.

So by delegating your marketing to a third party in any shape that you don't fully understand is a risk. Marketing isnt magic, so like has been mentioned before, if there's not a mailing list you can join to see and use, run. We all still agree Bookbub is one of the best promotions you can get and any one of us can get our genres email newsletter any day of the week to see how it works. There's no real proprietary secret sauce in marketing unless you need to hide what's really going on.


----------



## wheart

Deanna Chase said:


> I'll just point out that the exclusivity rule has been the rule since the beginning of KDP-Select. This isn't and never was a new rule. You have never been able to have your book available on another vendor while it's been in KDP Select and that includes preorders.


I believe the one that's in question is having an individual title published by the author and also in a boxed set published by someone else (both for sale at the same time). Thus the 'swap out' mentioned in Christine's post. Those who are involved, is this correct?


----------



## CassieL

There have been various iterations.

Early on there was the pre-order wide while all the books were in KU scenario.
Later there was the start the set with one group of titles and then swap them out for other titles scenario.


----------



## CABarrett

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I worry that examples from what trad pub books get away with though is dangerous because none of us have the muscle they do to protect them. We can't go toe to toe with Amazon if Amazon decides to close our account...


I am in complete agreement that this is terrifying stuff.


----------



## Pnjw

wheart said:


> I believe the one that's in question is having an individual title published by the author and also in a boxed set (both for sale at the same time). Thus the 'swap out' mentioned in Christine's post. Those who are involved, is this correct?


Ahh, okay. Yes, that is new. I believe Amazon started enforcing that right around Christmas last year.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> Also there are many others involved who are affected with us breaking our commitment to the contract/project (ex: the other authors in the project, the book cover designer, the content designer/formatter, etc.), not only the organizer, especially if a certain budget was set for ad expenses and new expenses would be incurred since the book cover would need to be redone, reformatting the book's contents to take out the canceling author's story, etc.


I forgot to address this in my previous response, and I'd like to. I agree there are a lot of authors involved--each is impacted by the actions and ethics of their fellow authors in the set and the organizer.

In may case, I was kicked out of the Spellbound box set. I found out when Rebecca posted that I'd dropped out. (I hadn't at that point, but that's beside the point.)

She announced that she wasn't sure if I was donating the spot or "forcing a refund" with PayPal. (I was doing neither, but that too, is beside the point.) Because of that, she wasn't sure if she'd need to charge someone the $500 buy in to cover my "forced refund" or could offer the spot for free.

Several people offered to pay the buy in. That would have meant she was free and clear to return my money (money owed to me, not as a refund, but because she was not honoring the terms of our original contract as previously stated) and yet, she chose not to. One might ask themselves why, if her primary interest is the authors in the set.

Also, once it became clear the terms of the box set were going to change so drastically (Having to UNPUBLISH our books to participate? Swapping out full length novels for shorts? {like that's not gonna tick some readers off--and rightfully so} Not to mention, for those, like me, who were going to pull our books out immediately following the wide week in an effort to avoid the other two options, we were now not going to receive nearly the amount of profit or exposure we would have with 3 months in KU) Rebecca could have offered to reshuffle the set. None of the ones I was involved with had even been put on preorder when this all happened.

If, as she claims, box sets are done by her for free, and she receives zero profit, why not do the right thing and offer to return the money of those who no longer felt it was a good fit? I suspect she could have filled the spots, because for many it was still a fine trade, but even she couldn't--why not offer? If there's no profit, (and in the case of my 3 sets, ads had not been booked) what's the difference if, for a month or two, only one box set went live?

One has to wonder.


----------



## Silly Writer

Nicholas Erik said:


> Thanks for the responses. I'm really at a loss for words. On the one hand, I now fully understand why the tail numbers looked off with the Book Blasts as I got more data. On the other hand, that's super lame to discover after spending $1,500+. The money is one thing, but I'm more concerned about unknowingly being associated with this type of gifting behavior. I am never using any of GenreCrave's services again.
> 
> To anyone who purchased a Book Blast based on my recommendation in my launch services thread, I sincerely apologize. Obviously I had no idea about the "secret" behind them, but that still sucks. That thread has been updated accordingly. Ridiculous.
> 
> Nick


To be fair, how could you have known? I didn't know either a year and a half ago when I booked a book-blast through here when it was "Hungry Author" and the description is pretty much the same as it was; and it doesn't mention gifting (excerpt from website taken one minute ago):

"*BOOK BLAST - $299*

Our Book Blast is our best selling service and often books out solid two-three months in advance. This is not a newsletter feature. This is a direct marketing campaign. We have various segments of readers on social media who have signed up for us to send them a message if we find a book we think they might like. Our book blast covers a send to the three best-fitting segments of readers we have. We do not give out information about our readers or about our segments, as this is one of the most effective services for new releases and our secret business model.

Titles $2.99-$4.99 have the best immediate ROI, but do not move as many copies or have the same ranking effect as titles priced $0.99. If you are looking to boost your book in ranking, we strongly recommend a $0.99 title. Newer titles perform better than older titles, but users have gotten great results even with titles that have been out for years. We will only perform one book blast per title at this time.

Book Blasts cannot be cancelled or rescheduled as we begin set up as soon as we receive your order. Our employees spend a lot of time setting up your book blast in the weeks leading up to it, and then they dedicate an entire day to getting you as many sales as they can.

Our records indicate that most of our clients get 80-400* sales with this blast. Many of our readers are reviewers, too. However, we do not guarantee book reviews or results on any of our packages. All we can do is guarantee our best effort to get you as many sales as possible with our readers. As with our other services, we recommend having a stellar cover and blurb for this feature.

We also offer a MEGA BOOK BLAST. The Mega Book Blast is for authors looking to make 120 - 700* sales. Although we cannot guarantee results, your book offer will go out to almost twice as many readers.

* Average sales based on $0.99 price point and are not a results guarantee. Results occur over the course of 1-2 days.

Please note: There is no way to view a Book Blast because that is done via a direct marketing campaign. Here is an example of the kind of proof we can provide that you blast ran. There is an extra fee for "Proof of Delivery" same as most companies have if you want to add tracking to a order you've placed. That said, your results will be clearly measurable by your ranking increase and sales."

_Edited to correct special character issue on KB. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> I believe the one that's in question is having an individual title published by the author and also in a boxed set published by someone else (both for sale at the same time). Thus the 'swap out' mentioned in Christine's post. Those who are involved, is this correct?


Yes, you're correct. It was present before December but that's when it started being enforced that I am aware of.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Yeah there's been a couple of changes on exclusivity expansion that coincidentally match situations with certain boxed sets. For example, there used to be no language specifically saying that books in KU couldn't be on preorder on another vendor until after threads here about some boxed sets flagrantly flouted that didn't exist (putting boxed sets in KU while the boxed set was also up for preorder on other vendors with intention to take it off sale the moment it went up for sale so only preorders we're honored for a list run and also to make sure they got the minimum 500 needed on a vendor not Amazon). There were boxed sets taken down, later restored, and a language change in the KU terms.

The same content can't be in KU on multiple KDP accounts rule that came about this December revolves around the wording that was always there "content that you have the exclusive right to publish" but probably wasn't just the multi-author boxed sets causing that expansion/enforcement but also the number of scammers making bogus boxedsets of titles in various orders on multiple pen names and likely multiple KDP accounts that were trying to farm page reads but never so many on one name or book to pop for All Star status and further scrutiny.


----------



## Not any more

wheart said:


> I believe the one that's in question is having an individual title published by the author and also in a boxed set published by someone else (both for sale at the same time). Thus the 'swap out' mentioned in Christine's post. Those who are involved, is this correct?


That rule was in place when I published a short story in an anthology in 2013. All of the authors were warned about it.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

brkingsolver said:


> That rule was in place when I published a short story in an anthology in 2013. All of the authors were warned about it.


Wow, I had no idea. I knew the TOS were dated in September but had no idea it went as far back as that.

And wheart, you're right; I should have known. At the time, like many, I thought as long as the book was out of KU while the set was wide (I'd planned the release date of my book so it would be) I thought it was OK to be in KU in two places. (Solo title and set)


----------



## C. Gockel

I have a few thoughts:

1) BookBub no longer takes letters from multi-author box sets into consideration. I suspect if they don't, other advertisers will follow their lead (and perhaps already do without explicitly saying so.) 

2) I actually have USA Today letters from my individual box set. It honestly didn't change the world. I had some nice sell-thru for a little while, but then, like all sales bumps, things trickled back to my typical monthly income.

3) You don't have to hit a bestseller list to benefit from a box set. I've been in several box sets and anthologies that haven't hit the bestseller list, but they actually did great by sell-thru, which means I got readers. Readers who love your work are more important than letters.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

I have no letters, and I just bought a 4400 square foot house for cash. Just sayin. 

I really don't think letters or no makes much difference. Certainly not worth jeopardizing your account and professional reputation for. Come awaaaaayyyy from the light.

(Deleted earlier post because I confused two topics. I should have said that the rule saying you couldn't have a title in Select and on preorder wide was always pretty clear. Basically, exclusive means exclusive. Not on Instafreebie. Not in a boxed set wide. Pretty clear.)


----------



## Pnjw

Rosalind J said:


> It wasn't new, though. It was always against the TOS, and anyone with an inkling of the contract they agreed to when they published surely would have known it. Just "not cottoned on to by Amazon yet."
> 
> Messing around on the wrong side of the line, even if a salesperson says it's the right side of the line, is a good way to get an account suspended by Amazon. Just because they haven't thought of or enforced sanctions against that particular scheme yet doesn't mean they won't. And saying, "I didn't know it was against the rules" isn't going to help that person who got taken in by the promise of ...whatever.


Well, I actually don't remember seeing it in the TOS and plenty of reps told us multi author boxed sets were fine as long as all the individual books in it were exclusive to Amazon. In fact, a friend of mine was putting together a multi author KU boxed set around the time Amazon started to enforce and the rep didn't even know it was a "new rule." So maybe it was there and maybe it wasn't, but I don't remember it and Amazon reps didn't even know. I think it's fair to give those of us "rule breakers" a pass on that one. But you can bet as soon as Amazon said, "Nope," we fell in line.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rosalind J said:


> I have no letters, and I just bought a 4400 square foot house for cash. Just sayin.
> 
> I really don't think letters or no makes much difference. Certainly not worth jeopardizing your account and professional reputation for. Come awaaaaayyyy from the light.


Totally agree. I thought I'd be getting exposed to thousands of new readers. Even if only 10% of those who bought the set read my book, that would have been worth it. That's not how these particular sets are run, which is why I rescinded my contract and backed away--even with her telling me she wouldn't return my money. I'd never have claimed those "letters." (That's not a put down for those who do--it's just not what I want to do.)


----------



## Nicholas Erik

Silly Writer said:


> To be fair, how could you have known? I didn't know either a year and a half ago when I booked a book-blast through here when it was "Hungry Author" and the description is pretty much the same as it was; and it doesn't mention gifting (excerpt from website taken one minute ago): [snip]


That's true. I still feel bad. From what I've read in this thread, the service is at best completely worthless, and at worst, putting you in Amazon's crosshairs.



ChristinaGarner said:


> Hi, Nick.
> 
> Yes, to my understanding, the Genre Crave Book Blast is about incentivizing readers to claim your book as a gift. (Which will then show to you as a sale.)
> 
> The process is outlined on the weebly site others have linked to in this thread but here's the basics:
> 
> There's a private FB group with about 5.6k people in it called Book Giveaways: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1627459970853706/ (there may be others; I don't know.)
> 
> Author pays $200+ for a Genre Crave Book Blast
> On the day, the book is listed as free--available for claiming as a gift--and if they do, they'll be entered to win a gift card. (Rick is brought up that this is against the law in some states, just FYI.)
> Obviously, the more "segments" you pay for your blast, the more money available to buy gifts, the bigger the impact on your rank.
> 
> So, you spend $200. She pays her assistant, say, $25 to handle the giveaway. (I'm guessing the amount--I don't know, I just know she has her assistant do them.) I've been told the gift card is also $25. (Haven't seen proof yet so can't say for sure). For your $200 you'll probably make about $35 in royalties, and b/c folks were incentivized to download the "gifted" book, many are likely not readers, which means little to no sell through.
> 
> I have had 2 blasts and neither led to follow up sales. And, like you said, the drop off is steep--b/c the "giveaway" only runs one day.
> 
> In her "tell all course" (excerpts are on the weebly site) she says this is her super secret way to sky rocket a launch and goes into detail about it.
> 
> The problem with offering this as a service is that anyone using the book blast is playing roulette with their Amazon account. I was told in no uncertain terms that they view this as rank manipulation and that the author is solely responsible for choosing providers that say w/in their TOS.


Thanks for the response. So glad the "Mega" Blast sales promotion I thought I was purchasing, was, in fact, just an increased chance of getting my KDP account flagged. Caveat emptor, right?

Needless to say, for anyone lurking or booking promo in the future, I think we all need to be careful of what promo providers we use. This has been stated before, but if something is opaque or secret, don't use it. Period. This is a long game, and any temporary ranking boost isn't worth getting your account shut down over. In light of this information and declining results for legitimate promo sites, I'm shifting almost all of my marketing efforts to PPC, where I know exactly where the dollars are going (since I'm the one in control of them).

As I stated previously, I will do zero business with Genre Crave in the future. Everyone can make their own decisions based on risk tolerance.

Argh. 

Nick


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Deanna Chase said:


> Well, I actually don't remember seeing it in the TOS and plenty of reps told us multi author boxed sets were fine as long as all the individual books in it were exclusive to Amazon. In fact, a friend of mine was putting together a multi author KU boxed set around the time Amazon started to enforce and the rep didn't even know it was a "new rule." So maybe it was there and maybe it wasn't, but I don't remember it and Amazon reps didn't even know. I think it's fair to give those of us "rule breakers" a pass on that one. But you can bet as soon as Amazon said, "Nope," we fell in line.


Sorry, Deanna. Edited post above. I was confusing the two things: preorder wide while in KU, and multi author boxed set in KU. Not reading carefully enough myself.


----------



## Pnjw

Rosalind J said:


> Sorry, Deanna. Edited post above. I was confusing the two things: preorder wide while in KU, and multi author boxed set in KU. Not reading carefully enough myself.


Ah, yes. I got confused earlier myself.  No worries. Lots of moving parts with this one.


----------



## Jill Nojack

Nicholas Erik said:


> I just had a Mega Blast on 4/29 (scheduled weeks before this whole thing broke) that fit this exact pattern. No other service just totally craters with a 95%+ drop.
> 
> Nick


Freebookservice has a similar pattern, but theirs is x amount over each of three days and then it craters (they used to only do free, now they have the 99 cent paid option, too). That has been confirmed to be click-farming (by members of this forum), but it also claims to have a secret mailing list that is all hush hush.


----------



## Susan Stec

ChristinaGarner said:


> I forgot to address this in my previous response, and I'd like to. I agree there are a lot of authors involved--each is impacted by the actions and ethics of their fellow authors in the set and the organizer.
> 
> If there's no profit, (and in the case of my 3 sets, ads had not been booked) what's the difference if, for a month or two, only one box set went live?
> 
> One has to wonder.





ChristinaGarner said:


> Several people offered to pay the buy in. That would have meant she was free and clear to return my money (money owed to me, not as a refund, but because she was not honoring the terms of our original contract as previously stated) and yet, she chose not to. One might ask themselves why, if her primary interest is the authors in the set.
> 
> One has to wonder.


She did some of the things you mentioned to me, Christine. In December I pulled out of 2 sets and the isa Fae collection because of her ethics, and because of a change in contracts. At the time she was angry about being reported, and in a PM with all the authors in one of the active sets, Fall into Magic (it was pulled by Amazon), which I was also a part of. She and some of the authors, Gina and Noree doing the talking, wanted to start reporting other sets to prove it wasn't just Rebecca breaking TOS's "new rule" I have screen shots of this conversation hat was incouraged by the organizer, Rebecca. She is not a publisher. She stated then that the only way "Zon" could've found out was if she was reported by the small group out to get her. 
I did not want to be part of that, and with all the trading of books as you mentioned, Christina, I just wanted to distance myself, which I did on the private pages for the sets I was in. I was the first, in all her active sets, to publicly challenge her. And several others followed.

She also said I had donated my spot and my cover in the collection, I found out later. i had not donated anything. But since she made the cover, she had a copy.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I never knew that about the contracts changing Christina. That makes sense now when you think about Amazon's terms that specifically calls out they can change the terms at any time. Contracts between professionals that lacked that make sense that it would require newly agreed terms, and a cautionary tale for people who build businesses that hinge on the availability of other 3rd party businesses to speak with attorneys for their boilerplate contracts. That experience speaks to a lot of different parts of the indie world and is a great thing to share.


I totally missed this post, but thanks, Elizabeth. You're totally right about the 3rd party thing. In order to make the new rules of the 3rd party apply to a prior contract, that contract would probably need to have language that made that clear. (INAL, but I can't think of another way.)


----------



## Guest

CrazyHorze said:


> It is obvious to me that we are dealing with a second wave of disruption in the publishing word. Only now it is the first wave of disruptors getting disrupted by the second wave. Mom and pop shops were disrupted by Wal-mart. Wal-mart is being disrupted by Amazon. Traditional publishing was disrupted by the first wave of indies and now that they have grown fat and stale they are getting disrupted by the new wave of indies who learn from guys like Mark Dawson who spends 30000 dollars a month on Facebook ads to sell his books and Rebecca who is skirting the line of good and bad to sell her writers' books. I applaud both of them. They are innovators. If the new wave of disruption is causing you pain, maybe now is a good time to think of the pain the first wave of indies caused the traditional publishing. How many of them lost their job because of us?
> 
> _Edited. As Betsy said in reopening the thread, name-calling is not permitted. You may not post again in this thread, CrazyHorze. - Becca._


Speaking for the first wave of indies, we haven't been disrupted. Not even a little bit. Many burned out and quit, true. But others went on to be hybrids and traditional writers. We're still putting out books and selling well. Hell, I'm doing better than I did when this all began. I have a solid foundation and great fans. I don't have to scheme and plot for visibility. I just send out an email to my readers. Nothing more complicated than that. 
As far as Rebecca Hamilton....never met her. Moreover, I could not care less what she does. She has zero impact on my career. And Mark Dawson can spend whatever he wants on Facebook ads. Don't know him either. I certainly don't care what he does. 
When my sales fall off, nine times out of ten it because I haven't released anything recently. It's not a result of what someone else is doing. It's not because of some "new wave" of indies. 
All the plots and scams in the world cannot replace a solid fanbase and good business practices. Well, that and writing good books.

_Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Huge difference in my mind, and I believe in most folks', between Mark Dawson and this kind of thing. One is white hat and one is black hat. Problem with black hat techniques, even if you have no ethical issues, is that you're risking your reputation and the wrath of Amazon. Probably not a good bet long term. 

Authors who are successful in the long term think, well ... long term. They tend to use methods that are sustainable, like prioritizing quality of product and presentation. Long term success is about growing a group of real readers who are fans. Effective advertising is just communication with the market that wants your book, drawing their attention to it so they can find it and test it out. The long term benefit comes from the people who read it, not just the sale itself.


----------



## Evenstar

I want to thank those who are putting themselves on the line to expose all the many different areas.

But I have more questions. I realise a lot of this has been covered with screen shots on the Passive Voice and the blog it relates to, but as I don't know who wrote the blog, it means I am unable to take it at face value. Instead, I've been checking facebook groups and other forums and it has been shocking me enormously to hear first hand experience right here and in other places that it is in fact all completely true.

So, I want _more_ information. And before I get shouted at, I think it is absolutely fair and right to ask for it!

It isn't in regards to gifted copies, it's this:

Do some of her boxed sets betray this part of the TOS?

From KDP TOS:

_If we terminate this Agreement because you have breached your representations and warranties or our *Content Guidelines*, you forfeit all Royalties not yet paid to you._

Regarding above-mentioned *content guidelines*:

_Poor Customer Experience
We don't accept books that provide a poor customer experience. We reserve the right to determine whether content provides a poor customer experience. See the Guide to Kindle Content Quality for examples of content that's typically disappointing to customers._

And regarding the* Guide to Kindle Content Quality:*

_Missing Content
Missing content issues occur when some *intended part* of the book is either mistakenly removed or includes *references to a portion of the book that isn't included in the book.*

Critical Issues
More text is missing than just a short phrase
Missing image section that the product description or the contents of the book indicate should be included
*Main book content that is only accessible through external links*
Product description indicates book includes CD, DVD or other ancillary content that is not accessible
Missing or unplayable audio/video content in a Kindle Enhanced with Audio and Video_

Or...

_Wrong Content
Books with wrong content are always removed from sale.

Wrong content occurs when a customer receives something other than what is advertised. This is most commonly caused by uploading an incorrect file, but can sometimes also occur if updates are made to the product information or copy/paste issues make the description incorrect. The easiest way to fix it is to upload the latest version of the correct file.

_
The way the boxed set operation has been described, it sounds like there could be some of this going on. Or not?

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Not any more

CrazyHorze said:


> It is obvious to me that we are dealing with a second wave of disruption in the publishing word. Only now it is the first wave of disruptors getting disrupted by the second wave. Mom and pop shops were disrupted by Wal-mart. Wal-mart is being disrupted by Amazon. Traditional publishing was disrupted by the first wave of indies and now that they have grown fat and stale they are getting disrupted by the new wave of indies who learn from guys like Mark Dawson who spends 30000 dollars a month on Facebook ads to sell his books and Rebecca who is skirting the line of good and bad to sell her writers' books. I applaud both of them. They are innovators. If the new wave of disruption is causing you pain, maybe now is a good time to think of the pain the first wave of indies caused the traditional publishing. How many of them lost their job because of us?


In spite of considering myself well educated, I'm having a difficult time making sense of this line of thinking. Should I think of Rebecca as Willie Sutton, or as Robin Hood? And what does any of this have to do with Amazon's ToS? If we were talking about someone who was challenging conventional wisdom and devising a revolutionary way of selling books, then I could follow the reasoning. But we're not. We're talking about manipulating rankings by violating standards of conduct laid out in a contractual relationship with a corporation that provides a platform for us to sell our books. We can take it or leave it. Patting yourself on the back for devising a way of twisting a sketchy loophole probably lasts about as long with Amazon as it does with IRS. A mouse needs to be careful if it tries to make a career out of pulling the cat's tail.

_Edited quoted material. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

For anyone following just this thread on potentially scammy box set tactics, there's some awesome advice and info related to this also over on the using PayPal for business thread.

http://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=250612


----------



## thesmallprint

This is getting like the diet industry with people looking for quick and painless fixes. The latest is the glory of marketing and the scramble to climb aboard the tumbril seems to be knocking the common sense out of many. When you leave your brains on the pavement there will be a gaggle of modern day snake oil sellers ready to fill the empty space in your head with daft promises.

Here's rule number one:  if somebody says they have a 'secret recipe' (as mentioned in some of the Book Blast quotes here) paint a  big red X on their back, expose them, laugh at them in public, do anything except give them money.

Once the marketing craze dies down, some other 'thing' will be right along shortly afterwards. Eschew it, folks. Ignore them all. If you are to make a living from writing then let it be through your talent. Word of mouth is all the marketing you need if you are good enough and in this for life. If you're not good enough you might get temporary 'success' from a flurry of marketing but it'll never hold up, no matter how much time and money you throw at ads, blurbs, covers, mailing lists, promotions. 

Marketing is not the Holy Grail. Mark Dawson released figures recently highlighting the most successful promotions of all those he takes part in - including the thousands spent on ads. If I'm remembering it right, his best return was from BookBub. So, there it is, apply for BookBubs as regularly as you can. If your work is good enough they'll give you one. If you get one you'll get more readers. If you get more readers they'll tell other readers about you. 

Stop feeding the snake oil merchants; it makes them breed.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Can I just say how awesome it is of the moderators to have allowed this thread to live. A lot of people are very happy to have these issues heard.

Over the past six months or so, I've spent hours fielding desperate emails and messages from people who signed up and paid, then didn't like the T&C or the tone in the groups or fell foul of the organiser, were bullied, had their author-Facebook friends put under pressure to unfriend them and desperately wanted out. Many lost hundreds, if not *thousands* of dollars.

Every time a thread was started about it here, it was shut down before the affected people could have their say and present their material. Many were simply too afraid of the blackballing and bullying to say a peep. There are still many behind the curtains who are still too afraid to speak out.

Whether or not anyone wants to get involved with tactics that skirt the edges of the Amazon T&C is up to them, but at least now it's become clear what goes on and what the risks are.

I'm sure that we can all agree that certainly, those who were not included in the sets, who pulled out long before the sets went live, and where a replacement was found, should have their money back. Maybe some people don't care about $500, but most do, especially if you get nothing for it except bullying and a wedge driven in your group of online author friends. Upcoming sets are $2000. Some people have walked away with NO return, NO money refunded and No inclusion in any box set.

They lost all their money. They lost friends. They are rightfully LIVID.

On behalf of the people who have messaged me and who are still afraid to speak out, thank you.


----------



## 75814

CrazyHorze said:


> It is obvious to me that we are dealing with a second wave of disruption in the publishing word. Only now it is the first wave of disruptors getting disrupted by the second wave. Mom and pop shops were disrupted by Wal-mart. Wal-mart is being disrupted by Amazon. Traditional publishing was disrupted by the first wave of indies and now that they have grown fat and stale they are getting disrupted by the new wave of indies who learn from guys like Mark Dawson who spends 30000 dollars a month on Facebook ads to sell his books and Rebecca who is skirting the line of good and bad to sell her writers' books. I applaud both of them. They are innovators. If the new wave of disruption is causing you pain, maybe now is a good time to think of the pain the first wave of indies caused the traditional publishing. How many of them lost their job because of us?
> 
> _Edited. As Betsy said in reopening the thread, name-calling is not permitted. You may not post again in this thread, CrazyHorze. - Becca_


Stop and re-read what you just wrote. Then think about it.

You are applauding using underhanded tactics and violating Amazon TOS as "revolutionary."

Applauding.

Did you also applaud the KU scammers? Did you also applaud the Wall Street creeps who caused the financial crisis?


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Patty Jansen said:


> Can I just say how awesome it is of the moderators to have allowed this thread to live. A lot of people are very happy to have these issues heard.
> 
> Over the past six months or so, I've spent hours fielding desperate emails and messages from people who* signed up and paid, then didn't like the T&C *or the tone in the groups or fell foul of the organiser, were bullied, had their author-Facebook friends put under pressure to unfriend them and desperately wanted out. Many lost hundreds, if not *thousands* of dollars.
> 
> Every time a thread was started about it here, it was shut down before the affected people could have their say and present their material. Many were simply too afraid of the blackballing and bullying to say a peep. There are still many behind the curtains who are still too afraid to speak out.
> 
> Whether or not anyone wants to get involved with tactics that skirt the edges of the Amazon T&C is up to them, but at least now it's become clear what goes on and what the risks are.
> 
> I'm sure that we can all agree that certainly, those who were not included in the sets, who pulled out long before the sets went live, and where a replacement was found, should have their money back. Maybe some people don't care about $500, but most do, especially if you get nothing for it except bullying and a wedge driven in your group of online author friends. Upcoming sets are $2000. Some people have walked away with NO return, NO money refunded and No inclusion in any box set.
> 
> They lost all their money. They lost friends. They are rightfully LIVID.
> 
> On behalf of the people who have messaged me and who are still afraid to speak out, thank you.


While I take your point and are generally in agreement with you, I'm not sure about the bit of your post I bolded. It seems to me, that they should NOT have paid until they had seen the T&C. Obviously, that's easy to say, and someone who's real eager and has no reason not to trust a person may skip that step. But for me, that is a big lesson new authors should take from this: Do Not Pay ANYTHING until you've seen a written agreement/contract and are comfortable with the terms.

It's a bit different if you did this due diligence and the contract looked good and then you discovered after the fact that all was not as it seemed. The real possibility of that happening is all the more reason to be sure you have something in writing to start with so that if there are problems later on, you have evidence. Watch Judge Judy, people!  Invariably the side that loses is the one who says "I don't have it with me." And Judy says, "Where did you think you were coming today?" Of course, the side who wins is the one who has the text messages from the other saying "I promise to pay you back."


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Evenstar said:


> I want to thank those who are putting themselves on the line to expose all the many different areas.
> 
> But I have more questions. I realise a lot of this has been covered with screen shots on the Passive Voice and the blog it relates to, but as I don't know who wrote the blog, it means I am unable to take it at face value. Instead, I've been checking facebook groups and other forums and it has been shocking me enormously to hear first hand experience right here and in other places that it is in fact all completely true.
> 
> So, I want _more_ information. And before I get shouted at, I think it is absolutely fair and right to ask for it!
> 
> It isn't in regards to gifted copies, it's this:
> 
> Do some of her boxed sets betray this part of the TOS?
> 
> From KDP TOS:
> 
> _If we terminate this Agreement because you have breached your representations and warranties or our *Content Guidelines*, you forfeit all Royalties not yet paid to you._
> 
> Regarding above-mentioned *content guidelines*:
> 
> _Poor Customer Experience
> We don't accept books that provide a poor customer experience. We reserve the right to determine whether content provides a poor customer experience. See the Guide to Kindle Content Quality for examples of content that's typically disappointing to customers._
> 
> And regarding the* Guide to Kindle Content Quality:*
> 
> _Missing Content
> Missing content issues occur when some *intended part* of the book is either mistakenly removed or includes *references to a portion of the book that isn't included in the book.*
> 
> Critical Issues
> More text is missing than just a short phrase
> Missing image section that the product description or the contents of the book indicate should be included
> *Main book content that is only accessible through external links*
> Product description indicates book includes CD, DVD or other ancillary content that is not accessible
> Missing or unplayable audio/video content in a Kindle Enhanced with Audio and Video_
> 
> Or...
> 
> _Wrong Content
> Books with wrong content are always removed from sale.
> 
> Wrong content occurs when a customer receives something other than what is advertised. This is most commonly caused by uploading an incorrect file, but can sometimes also occur if updates are made to the product information or copy/paste issues make the description incorrect. The easiest way to fix it is to upload the latest version of the correct file.
> 
> _
> The way the boxed set operation has been described, it sounds like there could be some of this going on. Or not?
> 
> _Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


From what I observed online when it happened, yes, that happened with a particular box set. The box set was put on preorder and readers bought the book based off the description. When the final preorder file was uploaded, it exceeded the file size requirements to be priced at $0.99. Amazon notified the publisher that the price would have to be increased when the file was uploaded and it exceeded the file size requirements for the $0.99 price point. The publisher choose to split the file, uploading a kindle file that had only half of the books promised, and inside the book was a link to instaFreebie to download the other half of the book.

The file size pricing requirement was not new. Readers who already pre-ordered at a lower price always get the lowest price offered during the pre-order period even if the price increases before the sale date. From Amazon, Pre-order pricing

This is the information that was added to the back of the book: (the link to instaFreebie has since been removed) From the response to a negative review HERE on Amazon


> Dear reader,
> 
> We apologize for the inconvenience of having to download the second half of this file through another site. Unfortunately, Amazon gave us a choice: Either increase the price of the book, or make the file smaller. We really wanted you to get this deal for $0.99, and the file could not be made any smaller, so we split in two.
> 
> If you prefer not to download the second half, we have another GREAT solution for you. On November 20th, the price of the collection goes up to $2.99. At that time, we can load the FULL file. You will be able to request the updated file be pushed through to your kindle at NO additional cost. At that time, you'll have the full collection all in one file on your kindle.
> 
> However, if you want access to the second half of this collection NOW, you can grab it by following the link below to download the rest of the Wicked Legends titles - again, at no additional cost.
> 
> Thank you for understanding, and again, we apologize on behalf of Amazon for forcing us to create the file in this way. We always prefer to get you the full file upfront, which is something all the other venders have allowed us to do. But we hope these stories make it worth the wait!
> 
> ***
> 
> We hope this helps clear the issue. Again, we understand Avid Reader's frustration, though at the same time, we want to make sure other readers are getting a completely accurate picture of the situation at hand, and the review above is unintentionally misleading about the situation (I believe due to the reader misunderstanding the situation - for that, we apologize that our wording wasn't clearer.)
> 
> That said, the claim that readers have to pay more money for the rest of the books is not true , nor is it true that they must download the rest via another site. That alternative is optional.
> 
> I repeat, you absolutely can get the updated of the file in a few days, directly to your kindle, at no additional charge. By no additional charge, we mean that the full file will be delivered and that is included in the $0.99 you already paid.
> 
> The cause of this set up is, 100%, Amazon's doing, and we are just doing our best as authors to honor a promise to our readers.
> 
> Thank you for your time and understanding.
> 
> x Rebecca Hamilton


----------



## Patty Jansen

Ann in Arlington said:


> While I take your point and are generally in agreement with you, I'm not sure about the bit of your post I bolded. It seems to me, that they should NOT have paid until they had seen the T&C. Obviously, that's easy to say, and someone who's real eager and has no reason not to trust a person may skip that step. But for me, that is a big lesson new authors should take from this: Do Not Pay ANYTHING until you've seen a written agreement/contract and are comfortable with the terms.
> 
> It's a bit different if you did this due diligence and the contract looked good and then you discovered after the fact that all was not as it seemed. The real possibility of that happening is all the more reason to be sure you have something in writing to start with so that if there are problems later on, you have evidence. Watch Judge Judy, people!  Invariably the side that loses is the one who says "I don't have it with me." And Judy says, "Where did you think you were coming today?" Of course, the side who wins is the one who has the text messages from the other saying "I promise to pay you back."


The T&C were changed on some people, several times. Christina has already explained how this was done. In my personal case, and it was piddly and minor, but there was no line in the T&C that said "Thou shalt send an email to your email list when I dictate within five minutes of my saying that you should." Problem was, I'd just sent an email and simply asked if I could send a bit later. Was refunded my money on the spot and was made persona non-grata for doing nothing more than that. I was lucky. I "only" lost a number of friends I wished I could have kept. On second thoughts, I really wish I could have kept some of them.

I laugh about it, but seriously, that's the tone. People see this and want out, often long before they get an opportunity to get into trouble themselves, and before the sets go live. If these people were actually refunded as any sane business would (since the preorders hadn't even gone live for some of them) a lot of this anger in this thread would not have happened.

About skirting the Amazon T&C, no one who joins has a clue that this happens. Very few people ever find out, even the ones who are in the sets. The screenshots in that post come from a super sekrit course where you can learn all the ways to do this kind of stuff. Ever wondered why the sets are never uploaded in the organiser's name? Because if you gift copies of other people's books, it counts as full sale.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

CrazyHorze said:


> It is obvious to me that we are dealing with a second wave of disruption in the publishing word. Only now it is the first wave of disruptors getting disrupted by the second wave. Mom and pop shops were disrupted by Wal-mart. Wal-mart is being disrupted by Amazon. Traditional publishing was disrupted by the first wave of indies and now that they have grown fat and stale they are getting disrupted by the new wave of indies who learn from guys like Mark Dawson who spends 30000 dollars a month on Facebook ads to sell his books and Rebecca who is skirting the line of good and bad to sell her writers' books. I applaud both of them. They are innovators. If the new wave of disruption is causing you pain, maybe now is a good time to think of the pain the first wave of indies caused the traditional publishing. How many of them lost their job because of us?
> 
> _Edited. As Betsy said in reopening the thread, name-calling is not permitted. You may not post again in this thread, CrazyHorze. - Becca_


Seriously? Skirting the line of good and bad is alright in your world? Right is right and wrong is wrong. The ability to distinguish one from the other is learned at a very young age. However, some people don't learn it, or don't learn it well. Others CHOOSE to ignore the difference, and intentionally break the rules. Prisons are full of these people and personally, I have no sympathy for any of them. Break the rules, pay the consequences.

This isn't a discussion about cutting edge marketing methods. It's a discussion on knowingly violating not just the TOS of the vendors we sell through, but the decorum of good business practice and just being a good person. If you can tell a good story, you can write a book. If you have a few bucks, you can hire someone to make it a better book, through better editing, formatting, and cover design. There aren't any shortcuts to success, but those who whine because they want something and want it now, will always be looking for one. Those people are easily distracted by the charming smile of the snake oil salesman. I also have no sympathy for them.

Patience is an adult quality. Instant gratification is what children demand.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Ann in Arlington said:


> While I take your point and are generally in agreement with you, I'm not sure about the bit of your post I bolded. It seems to me, that they should NOT have paid until they had seen the T&C. Obviously, that's easy to say, and someone who's real eager and has no reason not to trust a person may skip that step. But for me, that is a big lesson new authors should take from this: Do Not Pay ANYTHING until you've seen a written agreement/contract and are comfortable with the terms.
> 
> It's a bit different if you did this due diligence and the contract looked good and then you discovered after the fact that all was not as it seemed. The real possibility of that happening is all the more reason to be sure you have something in writing to start with so that if there are problems later on, you have evidence. Watch Judge Judy, people!  Invariably the side that loses is the one who says "I don't have it with me." And Judy says, "Where did you think you were coming today?" Of course, the side who wins is the one who has the text messages from the other saying "I promise to pay you back."


This is an excellent point and one I'd be a hypocrite to say I haven't done before (albeit thankfully in much smaller denominations). A lot us want to primarily be writers or publishers. There's no real interest in the boring business side of things. However, we do ourselves no favors by going down this path because we ARE a business and will be held accountable as such if things go awry. As much as I would love to live in a world where a handshake was all that was needed to seal the deal between two honorable parties, the reality is much much different.

A lot of us spend a great deal of time buying books, attending classes etc on improving our writing and/or marketing, but it would also greatly benefit us to spend some time learning the ins and outs of running a business (vs. the perils of learning by trial and error). Buy books on this, attend meetings, find your local chapter of the Small Business Association and see if you can find someone willing to mentor you on the basics. It's the side of what we do that seems to be most often be neglected, but ultimately is no less important than anything else we do to further our craft.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Patty Jansen said:


> The T&C were changed on some people, several times. Christina has already explained how this was done. In my personal case, and it was piddly and minor, but there was no line in the T&C that said "Thou shalt send an email to your email list when I dictate within five minutes of my saying that you should." Problem was, I'd just sent an email and simply asked if I could send a bit later. Was refunded my money on the spot and was made persona non-grata for doing nothing more than that. I was lucky. I "only" lost a number of friends I wished I could have kept. On second thoughts, I really wish I could have kept some of them.
> 
> I laugh about it, but seriously, that's the tone. People see this and want out, often long before they get an opportunity to get into trouble themselves, and before the sets go live. If these people were actually refunded as any sane business would (since the preorders hadn't even gone live for some of them) a lot of this anger in this thread would not have happened.
> 
> About skirting the Amazon T&C, no one who joins has a clue that this happens. Very few people ever find out, even the ones who are in the sets. The screenshots in that post come from a super sekrit course where you can learn all the ways to do this kind of stuff. Ever wondered why the sets are never uploaded in the organiser's name? Because if you gift copies of other people's books, it counts as full sale.


Well, as I said, if you agree to something and then the terms change . . . . having written record of what you agreed to is critical. It's unfortunate, but all you can control is how you behave. It is appropriate to shine a light on behavior that does not appear to be professional.


----------



## PhoenixS

First, another thank you to the mods for keeping this thread open.

Second, just to note that while there are many who have been/continue to be afraid to speak out publicly, not all have been silent. I know several people who have approached Amazon directly with their concerns.

Third, to Evenstar's concerns about the bolded copy in the T&Cs in her post, yes, many of Rebecca's box sets have been violating the critical issues section. Some of her boxes have been removed because of it as have other organizers' boxes following that example. As has been pointed out elsewhere, the gamble is in the timing. All Rebecca needs is that one-week window right after release to not get caught.

Fourth, regarding the Paypal account(s)... my understanding (and I'm not privy to any of Rebecca's closed-wall groups so she can jump in her to correct me, if needed, but this is gleaned from what I've seen in her own public posts on the subject) is that she maintains several PP accounts. The explanation I've seen is that this helps her track the money better -- which money goes to which box type of thing.

On the face of it, that sounds innocuous enough. For someone on the up-and-up, that could indeed be nothing more than good accounting practices, despite the fact that Paypal allows an individual to have only one personal account and one business account.

What's wrong with having multiple business accounts? PayPal will send a 1099K to accounts with over 200 transactions totaling over $20K. Theoretically, if someone has, say, 10 box sets with 22 authors each who are paying $500 each, if that all came in on one account, that's 220 transactions totaling $110,000. That will trigger a 1099K. But if each box set is its own account, then each account only generates 22 transactions totaling $11,000. No 1099K. And for boxes with a $2K buy-in, even though that total amount is $44K and over the $20K threshold, the number of transactions is only 22 and will not trigger a 1099K.

So the potential at least for tax fraud is high in a situation with multiple accounts.

[ETA: To my knowledge, F&F transactions don't trigger a 1099K regardless.]


----------



## Patty Jansen

Ann in Arlington said:


> Well, as I said, if you agree to something and then the terms change . . . . having written record of what you agreed to is critical. It's unfortunate, but all you can control is how you behave. It is appropriate to shine a light on behavior that does not appear to be professional.


Which is why many of us are happy that the thread hasn't been shut down before all this could be discussed. So thank you.


----------



## MyraScott

Patty Jansen said:


> Which is why many of us are happy that the thread hasn't been shut down before all this could be discussed. So thank you.


There is so much fear of retaliation... without public discussion, so many people are afraid to put their business in the crosshairs for sabotage. You shouldn't have to risk your social media presence or your Amazon account just because you were trying to market your books.

No one should have to enter the Twilight Zone of being attacked simply for trying to get their books in front of readers- and the fact that people are finding out that they are not getting what they paid for until after they've sent their money in is a real "boiling the frog" scenario.

People sign up in good faith but each thing they are asked to do (send PayPal funds that skirt the IRS, give out gift copies, downvote another author's book or unfriend them) ties them into the cult mentality a little more and makes it harder to speak out.

_Because you should have known better,_ they are told. _You got yourself into this mess and now you are part of it._

That's ridiculous. Writing and publishing and promoting are businesses, not secret clubs. I swear some of the stories of these people ought to be made into books because it is truly the innocent being sucked into an organization that they can't get out of without damaging themselves.

Thank you for this thread.


----------



## 75814

The problem with "well, they should have known better" is it borders on victim-blaming. I haven't read the contracts used in these situations, but I have read contracts in plenty of other situations that were really confusing. It's very easy to say, "well, you read the contract and it was up to you to understand it," but another question should be, why is the person writing that contract stipulating these terms? Why are they presenting them in language purposefully designed to be muddy?

Yeah, the person signing the contract should have been more aware. But I don't believe that 100% excuses the person writing these contracts. 

And as Myra pointed out, that kind of talk also scares people out of sharing their stories so other writers can learn from their mistakes.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I don't think it is meant as victim blaming or as an excuse for the vendor; I think it is meant as a caution to people reading this thread to assist them in evaluating services in the future.  Members have posted here that, in hindsight, they indeed should have known better.  Let's leave it at that and not lose the focus on answering questions that have been asked concerning the business practices in question, thanks.

Betsy


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Perry Constantine said:


> The problem with "well, they should have known better" is it borders on victim-blaming. I haven't read the contracts used in these situations, but I have read contracts in plenty of other situations that were really confusing. It's very easy to say, "well, you read the contract and it was up to you to understand it," but another question should be, why is the person writing that contract stipulating these terms? Why are they presenting them in language purposefully designed to be muddy?
> 
> Yeah, the person signing the contract should have been more aware. But I don't believe that 100% excuses the person writing these contracts.
> 
> And as Myra pointed out, that kind of talk also scares people out of sharing their stories so other writers can learn from their mistakes.


These are good points. In addition, people make mistakes, and I give a lot of credit to people who were behaving in a certain way and then walk their way back from it, saying, "You know, I got stuck in the quagmire in part due to my own mistakes, and now I'm going to try to extract myself." Too often, the natural tendency of most of us (myself included) is to double down, to justify, to wade ever deeper until we're drowning in our mistakes.


----------



## lincolnjcole

MyraScott said:


> What's crazy is a friend of mine had Amazon threaten to close her account for gifting one book to a friend who, unrequested, then left a review. The email from Amazon warned her they "don't tolerate authors trying to manipulate ranks."
> 
> With a single gifted copy.
> 
> And yet a promo organizer buys a spot on the lists with thousands of gifted copies and claims to get a special call from an Amazon executives on Sunday telling her how much they love her and would never think of doing anything to hurt her?
> 
> It makes not one bit of sense. Not even a little.


I can attest to this, but not quite with the same conclusion as you drew. A friend of mine was targeted for a similar letter from Amazon for trying to 'game' the system when friends and family attempted to post reviews on his book. He has 13 reviews total after several months with a number of copies sold.

However, Amazon is notorious for being willing to back the big players. They send letters like this to small players so they can brag about 'regulating' and protecting their system to keep a fair playing field, and then look the other way when big players do it (because the big players bring in tons of money). In the last few years and especially months Amazon has started instituting new systems designed to punish and harm indie authors for the benefit of traditional publishers, but this shouldn't surprise anyone: just like in politics, the lobbyists focus on helping the minority rather than the majority and most people are left out in the cold.

In this particular case, an indie system was developed to more or less 'cheat' to bring in huge amounts of money and prestige, and it raises the bar of entry for other indie authors who want to compete. It's essentially a natural evolution of the game where the cost of entry goes up, benefits go down, and the elite separate themselves from the rest of the back through semi-shady tactics. History can and will be rewritten by the victors.


----------



## Not any more

I have dealt with contracts in a professional capacity for the past 30 years (no, I'm not a lawyer). Currently, I'm locked in litigation because I signed a poorly-written contract in my personal life 12 years ago. Stupid happens. Try to keep it to a minimum.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

lincolnjcole said:


> In this particular case, an indie system was developed to more or less 'cheat' to bring in huge amounts of money and prestige, and it raises the bar of entry for other indie authors who want to compete. It's essentially a natural evolution of the game where the cost of entry goes up, benefits go down, and the elite separate themselves from the rest of the back through semi-shady tactics. History can and will be rewritten by the victors.


Hence why posts like this and others. Amazon can and has been known to act if something is proven to be an issue that isn't going away. Case in point that KU bonus a lot of us got some months back from them finally acting on the various page reads scams going on. One could argue their reasons for doing so, but I'd like to think multiple voices in the industry putting pressure on them to act helped.

There is also the customer to think about, who I think we can all agree is Amazon's top priority always. It's been discussed here some items which are very much potential customer / product issues: half-filled box sets with links to instafreebie to download the rest, box sets which never list the actual books within them - allowing different ones be swapped in and out, etc. All of these are potential issues which their customer care has to deal with - and have no doubt they will rule in favor of the customer.

It's not an easy fight, but pushing to make sure Amazon enforces their TOS fairly and doesn't tolerate black hat tactics to defraud customers (or their other vendors) is a fight where we can make a difference.


----------



## Not any more

ebbrown said:


> This is the information that was added to the back of the book: (the link to instaFreebie has since been removed) From the response to a negative review HERE on Amazon


This absolutely floors me. I don't think anything else needs to be said.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

brkingsolver said:


> This absolutely floors me. I don't think anything else needs to be said.


Me too. There's a level of arrogance in assuming that anyone would be okay with this. The whole point of Amazon is one click and it's on my kindle. Not everyone wants to go through other steps and - more importantly - not everyone is savvy enough to know what the heck an instafreebie even is or how to use it. For all readers know it's some pirate site (yes, we know it's not, but think of someone not in our industry).

I liken this to me purchasing a set of tools, only to find half missing and I need to send in a business reply card to claim the rest. Yes, they might be free, but that's not what I - the customer - signed up for.


----------



## unkownwriter

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I don't think it is meant as victim blaming or as an excuse for the vendor; I think it is meant as a caution to people reading this thread to assist them in evaluating services in the future. Members have posted here that, in hindsight, they indeed should have known better. Let's leave it at that and not lose the focus on answering questions that have been asked concerning the business practices in question, thanks.
> 
> Betsy


That may have been what was meant, but that wasn't how I read it, and it seems I wasn't the only one. People make mistakes, they trust people they shouldn't. If there's no safe place for them to share what happened, then the bad acts continue to go on.

Due to the person in question's bad acts, I have been affected myself, and I've never done business with her. I'd like to have more evidence presented, so thanks for keeping the thread open. I only wish I could see the comments on that linked site, but it cuts off after the first one for me.


----------



## AYClaudy

This entire thread has been eye opening to me and really made me think about my business and long term goals in a new way. Thank you to all who are discussing so openly. 

I feel like I'm in a business ethics course all over again, and I'd love to hear more thoughts about gifting practices. 

While gifting enough copies to hit a list is (in my mind) clearly wrong, there seems to be a lot of gray areas leading up to this or around the practice of gifting in general. 

I'm not connected to this in any way, but it's raised several questions about what I thought was standard practices-- or at least rampant practices.  

If you are in KU my take on the TOS is that the only way to give away copies of your book (as a contest, raffle, giveaway) is through direct gifting. But even outside of KU, I would think there are definite advantages for the reader and the author to gifting through Amazon. While you are not supposed to do it to alter rank, that is a side effect of running giveaways for promotion. So at what point or what volume of giveaways does this become wrong? 

I can understand Amazon's position of allowing it since it is really just gift cards for the book's amount, and the reader could use it for anything they wanted. So maybe that's where it becomes wrong, then requiring it to be used within a given time frame to ensure it boosts your rank?

I'm honestly just curious of where other people's lines are about this and IF amazon were to put a limit on it, what would/ should that limit be? 

(Just to clarify, I have gifted copies of my books as part of author takeovers and release week giveaways for promotion, but never large quantities that would do much for ranking, maybe 10 at the most at a given time, and never with requirements for claiming the prize. Although I can't lie it's been tempting when the rank is teetering and about to break 100, but then I actually refrained from any giveaways because I wanted to see how high I could go from actual sales. Just the way my ego works  )


----------



## Susanne123

As someone who has not yet published, I'd like to thank so many experienced authors for stepping up and taking the time to educate us. I know it takes time from your writing and I do appreciate this thread. My head is spinning.


----------



## Not any more

Susanne123 said:


> As someone who has not yet published, I'd like to thank so many experienced authors for stepping up and taking the time to educate us. I know it takes time from your writing and I do appreciate this thread. My head is spinning.


It doesn't have to be this complicated. Most people can have an entire career without any of this kind of drama. Really.


----------



## C. Gockel

> It doesn't have to be this complicated. Most people can have an entire career without any of this kind of drama. Really.


This.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

In regards to gifting through the vendor: I do not do this.

Why?

In my experience, and I DO give my readers ample opportunities to get my books for free both chapter by chapter and at the end as a PDF or other file download, it is better to handle the gifting stuff yourself. Note, I am not gifting in order to make  list or boost my sales rank, if those are your goals, and we've covered how they really shouldn't be your goals, but if they are, this system won't work for you.

Giving readers free books is not unethical. Like I said, I do it all the time. I prefer to give my readers the files to download so that #1 I can see who is savvy enough to do so and therefore more likely to leave me an honest review. I only ever ask for honest reviews, and for the most part those are 3-5 stars and I'm fine with that. Reviews are for readers.  

#2, if I am handling the gifting, I have their email address that I know works. This is important, because as we all know, many of us have Amazon accounts with email addresses we rarely check unless we have to. We've had the Amazon account for going on 10+ years, so's the email address, we all know how functional that email address is likely to be . . . 

#3 and this is going to be WHOA, AMAZING . . . many of my readers who get a FREE copy from me go BUY the book for themselves. I gave them the book free and they appreciate that, but then they go to the store to buy a copy because they want to own it, too. This means that my free systems don't impact my ability to make a living wage at this.

I do realize this method won't help anyone make a USAToday Bestseller List, nor does it help you debut a book #1 in a heavily competitive category. But I always say rank doesn't pay the bills . . . this is an example of a long-tail, long-career type system to build true fans vs. incetivizing downloads.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I do realize this method won't help anyone make a USAToday Bestseller List, nor does it help you debut a book #1 in a heavily competitive category. But I always say rank doesn't pay the bills . . . this is an example of a long-tail, long-career type system to build true fans vs. incetivizing downloads.


Doing it this way you're potentially building a relationship with the reader. A loyal reader is going to ultimately be far more beneficial to your business than a quick bump in rank.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> #3 and this is going to be WHOA, AMAZING . . . many of my readers who get a FREE copy from me go BUY the book for themselves. I gave them the book free and they appreciate that, but then they go to the store to buy a copy because they want to own it, too. This means that my free systems don't impact my ability to make a living wage at this.


As a reader, I've done this--more with KU reads than others (since one I have a book in my permanent Kindle library, I don't really know whether it as free or not). But if I fall for an author  I want the books to be mine whether I'm in KU or not. I want it to be a long-term relationship, not an office romance.

Betsy


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

MyraScott said:


> There is so much fear of retaliation... without public discussion, so many people are afraid to put their business in the crosshairs for sabotage.


Yes. That's the sad part of it all. It is not fun to be on the other end of a targeted hate campaign. Discussion about this issue is at least one positive thing to come out of it.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Ann in Arlington said:


> While I take your point and are generally in agreement with you, I'm not sure about the bit of your post I bolded. It seems to me, that they should NOT have paid until they had seen the T&C. Obviously, that's easy to say, and someone who's real eager and has no reason not to trust a person may skip that step. But for me, that is a big lesson new authors should take from this: Do Not Pay ANYTHING until you've seen a written agreement/contract and are comfortable with the terms.
> 
> It's a bit different if you did this due diligence and the contract looked good and then you discovered after the fact that all was not as it seemed. The real possibility of that happening is all the more reason to be sure you have something in writing to start with so that if there are problems later on, you have evidence. Watch Judge Judy, people!  Invariably the side that loses is the one who says "I don't have it with me." And Judy says, "Where did you think you were coming today?" Of course, the side who wins is the one who has the text messages from the other saying "I promise to pay you back."


I agree 100% that I shouldn't have sent money before seeing a contract. However in the case of the three sets I as in, second contracts (with different terms) were later forced upon participants. At that point, it's simply not legal to keep the participant's money unless they sign the new contract.

I have the proof that all of this happened exactly as I've stated--multiple lawyers who have reviewed my documentation agree that this is a cut dry case--the monies are owed to me. That doesn't negate the fact that thus far she has refused to do so.

I first requested my money back in January. At the time, I hadn't consulted an attorney and asked for refunds because of the change in terms not feeling like a good fit. I kept it professional and knew to tread lightly having witnessed her public retaliatory tactics. (Had I seen any of the before I'd paid, I never would have; I find bullying abhorrent.) She responded that there were no refunds and proceeded to post on Facebook a long rant about how I was "letting 70 authors down" and she hoped I decide to be a "woman of my word."

I mean, honestly--who conducts business this way? But it is effective--someone who only has $500 in the game who wants out, decides instead to keep their head low, go through with their set and get away. I can't tell you the amount of messages I received to that effect after she first went after me. "I'm so sorry you're going through this--I want out too, but I'm scared of the 1-star review brigade" etc.

Someone like myself who is owed thousands has to make a choice--is it worth it to hire a lawyer? If the demand letter goes unanswered is it worth it to go to court?

Not just because even if you prevail some/most of your award will go to the attorney, but because I know from firsthand experience the lengths Rebecca will go to in order to assassinate a person's character. The attempt this past Sunday was the most recent and especially vicious, defamatory, and easily proven for the lies they are. It's that post that has forced my hand on several fronts, because no one accuses me of plagiarism or attacks my character without answering for it. At this point, I'm willing to go in the hole if necessary, that is how repugnant of an attack it was.

But it's that exact behavior that keeps others from speaking up, and it's that fear of retaliation that is still keeping folks silently PM-ing me support and screen shots.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Patty Jansen said:


> Whether or not anyone wants to get involved with tactics that skirt the edges of the Amazon T&C is up to them, but at least now it's become clear what goes on and what the risks are.


Exactly this. I have no wish to tell others what they should or shouldn't do. But like Nick said earlier, if I'd known what a Book Blast was, I wouldn't have booked one. For those how see how it works and see that it could be flagged for rank manipulation and still decide it's worth the risk, they should book the service.

Likewise, if any of the other tactics in this thread are a good fit for a person's personal integrity, they should continue to do business with Rebecca and GenreCrave. It's transparency I want, so that people can make an informed choice.

I'm also grateful for the thread remaining open. Thanks, mods


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

ChristinaGarner said:


> Not just because even if you prevail some/most of your award will go to the attorney, but because I know from firsthand experience the lengths Rebecca will go to in order to assassinate a person's character. The attempt this past Sunday was the most recent and especially vicious, defamatory, and easily proven for the lies they are. It's that post that has forced my hand on several fronts, because no one accuses me of plagiarism or attacks my character without answering for it. At this point, I'm willing to go in the hole if necessary, that is how repugnant of an attack it was.
> 
> But it's that exact behavior that keeps others from speaking up, and it's that fear of retaliation that is still keeping folks silently PM-ing me support and screen shots.


That's why I'm glad this forum has been left open. It's public. No behind closed doors shenanigans. Anyone speaking up here and then being retaliated against - well, first off, hopefully it doesn't happen. But, if it does, you 1) have a potential record to show to Amazon to correlate against any 1 star deluges and 2) I'd like to think there's enough of us here who can both give support to anyone being bullied as well as offer any help or advice we can give on how to deal with it. There's a good group here on kboards and I think most of us don't want to see that happen to anybody.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Ann in Arlington said:


> While I take your point and are generally in agreement with you, I'm not sure about the bit of your post I bolded. It seems to me, that they should NOT have paid until they had seen the T&C. Obviously, that's easy to say, and someone who's real eager and has no reason not to trust a person may skip that step. But for me, that is a big lesson new authors should take from this: Do Not Pay ANYTHING until you've seen a written agreement/contract and are comfortable with the terms.
> 
> It's a bit different if you did this due diligence and the contract looked good and then you discovered after the fact that all was not as it seemed. The real possibility of that happening is all the more reason to be sure you have something in writing to start with so that if there are problems later on, you have evidence. Watch Judge Judy, people!  Invariably the side that loses is the one who says "I don't have it with me." And Judy says, "Where did you think you were coming today?" Of course, the side who wins is the one who has the text messages from the other saying "I promise to pay you back."


Here in the real world, we don't have access to Judge Judy. Going to court is ruinously expensive. If you've lost five hundred, two thousand dollars? Just gift it to a lawyer of your acquaintance. Maybe she'll buy you a bottle of wine with it, and you can drown your sorrows.

Not to mention the flying monkeys that would descend on you. That's scarier than losing the money. Most people feel forced to swallow their loss and walk away, or try to get out by pleading ill health, family emergency, etc.

I don't have personal experiences. I don't cross promo. I've seen lots of screen shots, though, and also the open part of the Facebook page before I was blocked. It gets ugly.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> That's why I'm glad this forum has been left open. It's public. No behind closed doors shenanigans. Anyone speaking up here and then being retaliated against - well, first off, hopefully it doesn't happen. But, if it does, you 1) have a potential record to show to Amazon to correlate against any 1 star deluges and 2) I'd like to think there's enough of us here who can both support anyone being bullied as well as offer any help or advice we can give on how to deal with it. There's a good group here on kboards and I think most of us don't want to see that happen to anybody.


Thanks, Rick. <3

The support I've been getting is amazing. The public support is the most helpful, but even the private support is comforting. So many people have been scared for so long. For me it wasn't so much fear as--what is this worth to me? I have a life to live and books to write. I can see why many prefer to remain silent but I hope that more will speak up.


----------



## CassieL

ChristinaGarner said:


> ...the 1-star review brigade" etc.


You know, this hasn't come up here explicitly yet, but I actually decided I wasn't comfortable working with her (and walked away from some advertising I'd already paid for) because of a situation with another author that she broadcast all over her FB page and that resulted in a number of her followers going and leaving one-star reviews on that author's page based on just her say-so about what had happened. (Unfortunately, discussion of that matter wasn't allowed on Kboards and was shut down almost immediately even though it would've been a productive conversation to have.)

I almost never review books, but for those who do, IMO, any review you leave should be a legitimate review of that author's work. Leaving reviews based on someone else's opinion of the book (and this is a wider issue than just this situation), is not okay. And doing so because of someone else's opinion of the author is even worse.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Me too. There's a level of arrogance in assuming that anyone would be okay with this. The whole point of Amazon is one click and it's on my kindle. Not everyone wants to go through other steps and - more importantly - not everyone is savvy enough to know what the heck an instafreebie even is or how to use it. For all readers know it's some pirate site (yes, we know it's not, but think of someone not in our industry).
> 
> I liken this to me purchasing a set of tools, only to find half missing and I need to send in a business reply card to claim the rest. Yes, they might be free, but that's not what I - the customer - signed up for.


FWIW, if I bought a book and got halfway through and saw that, to finish it, I had to download it via a link, I'd be returning the book to Amazon and complaining loudly. Even if past the 7 days I'd be contacting them and demand my money back. Yes, even if it was only 99 cents. AND, I'd report it via the link on the book page. And, I might even leave a non-positive review.

I get that we're talking about anthology type things, but still: if I expected 10 shorts and only got 5, clearly I did not get what I paid for.


----------



## 75814

The 1-star brigade is troubling, especially because of the tacit endorsement of this activity. I could be wrong, but I have never seen an instance of her telling her followers not to do that or chastising those who have done it.

I had a similar issue early in my career. Not exactly the same, but similar. When I published one of my early books, I sent it to a review site. The review that was posted was very critical, but the criticism was fair. At the time I didn't know any better, so I posted a link to the review on my blog at the time, thanked the reviewer for reading and commenting, and said I'd consider what he said.

Then I went about my day and when I got home, I found out several of my fans had spammed the reviewers site with insulting comments. I was absolutely disgusted and I immediately posted a blog entry issuing a public apology to the reviewer and urging my fans that this kind of behavior is completely unacceptable and it's not the kind of support I want.

The reviewer appreciated what I did and has actually become a good friend of mine since then. And that's the way I think an ethical author should address these kinds of things. If she's really not endorsing the 1-star brigade, she should call them out.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Betsy the Quilter said:


> As a reader, I've done this--more with KU reads than others (since one I have a book in my permanent Kindle library, I don't really know whether it as free or not). But if I fall for an author  I want the books to be mine whether I'm in KU or not. I want it to be a long-term relationship, not an office romance.
> 
> Betsy


If I get a free book as a "try it, you might like it" I do 'own' the book -- as much as I would if I bought and paid for it.

What that free book does for me is let me have a taste -- like at Costco -- and if I like it, I buy the mega pack of whatever they're selling. I don't go back and try to pay the person for the sample. 

KU is different -- so, yeah, if you want to have a copy to keep without having to borrow when you want to re-read, you'd have to buy it.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

ChristinaGarner said:


> I agree 100% that I shouldn't have sent money before seeing a contract. However in the case of the three sets I as in, second contracts (with different terms) were later forced upon participants. At that point, it's simply not legal to keep the participant's money unless they sign the new contract.
> 
> I have the proof that all of this happened exactly as I've stated--multiple lawyers who have reviewed my documentation agree that this is a cut dry case--the monies are owed to me. That doesn't negate the fact that thus far she has refused to do so.
> 
> I first requested my money back in January. At the time, I hadn't consulted an attorney and asked for refunds because of the change in terms not feeling like a good fit. I kept it professional and knew to tread lightly having witnessed her public retaliatory tactics. (Had I seen any of the before I'd paid, I never would have; I find bullying abhorrent.) She responded that there were no refunds and proceeded to post on Facebook a long rant about how I was "letting 70 authors down" and she hoped I decide to be a "woman of my word."
> 
> I mean, honestly--who conducts business this way? But it is effective--someone who only has $500 in the game who wants out, decides instead to keep their head low, go through with their set and get away. I can't tell you the amount of messages I received to that effect after she first went after me. "I'm so sorry you're going through this--I want out too, but I'm scared of the 1-star review brigade" etc.
> 
> Someone like myself who is owed thousands has to make a choice--is it worth it to hire a lawyer? If the demand letter goes unanswered is it worth it to go to court?
> 
> Not just because even if you prevail some/most of your award will go to the attorney, but because I know from firsthand experience the lengths Rebecca will go to in order to assassinate a person's character. The attempt this past Sunday was the most recent and especially vicious, defamatory, and easily proven for the lies they are. It's that post that has forced my hand on several fronts, because no one accuses me of plagiarism or attacks my character without answering for it. At this point, I'm willing to go in the hole if necessary, that is how repugnant of an attack it was.
> 
> But it's that exact behavior that keeps others from speaking up, and it's that fear of retaliation that is still keeping folks silently PM-ing me support and screen shots.


And I agree: if the terms change AFTER you've agreed to something -- that's not legitimate business practice and you have the right to back out and for the other party to make you whole.

I totally get that there may be repercussions to exerting that right -- legal fees, professional retaliation.

Again, my point is only that this makes it that much MORE important for rookies to research everything and be sure the people they're dealing with are above board in their business dealings.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Rosalind J said:


> Here in the real world, we don't have access to Judge Judy. Going to court is ruinously expensive. If you've lost five hundred, two thousand dollars? Just gift it to a lawyer of your acquaintance. Maybe she'll buy you a bottle of wine with it, and you can drown your sorrows.
> 
> Not to mention the flying monkeys that would descend on you. That's scarier than losing the money. Most people feel forced to swallow their loss and walk away, or try to get out by pleading ill health, family emergency, etc.
> 
> I don't have personal experiences. I don't cross promo. I've seen lots of screen shots, though, and also the open part of the Facebook page before I was blocked. It gets ugly.


Sorry -- my Judge Judy reference was only meant to be a way of emphasizing to have things in writing in case it goes sideways.

I do get, as I've mentioned, that exercising your rights is sometimes not worth the aggravation and cost.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> In regards to gifting through the vendor: I do not do this.
> 
> Why?
> 
> In my experience, and I DO give my readers ample opportunities to get my books for free both chapter by chapter and at the end as a PDF or other file download, it is better to handle the gifting stuff yourself. Note, I am not gifting in order to make list or boost my sales rank, if those are your goals, and we've covered how they really shouldn't be your goals, but if they are, this system won't work for you.
> 
> Giving readers free books is not unethical. Like I said, I do it all the time. I prefer to give my readers the files to download so that #1 I can see who is savvy enough to do so and therefore more likely to leave me an honest review. I only ever ask for honest reviews, and for the most part those are 3-5 stars and I'm fine with that. Reviews are for readers.
> 
> #2, if I am handling the gifting, I have their email address that I know works. This is important, because as we all know, many of us have Amazon accounts with email addresses we rarely check unless we have to. We've had the Amazon account for going on 10+ years, so's the email address, we all know how functional that email address is likely to be . . .
> 
> #3 and this is going to be WHOA, AMAZING . . . many of my readers who get a FREE copy from me go BUY the book for themselves. I gave them the book free and they appreciate that, but then they go to the store to buy a copy because they want to own it, too. This means that my free systems don't impact my ability to make a living wage at this.
> 
> I do realize this method won't help anyone make a USAToday Bestseller List, nor does it help you debut a book #1 in a heavily competitive category. But I always say rank doesn't pay the bills . . . this is an example of a long-tail, long-career type system to build true fans vs. incetivizing downloads.


If I weren't exclusive with Amazon, this is how I would handle gifting/giving free copies. However, it's my understanding that by being in Select/exclusive it is against Amazon's TOS to give even free copies. Last thing I want to do is upset the Zon, so I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle things. Of course, it was my decision to be exclusive so I have to work within their guidelines.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Doing it this way you're potentially building a relationship with the reader. A loyal reader is going to ultimately be far more beneficial to your business than a quick bump in rank.


Although it seems like a fair number of people believe that the quick way to get rich in this business is to collect large sums of money from a small number of writers, rather than small sums of money from a large number of readers.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

ChristinaGarner said:


> Someone like myself who is owed thousands has to make a choice--is it worth it to hire a lawyer? If the demand letter goes unanswered is it worth it to go to court?


This is exactly the sort of case where a GoFundMe campaign would be a legitimate way to help defray costs. Just putting that out there.


----------



## Not any more

Felicia Beasley said:


> If I weren't exclusive with Amazon, this is how I would handle gifting/giving free copies. However, it's my understanding that by being in Select/exclusive it is against Amazon's TOS to give even free copies. Last thing I want to do is upset the Zon, so I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle things. Of course, it was my decision to be exclusive so I have to work within their guidelines.


You are allowed to provide a free copy to reviewers and for other professional promotional businesses. Note I didn't say a thousand free copies. ARCs have always been a part of publishing.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot

ebbrown said:


> This is the information that was added to the back of the book: (the link to instaFreebie has since been removed) From the response to a negative review HERE on Amazon


Holy hell.


----------



## AYClaudy

Felicia Beasley said:


> If I weren't exclusive with Amazon, this is how I would handle gifting/giving free copies. However, it's my understanding that by being in Select/exclusive it is against Amazon's TOS to give even free copies. Last thing I want to do is upset the Zon, so I'm trying to figure out the best way to handle things. Of course, it was my decision to be exclusive so I have to work within their guidelines.


That's my understanding as well. Which then goes against their rank manipulation since even though that's not the intention when I gift, it is a side effect, even just minor. But if I wasn't in KU, I'd probably use bookfunnel or something of the sort for giveaways.


----------



## Used To Be BH

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> In regards to gifting through the vendor: I do not do this.
> 
> Why?
> 
> In my experience, and I DO give my readers ample opportunities to get my books for free both chapter by chapter and at the end as a PDF or other file download, it is better to handle the gifting stuff yourself. Note, I am not gifting in order to make list or boost my sales rank, if those are your goals, and we've covered how they really shouldn't be your goals, but if they are, this system won't work for you.
> 
> Giving readers free books is not unethical. Like I said, I do it all the time. I prefer to give my readers the files to download so that #1 I can see who is savvy enough to do so and therefore more likely to leave me an honest review. I only ever ask for honest reviews, and for the most part those are 3-5 stars and I'm fine with that. Reviews are for readers.
> 
> #2, if I am handling the gifting, I have their email address that I know works. This is important, because as we all know, many of us have Amazon accounts with email addresses we rarely check unless we have to. We've had the Amazon account for going on 10+ years, so's the email address, we all know how functional that email address is likely to be . . .
> 
> #3 and this is going to be WHOA, AMAZING . . . many of my readers who get a FREE copy from me go BUY the book for themselves. I gave them the book free and they appreciate that, but then they go to the store to buy a copy because they want to own it, too. This means that my free systems don't impact my ability to make a living wage at this.
> 
> I do realize this method won't help anyone make a USAToday Bestseller List, nor does it help you debut a book #1 in a heavily competitive category. But I always say rank doesn't pay the bills . . . this is an example of a long-tail, long-career type system to build true fans vs. incetivizing downloads.


Interesting! My take is a little different.

Like AYClaudy, I started giving reviewers free copies through Amazon gifting because I was a little concerned about Select guidelines. I know some other authors have received the answer from customer service that giving a few free copies to reviewers was not a violation of the Select TOS, but Amazon is not always consistent, so I figured I'd err on the side of caution. This language comes from Amazon's guidelines, though I don't remember exactly where: "You may not intentionally manipulate your products' rankings, including by offering an excessive number of free...products, in exchange for a review." That sounds as if Amazon sees gifting a few books to reviewers as OK, though what excessive means could well be questioned. In general, a small number of gifted copies aren't going to have much effect on ranking, especially if they tend to happen one at a time over a long period. An Amazon ebook giveaway, which is part of Amazon's own system, would produce a more immediate and noticeable bump. Personally, I was never trying to manipulate my rank, and I'd be fine with a policy that didn't count gifted copies or that had a separate button that said "gift a review copy" that didn't count in ranking.

With regard to #1, I'm not seeing the link between savvyness and honesty. I've known people who were very honest but not tech savvy enough to sideload a file to their Kindle. Anyway, I always felt that giving a reviewer the same experience as a purchaser avoided the risk that the reviewer would be annoyed by problems getting the file sideloaded and perhaps unconsciously have a more negative attitude toward the book.

With regard to #2, I think that varies a lot. Most of the people I know use their regular email address with their Amazon account. However, if someone didn't, I'd assume if they knew a review copy was coming, they'd check their Amazon email.

With regard to #3, I can't argue with that one. Clearly those people are serious fans!


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Felicia Beasley said:


> Personally, I think they should just remove the ranking benefit of gifted copies. With giveaways through Amazon, each giveaway only counts as one sale no matter how many copies are a part of the giveaway, and it has no effect on rank. I've learned the hard way to double check the TOS myself, rather than take someone's word that something is fine. Gotta protect my own booty.
> 
> As for the person this thread is about, I can only speak to my own experiences. Business wise, I've never been asked to do something against TOS or unethical/immoral. I wasn't part of the box sets that are being talked about in this thread. I am a part of a few box sets (with this organizer and others), but none of this has been asked of me. It was clear upon signing the contract that my contribution has to be exclusive, and even in the pre-order file the story can't be in KU. My reasons for being in box sets/anthologies has nothing to do with making a list. My goals are exposure and author networking, and I have no desire to do anything that would risk my Amazon account.
> 
> Outside of business, as a friend, Rebecca has always gone above and beyond in her support, with no gain for herself. As someone who has only had positive experiences, as well as having received some rather ugly PMs from those speaking against her (nobody on Kboards and I'm not naming names because that isn't cool), its hard to stomach everything that's been going on. I can only speak to my own experience, everything else would be hearsay or rumor. Author bullying and witch hunts are ugly and unacceptable no matter who is doing it or their reasons why. I won't participate in it regardless of my relationship with whoever is asking. No one deserves to be one-starred, or harassed, or have people turned against them.


Hi, Felicia. Thanks for speaking about your experiences with Rebecca being positive. All sides to a story are important so people can make a decision about who they do business with.

In regards to the giveaway not affecting rank: I've heard this also; however, I'm confused about something. I've seen giveaways run with only one book as the prize, and I believe, only one winner. Meaning, anyone who enters, wins. If that doesn't affect rank, what's the advantage?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Boyd said:


> AFAIK, gifting from your own account (the one the book is published under) does not count towards rank, so it'd be safe from rank manipulation stuff thingy things. If it's gifted from another account that did not publish the book, then it does count toward rank. I could be wrong, but this is my understanding of how it works.


This is what I found out yesterday:https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A2SPN65RHEW2G

Gifting for Kindle
Customers can gift all titles available through KDP on Amazon.com, through wish lists or book detail pages. The only current exception is for titles that are not available in the country where the customer lives.

Your royalties will be based on the price and royalty option selected at the time the Kindle gift was purchased. After the gift recipient downloads your title, your royalties will accrue, and the sale will show on your reports. *A gift sale counts toward a sales rank only if it is redeemed within 24 hours by the recipient. *

You are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you like to help promote it. Be aware that gift recipients have the option of choosing a gift certificate instead. Also, as with all Kindle sales, gift recipients have the option to return the gift within 7 days of downloading. Learn more on the Amazon Help page, Give and Receive Kindle Devices and Books.

I suspect this might be why some of the screen shots on the weebly site tell people they have to claim by midnight.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Hi, Felicia. Thanks for speaking about your experiences with Rebecca being positive. All sides to a story are important so people can make a decision about who they do business with.
> 
> In regards to the giveaway not affecting rank: I've heard this also; however, I'm confused about something. I've seen giveaways run with only one book as the prize, and I believe, only one winner. Meaning, anyone who enters, wins. If that doesn't affect rank, what's the advantage?


I'm not sure. The giveaways I ran through Amazon were to gain follows on Amazon. It was just something I did to see how it worked. I know with giveaways, if the person doesn't claim the prize, you don't get it counted as a sale (so you don't get the royalty). It's possible people don't understand how the giveaways work and it not affecting rank so they think it does. I don't know.


----------



## PatriciaDreas

I have no "skin in this game" but have been following this thread as a precautionary tale (not that I'm really grasping everything). I noticed the following in my morning newsletters:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/?tag=affiliatetagremoved

Is this an example of a "book blast" promotion?


----------



## AYClaudy

brkingsolver said:


> You are allowed to provide a free copy to reviewers and for other professional promotional businesses. Note I didn't say a thousand free copies. ARCs have always been a part of publishing.


Amazon use to use language that made me think that was the case, but they've since updated the KU exclusivity language to say:

"You may also provide professional reviewers with a copy of your book via email for the purpose of editing, proofreading and helping with other quality improvements."

That makes it all a bit less likely that e-mailing free copies to giveaway winners or even reviewers that are not "professional" is okay with them. It even seems to be that if the reviewer is just reviewing, that's not okay, that they need to be a beta reader or something...


----------



## ChristinaGarner

MonkishScribe said:


> This is exactly the sort of case where a GoFundMe campaign would be a legitimate way to help defray costs. Just putting that out there.


You aren't the first to mention this to me. I would be mortified to do so, but it might come to that. Thanks for the suggestion. My hope would still be to settle this without litigation, but that seems extremely unlikely at this point.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

PatriciaDreas said:


> I have no "skin in this game" but have been following this thread as a precautionary tale (not that I'm really grasping everything). I noticed the following in my morning newsletters:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/?tag=affiliatelinkremoved
> 
> Is this an example of a "book blast" promotion?


No; that looks like an affiliate link to a box set on Amazon.


----------



## Not any more

PatriciaDreas said:


> I have no "skin in this game" but have been following this thread as a precautionary tale (not that I'm really grasping everything). I noticed the following in my morning newsletters:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/?tag=affiliate link removed
> 
> Is this an example of a "book blast" promotion?


This is a boxed set organized and promoted by the company in question. Past there, I have no knowledge of how it is put together or promoted. I do note that in the front matter is an offer of a free gift and it says with a receipt the buyer will receive additional books for subscribing.

:shrug:


----------



## wheart

ChristinaGarner said:


> Several people offered to pay the buy in. That would have meant she was free and clear to return my money (money owed to me, not as a refund, but because she was not honoring the terms of our original contract as previously stated) and yet, she chose not to. One might ask themselves why, if her primary interest is the authors in the set.


If I remember correctly from what I read in one of Rebecca's posts ... if someone has to drop out, they would be donating their spot and paid back/refunded via the royalties. Is this correct? And was that written into the original contract that you signed? Was that the method to which refunds were to be handled?

If this is correct, I would presume she might've been just sticking to the principle of the thing and not making exceptions in the case many authors take to doing this. I could see where that would be a problem (authors having buyer's remorse after things are well into the process and money already spent for book covers, etc.).

However, if others were willing to pay the buy in, in my opinion, she should have taken their offer and with that, refunded you. And if others followed suit, and no one was willing to pay the buy in, then the contract terms stand with the royalties refund method.

You mentioned she did refund you on the one boxed set, so are you still awaiting refunds on the other two?

If you are and those two boxed sets are up for sale still, she would need to honor that part of the first contract, so you may still receive your refund from the royalties. Unfortunately, that may take a while unless the price is increased to $2.99+ to receive a higher royalty rate.

I can see both sides of the fence here because ... on one hand, you can't have people cancel out after time/effort/expense and setups have already been cast. On the other hand, in your case, you had every right to not sign the second contract when the anthology's content changed from 'clean' to 'steamy.' That wasn't the product you had originally agreed to.

I'm gathering from what's been said, it seems the first contract had to be changed due to unforseen circumstances with Amazon's reps originally approving the boxed set(s) saying it would be fine, and then later changing their stance on that. In all fairness, we can't blame Rebecca for having to incorporate those changes since it would be an important change.

However, the 'clean' to 'steamy' change is a different issue altogether and reason for someone who writes 'clean' to want to pull out.

The only question then is, how you'd be receiving that refund as I mentioned in my first paragraph.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

wheart said:


> The only question then is, how you'd be receiving that refund as I mentioned in my first paragraph.


I think you're kind of going on the assumption here that there was an amicable break, maybe followed by Rebecca telling Christina she'd have to wait for the box set to earn out. Maybe I'm reading between the lines, but that's not what I'm seeing in Christina's posts. I'm seeing more of a case of "Too bad / so sad ... oh and let me trash your reputation while I'm at it". Christina, please correct me if I'm wrong here.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

If this is who I _think_ this is about, I have direct personal experience working with this person. And it's not a happy story. Lots of bullying and very unprofessional behavior. I've kept my mouth shut over the years because I didn't want any retaliation. I know other authors who've worked with this person and have nothing but positive things to say, so I've long been in an uncomfortable position. I just do me and stick with my close knit circle of trusted authors and freelancers.


----------



## wheart

Patty Jansen said:


> In my personal case, and it was piddly and minor, but there was no line in the T&C that said "Thou shalt send an email to your email list when I dictate within five minutes of my saying that you should." Problem was, I'd just sent an email and simply asked if I could send a bit later.


Was there a reason that the dates the authors were to email their mailing lists, needed to be on particular days? Was that discussed in the Facebook group beforehand (before the contracts were signed)?



Bill Hiatt said:


> An Amazon ebook giveaway, which is part of Amazon's own system, would produce a more immediate and noticeable bump.


The Amazon Giveaway method doesn't count toward ranking.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> If I remember correctly from what I read in one of Rebecca's posts ... if someone has to drop out, they would be donating their spot and paid back/refunded via the royalties. Is this correct? And was that written into the original contract that you signed? Was that the method to which refunds were to be handled?
> 
> If this is correct, I would presume she might've been just sticking to the principle of the thing and not making exceptions in the case many authors take to doing this. I could see where that would be a problem (authors having buyer's remorse after things are well into the process and money already spent for book covers, etc.).
> 
> However, if others were willing to pay the buy in, in my opinion, she should have taken their offer and with that, refunded you. And if others followed suit, and no one was willing to pay the buy in, then the contract terms stand with the royalties refund method.
> 
> You mentioned she did refund you on the one boxed set, so are you still awaiting refunds on the other two?
> 
> If you are and those two boxed sets are up for sale still, she would need to honor that part of the first contract, so you may still receive your refund from the royalties. Unfortunately, that may take a while unless the price is increased to $2.99+ to receive a higher royalty rate.
> 
> I can see both sides of the fence here because ... on one hand, you can't have people cancel out after time/effort/expense and setups have already been cast. On the other hand, in your case, you had every right to not sign the second contract when the anthology's content changed from 'clean' to 'steamy.' That wasn't the product you had originally agreed to.
> 
> I'm gathering from what's been said, it seems the first contract had to be changed due to unforseen circumstances with Amazon's reps originally approving the boxed set(s) saying it would be fine, and then later changing their stance on that. In all fairness, we can't blame Rebecca for having to incorporate those changes since it would be an important change.
> 
> However, the 'clean' to 'steamy' change is a different issue altogether and reason for someone who writes 'clean' to want to pull out.
> 
> The only question then is, how you'd be receiving that refund as I mentioned in my first paragraph.


I have received zero money back--I was not refunded for a set. I'm sorry if there was a miscommunication on that. I was kicked out of one, (she claimed I'd backed out, but I hadn't) and then I rescinded the contract for the others.

I was told I could be paid back from the royalties--IF there was a profit. (That's a big if, b/c sometimes people add thousands more the sets and they are paid back first. Also, I have valid concerns about her ethics and accounting practices to that wasn't a viable option for me.)

Here's the real problem, as I've stated--the moment we were told the original contracts were not good enough and would need to sign new ones to participate, we were not bound in any way to those contracts. At all. Those who chose to enter the new agreement were free to do so. Those of us who chose not to were owed out money back--not as a *maybe* later on *if* the sets made money. She could have given our spots to others willing to pay for them--she chose not to.

And Rebecca is absolutely responsible for providing a contract that depends on a 3rd party's TOS and not including provisions for the TOS changing. You might personally think I should have agreed to the second contract because it wasn't her fault that Amazon started enforcing a long-standing rule, but that simply isn't the law.

Rick, I hope I answered your question above--she did offer royalties if and when they occurred. Two minutes after I received that email she blasted me on Facebook which only made me less likely to trust her. (Also, I don't take screen shots of ads as proof of money spent, so...)


----------



## AllyWho

wheart said:


> If I remember correctly from what I read in one of Rebecca's posts ... if someone has to drop out, they would be donating their spot and paid back/refunded via the royalties. Is this correct?


No. In most cases I've heard about if you drop out (or are kicked out) there is *no* refund. Next person up who takes your spot *also pays* the opt in.

Here's the bit that seems to be tripping a lot of people up - what she posts publicly and what actually happens, are two different things. She tells people there are refunds when there aren't and she then is paid twice, because the next author also pays the same amount.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart,

I just want to reiterate that the terms of the contract covered changes that had nothing to do with KU. For instance, there was a clause in the new contract that said any verbal/written agreement made after the date of signing would be legally binding. My personal experience with Rebecca made it impossible for me to agree to that. What she deems an "agreement" is likely not what I would deem one.

Regardless, the changes made that had to do with KU impacted the profit to be made dramatically and impacted the reader experience. (Unpublish and lose our reviews? Shorts instead of novels? That's not what I signed up for.) I even offered that maybe we just keep the set wide--that way we could all stay in with our novels and not tick off readers. I suggested that solution even though it would have cost me substantially to keep my book out of KU for 3 months, as it accounts for half of my income. She shot me down. 

The fact remains, once second contracts were required, the first were voidable and each party needed to be made whole.


----------



## wheart

ChristinaGarner said:


> I have received zero money back--I was not refunded for a set. I'm sorry if there was a miscommunication on that.


My mistake. There's soooo much verbiage to read in this thread, lol, that I might've forgotten who said what. I went back to find who said that and it was Patty who said she got a refund.



ChristinaGarner said:


> You might personally think I should have agreed to the second contract because it wasn't her fault that Amazon started enforcing a long-standing rule, but that simply isn't the law.


No, I don't think anything of that sort. I don't know what was in that contract and can't make that assessment. Plus that wouldn't be my call to make. Only you know what would be right for you. I'm just trying to assess what's true and make sure that everyone is getting a fair judgement.

There are certainly things that I wouldn't recommend with Rebecca's program. But I've gone back to read a lot of her posts here on Kboards because I truly hate to see someone whose heart and intention is in trying to help people, being raked through the coals without a fair and objective trial. In my eyes, she's responded quite amicably, at least here on these forum. Unfortunately, as I mentioned, I can't join Facebook groups so I can't read what's written or observe her behavior there.

For me, I see Rebecca as having made some major mistakes but her crime is having trusted Amazon's and PayPal's reps' words with approving things that we all know can change any moment. Also being stubborn to not heed the warnings of authors who were concerned about those things.

I don't see her as a bad person who is out to hurt people or scam them. I do hope she learns from this ordeal and make the changes to her program that would make these issues no longer issues.

I do hope Rebecca and you all can reach a solution to where everyone stays professional in their dealings with these matters and follows through with their commitments that were agreed upon. If Rebecca has committed to paying the refunds back with royalties, she should do so regardless of how long it takes. That would be the right thing to do.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Thanks for clarifying your stance. 

I cannot agree on your stance that she refund me with royalties no matter how long it takes because it is not a refund it is money legally owed to me. And it's money she was legally obligated to pay months ago. There is simply no legal standing for her to do otherwise. 

I'm surprised you see this thread as Rebecca being raked over the coals. I think myself and everyone else have been reasonably measured with our responses, only speaking of facts and our direct experiences. I'm sorry if you feel differently.

Trusting Amazon and PayPal reps are not her only crimes. ("Crimes used colloquially, as breaking Amazon's TOS is certainly not a crime.) She posted on this very forum that she only has people pay via friends and family b/c she makes no profit, which is proved untrue by her asking me to pay that way for Charmed Legacy, a contract which has payment for her services built into it. There are countless examples of this, but I'm not looking to get the thread closed.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

wheart said:


> There are certainly things that I wouldn't recommend with Rebecca's program. But I've gone back to read a lot of her posts here on Kboards because I truly hate to see someone whose heart and intention is in trying to help people, being raked through the coals without a fair and objective trial. In my eyes, she's responded quite amicably, at least here on these forum. Unfortunately, as I mentioned, I can't join Facebook groups so I can't read what's written or observe her behavior there.
> 
> For me, I see Rebecca as having made some major mistakes but her crime is having trusted Amazon's and PayPal's reps' words with approving things that we all know can change any moment. Also being stubborn to not heed the warnings of authors who were concerned about those things.
> 
> I don't see her as a bad person who is out to hurt people or scam them. I do hope she learns from this ordeal and make the changes to her program that would make these issues no longer issues.
> 
> I do hope Rebecca and you all can reach a solution to where everyone stays professional in their dealings with these matters and follows through with their commitments that were agreed upon. If Rebecca has committed to paying the refunds back with royalties, she should do so regardless of how long it takes. That would be the right thing to do.


Many of us started in that opinion zone about a year+ ago Wheart. Like I myself have never lost money to Rebecca, or done any boxed sets. And it was like every single time we all thought "Okay, well maybe she understands now . . ." it just kept getting worse in terms of public shaming, private boasts of rules being okay to break and invoking reps, lawyers, and even sheriff offices as all on her side. It gets really bizarre at times when you try to follow the timeline.

My perspective comes from when I was book promoter/marketer. Some here can remember when I ran the author ads of TheCheapEbook and can attest that we had a very solid reputation. We also cared about helping authors out and had free programs for advertising. Authors saw this, they could post a book once per day on a special Facebook page just for them and we used those posts to fill in our spots in our daily deals email. Authors could also buy banners up top or Facebook posts, all about $5 each or $25 for the month of an ad in rotation . . . we never required books to be a certain price, we were one of the few outlets that promoted wide books at regular prices.

I never had an author who requested a refund get told no. Everyone who wanted a refund, for whatever reason, got one. I never spent money from ads that hadn't run yet, how was I to know if my server wouldn't go down etc.? We did BIG promotions too, our Santa Sampler was $10,000 back in 2012 with 100 authors participating. Everyone had a separate log in to see their feedback on their samples on Amazon from real readers. We gave away thousands in Kindle Fires, etc. everything was itemized out in the budget and authors knew me and my staff were making $5,000 across 3 people for 8 weeks of work (so about $200 a week). No one ever has a problem about people making money for the work they are doing. Where it would have been shady of me would be if I had collected that $10,000, never delivered any of those pages and promotions on time, and waited for authors to complain to me they don't see their ad vs. sending them an easy email of "here's your ad." It was easy to provide good customer service.

The only reason I stopped being a book marketer is because the Amazon Affiliate program changed to the point that we would have had to rely even more heavily on our author ads for cash flow, there were a few authors who drove me bonkers and on a $5 ad they wanted 20 billion emails to hold their hands and then still wanted a refund when the $5 ad didn't make them top 100 in the Paid Kindle Store (and yep, they got a refund, and removed fromt he email list for new ads LOL), and it is a hard business to run. It's a lot of moving parts . . . you have scheudling to maintain, authors need day swaps, and to be honest with you, this is very egotistical to say, but my skills exceeded that task oriented day-to-day aspect of running the ad program. My business partner and I who ran the site amicably closed it down, amicably worked on publishing projects together later, and amicably are still best friends today. Already talked to her on the phone for the day, matter of fact.  I realized that for me, the stress of worrying about day-to-day operations AND future cash flow (new ads, managing new purchases, onboarding new authors to how to market their books), creating all of the ads, etc. was not for me. I wanted a bigg percentage of my income to be passive based, like the backlist of a publisher. That was my personal choice.

That said, running these kinds of companies takes a lot of mental fortitude and strong organizational skills. It's tempting when there's thousands of dollars in a Paypal account to start spending beyond that month's intake. What I mean is that we booked on a rolling 90 days. So I would have signups for say May, Jun, July in the paypal account. I had to make sure when the end of May happened, I ONLY paid out May's ads keeping 20% in reserve for 6 months in case someone's ad ran and they still wanted a refund. See, I'm from a school of customer service (Disney) where you refund that $5 or $50 right away and keep the customer's good will. And that worked. Shrinkage and returns or authors flaking out is PART of working in this industry, just like we have customers who return our books. You can't base your revenue projections on every single ad or every single client/reader working perfectly to plan. If I was running a 20 book boxed set, I would have made sure the marketing budget had gates that at some point would mean we don't buy THIS until after the boxed set comes out and the full service delivery happens. In Rebecca's situation, most often than not she is trying to run a business and call it a hobby. She states things like she makes no profit, she's doing this as a friend, etc. This is one reason I think things get so out of hand, and is just a blanket warning to anyone:

Run your business like a businesss. Run your friendships like a friendship (and there should be no money invovled).

Anyway, I do empathize that running an author promotion business is NOT EASY. Authors is divas  (not saying the victims are divas, just a general observation there), and that all of this is a very big cautionary tale and why it's being shared now. The red flags are red flags for a reason, and a 100 red flags on a company can mean you have a wonderful, perfect experience. Or it could mean you are the unlucky one who gets the full slate of consequences disproportionately. Risk management, especially business to business, is a critical skill we all have to have.


----------



## AllyWho

Question for the mods Re: GenreCave

There's some valuable information in this thread about the promotion service called GenreCave, but its getting lost amongst everything else. It is a service often talked about/recommended on the k-boards. Should that discussion have its own thread, so it is easier to find/searchable in the future? Some authors use that service and it might be valuable to have a seperate thread to discuss GenreCave methods, results, ROI and overall experiences? The service doesn't have a yellow pages listing, so there's nowhere to post feedback etc.


----------



## wheart

ChristinaGarner said:


> I'm surprised you see this thread as Rebecca being raked over the coals. I think myself and everyone else have been reasonably measured with our responses, only speaking of facts and our direct experiences. I'm sorry if you feel differently.


Sorry, I should have said 'some people' raking her over the coals because some have made disparaging remarks that would have an affect on her reputation as to what kind of person she is.

You have shared your own experiences in an amicable way, and I thank you for that. It has given those of us who haven't had firsthand dealings know what has transpired.

Another lesson we can all take away from this is ... don't jump into more than one project at a time. We should always test the waters first to make sure we're happy with the outcome especially when there's a lot of money at stake.

I wish you well.


----------



## Not any more

AliceW said:


> Question for the mods Re: GenreCave
> 
> There's some valuable information in this thread about the promotion service called GenreCave, but its getting lost amongst everything else. It is a service often talked about/recommended on the k-boards. Should that discussion have its own thread, so it is easier to find/searchable in the future? Some authors use that service and it might be valuable to have a seperate thread to discuss GenreCave methods, results, ROI and overall experiences? The service doesn't have a yellow pages listing, so there's nowhere to post feedback etc.


I beg to differ. That is the business we've been discussing the entire time. There is no separation.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Many of us started in that opinion zone about a year+ ago Wheart. Like I myself have never lost money to Rebecca, or done any boxed sets. And it was like every single time we all thought "Okay, well maybe she understands now . . ." it just kept getting worse in terms of public shaming, private boasts of rules being okay to break and invoking reps, lawyers, and even sheriff offices as all on her side. It gets really bizarre at times when you try to follow the timeline.


I agree wholeheartedly with you. I also haven't had any dealings with her since before she was a published author (so, the way-way-WAY back machine), and none since. I have not been an author she's accused of [anything] publicly and I don't have friends or close acquaintances affected by her business practices. I have no goats in this farm.

But it's naive, as well, for us to pretend this hasn't come up repeatedly. It came up with another author (who's name I forget) who had a thread here about a box set being taken down and, again, we all warned about the KU books on Kobo. Again and again, there is a public scrambling because yet another book was taken down by KDP. There is the paypal issue, the gifting, the KU books, the swapping, the public call outs of comments made on KBoards and dragged to Facebook to cause boycotts of authors...we've been aware of it for a long time now.

In the end, what people think they're doing or what they say they're doing doesn't actually matter. It's what they are actually doing. The fear alone of people speaking out about this sets off the alarm bells. Deal with her business or not (I don't even know if she runs it by herself or with others, honestly). But don't confuse friendship with business. THey are two very different things and it's easy to stop being friendly when you have someone's cash in your pocket and no easy way for them to get it back.

As you say, red flags are red flags.

*note: I have two online acquaintances who were harassed by Rebecca for calling out her business practices (but didn't do business with her).


----------



## Becca Mills

Folks, let's try to stay as on-topic as possible, so that the most relevant info remains easy to find within this very long thread. For instance, discussion of how gifting can work within and outside KU might better taken place in a separate thread. Also, please remember to stick to personal experience and concrete evidence rather than secondhand reports.



wheart said:


> There are certainly things that I wouldn't recommend with Rebecca's program. But I've gone back to read a lot of her posts here on Kboards because I truly hate to see someone whose heart and intention is in trying to help people, being raked through the coals without a fair and objective trial. In my eyes, she's responded quite amicably, at least here on these forum. Unfortunately, as I mentioned, I can't join Facebook groups so I can't read what's written or observe her behavior there.


Our goal is not to "pass judgment" as a community. Rather, we want to provide a space where every member can make information available so that individuals can make their own informed decisions. We're open to information from both sides of this issue, so long as that information is concrete and direct and presented within the bounds of our forum decorum.



AliceW said:


> Question for the mods Re: GenreCave
> 
> There's some valuable information in this thread about the promotion service called GenreCave, but its getting lost amongst everything else. It is a service often talked about/recommended on the k-boards. Should that discussion have its own thread, so it is easier to find/searchable in the future? Some authors use that service and it might be valuable to have a seperate thread to discuss GenreCave methods, results, ROI and overall experiences? The service doesn't have a yellow pages listing, so there's nowhere to post feedback etc.


Great question. Since GenreCrave is part of Rebecca Hamilton's suite of services, let's keep discussion of it in this thread while the moderators think about the possibility of separating it out for visibility. We can always break those posts out into a separate thread later, if need be.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> Another lesson we can all take away from this is ... don't jump into more than one project at a time. We should always test the waters first to make sure we're happy with the outcome especially when there's a lot of money at stake.
> 
> I wish you well.


Thanks for clarifying about the coals and you are absolutely right about one project at a time. That is another mistake I made.

And thank you for the well wishes--same


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

ChristinaGarner said:


> You aren't the first to mention this to me. I would be mortified to do so, but it might come to that. Thanks for the suggestion. My hope would still be to settle this without litigation, but that seems extremely unlikely at this point.


If the cost of an attorney is stopping you, I'd be more than happy to contribute through a GoFundMe, or directly to the attorney. A line has to be drawn and an example made of those who cross it.

As to your later comment, that any change in the contract would still be legally binding, no way. Any change in a contract, even changing the word "too" to "two" would require a new signature, or at the very least, your initials on the change, agreeing to it.

*ETA a comma.

_Edited. This thread's second life is dedicated to concrete evidence and discussion thereof. - Becca_


----------



## AllyWho

brkingsolver said:


> I beg to differ. That is the business we've been discussing the entire time. There is no separation.


I was talking specifically about the GenreCave book promotions, as opposed to the boxed sets. But happy to stick with the mods decision.

I thought separating it out might be easier for people to find in the future, as GenreCave is often used/recommended by other authors and the name of this thread doesn't indicate the business or services under discussion.


----------



## wheart

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> My perspective comes from when I was book promoter/marketer. Some here can remember when I ran the author ads of TheCheapEbook and can attest that we had a very solid reputation. We also cared about helping authors out and had free programs for advertising. Authors saw this, they could post a book once per day on a special Facebook page just for them and we used those posts to fill in our spots in our daily deals email. Authors could also buy banners up top or Facebook posts, all about $5 each or $25 for the month of an ad in rotation . . . we never required books to be a certain price, we were one of the few outlets that promoted wide books at regular prices.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing all that, Elizabeth . In my own past business (I'm retired now) I've had to deal with customers (retail and wholesale) so I certainly can relate to the headaches involved, lol, and also when customer service is put above your own welfare (even if you have to take a loss at times). I'm not going to compare with you my scars (like in the movie _Jaws_ ) since it's not important here, but I enjoyed reading yours.


----------



## Not any more

AliceW said:


> I was talking specifically about the GenreCave book promotions, as opposed to the boxed sets. But happy to stick with the mods decision.
> 
> I thought separating it out might be easier for people to find in the future, as GenreCave is often used/recommended by other authors and the name of this thread doesn't indicate the business or services under discussion.


The Book Blasts that use the same tactics as the boxed sets are run by GenreCrave. There has been extensive discussion of these on this thread. You're right, there's a lot here to sort out. It's the totality that shows the pattern. Each item by itself might be explained or justified. When you look at a pattern of behavior that defines a business model you get the whole picture.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

AliceW said:


> I was talking specifically about the GenreCave book promotions, as opposed to the boxed sets. But happy to stick with the mods decision.
> 
> I thought separating it out might be easier for people to find in the future, as GenreCave is often used/recommended by other authors and the name of this thread doesn't indicate the business or services under discussion.


If people search for GenreCrave, either here or by an external search engine (it's GenreCrave, isn't it, not GenreCave?) this thread will show up, even without it being in the subject.

I think if a separate thread were to be started, there would be a lot of duplication. As Becca said, let's keep it here for now, reserving the right to change our minds if we need to. 

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Wayne Stinnett said:


> If the cost of an attorney is stopping you, I'd be more than happy to contribute through a GoFundMe, or directly to the attorney. A line has to be drawn and an example made of those who cross it.
> 
> As to your later comment, that any change in the contract would still be legally binding, no way. Any change in a contract, even changing the word "too" to "two" would require a new signature, or at the very least, your initials on the change, agreeing to it.
> 
> *ETA a comma.
> 
> _Edited. This thread's second life is dedicated to concrete evidence and discussion thereof. - Becca_


That is a very kind offer, Wayne, and I appreciate it more than I can say. Right now the costs are such that I can cover them, but if it goes beyond that, I'll consider asking for help 

With regards to the contract--you're right. But I remember Rebecca posting something like, reply to this thread to prove you read it. (Can't remember what the post was about.) By the terms of the new contract she could claim that a "written agreement." It might not hold up in court, but many might not know that, and who wants to go to court anyway?


----------



## wheart

Becca Mills said:


> Our goal is not to "pass judgment" as a community. Rather, we want to provide a space where every member can make information available so that individuals can make their own informed decisions. We're open to information from both sides of this issue, so long as that information is concrete and direct and presented within the bounds of our forum decorum.


*thumbs up*!


----------



## Silly Writer

wheart said:


> <snip>
> There are certainly things that I wouldn't recommend with Rebecca's program. But I've gone back to read a lot of her posts here on Kboards because I truly hate to see someone whose heart and intention is in trying to help people, being raked through the coals without a fair and objective trial. In my eyes, she's responded quite amicably, at least here on these forum. Unfortunately, as I mentioned, I can't join Facebook groups so I can't read what's written or observe her behavior there.
> 
> For me, I see Rebecca as having made some major mistakes but her crime is having trusted Amazon's and PayPal's reps' words with approving things that we all know can change any moment. Also being stubborn to not heed the warnings of authors who were concerned about those things.
> 
> I don't see her as a bad person who is out to hurt people or scam them. I do hope she learns from this ordeal and make the changes to her program that would make these issues no longer issues.


Okay, I've stayed out of this so far because I have already been a victim of RH and don't want to live through that nightmare again, but at this point, I'm gonna speak up--and I hope the dozens of others out there who had this happen to them will also, if only to help the newbies in the future, and/or keep RH from ever doing this to anyone else again.

I'll start with the fact that some of RH's business tactics are sound. She actually does a good job for some people, too. In 2013 her services got me me to #4 Free in the Entire Store with a promo she was running then. It was legit, I saw it happening. She teamed me up with 3 other authors like myself and we all blitzed each other on all social media and newsletters, and she also sent out social media blasts--which we could see. It wasn't expensive, but it was effective. I give her that one.

So...fast forward to a year and a half ago. I used to be on these boards all the time. I'm a helpful person by nature and if you look at my past posts you'll see that's what I do here. Mostly when I post, it's to help one of my peers. I rarely get involved in drama. I have many author friends. No enemies, that I'm aware of. I too believed all the hype about RH's new services, so I paid $150 for a New Release BookBlast from Hungry Author (one of the previous names of her companies). At the same time, I commissioned her to design me several FB ads for the cost of $20 each (I think). The Book Blast, at that time, said it was a social media and newsletter blast out to 150,000 of her *followers* and *newsletter subscribers.* So, like any other service I pay for, I joined all her newsletters and followed her on social media. It also included sending the book beforehand to her reader/review list, which could get you anywhere from 5-80 reviews upon release day. (reviews were not guaranteed and I ultimately ended up with 1, which is not my complaint)

I thought we were friends, RH and I. The day of my launch, she forgot my blast. I very nicely emailed her a few days later and asked about it and she snarkily replied it would go out at the scheduled date. I politely replied the date had passed. She apologized and said she was getting to work on it. I didn't get upset at all. No problem. Stuff happens...so a few days passed all I saw were 2 tweets. I checked every newsletter several times, and her FB posts, but couldn't find any mention of the book. I reached out again and she bit my head off, implied she couldn't tell me WHERE my book had been blasted, but that she had spent 7.5 hours just that evening on it. I told her I wasn't seeing sales. I had also ran an ENT and a few others as well as sent out my own Newsletter. My newsletter clicks matched up exactly to the number of buys on the newsletter day, and the other promo services claimed the other sales, so I really wasn't seeing where she'd done anything. (as of this thread I now know why I couldn't see anything happening, as apparently it was all shady gifting?)

I reached out to her via email/pm to ask where was the blitz happening? But all I could get back from RH was snark and defensive remarks. Having been on her FB and seen the naming/shaming of anyone who dared to question her services before, I walked it back, accepted full responsibility and even apologized and said I must've been wrong (which I wasn't), etc., etc... I decided I'd just take the blame and eat that $150 bucks rather than upset her. Finally, that appeased her. But before the conversation was over, I asked if she'd resize the graphics I'd purchased to the appropriate size that Facebook requires, as they had come over a month or so before, and since I was just then ready to launch ads, I had found out that day that they were the wrong size for ads. I have no skills in graphics and didn't have PhotoShop nor did I know how to do that (I do now though).

She lost her mind. She refused to re-size. Said she no longer had them (?). Accused me of asking her to work for free (by this time I had paid close to $200 and still hadn't got anything I'd paid for as far as I knew) and then she blocked me on FB and began her Name & Shame Game on me, even posting my graphics with my book covers for her friends/minions to attack me. I did not ask her to work for free. I paid for those services. I also didn't ask for a refund...just a resizing on the ads, and I'd eat the blitz cost. But she was on a rampage. She'd moved on from the last victim (which I watched in horror just a few days before) and was now on me like fly on rice.

My friends--who were astonished and gut-punched for me--sent me screenshots of the naming/shaming. I was so humiliated. I just wanted to hide under a rock. And I kind of did.

The embarrassment and unfairness of the whole thing pushed me into a deep depression. I gave up writing/marketing for a long while after that. She had this reputation here on Kboards that made me feel like everyone would think this drama was all MY fault. I couldn't write my books. I stopped helping newbies and pretty much stayed off Kboards. I basically hid under my blankets away from the Indie World to lick my wounds. It was like that bad dream where you feel like you're standing in front of all your co-workers naked and have no where to run.

If it wasn't for my tight group of writer buddies (all members here) that wouldn't let me give up, I wouldn't have ever wrote another word or published anything else. I lost A LOT OF TIME to that bizarre attack. I lost a lot of momentum on my books, and I still haven't got it back. I lost sleep. I shed a lot of tears. I didn't deserve that. No one does. And I can name a lot more authors just like me who didn't deserve it, and have yet to speak out due to the brutality of what they too went through. Of course I won't name them. If they want to step up, they can. If not, I totally understand why.

We writers are weird. Lots of us don't do well in real-life social situations. MANY of us come to Kboards to find our tribe. We get to know people and get comfortable. We learn. We help. We lift each other up. We make ourselves part of this community. We make it a place to vent, help, learn, and hang out when we just CAN'T write the wordz and need someone who understands what we feel when we just can't write the wordz and instead want to screw off for a while. But when you're publicly crucified, vilified, and made a spectacle of in front of your peers, you lose your place; your sense of belonging. We all deserve to be treated kindly, professionally and fairly, especially if that's the way we treat others. RH ruined Kboards for so many people. So many have felt violated and shamed with her public tar and featherings. She took a lot from me with this bullying.

People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.

Well, now you know why.


----------



## A J Sika

This whole thread makes me so sad... and leery of promo-sites

Already, many promo-sites have become ineffective because of stringent affiliate rules and reader fatigue (because of constant email blasts). And now, we get to know that some of the more effective ones might be playing loose with Amazon's rules and thus risking our accounts because of their 'secret sauces' or whatever...

*sigh

To be honest, whenever I read Rebecca's posts, she comes off as a very nice person who makes bad decisions at times. Unfortunately, this is my sole source of income. I don't have the luxury of getting in bed with someone who makes mistakes that could end up hurting my business.

So for Rebecca; even if you feel attacked or ganged up on, there are obviously kinks with your business operations (the gifting thing, paypal payment, one-star brigade, review swapping etc). They might be unintentional but they are happening and you need to deal with them instead of burying your head in the sand - or in this case in your private facebook page where your fanclub are just rarara-ing you.

Please, please, please fix your business model before you end up getting someone's account blocked.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Silly Writer said:


> People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.


I'm truly sorry you had to go through that.


----------



## CassieL

AliceW said:


> Question for the mods Re: GenreCave
> 
> There's some valuable information in this thread about the promotion service called GenreCave, but its getting lost amongst everything else. It is a service often talked about/recommended on the k-boards. Should that discussion have its own thread, so it is easier to find/searchable in the future? Some authors use that service and it might be valuable to have a seperate thread to discuss GenreCave methods, results, ROI and overall experiences? The service doesn't have a yellow pages listing, so there's nowhere to post feedback etc.


There is a thread for the GenreCrave service: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,234876.0.html


----------



## Monique

Silly Writer said:


> RH ruined Kboards for so many people. So many have felt violated and shamed with her public tar and featherings. She took a lot from me with this bullying.


Yes, you're not alone.

It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


----------



## Silly Writer

Monique said:


> Yes, you're not alone.
> 
> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


I asked about you to a friend this last weekend! I wish you'd have reached out to me. Or me to you. Didn't know you went through this too. 
(((Big Hug)))


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Monique said:


> Yes, you're not alone.
> 
> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


This is really upsetting and totally believable. I'm glad you've both added your voices here.


----------



## C. Gockel

> People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.
> 
> Well, now you know why.


I'm so sorry that this happened to you.



> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


And this is why so many good writers leave. I'm so sorry Monique.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Monique said:


> Yes, you're not alone.
> 
> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


I forgot about this. So, yes, I have had someone I consider an online friend to have been attacked by RH through KBoards-to-Facebook connection. I stand corrected in my previous post.

And, yes, my fear of RH off Kboards has been my reason for rarely posting here anymore. Since disagreement results in an immediate accusation of libel, it's just not worth the headache. She's not done it to me here, but it's happened enough in regular cycle to others that it's not been worth the headache.


----------



## Not any more

Monique said:


> Yes, you're not alone.
> 
> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


I was thinking about you recently and how active you used to be in this forum. Wondered if you just got busy or tired of some of the crap that occasionally goes on. Sorry to hear the real reason, but glad to see you again.


----------



## wheart

Thanks for sharing, everyone (especially those directly involved with their experiences on both sides of this issue). 

Glad to see those who haven't been around a while, are back on these forums. Many members miss you so you shouldn't stay away because of any one person.

Anyway, *hugs* to everyone who is hurting (on both sides).


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Silly Writer said:


> People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.
> 
> Well, now you know why.


Well, I remember you  I'm sorry you've went through this. It's not right.


----------



## AllyWho

A J Sika said:


> So for Rebecca; even if you feel attacked or ganged up on, there are obviously kinks with your business operations (the gifting thing, paypal payment, one-star brigade, review swapping etc). They might be unintentional but they are happening and you need to deal with them instead of burying your head in the sand - or in this case in your private facebook page where your fanclub are just rarara-ing you.


Personally I think it's been going on for far too long to be unintentional. There is an old thread on AW dating back to 2012 that touches on her (starts about half way down page 29) and appears to show the exact same tactics especially with dodgy methods, fake accounts, 1-star attacks and then crying victim when people confront her. She was ultimately banned from Goodreads for creating sock puppet accounts and harassing reviewers. And this is all 5 years ago.
http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?230972-Authors-should-really-stop-telling-readers-how-to-give-reviews/page29
And from Goodreads
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show.html?id=305663058&page=1&type=review#comment_48160987


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Krista D. Ball said:


> Well, I remember you  I'm sorry you've went through this. It's not right.


No, it's not. None of this is right, for anyone it happened to. There's a vast difference between a deal gone bad and this. Losing money is one thing, but this sort of stuff crosses lots of lines, both professional and personally.


----------



## unkownwriter

Silly Writer, your post made me cry. You could have shared what happened to you. I would have believed you. I got person in question's number early on, she's been on Ignore for years.

Monique, hugs to you as well. I guess I always figured you were too busy to post any more, but it turns out like so many others you've been harassed until you couldn't put up with anymore. I'm sorry.

It's easy to give the benefit of the doubt, and that's good, but believe me, this isn't the first time I've heard of the behaviors of the person in question. It's been going on for years, and people are so afraid to say anything that many just don't know how this person operates.

Like others have said, research and know what you're getting into. No one can tell you what to do or not do, it's your career. But be aware that people aren't always as nice as they first seem, and sometimes their business isn't riding shiny unicorns.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> No, it's not. None of this is right, for anyone it happened to. There's a vast difference between a deal gone bad and this. Losing money is one thing, but this sort of stuff crosses lots of lines, both professional and personally.


This is another issue that needs to be brought up. In order to keep doing business with her, a person needs to be OK with these tactics. You cannot spend two days on Facebook without witnessing the harassment. I have already apologized to one author who very famously got harassed and pummeled with one stars a few months ago. I was in over $4k deep and just wanted to keep my head low and get out. I didn't join the dog pile, and already knew I'd not be engaging in any future services/sets/collections, but I didn't speak up and I'm ashamed of that.

Anyone in her group saw that vileness directed at me this weekend which only ads to the countless other rants directed at others. Might be worth asking yourself whether it aligns with your integrity to keep such company.


----------



## Mari Oliver

I've been following this thread since the beginning. I find it sad, worrisome, and depressing. What is the point of working hard to write good books and build an audience if folks can just buy their way to the best-sellers list or drop $$$ to soar to the top of the Amazon algorithms? What hope is there for those of us who have limited funds, limited resources? Is is a waste to take years building an audience when another author with way more funding can get it right away? Why even bother?

I didn't realize this sort of thing was going on.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Silly Writer

she-la-ti-da said:


> Silly Writer, your post made me cry. You could have shared what happened to you. I would have believed you. I got person in question's number early on, she's been on Ignore for years.
> 
> Monique, hugs to you as well. I guess I always figured you were too busy to post any more, but it turns out like so many others you've been harassed until you couldn't put up with anymore. I'm sorry.
> 
> It's easy to give the benefit of the doubt, and that's good, but believe me, this isn't the first time I've heard of the behaviors of the person in question. It's been going on for years, and people are so afraid to say anything that many just don't know how this person operates.
> 
> Like others have said, research and know what you're getting into. No one can tell you what to do or not do, it's your career. But be aware that people aren't always as nice as they first seem, and sometimes their business isn't riding shiny unicorns.


Thanks. I fully expect to wake up to a rash of 1-stars tomorrow, or maybe in the next week...but it will be worth it if it keeps one more person from being next on the chopping block. I hope in the future, we Kboarders can stand together and not be afraid to speak out against these types of shenanigans. I know I won't be silenced anymore.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Mari Oliver said:


> I've been following this thread since the beginning. I find it sad, worrisome, and depressing. What is the point of working hard to write good books and build an audience if folks can just buy their way to the best-sellers list or drop $$$ to soar to the top of the Amazon algorithms? What hope is there for those of us who have limited funds, limited resources? Is is a waste to take years building an audience when another author with way more funding can get it right away? Why even bother?
> 
> I didn't realize this sort of thing was going on.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


Well, I just keep my head down, keep writing my books, and to hell with any and all abusive scammers and their supporters. From the KU page read scammers with their ripped content right down to those stealing money from authors.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Silly Writer said:


> Thanks. I fully expect to wake up to a rash of 1-stars tomorrow, or maybe in the next week...but it will be worth it if it keeps one more person from being next on the chopping block. I hope in the future, we Kboarders can stand together and not be afraid to speak out against these types of shenanigans. I know I won't be silenced anymore.


Thank you for doing it. Lord knows many of us knew it was going on, but opened witnessed situations like yours and were too afraid.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie

Mari Oliver said:


> I've been following this thread since the beginning. I find it sad, worrisome, and depressing. What is the point of working hard to write good books and build an audience if folks can just buy their way to the best-sellers list or drop $$$ to soar to the top of the Amazon algorithms? What hope is there for those of us who have limited funds, limited resources? Is is a waste to take years building an audience when another author with way more funding can get it right away? Why even bother?
> 
> I didn't realize this sort of thing was going on and that authors were being ripped off in this way. It's truly sickening.


It's always been this way, even before ebooks were a thing. Books are a product and marketing is what sells a product. The issue at hand is what kind of marketing is ethical. So don't let the thread get you down.


----------



## Gone To Croatan

Gentleman Zombie said:


> It's always been this way, even before ebooks were a thing.


Wasn't buying your way onto the bestseller list by buying copies of your (print) books in the right stores a grand old tradition in trade publishing?

There's a reason I really don't care whether a book says 'XYZ Bestselling Author' on the front when I buy it. Those letters may have meant something once, but have become horribly degraded over the last decade or two.


----------



## C. Gockel

> I've been following this thread since the beginning. I find it sad, worrisome, and depressing. What is the point of working hard to write good books and build an audience if folks can just buy their way to the best-sellers list or drop $$$ to soar to the top of the Amazon algorithms?


Chin up! Being on the bestseller list doesn't mean a lot. I know authors who make 200k+ (not me!) who never hit the bestseller list. And there are authors who have listed who aren't making squat. You also don't have to be on top of the algos. Trust me on this, my books generally hang around the 30,000 range and yet I'm able to make a living.


----------



## Donna White Glaser

Monique said:


> Yes, you're not alone.
> 
> It's been nearly a year since I posted here. I left because of attacks from RH, too.


I've been wondering where you've been, Monique! I'm so glad to see you here again.


----------



## Mari Oliver

Gentleman Zombie said:


> It's always been this way, even before ebooks were a thing. Books are a product and marketing is what sells a product. The issue at hand is what kind of marketing is ethical. So don't let the thread get you down.


It was fleeting. Nothing some Fleetwood Mac and a cup of coffee couldn't cure.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Silly Writer said:


> Thanks. I fully expect to wake up to a rash of 1-stars tomorrow, or maybe in the next week...but it will be worth it if it keeps one more person from being next on the chopping block. I hope in the future, we Kboarders can stand together and not be afraid to speak out against these types of shenanigans. I know I won't be silenced anymore.


If that happens, my advice would be to bring it here. Make it public. Maybe together the folks here can help. At the very least, it'll shine a light on this and make it known. This is the sort of stuff that group wants people to slink away from. So perhaps the best recourse is to do the opposite.

That said, it's your business. So kind of easy to say from my end. But know you have support here.


----------



## ........

AliceW said:


> Personally I think it's been going on for far too long to be unintentional. There is an old thread on AW dating back to 2012 that touches on her (starts about half way down page 29) and appears to show the exact same tactics especially with dodgy methods, fake accounts, 1-star attacks and then crying victim when people confront her. She was ultimately banned from Goodreads for creating sock puppet accounts and harassing reviewers. And this is all 5 years ago.
> http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?230972-Authors-should-really-stop-telling-readers-how-to-give-reviews/page29
> And from Goodreads
> https://www.goodreads.com/review/show.html?id=305663058&page=1&type=review#comment_48160987


Gosh, that goodreads thread nails the behavior! There has been smoke and fire for a number of years.

Personally, I can confirm I've seen Rebecca come into private groups when doing a list run offering inducement for sales. Sometimes its marketing dollars provided for her against any service you buy from her. Other times it's newsletter feature. Sometimes the author involved offers an email mention (something like "Show me the receipt and I'll push your book in my next newsletter to 10,000 readers!).

The most recent of these was in the 20Booksto50K Facebook group, which was odd given the group has strict "no marketing" rules. One of the admins approved it, it was up for a few days and then vanished. Authors were posting on it that they had bought the book on Apple or B&N and it was *absolutely* in return for marketing dollars or other inducement.

Such inducements are against not just Amazon but Apple and B&N, et al terms of service, particularly regarding rank manipulation.

I joined GenreCrave looking for advertising options. I didn't know a Book Blast was actually RH gifting copies to her carefully cultivated group who were then entered into a competition to win gift cards.

I'm incredibly grateful I didn't go ahead with that promotion. All Amazon needs to do is see unusual gifting activity on your account and you could lose it.

It is once again a reminder that you should not trust any service that cannot be clearly explained or relies on super secret special sauce. BK Knights has a website, a twitter and facebook where you can see it all happen. BookBub and others too.

USA Today, if they cared about the credibility of the "letters" should ban multi-author boxsets from their list.

The Dark Humanity boxset RH was involved in did that "swapping out" titles thing. You can check the one-star reviews where people talk about what was in the preview wasn't in the book and that titles from the same author were in there but not the one they thought. There is even a review titled "bait and switch?".

As soon as these boxsets make the list, they're unpublished from everywhere except Amazon. So you can't see any negative reviews on B&N, Apple, etc, without accessing a cached version of the website. It's a neat way to hide all the one-star reviews regarding the content quality and stories being switched out.

You can look at Dark Humanity and see every author in it. Last I checked almost all of them now say "USA Today Bestseller" and many have added it to front covers.

We have no idea how many of the copies that moved on B&N or iBooks were from the cultivated "buy and enter competition" group. No idea how many were gifted copies operating under the same thing.

Those authors proudly proclaiming their bestseller status appeared on that list for a hot minute and then vanished and we know that some portion of the sales were illegitimate. In RH's own words, she has carefully cultivated the gift group, tossing out anyone who doesn't redeem their gifted copy within 24-hours.

I'm honestly not sure if the authors in those boxsets know *how* their letters came to be. I was certainly unaware of the true nature of the BookBlast until recently. There is a lot of legitimate marketing activity and tasks these authors are given so it's entirely possible they believe they truly did earn their bestseller status with their massive coordinated attempt.

It's good the word is getting out and this thread is staying open. I was an inch away from buying a BookBlast before I found out what was going on. People speaking out about what is happening possibly saved my Amazon account!


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Thanks Silly Writer and Monique, for sharing these stories. I am so sorry you faced this.


----------



## Silly Writer

Rick Gualtieri said:


> If that happens, my advice would be to bring it here. Make it public. Maybe together the folks here can help. At the very least, it'll shine a light on this and make it known. This is the sort of stuff that group wants people to slink away from. So perhaps the best recourse is to do the opposite.
> 
> That said, it's your business. So kind of easy to say from my end. But know you have support here.


I took a screenshot of my book page(s) and review sections that are date-stamped a moment after I posted here. If I have any retaliation I'll send it to Amazon to figure out. I'd suggest anyone who spoke up do the same and if we get hit, we can all send the screenshots with the reviewer names (probably will be many of the same) then we'll have proof of the retaliation 1-star/up-down voting. Maybe Amazon will step in then.


----------



## Diamond Eyes

Silly Writer said:


> People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.


As one of those rookies, I think you should definitely post here more. You seem like a very nice and knowledgeable person. I guarantee there are many people out here who will appreciate you and the others that have left or felt discouraged because of any harassment.

Most people can get a vibe for who is on the up-and-up and who is rotten in situations like this. Hopefully you all will never feel dissuaded in any way from sharing with this or any other community because of some bully or shady nonsense.


----------



## ........

If you go back through the mega boxsets RH has made, many vanish after a short time. All the one-star reviews about bait and switch vanish too - certainly makes it harder for any author to check the reader customer experience with these box sets.

It seems to be a very common issue that customers are delivered a file with contents only in it too.


----------



## 864

Silly Writer said:


> We writers are weird. Lots of us don't do well in real-life social situations. MANY of us come to Kboards to find our tribe. We get to know people and get comfortable. We learn. We help. We lift each other up.We make ourselves part of this community. We make it a place to vent, help, learn, and hang out when we just CAN'T write the wordz and need someone who understands what we feel when we just can't write the wordz and instead want to screw off for a while.


This is what Harv loved about KBoards... The community. The family of it all. This is why I have kept it going even though it was really his "baby." This KBoards family was very good to him and to us when he was so sick. This is what I want for KBoards...for those who read and those who write.


----------



## Not any more

KennySkylin said:


> As one of those rookies, I think you should definitely post here more. You seem like a very nice and knowledgeable person. I guarantee there are many people out here who will appreciate you and the others that have left or felt discouraged because of any harassment.
> 
> Most people can get a vibe for who is on the up-and-up and who is rotten in situations like this. Hopefully you all will never feel dissuaded in any way from sharing with this or any other community because of some bully or shady nonsense.


The problem is that the nastiness doesn't manifest here. It shows up every where else. Reviews, up or down votes, on Facebook and Twitter, in your inbox.

Full disclosure, I gave The Forever Girl a three star review in 2012. It was the last review I ever posted.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## jaehaerys

I know this has been said by others more eloquent than I, but I just want to say to those speaking out here, I'm sorry for what you've been through. It's sad that authors are having these experiences. I admire your courage in speaking up. Also glad that the mods have allowed this discussion to continue, and I'm happy that such a supportive indie community like kboards exists. Monique and SillyWriter, welcome back, I've always appreciated your posts. All the best to you.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Welcome home, Monique and Silly Writer. And anyone else lurking, but timid about coming forward. I'm really sorry these things happen to good, honest, hard-working people, whose only mistake was trusting someone. How do we as a community tolerate these kind of actions. Of course, your posts are now the subject of much ridicule. But, it's behind closed doors. 

I like the idea of screen shots of your current reviews. Maybe that should be done daily, even. I really think this is a tactic that will likely not be employed again. As they will know it can come back to haunt them. But, if it does, please come here and post it for the world to see. Your friends here can complain to the Zon about it, and steps will be taken.

Again, welcome home.


----------



## ........

Joseph Bradshire said:


> Hey Mari, I think you are reading this wrong.
> 
> People are not building a career this way or making money. They are spending thousands merely for the title of "best seller". They aren't actually a best seller, they don't have a readership, a long term career or the money that comes with being a best seller. They ONLY have the ability to tell their friends they are a best seller.
> 
> Few if anyone has spun this into an actual professional career.
> 
> There are no shortcuts. Putting out good books, with appropriate covers, in series, over time is still the ticket.
> 
> So no frets Mari!
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


Yes, it's true. Go through the Dark Humanity authors. Many would not be making a living wage. The ones who are, the bigger names, essentially sponsored a bunch of authors onto the USA Today list on the back of their hard work and good books.


----------



## AllyWho

For those lurkers who still think this is "new" behaviour by this book promoter, as opposed to a consistent method of operating her business, here is a Cuddlebuggery blog post from 2012 about Rebecca Hamilton asking for positive reviews to be up-voted, negatives one down-voted and threatening lawsuits to anyone who speaks out against her.
http://cuddlebuggery.com/blog/2012/04/02/buzz-worthy-news-april-2-2012/

Thread from AW about her former publishing company Immortal Ink Publishing. If you read the posts you will find that many of her practices and responses seem eerily familiar.
http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?240635-Immortal-Ink-Publishing


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Silly Writer said:


> I took a screenshot of my book page(s) and review sections that are date-stamped a moment after I posted here. If I have any retaliation I'll send it to Amazon to figure out. I'd suggest anyone who spoke up do the same and if we get hit, we can all send the screenshots with the reviewer names (probably will be many of the same) then we'll have proof of the retaliation 1-star/up-down voting. Maybe Amazon will step in then.


Good idea. Better safe than sorry.

Rebecca is currently going after me on Facebook for a second time this week with yet more claims that I left her box sets because she would not let ME break the rules. It's a laughable notion--I specifically planned the launch of my book around the date it needed to be out of KU by for the wide week.

She well knows this, because we had a back and forth in the box set group later, when she posted I had to be out 10 days in advance, when that had never been expressed--my title was going to be out 4-5 days prior. Luckily I have screen shots of all of this so that I can prove these allegations to be the falsehoods they are. (Not to mention Amazon clearly lists when my book launched)! Still, it's a crappy thing to have to deal with.

Character assassination as a business practice seems like a good way to get in some pretty serious trouble.


----------



## Not any more

AliceW said:


> For those lurkers who still think this is "new" behaviour by this book promoter, as opposed to a consistent method of operating her business, here is a Cuddlebuggery blog post from 2012 about Rebecca Hamilton asking for positive reviews to be up-voted, negatives one down-voted and threatening lawsuits to anyone who speaks out against her.
> http://cuddlebuggery.com/blog/2012/04/02/buzz-worthy-news-april-2-2012/
> 
> Thread from AW about her former publishing company Immortal Ink Publishing. If you read the posts you will find that many of her practices and responses seem eerily familiar.
> http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?240635-Immortal-Ink-Publishing


&#128536;


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Oh, I remember STGRB well. I even made their list of authors to avoid.


Why is it the biggest bullies always claim to be the victim of bullying?


----------



## Not any more

ChristinaGarner said:


> Why is it the biggest bullies always claim to be the victim of bullying?


It's called deflection.


----------



## Silly Writer

Rick Gualtieri said:


> If that happens, my advice would be to bring it here. Make it public. Maybe together the folks here can help. At the very least, it'll shine a light on this and make it known. This is the sort of stuff that group wants people to slink away from. So perhaps the best recourse is to do the opposite.
> 
> That said, it's your business. So kind of easy to say from my end. But know you have support here.


Thanks Rick, and I will bring it here. If for nothing else, to show the non-believers it is still happening...



ChristinaGarner said:


> Good idea. Better safe than sorry.
> 
> Rebecca is currently going after me on Facebook for a second time this week with yet more claims that I left her box sets because she would not let ME break the rules. It's a laughable notion--I specifically planned the launch of my book around the date it needed to be out of KU by for the wide week.


I'm so sorry this is still happening to you. Hang in there, she moves on quick. It'll be someone else's turn in the barrel in a few days 



Wayne Stinnett said:


> Welcome home, Monique and Silly Writer. And anyone else lurking, but timid about coming forward. I'm really sorry these things happen to good, honest, hard-working people, whose only mistake was trusting someone. How do we as a community tolerate these kind of actions. Of course, your posts are now the subject of much ridicule. But, it's behind closed doors.
> 
> I like the idea of screen shots of your current reviews. Maybe that should be done daily, even. I really think this is a tactic that will likely not be employed again. As they will know it can come back to haunt them. But, if it does, please come here and post it for the world to see. Your friends here can complain to the Zon about it, and steps will be taken.
> 
> Again, welcome home.


Thanks Wayne. Much appreciated.



dn8791 said:


> I know this has been said by others more eloquent than I, but I just want to say to those speaking out here, I'm sorry for what you've been through. It's sad that authors are having these experiences. I admire your courage in speaking up. Also glad that the mods have allowed this discussion to continue, and I'm happy that such a supportive indie community like kboards exists. Monique and SillyWriter, welcome back, I've always appreciated your posts. All the best to you.


Thank you!



chc said:


> This is what Harv loved about KBoards... The community. The family of it all. This is why I have kept it going even though it was really his "baby." This KBoards family was very good to him and to us when he was so sick. This is what I want for KBoards...for those who read and those who write.


It's what most of us love about what Harvey created. We all miss him, too. (((Big Hugs))) and thank YOU for keeping it going for us!


----------



## Guest

Silly Writer said:


> Okay, I've stayed out of this so far because I have already been a victim of RH and don't want to live through that nightmare again, but at this point, I'm gonna speak up--and I hope the dozens of others out there who had this happen to them will also, if only to help the newbies in the future, and/or keep RH from ever doing this to anyone else again.
> 
> I'll start with the fact that some of RH's business tactics are sound. She actually does a good job for some people, too. In 2013 her services got me me to #4 Free in the Entire Store with a promo she was running then. It was legit, I saw it happening. She teamed me up with 3 other authors like myself and we all blitzed each other on all social media and newsletters, and she also sent out social media blasts--which we could see. It wasn't expensive, but it was effective. I give her that one.
> 
> So...fast forward to a year and a half ago. I used to be on these boards all the time. I'm a helpful person by nature and if you look at my past posts you'll see that's what I do here. Mostly when I post, it's to help one of my peers. I rarely get involved in drama. I have many author friends. No enemies, that I'm aware of. I too believed all the hype about RH's new services, so I paid $150 for a New Release BookBlast from Hungry Author (one of the previous names of her companies). At the same time, I commissioned her to design me several FB ads for the cost of $20 each (I think). The Book Blast, at that time, said it was a social media and newsletter blast out to 150,000 of her *followers* and *newsletter subscribers.* So, like any other service I pay for, I joined all her newsletters and followed her on social media. It also included sending the book beforehand to her reader/review list, which could get you anywhere from 5-80 reviews upon release day. (reviews were not guaranteed and I ultimately ended up with 1, which is not my complaint)
> 
> I thought we were friends, RH and I. The day of my launch, she forgot my blast. I very nicely emailed her a few days later and asked about it and she snarkily replied it would go out at the scheduled date. I politely replied the date had passed. She apologized and said she was getting to work on it. I didn't get upset at all. No problem. Stuff happens...so a few days passed all I saw were 2 tweets. I checked every newsletter several times, and her FB posts, but couldn't find any mention of the book. I reached out again and she bit my head off, implied she couldn't tell me WHERE my book had been blasted, but that she had spent 7.5 hours just that evening on it. I told her I wasn't seeing sales. I had also ran an ENT and a few others as well as sent out my own Newsletter. My newsletter clicks matched up exactly to the number of buys on the newsletter day, and the other promo services claimed the other sales, so I really wasn't seeing where she'd done anything. (as of this thread I now know why I couldn't see anything happening, as apparently it was all shady gifting?)
> 
> I reached out to her via email/pm to ask where was the blitz happening? But all I could get back from RH was snark and defensive remarks. Having been on her FB and seen the naming/shaming of anyone who dared to question her services before, I walked it back, accepted full responsibility and even apologized and said I must've been wrong (which I wasn't), etc., etc... I decided I'd just take the blame and eat that $150 bucks rather than upset her. Finally, that appeased her. But before the conversation was over, I asked if she'd resize the graphics I'd purchased to the appropriate size that Facebook requires, as they had come over a month or so before, and since I was just then ready to launch ads, I had found out that day that they were the wrong size for ads. I have no skills in graphics and didn't have PhotoShop nor did I know how to do that (I do now though).
> 
> She lost her mind. She refused to re-size. Said she no longer had them (?). Accused me of asking her to work for free (by this time I had paid close to $200 and still hadn't got anything I'd paid for as far as I knew) and then she blocked me on FB and began her Name & Shame Game on me, even posting my graphics with my book covers for her friends/minions to attack me. I did not ask her to work for free. I paid for those services. I also didn't ask for a refund...just a resizing on the ads, and I'd eat the blitz cost. But she was on a rampage. She'd moved on from the last victim (which I watched in horror just a few days before) and was now on me like fly on rice.
> 
> My friends--who were astonished and gut-punched for me--sent me screenshots of the naming/shaming. I was so humiliated. I just wanted to hide under a rock. And I kind of did.
> 
> The embarrassment and unfairness of the whole thing pushed me into a deep depression. I gave up writing/marketing for a long while after that. She had this reputation here on Kboards that made me feel like everyone would think this drama was all MY fault. I couldn't write my books. I stopped helping newbies and pretty much stayed off Kboards. I basically hid under my blankets away from the Indie World to lick my wounds. It was like that bad dream where you feel like you're standing in front of all your co-workers naked and have no where to run.
> 
> If it wasn't for my tight group of writer buddies (all members here) that wouldn't let me give up, I wouldn't have ever wrote another word or published anything else. I lost A LOT OF TIME to that bizarre attack. I lost a lot of momentum on my books, and I still haven't got it back. I lost sleep. I shed a lot of tears. I didn't deserve that. No one does. And I can name a lot more authors just like me who didn't deserve it, and have yet to speak out due to the brutality of what they too went through. Of course I won't name them. If they want to step up, they can. If not, I totally understand why.
> 
> We writers are weird. Lots of us don't do well in real-life social situations. MANY of us come to Kboards to find our tribe. We get to know people and get comfortable. We learn. We help. We lift each other up. We make ourselves part of this community. We make it a place to vent, help, learn, and hang out when we just CAN'T write the wordz and need someone who understands what we feel when we just can't write the wordz and instead want to screw off for a while. But when you're publicly crucified, vilified, and made a spectacle of in front of your peers, you lose your place; your sense of belonging. We all deserve to be treated kindly, professionally and fairly, especially if that's the way we treat others. RH ruined Kboards for so many people. So many have felt violated and shamed with her public tar and featherings. She took a lot from me with this bullying.
> 
> People used to ask me where I've been...why don't I post much anymore...what have I been doing. You can see I have a few thousand posts, yet none of the rookies even know who I am.
> 
> Well, now you know why.


I'm so sorry this happened to you, Silly Writer! Thank you so much for sharing your experience and for not giving up.


----------



## Dpock

Isn't this RH person (and her former STGRB mob) just the tip of the iceberg? My impression has been there are cabals, cliques, and gangs operating all over Amazon and it's most telling in the reviews. I'm sure that needs no explanation. 

I've mentioned this before only to be told to mind my own business. I don't disagree on this point, but it's nice to vent every now and then. 

It would be nice if there was a guild of some for legitimate indies playing by all the rules (maybe there is) that had some real firepower to manage disputes or call foul when appropriate. Some collective bargaining power with Amazon would be good to have on our side.


----------



## Not any more

For those who missed STGRB and its now-defunct website, we started this thread with Passive Voice... Read the comments.

http://www.thepassivevoice.com/2012/07/stop-the-goodreads-bullies/


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I will admit I am really confused. How does STGRB (Stop the Good Reads Bullies) factor in to the boxed set issues? Did Rebecca Hamilton run that site or something? Or just make some tweets about reviews asking for up votes and down votes?

TBH I had my hands full with a completely different set of bad actors at the time, so I wasn't involved at all with the Good Reads stuff. Maybe someone can make more sense of what we are supposed to see with the comments on Passive Voice? So many of the links etc. are just holding pages with the content of the site gone....


----------



## Not any more

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I will admit I am really confused. How does STGRB (Stop the Good Reads Bullies) factor in to the boxed set issues? Did Rebecca Hamilton run that site or something?


She was one of the major players. That is why she was booted from GR. It's the pattern of behavior.


----------



## Patty Jansen

brkingsolver said:


> She was one of the major players. That is why she was booted from GR. It's the pattern of behavior.


I googled this a lot a few months back, but while woe is me responses to reviews were easy to find, could find zero evidence that she was one of the organisers of STGRB.

On behalf of the people who have been bullied and have lost money on the box set thing, please keep this off the thread unless you have evidence. I don't want this thread to be locked. It needs to stay on topic and discuss current issues.


----------



## ........

Patty Jansen said:


> I googled this a lot a few months back, but while woe is me responses to reviews were easy to find, could find zero evidence that she was one of the organisers of STGRB.
> 
> On behalf of the people who have been bullied and have lost money on the box set thing, please keep this off the thread unless you have evidence. I don't want this thread to be locked. It needs to stay on topic and discuss current issues.


It's hard to know exactly how she was involved. There are posts like this one that show she was referring people to the website: https://www.facebook.com/annericefanpage/posts/934951083216946

Also she was on Goodreads fighting and arguing with people around the same time, particularly Kat Kennedy. There is a post on it here: https://stopthestgrbbullies.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/stop-the-gr-bullies-on-kat-kennedy-part-one/

It's all ancient history now (sorta) but you have a series of things happen close together in time, then the STGRB page appear. The ownership *wasn't* RH but then you see her picking her side in the fight and various other things going on.

It all doesn't matter much to this particular topic I think and I'm not sure it's possible to get to the truth.

Edit: I'll add that a lot of it is mixed up in time, things happening at X, written at Y, screengrabbed at Z. It's far too complicated to make any real sense of.


----------



## Kwrite

SummerNights said:


> Christina, you've probably seen this already but RH kind of implied today that you plagiarized an entire box set and uploaded it to Kobo so that you would get her in trouble with Amazon.
> I mean, you can't make this stuff up.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

SummerNights said:


> Christina, you've probably seen this already but RH kind of implied today that you plagiarized an entire box set and uploaded it to Kobo so that you would get her in trouble with Amazon.
> I mean, you can't make this stuff up.


I've been getting screen shots of everything being said about me--thankfully there are many looking out for me, and now that the attacks have turned especially vicious and I have solid evidence of them being lies, even more are reaching out and offering support.

I can state unequivocally that the accusation is 100% untrue, as are all of her accusations against me thus far.

There really is not basement to this thing.


----------



## Becca Mills

Patty Jansen said:


> I googled this a lot a few months back, but while woe is me responses to reviews were easy to find, could find zero evidence that she was one of the organisers of STGRB.
> 
> On behalf of the people who have been bullied and have lost money on the box set thing, please keep this off the thread unless you have evidence. I don't want this thread to be locked. It needs to stay on topic and discuss current issues.


Thanks, Patty, yes -- I do think the STGRB stuff is too dated and unprovable (since the site is gone) to be a useful topic to dwell on here.


----------



## Honesty

ChristinaGarner said:


> Good idea. Better safe than sorry.
> 
> Rebecca is currently going after me on Facebook for a second time this week with yet more claims that I left her box sets because she would not let ME break the rules. It's a laughable notion--I specifically planned the launch of my book around the date it needed to be out of KU by for the wide week.
> 
> She well knows this, because we had a back and forth in the box set group later, when she posted I had to be out 10 days in advance, when that had never been expressed--my title was going to be out 4-5 days prior. Luckily I have screen shots of all of this so that I can prove these allegations to be the falsehoods they are. (Not to mention Amazon clearly lists when my book launched)! Still, it's a crappy thing to have to deal with.
> 
> Character assassination as a business practice seems like a good way to get in some pretty serious trouble.


Can we see those screenshots? (Just to clarify, so there's no confusion...the ones YOU have to prove YOUR allegations, not the ones getting sent to you)


----------



## Honesty

Silly Writer said:


> Way to keep it classy, and keep this thread on target. It says a lot that you're seeing those new screen shots re: you and not reacting and haven't posted about it here since it was sorta off subject (although it does fall into the bullying part a bit). Like many others, when she posted the attack on me, I also was pm'd the screenshots. I appreciate the many people staying in that group who question the ethics and inform everyone of all the baseless accusations.


Can we see some of these screenshots you say you have?


----------



## Honesty

ChristinaGarner said:


> I forgot to address this in my previous response, and I'd like to. I agree there are a lot of authors involved--each is impacted by the actions and ethics of their fellow authors in the set and the organizer.
> 
> In may case, I was kicked out of the Spellbound box set. I found out when Rebecca posted that I'd dropped out. (I hadn't at that point, but that's beside the point.)
> 
> She announced that she wasn't sure if I was donating the spot or "forcing a refund" with PayPal. (I was doing neither, but that too, is beside the point.) Because of that, she wasn't sure if she'd need to charge someone the $500 buy in to cover my "forced refund" or could offer the spot for free.
> 
> Several people offered to pay the buy in. That would have meant she was free and clear to return my money (money owed to me, not as a refund, but because she was not honoring the terms of our original contract as previously stated) and yet, she chose not to. One might ask themselves why, if her primary interest is the authors in the set.
> 
> Also, once it became clear the terms of the box set were going to change so drastically (Having to UNPUBLISH our books to participate? Swapping out full length novels for shorts? {like that's not gonna tick some readers off--and rightfully so} Not to mention, for those, like me, who were going to pull our books out immediately following the wide week in an effort to avoid the other two options, we were now not going to receive nearly the amount of profit or exposure we would have with 3 months in KU) Rebecca could have offered to reshuffle the set. None of the ones I was involved with had even been put on preorder when this all happened.
> 
> If, as she claims, box sets are done by her for free, and she receives zero profit, why not do the right thing and offer to return the money of those who no longer felt it was a good fit? I suspect she could have filled the spots, because for many it was still a fine trade, but even she couldn't--why not offer? If there's no profit, (and in the case of my 3 sets, ads had not been booked) what's the difference if, for a month or two, only one box set went live?
> 
> One has to wonder.


Did you get the refund?

Also, following Amazon TOS is your responsibility too, as an author. Sounds to me like you made the decisions about leaving KU or staying in.


----------



## Honesty

Rosalind J said:


> Huge difference in my mind, and I believe in most folks', between Mark Dawson and this kind of thing. One is white hat and one is black hat. Problem with black hat techniques, even if you have no ethical issues, is that you're risking your reputation and the wrath of Amazon. Probably not a good bet long term.
> 
> Authors who are successful in the long term think, well ... long term. They tend to use methods that are sustainable, like prioritizing quality of product and presentation. Long term success is about growing a group of real readers who are fans. Effective advertising is just communication with the market that wants your book, drawing their attention to it so they can find it and test it out. The long term benefit comes from the people who read it, not just the sale itself.


Do we have any proof of black hat techniques being used? Proof as in proof, not speculation.


----------



## Honesty

Patty Jansen said:


> Can I just say how awesome it is of the moderators to have allowed this thread to live. A lot of people are very happy to have these issues heard.
> 
> Over the past six months or so, I've spent hours fielding desperate emails and messages from people who signed up and paid, then didn't like the T&C or the tone in the groups or fell foul of the organiser, were bullied, had their author-Facebook friends put under pressure to unfriend them and desperately wanted out. Many lost hundreds, if not *thousands* of dollars.
> 
> Every time a thread was started about it here, it was shut down before the affected people could have their say and present their material. Many were simply too afraid of the blackballing and bullying to say a peep. There are still many behind the curtains who are still too afraid to speak out.
> 
> Whether or not anyone wants to get involved with tactics that skirt the edges of the Amazon T&C is up to them, but at least now it's become clear what goes on and what the risks are.
> 
> I'm sure that we can all agree that certainly, those who were not included in the sets, who pulled out long before the sets went live, and where a replacement was found, should have their money back. Maybe some people don't care about $500, but most do, especially if you get nothing for it except bullying and a wedge driven in your group of online author friends. Upcoming sets are $2000. Some people have walked away with NO return, NO money refunded and No inclusion in any box set.
> 
> They lost all their money. They lost friends. They are rightfully LIVID.
> 
> On behalf of the people who have messaged me and who are still afraid to speak out, thank you.


Can we see some proof of these accusations regarding the multitude of people scammed by RH, or do we just take your word for it?


----------



## Honesty

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> In regards to gifting through the vendor: I do not do this.
> 
> Why?
> 
> In my experience, and I DO give my readers ample opportunities to get my books for free both chapter by chapter and at the end as a PDF or other file download, it is better to handle the gifting stuff yourself. Note, I am not gifting in order to make list or boost my sales rank, if those are your goals, and we've covered how they really shouldn't be your goals, but if they are, this system won't work for you.
> 
> Giving readers free books is not unethical. Like I said, I do it all the time. I prefer to give my readers the files to download so that #1 I can see who is savvy enough to do so and therefore more likely to leave me an honest review. I only ever ask for honest reviews, and for the most part those are 3-5 stars and I'm fine with that. Reviews are for readers.
> 
> #2, if I am handling the gifting, I have their email address that I know works. This is important, because as we all know, many of us have Amazon accounts with email addresses we rarely check unless we have to. We've had the Amazon account for going on 10+ years, so's the email address, we all know how functional that email address is likely to be . . .
> 
> #3 and this is going to be WHOA, AMAZING . . . many of my readers who get a FREE copy from me go BUY the book for themselves. I gave them the book free and they appreciate that, but then they go to the store to buy a copy because they want to own it, too. This means that my free systems don't impact my ability to make a living wage at this.
> 
> I do realize this method won't help anyone make a USAToday Bestseller List, nor does it help you debut a book #1 in a heavily competitive category. But I always say rank doesn't pay the bills . . . this is an example of a long-tail, long-career type system to build true fans vs. incetivizing downloads.


To newbies...This is BS advice. *Higher rank means more exposure means more income.* Achieve it ethically and morally, by all means, but do try to achieve it.


----------



## Logan R.

Honesty said:


> To newbies...This is BS advice. *Higher rank means more exposure means more income.* Achieve it ethically and morally, by all means, but do try to achieve it.


Why are you giving advice to "newbies" when you've only had 6 posts? I'd much rather take Elizabeth's advice than that of someone who's made so few posts. If you'd like to provide links to your own works or let us know why we should trust you, please do. Until then, I think I'll follow the advice of those more established authors.


----------



## AllyWho

Honesty said:


> Do we have any proof of black hat techniques being used? Proof as in proof, not speculation.


Yes. It's in the previous 25 pages that you obviously didn't read in your rush .

_Edited. AliceW, it's the middle of the night where I am. Pretty please, don't make my phone bark at me. - Becca_


----------



## AllyWho

Honesty said:


> To newbies...This is BS advice. *Higher rank means more exposure means more income.* Achieve it ethically and morally, by all means, but do try to achieve it.


Since you know all about it, why don't you firstly lay out your publishing creditentials and then explain to us how paying a promoter thousands of dollars to gift your book, results in more income for the author?


----------



## Becca Mills

Honesty, as moderators have noted at several points in the latter portion of this thread, we are looking for members to relate their own personal experiences and/or to back their claims up with concrete evidence. Links to sites hosting screenshots, as in this thread's OP, are permissible, though the screenshots themselves should not be posted here. We would like to make evidence from both sides of this issue available so that every member can come to her or his own decision. We are also asking members to avoid name-calling and labeling ("scamming," "black hat," etc.), as happened when the thread was new and passions were running high. If you are not convinced by Christina's descriptions of her personal experiences, that's fine. If you have evidence of your own to provide or experiences to relate, please feel free to do so. Welcome to KBoards.

Other members, please do not rise to the opportunity for a fight. Remember that keeping this thread open is our shared priority.


----------



## Honesty

Becca Mills said:


> Honesty, as moderators have noted at several points in the latter portion of this thread, we are looking for members to relate their own personal experiences and/or to back their claims up with concrete evidence. Links to sites hosting screenshots, as in this thread's OP, are permissible, though the screenshots themselves should not be posted here. We would like to make evidence from both sides of this issue available so that every member can come to her or his own decision. We are also asking members to avoid name-calling and labeling ("scamming," "black hat," etc.), as happened when the thread was new and passions were running high. If you are not convinced by Christina's descriptions of her personal experiences, that's fine. If you have evidence of your own to provide or experiences to relate, please feel free to do so. Welcome to KBoards.
> 
> Other members, please do not rise to the opportunity for a fight. Remember that keeping this thread open is our shared priority.


No I am not satisfied by the personal accounts. There are many tall tales and accusations not substantiatied by any concrete proof here. And I have read this thread back to back. If screen shots aren't allowed to be posted here, then they can post links to places where they are allowed to be posted. None have done so.


----------



## Honesty

Joseph Bradshire said:


> The answer is yes.


Let's see it...


----------



## Honesty

AliceW said:


> Yes. It's in the previous 25 pages that you obviously didn't read in your rush .
> 
> _Edited. AliceW, it's the middle of the night where I am. Pretty please, don't make my phone bark at me. - Becca_


I did read the 25 pages. Saw no actual proof, just accusations.


----------



## Honesty

Joseph Bradshire said:


> The answer is to your first question is well documented throughout this lengthy thread, you'll have to read it. And no, don't take anyone's word. Check the screen shots, testimonials, etc...just like a court would do if you want to get that strict.


Testimonials sure, but no actual proof of wrongdoing.


----------



## Honesty

Joseph Bradshire said:


> To newbies? Lol. Like us?
> 
> Higher rank for one's self perhaps means more exposure, fans, eyes, etc...but that's not what's happening here. Being part of a well gifted boxed set is not the same thing at all. I would argue it's radically different.
> 
> But we can just check this. We can make a call out to anyone that has used the gifted boxed set method and broke even, made money, launched a career. I only need one solid example out of the hundreds that have participated. Did this method, irregardless of ethics or morality, net anyone any money? (ignoring the organizer, of course, one assumes money flowed that direction but I'm supposed to pretend I can't be sure that it did, so I'll not state so definitively).
> 
> I'm really the wrong person to be answering these leading questions, but everyone else seems to be asleep and, well...here I am. Uncle Jo, defender of the whatever.


What proof do we have that high rank was achieved by gifting? According to Amazon gifted copies do not influence rank.


----------



## Becca Mills

Honesty said:


> No I am not satisfied by the personal accounts. There are many tall tales and accusations not substantiatied by any concrete proof here. And I have read this thread back to back. If screen shots aren't allowed to be posted here, then they can post links to places where they are allowed to be posted. None have done so.


It's your right not to be convinced, Honesty. Internet forums aren't courts of law. All we can do is provide a space where people can view the evidence others choose to provide and come to their own conclusions.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Honesty said:


> What proof do we have that high rank was achieved by gifting? According to Amazon gifted copies do not influence rank.


I don't have any personal stake in any of this, so I speak here only as a concerned bystander, but my understanding is that Rebecca herself has stated that gifting is the 'secret sauce' that achieves the high rank, and that if an author gifts copies of her own book, that doesn't affect rank, true, but if it's another author's book, it DOES affect rank. But if I've got that wrong I'm sure someone will correct me.


----------



## Ava Glass

Honesty said:


> According to Amazon gifted copies do not influence rank.


Not true.



> A gift sale counts toward a sales rank only if it is redeemed within 24 hours by the recipient.


https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A2SPN65RHEW2G


----------



## Becca Mills

Honesty said:


> Testimonials sure, but no actual proof of wrongdoing.


I agree that screenshots and other such evidence can make personal accounts more convincing. But as I was just saying to my students today ... well, yesterday, at this point, _ethos_ can also factor powerfully into making an argument convincing. Christina, Patty, Silly Writer, and Monique are all members of long standing who have spent years on the forum demonstrating their credibility. Those of us who've been here a while know them, know their books, know their personalities, know their values. It seems that for many, their track record as members of the community makes them believable.


----------



## 41419

Here's a testimonial: I started receiving complaints about all this maybe ten months ago. I wanted to see what was going on for myself, so I checked out the claims, and I saw it with my own eyes: a box set in KU which had titles that were wide - on Kobo, B&N and Apple. Multiple titles. Over two different box sets. They weren't mentioned in the sales description, but once you clicked inside the book you could see them.

So... yeah.


----------



## ........

I have a testimonial too, Honesty- Rebecca and another author came into the 20Booksto50K facebook group to trade inducements for authors purchasing books to get a boxset number up so it could make a list. This is a direct violation of TOS.

Then the post was deleted shortly thereafter. I didn't take a screenshot but perhaps others did. 

In Rebecca's group I've also seen her offering marketing dollars if you bought a particular book. It's usually put as "Hey, this book needs help at iBooks/B&N/whatever. Buy a copy, show the receipt and I'll put that much toward your next marketing campaign/advertising". 

Have seen it more than once. Also a violation of TOS.

If you read the inside indie website they also show the screenshots where Rebecca talks about her group of readers who are gifted copies and must claim them or be kicked out of the group. She says there is a high claim rate. This is how the BookBlasts operate. 

It is of zero surprise to me that a new account would appear at this point trying to cast doubt. 

To any author out their reading this - keep your cool. Being baited into a fight is exactly what is required to shut the thread down.


----------



## ......~......

........ said:


> I have a testimonial too, Honesty- Rebecca and another author came into the 20Booksto50K facebook group to trade inducements for authors purchasing books to get a boxset number up so it could make a list. This is a direct violation of TOS.
> 
> Then the post was deleted shortly thereafter. I didn't take a screenshot but perhaps others did.


That's what I saw as well in the notification email Facebook sends me (by the time I clicked on the link the post had been deleted). The author in question (who's also a member here) said they needed to hit certain sales numbers in Apple, Kobo, Nook stores to qualify for a USAT bestseller list or something to that effect. Didn't take a screenshot either, but I definitely saw it.


----------



## Evenstar

Honesty said:


> Testimonials sure, but no actual proof of wrongdoing.


Honesty - Did you read the InsideIndie blog that this all comes from? There are a ton of screenshots on there. All very damning and backing up what people here are saying. Unless you are suggesting that they have been photoshoped or made up? But if you believe them to be genuine screenshots then they paint a very bleak picture of inciting people into breaking the Amazon TOS and F&F Paypal payments and also several examples of bullying.

This community works on a basis of social responsibility and building trust in recognisable names who post helpful advice. I have been here for years now, so I have come to respect the opinions of certain people and to know their online 'voice'. Many of those people are speaking up for the first time and it does not fit with their characters to be making baseless accusations.

You are showing up as new to this community whereas others have thousands of posts to validate their input here. It counts for a great deal. Perhaps you have been here a long time under another name, or perhaps you have never been to kboards before, but we know and trust these people. Even those who post here as an anonymous fun name, are well respected authors that many of us know through other areas of the publishing world.

Mods - if this next bit is considered not on point enough or too inflammatory then I totally understand it being deleted:

Many others also know and trust Rebecca Hamilton from here too, which is what makes it so sad, but there are too many trusted voices on the other side to be ignored now. It doesn't benefit them to be going on a witchhunt, especially if what they are saying about retaliation is true (which the screenshots indicate that it is), but bullying is a terrifying experience and destroys careers and self esteem, and it does need to be addressed or it continues. I consider it every bit as important as "box set scams" (The title of the thread), perhaps more so. We can all avoid making decisions that violate terms of service but we can not control personal attacks and the damage they do which can last a lifetime for some people. Only by having many people standing up at same time does it come to light, and hopefully stop. Rebecca seems like a nice person, but she has a lot of fans who are very passionate and unfortunately they defend her with tactics that are undermining the wonderful and supportive world of indie publishing, as well as affecting real people and their lives. I'm sorry if that sounds accusatory, but bullying makes me feel sick and I don't want to see it pushed under the carpet.


----------



## Honesty

Joseph Bradshire said:


> http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html
> 
> This is a pretty good start. But I want to point out that all evidence is ultimately based on testimony. Testimony that it's not a photoshop. In a court of law it's referred to as the process of authentication (though, honestly, it's been forever since I passed the bar so don't quote me). It takes a person with a good reputation to really authenticate or validate evidence. So please check out the reputations of the people posting testimonials and screen shots. You'll find them to be paragons, but some you can't authenticate because the internet is highly anonymous. So I can understand, somewhat, your reticence despite the outcry.
> 
> If you are trying to convince yourself to spend thousands to achieve a rank or something, if that's who you are, well, most are warning against it. But if you cannot be swayed, go for it. Come back and tell us if you broke even. I'm still looking for the person who did.


Most of the stuff on that site is five years old, as in before the boxed sets era. I meant recent proof of people scammed, and getting ganged up on, etc.


----------



## Honesty

Logan R. said:


> Why are you giving advice to "newbies" when you've only had 6 posts? I'd much rather take Elizabeth's advice than that of someone who's made so few posts. If you'd like to provide links to your own works or let us know why we should trust you, please do. Until then, I think I'll follow the advice of those more established authors.


Consider my posts as my own personal testimonials and opinion, which I would like to offer anonymously. You are of course completely free to follow the advice of anyone you wish to follow advice from.


----------



## Honesty

PaulineMRoss said:


> I don't have any personal stake in any of this, so I speak here only as a concerned bystander, but my understanding is that Rebecca herself has stated that gifting is the 'secret sauce' that achieves the high rank, and that if an author gifts copies of her own book, that doesn't affect rank, true, but if it's another author's book, it DOES affect rank. But if I've got that wrong I'm sure someone will correct me.


Sounds like something Amazon should take care of, don't you think? As moderator Becca Mills stated in response to one of my posts, this forum is not a "court of law." Especially since I've yet to see a shred of proof that any of this was actually done or said.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Honesty

Becca Mills said:


> I agree that screenshots and other such evidence can make personal accounts more convincing. But as I was just saying to my students today ... well, yesterday, at this point, _ethos_ can also factor powerfully into making an argument convincing. Christina, Patty, Silly Writer, and Monique are all members of long standing who have spent years on the forum demonstrating their credibility. Those of us who've been here a while know them, know their books, know their personalities, know their values. It seems that for many, their track record as members of the community makes them believable.


I have followed this forum for 5 years too. And I researched the background of this issue over the last couple of days since this thread started, as well as the backgrounds of the people involved. There are also a lot of mentions of the vast numbers of people scammed by RH, yet only a handful of the same authors keep posting about it. As for breaking Amazon TOS by either gifting, or having a title in KU and wide at the same time, that's for Amazon to handle, and if anyone wishes to break those rules, they will most likley face the consequences. Everyone is free to read the TOS and follow them. Or not.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Honesty said:


> Sounds like something Amazon should take care of, don't you think? As moderator Becca Mills stated in response to one of my posts, this forum is not a "court of law", so what gives anyone here the right to drag someone through the mud so publically and with what I can only read as malicious intent. Especially since I've yet to see a shred of proof that any of this was actually done or said.


You continue to say you haven't seen any proof or evidence. Multiple people are posting here about their experiences. We have long-time trusted members like Monique and Silly Writer, bestselling writers like Rosalind, and even David Gaughran, who has done yeoman's work for years helping out indie writers on his blog, in his writing, and at conferences. In addition, the OP links to a web site with extensive records about this sort of behavior in the original post. What you're saying is that you don't _believe_ the evidence and proof. That is another thing entirely.

I belong to two different groups of professional writers, some of them earning mid-six figures or above, and both of them have been discussing, off the record, Rebecca Hamilton's bad behavior, bullying, and gaming the system for at least a year now. This isn't just random people deciding to hunt down a successful writer out of jealousy.


----------



## Honesty

dgaughran said:


> Here's a testimonial: I started receiving complaints about all this maybe ten months ago. I wanted to see what was going on for myself, so I checked out the claims, and I saw it with my own eyes: a box set in KU which had titles that were wide - on Kobo, B&N and Apple. Multiple titles. Over two different box sets. They weren't mentioned in the sales description, but once you clicked inside the book you could see them.
> 
> So... yeah.


OK, so someone was violating Amazon's TOS and they probably got penalized for it. I'm sure it happens everyday. The best thing to do is report it.


----------



## ........

Honesty - you keep repeating you haven't seen a shred of proof - look at the section of inside indie regarding gifting copies. Those are recent screenshots (and you can see dates).

It's all there quite clearly - offering inducements to buy violates TOS.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks,

A reminder that we are asking for members to post first-hand experiences, good or bad, on the box set topic.  

You've made your request, Honesty.  People will consider whether what they've provided is sufficient or not, and you or other readers can make judgments based on what is in the thread and who has been posting.  If you have first hand experience with this promoter or promotion, you are welcome to share it.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

........ said:


> Honesty - you keep repeating you haven't seen a shred of proof - look at the section of inside indie regarding gifting copies. Those are recent screenshots (and you can see dates).
> 
> It's all there quite clearly - offering inducements to buy violates TOS.


There's a twitter site out there too, @iamscamilton, I believe. Unedited screenshots there. Feel free to browse.


----------



## Logan R.

Honesty said:


> Consider my posts as my own personal testimonials and opinion, which I would like to offer anonymously. You are of course completely free to follow the advice of anyone you wish to follow advice from.


But your posts are not testimonials or opinions. They're just attacks. You're attacking people for giving their own testimonials and opinions, but when you do the same you're crying "this is just what I think and say! You have no basis for calling me out!" For example:



Honesty said:


> Sounds like something Amazon should take care of, don't you think? As moderator Becca Mills stated in response to one of my posts, this forum is not a "court of law." *Especially since I've yet to see a shred of proof that any of this was actually done or said.*
> 
> _Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


Emphasis my own.

You've given no proof as to why _anybody_ should take your advice. You're coming to the defense of RH, but you're not giving any evidence as to why we should believe she's great.

Trust me, I want to believe she's as great as the next person. I hope she's doing all these great things, getting people their letters and stuff like that, just because she's that altruistic. I'm an optimist like that. But you're not doing her or anybody else any favors. Everybody that's given testimonies and warned about her services are people I trust because they've proven themselves. You have not done that. You could do that if you provide screenshots and testimonies of your own, but attacking members of this forum that have freely given advice and information to help all of us is not going to get you anywhere.

And to the mods, thank you for keeping this thread open. Light needs to be shined on things like this. I agree that there's been a lot of speculation, and I do wish that _*both*_ sides could provide more screenshots and proof. However, I think the one thing better than screenshots and testimonials is first-hand experience.

Which is exactly what we're seeing here.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

........ said:


> I have a testimonial too, Honesty- Rebecca and another author came into the 20Booksto50K facebook group to trade inducements for authors purchasing books to get a boxset number up so it could make a list. This is a direct violation of TOS.
> 
> Then the post was deleted shortly thereafter. I didn't take a screenshot but perhaps others did.


I do have a screenshot. I had posted it to my personal FB page, where it caused a bit of a kerfluffle. Anyway, it mentions Rebecca, but was actually posted by her co author. No idea if Rebecca herself also posted, I'm not in 20books so if she did I didn't see it (the other post was discussed quite extensively outside of the group since the mods seemed to be pruning dissenting opinions at the time, hence why I have a copy).

Anyway the offer was buy the book on iBooks and Nook and then, after showing a receipt of course, you'd be offered a spot in the co authors newsletter. Blatant buying of sales in my book, but others disagreed.


----------



## Evenstar

Honesty said:


> Consider my posts as my own personal testimonials and opinion, which I would like to offer anonymously. You are of course completely free to follow the advice of anyone you wish to follow advice from.


What exactly is your own personal testimonial if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Also, just to add, please don't take Honesty's bait. Unless they're sharing anything or linking to anything more substantial than "I don't believe you"' I think it's safe to say that engaging further is a) a waste of time and b) puts this thread in lockdown danger.


----------



## Honesty

MonkishScribe said:


> You continue to say you haven't seen any proof or evidence. Multiple people are posting here about their experiences. We have long-time trusted members like Monique and Silly Writer, bestselling writers like Rosalind, and even David Gaughran, who has done yeoman's work for years helping out indie writers on his blog, in his writing, and at conferences. In addition, the OP links to a web site with extensive records about this sort of behavior in the original post. What you're saying is that you don't _believe_ the evidence and proof. That is another thing entirely.
> 
> I belong to two different groups of professional writers, some of them earning mid-six figures or above, and both of them have been discussing, off the record, Rebecca Hamilton's bad behavior, bullying, and gaming the system for at least a year now. This isn't just random people deciding to hunt down a successful writer out of jealousy.


Can you please direct me to those FB groups. Via PM is fine. Thanks!


----------



## Honesty

Rick Gualtieri said:


> There's a twitter site out there too, @iamscamilton, I believe. Unedited screenshots there. Feel free to browse.


Thanks!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Joseph Bradshire said:


> Yes. You beat me to it. I'm not used to a heavily moderated forum, but I assume this is coming.





Rick Gualtieri said:


> Also, just to add, please don't take Honesty's bait. Unless they're sharing anything or linking to anything more substantial than "I don't believe you"' I think it's safe to say that engaging further is a) a waste of time and b) puts this thread in lockdown danger.


If it hasn't become clear, we are committed to leaving this thread open. This means that we are monitoring the thread very closely and *have* and will continue to edit posts, remove posts, ban people from the thread and place people on post approval as required.

We're asking for first hand accounts of people's experiences, good and bad. Screenshots may be linked to, if desired. And keep it classy, KBoards.

Let's everyone move on, and remember that not every post needs to be responded to. If you don't think a post adds to the conversation, ignore it or report it if you think it violates Forum Decorum.

Betsy
KB Moderator


----------



## Lydniz

I'd just like to thank the mods for their efforts in keeping the thread open. I know that earlier threads on the same subject have tended to be killed off once things started getting heated, but this is all stuff that needs to be said - and most importantly read by authors who might not have been aware this was going on.


----------



## Logan R.

Joseph Bradshire said:


> Someone will link the FB page.
> 
> But honestly, dude, like I said before, if you are a new writer...this method doesn't start a career. It doesn't make money either.
> 
> I'm not 100% on that though, but I do invite anyone who has made money on this to please let us know. I'm certain some would put up with the alleged sacrifice of integrity and risk the alleged possibility of bullying if a career/money was the result.
> 
> I've just not seen anyone walk away with a career from this, no matter how much money they laid down. Which is why I even say anything. Not because I'm a jealous hater, but because I have empathy for new people and don't like to see them taken advantage of (allegedly).


As someone who's made a living off this for a couple years, and been publishing (and been a member of this forum) since 2011, I can agree that yes, this is definitely not how you do things. In my six years (as of next week!) I've seen plenty of people come and go. Some do the right things, some do the wrong. Some do things I agree with, some do things I don't. That's the beauty of this forum. Everything is public, out in the open. You can read and see if the things said here are things that you morally agree with or not.

Most of the time, the immoral things are more obvious than others. I'm not attacking anyone in particular, not even you Honesty. I'm just saying that from what I've seen, this is not how you do things.

I could be totally wrong, but that's my own, _personal_, opinion and testimonial. No screenshots required.

_NOTE: Edited to clarify a couple of things. It's late here so some of my thoughts weren't coming across very well._


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Let's keep the focus on first-hand experiences with the box set promotions and not on each other.  I'm going to have to insist and be heavy-handed with my pruning shears.  Posts have and will be removed; as we review the overnights, more may be removed.  Please don't hesitate to PM me if you have questions.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Betsy, I don't wish to derail this thread. Would it be permissible for me to start a different thread about different ways to be free? I know the concept of permafree etc. Has been talked about before, but that one post I made about a different way I've been free seems to keep getting quoted and it might be better to move discussions about that to a separate thread.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Betsy, I don't wish to derail this thread. Would it be permissible for me to start a different thread about different ways to be free? I know the concept of permafree etc. Has been talked about before, but that one post I made about a different way I've been free seems to keep getting quoted and it might be better to move discussions about that to a separate thread.


That would be fine, EAW, and a good topic for discussion, thanks!

Betsy


----------



## Krista D. Ball

dgaughran said:


> Here's a testimonial: I started receiving complaints about all this maybe ten months ago. I wanted to see what was going on for myself, so I checked out the claims, and I saw it with my own eyes: a box set in KU which had titles that were wide - on Kobo, B&N and Apple. Multiple titles. Over two different box sets. They weren't mentioned in the sales description, but once you clicked inside the book you could see them.
> 
> So... yeah.


I can back this up by saying that I've also heard the grumblings for about a year or so. I have personally looked at her box sets on Kobo (since I buy most of my books there) and have seen KU titles in box sets on Kobo. When posts were made on KBoards about box sets being taken down, etc etc the blurbs and TOC would change on Amazon, but often the insides on Kobo weren't - still showing KU titles.

I've also seen the use of price matching to get around max Amazon size requirements for 99c box sets. i.e. Pricing at $2.99 on Amazon because the box is too big, and then pricing at 99c elsewhere, triggering a price match, to get the 99c Amazon price for the preorder phase. I don't know if this is allowed or not; I just know that I've gotten nastygrams from Amazon for something as simple as another retailer changing their price before Amazon does when setting up a sale, and being told I'm not allowed to sell a book for cheaper elsewhere ~~Or Else.~~


----------



## Stewart Matthews

One thing hasn't been clear to me while following this thread--what happens to the box sets when the promo is over? Are they taken down from Amazon? Are any payouts made to participating authors? Do those authors see a boost of sales on their other books or receive a surge of email signups?


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Amazon's rules are clear on book file size requirements and price. 
This speaks volumes to me.
http://insideindie.weebly.com/ask-and-ye-shall-receive.html


----------



## Alan Petersen

........ said:


> I have a testimonial too, Honesty- Rebecca and another author came into the 20Booksto50K facebook group to trade inducements for authors purchasing books to get a boxset number up so it could make a list. This is a direct violation of TOS.
> 
> Then the post was deleted shortly thereafter. I didn't take a screenshot but perhaps others did.
> 
> In Rebecca's group I've also seen her offering marketing dollars if you bought a particular book. It's usually put as "Hey, this book needs help at iBooks/B&N/whatever. Buy a copy, show the receipt and I'll put that much toward your next marketing campaign/advertising".
> 
> Have seen it more than once. Also a violation of TOS.
> 
> If you read the inside indie website they also show the screenshots where Rebecca talks about her group of readers who are gifted copies and must claim them or be kicked out of the group. She says there is a high claim rate. This is how the BookBlasts operate.
> 
> It is of zero surprise to me that a new account would appear at this point trying to cast doubt.
> 
> To any author out their reading this - keep your cool. Being baited into a fight is exactly what is required to shut the thread down.


I've been lurking on this thread. It's like a roadside accident I can't stop rubbernecking. And I am grateful for those that have spoken up so others might not be unwittingly get tangled up in a promo that doesn't appear to be on the up and up when it comes to TOS and other personal view things.

For me personally, any service that has a "secret sauce" would be a red flag. That Freebook service awhile back was the same thing. They wouldn't share their "secret sauce" which ended having innocent authors that tried the service threatened by Amazon.

For a promo site/service, there is no secret sauce that's a trade secret. We know how BookBub and other sites do it.

But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.

With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


----------



## C. Gockel

> One thing hasn't been clear to me while following this thread--what happens to the box sets when the promo is over? Are they taken down from Amazon? Are any payouts made to participating authors? Do those authors see a boost of sales on their other books or receive a surge of email signups?


This is kind of off topic, but ... in general authors all get payouts depending on the amount of money made, and how much they put in. A lot of sets don't require any buy-in and the organizer will just pay for expenses from profits. Payouts back in the day before KDP put the 3500 page limit per title were huge, but I think they've been decent before KDP started enforcing the exclusivity rule. I've heard in these 20 author sets they were making $500/per month commitment.

Sell-thru depends on the quality of the book and how well it fits the theme. This is inevitable, and sell-thru isn't something an organizer can control.

But you don't have to list to get sell-thru. Just getting up high in the ranks, and selling a lot of books will give your series a boost. I know because I've been in several sets like this.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Alan Petersen said:


> I've been lurking on this thread. It's like a roadside accident I can't stop rubbernecking. And I am grateful for those that have spoken up so others might not be unwittingly get tangled up in a promo that doesn't appear to be on the up and up when it comes to TOS and other personal view things.
> 
> For me personally, any service that has a "secret sauce" would be a red flag. That Freebook service awhile back was the same thing. They wouldn't share their "secret sauce" which ended having innocent authors that tried the service threatened by Amazon.
> 
> For a promo site/service, there is no secret sauce that's a trade secret. We know how BookBub and other sites do it.
> 
> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.
> 
> With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


Respectfully, being a closed group does not override other issues. Like if someone in a closed Facebook group posts proof they are defrauding people or scamming people, the virtue of a closed group should not protect that individual. There were a LOT of people who left 20booksto50k over what happened with the "buy this book and post your proof for a newsletter swap."

I've been on the receiving end of a bigger author flexing her Top 100 in the Paid Kindle Store status to get me to do all kinds of shady stuff. Most of it I said absolutely not, but I did work for free for 3 months before my husband got me to realize what I was doing . . . all for a promise of exposure.

In my opinion, ANY closed Facebook group or private author space that protects wrongdoing in the interest of privacy is how we get ourselves in these kind of messes to begin with.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Alan Petersen said:


> I've been lurking on this thread. It's like a roadside accident I can't stop rubbernecking. And I am grateful for those that have spoken up so others might not be unwittingly get tangled up in a promo that doesn't appear to be on the up and up when it comes to TOS and other personal view things.
> 
> For me personally, any service that has a "secret sauce" would be a red flag. That Freebook service awhile back was the same thing. They wouldn't share their "secret sauce" which ended having innocent authors that tried the service threatened by Amazon.
> 
> For a promo site/service, there is no secret sauce that's a trade secret. We know how BookBub and other sites do it.
> 
> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.
> 
> With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


I'd venture that many of us not directly affected have seen screenshots and proof that aren't ours to share. We've also seen Facebook shenanigans (well, I have) and review targeting. Did I screen shot? Nope, I just made a strong mental note to steer clear and then did so.

Reputation matters in this business. Who you are online matters. Your record of how you treat people matters. And your choice of business partners matters. All those things are how others will judge you--and that matters. Why is Becca a moderator here? Because she's wicked smart and fair-minded. How do we know that? Years of watching her respond on this site. *

Sucking up accomplished. They're putting in my new library floor downstairs. Time to go down there and shift impatiently from foot to foot.

_*Plus she paid us. --Betsy_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Alan Petersen said:


> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.
> 
> With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


I guess the issue there is that pretty much *everything* being said on the RH side of things, ie the stuff being shared in screenshots, is behind closed doors in either closed or secret groups. So the question is what do you do if someone uses (or abuses) the closed nature of a group to post things that are potentially against TOS or unethical? Do you respect the group rules and let it go, or not?

It's a tough choice, I agree. By acting on what you think is the greater good, one actively risks being alienated because others may think you're not trustworthy. It's a classic case of whistleblowing, which doesn't always work out well for the whistleblower themselves.


----------



## MyraScott

When a person enters into a business contract, they should expect businesslike behavior, not personal sob stories and attacks. They certainly shouldn't expect months of nightmarish attacks, threats and legal hassles.

I guess the more money you have sunk into it and the better results you get, the easier it is to look the other way while authors are being hounded, blamed and bullied? Or do people think *everyone else* is lying and *only *the promoter is telling the truth?

Aside from tactics and buying your way to letters, I really don't know how people watch the dogs being let loose on an author who's run afoul of the organizer and thinks it's ok to keep doing business with that organizer. There are too many of these stories to convince yourself that every single one of them "deserved" it. There is too much evidence.

Or maybe it's just that everyone sees the torches and the pitchforks set loose and no one wants the mob set on them. I will tell you that I unpublished my books before posting in this thread because the threat is very real.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Alan Petersen said:


> I've been lurking on this thread. It's like a roadside accident I can't stop rubbernecking. And I am grateful for those that have spoken up so others might not be unwittingly get tangled up in a promo that doesn't appear to be on the up and up when it comes to TOS and other personal view things.
> 
> For me personally, any service that has a "secret sauce" would be a red flag. That Freebook service awhile back was the same thing. They wouldn't share their "secret sauce" which ended having innocent authors that tried the service threatened by Amazon.
> 
> For a promo site/service, there is no secret sauce that's a trade secret. We know how BookBub and other sites do it.
> 
> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.
> 
> With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


I just want to point out that the website full of screenshots are often screenshots of closed groups, secret groups, or PMs. I know some of the screenshots were shared in confidence and yet are still being posted without permission. That makes me feel really icky for the person whose trust has been broken. Nothing is safe right now. Whatever you say in a closed or secret group or a PM or anything can be used against you or at least shared without your permission. I'm not saying it's right or okay, but it is what it is.


----------



## Not any more

Felicia Beasley said:


> I just want to point out that the website full of screenshots are often screenshots of closed groups, secret groups, or PMs. I know some of the screenshots were shared in confidence and yet are still being posted without permission. That makes me feel really icky for the person whose trust has been broken. Nothing is safe right now. Whatever you say in a closed or secret group or a PM or anything can be used against you or at least shared without your permission. I'm not saying it's right or okay, but it is what it is.


I think many of us are being reminded that nothing on the internet is truly private. A woman I know had her boss mention that he'd seen a nude picture of her. The picture was seven years old from her university days and she'd completely forgotten about it.

At the risk of sounding priggish, if you watch your behavior and what you say/write, then you don't have to worry about being "exposed". As I said, a reminder for all of us.


----------



## Stewart Matthews

Alan Petersen said:


> I've been lurking on this thread. It's like a roadside accident I can't stop rubbernecking. And I am grateful for those that have spoken up so others might not be unwittingly get tangled up in a promo that doesn't appear to be on the up and up when it comes to TOS and other personal view things.
> 
> For me personally, any service that has a "secret sauce" would be a red flag. That Freebook service awhile back was the same thing. They wouldn't share their "secret sauce" which ended having innocent authors that tried the service threatened by Amazon.
> 
> For a promo site/service, there is no secret sauce that's a trade secret. We know how BookBub and other sites do it.
> 
> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.
> 
> With regards to what's being discussed in this thread, there are enough sources of evidence out there (including a dedicated website chock-full of screenshots) to make the case against using this person's services without violating the terms/trust of a closed Facebook group.


I would normally agree with you. Closed groups are closed for a reason.

However, its very difficult to have a thread about underhanded behavior if one is not allowed to show any examples of such.


----------



## MyraScott

Felicia Beasley said:


> I just want to point out that the website full of screenshots are often screenshots of closed groups, secret groups, or PMs. I know some of the screenshots were shared in confidence and yet are still being posted without permission. That makes me feel really icky for the person whose trust has been broken. Nothing is safe right now. Whatever you say in a closed or secret group or a PM or anything can be used against you or at least shared without your permission. I'm not saying it's right or okay, but it is what it is.


I think a good rule of thumb is to never put anything on the Internet _anywhere_ that you wouldn't stand behind. Forums and social media are _publishing_ and once you put things out there, you can't control where they go.


----------



## Alan Petersen

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Respectfully, being a closed group does not override other issues. Like if someone in a closed Facebook group posts proof they are defrauding people or scamming people, the virtue of a closed group should not protect that individual. There were a LOT of people who left 20booksto50k over what happened with the "buy this book and post your proof for a newsletter swap."
> 
> I've been on the receiving end of a bigger author flexing her Top 100 in the Paid Kindle Store status to get me to do all kinds of shady stuff. Most of it I said absolutely not, but I did work for free for 3 months before my husband got me to realize what I was doing . . . all for a promise of exposure.
> 
> In my opinion, ANY closed Facebook group or private author space that protects wrongdoing in the interest of privacy is how we get ourselves in these kind of messes to begin with.


I agree. I didn't see that post on 20Booksto50K but the person above said the mods deleted it. So they're protecting 20Booksto50K members from that type of shady behaviors. I know that because it's a closed group doesn't really mean jack on the Internet. But If there is unethical stuff going on in a closed group we're asked to report it to the mods and even Facebook and they take care of it.

I'm talking about third-party closed groups here. If there is a closed group actively involved in black hat stuff and shady stuff then I agree, those posts are fair game and should be screenshotted for evidence. But an innocent third-party closed group, I just don't believe it's right to share what happens inside a closed group. Especially in this situation where there already is a ton of evidence.

Anyway, that's my opinion on the matter. I don't want to get into a big brouhaha over this. It's just my opinion.


----------



## PhoenixS

Krista D. Ball said:


> I can back this up by saying that I've also heard the grumblings for about a year or so. I have personally looked at her box sets on Kobo (since I buy most of my books there) and have seen KU titles in box sets on Kobo. When posts were made on KBoards about box sets being taken down, etc etc the blurbs and TOC would change on Amazon, but often the insides on Kobo weren't - still showing KU titles.
> 
> I've also seen the use of price matching to get around max Amazon size requirements for 99c box sets. i.e. Pricing at $2.99 on Amazon because the box is too big, and then pricing at 99c elsewhere, triggering a price match, to get the 99c Amazon price for the preorder phase. I don't know if this is allowed or not; I just know that I've gotten nastygrams from Amazon for something as simple as another retailer changing their price before Amazon does when setting up a sale, and being told I'm not allowed to sell a book for cheaper elsewhere ~~Or Else.~~





ebbrown said:


> Amazon's rules are clear on book file size requirements and price.
> This speaks volumes to me.
> http://insideindie.weebly.com/ask-and-ye-shall-receive.html


Proof of the forced price matching despite file sizes too large for the 99 cent price is easy. Just check out the newest box set launch that was linked to from this thread yesterday. I did. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Alan Petersen said:


> I agree. I didn't see that post on 20Booksto50K but the person above said the mods deleted it. So they're protecting 20Booksto50K members from that type of shady behaviors.


Normally I would agree. Had it been a case of someone posted it, and the mods immediately deleted it with a warning, it would be a no brainer. But I think plenty who are in the group can attest it was a pretty big blowup, with at least some of the mods actively defending the original post, and ultimately causing some people to leave the group.

Like I said before, I'm not in 20Books. Never have been. But this was a big enough issue that it spilled over into other discussions. That typically doesn't happen for a quick "oops that was a mistake" post.


----------



## Fel Beasley

brkingsolver said:


> I think many of us are being reminded that nothing on the internet is truly private. A woman I know had her boss mention that he'd seen a nude picture of her. The picture was seven years old from her university days and she'd completely forgotten about it.
> 
> At the risk of sounding priggish, if you watch your behavior and what you say/write, then you don't have to worry about being "exposed". As I said, a reminder for all of us.


Oh, I agree. As for being exposed, people make mistakes. Or they agree to do something that can be seen as unethical, but don't end up doing it. Christina is one example of this. There are people who believe that she broke TOS in a box set she wasn't even in, because of a screenshot that only shows part of the picture. I now have a deep distrust of screenshots having seen how they can be twisted or context can be removed. There are accusations of things that didn't happen which in my mind does a disservice to those who are telling the truth because it casts things in doubt. If I go by my personal experiences, as well as the experiences told to me by people that I respect and trust, it paints a very different picture.


----------



## sela

I've read this thread over several times now.

Here's what I've gleaned.

It's a tough world out there for indies. There are 4,000 new ebooks published on Amazon EVERY DAY! All of this intrigue is because writers are desperate to succeed in a very crowed and competitive market. When people are desperate, they are open to being flimflammed.

The big question indies face is how do we get our books visible? How do we make a career out of this, if that's our goal?

I've been in this business since June 2012 and have consistently made six figures since 2013. I've taken courses. I've learned how to advertise on social media. I've applied for promos. I've tried to maximize my catalogue's appeal via new covers, reworked blurbs and keywords. All my books have been professionally edited. I've read pretty much every single writing book out there. I've watched hundreds of hours of videos and listened to hundreds of hours of podcasts. I've read industry blogs. I've written and published 13 full-length novels, 3 novellas and several short stories.

What I have learned is that there is no secret sauce.

There is only:

1) Writing a commercial book that has an audience, and,
2) Getting that book in front of its audience, and,
3 Doing that over and over again.

The first is a matter of craft and smarts.

The second is a matter of professional presentation and marketing.

The third is a matter of perseverance.

No secrets. All the information you need is out there if you want to read and watch and listen and study.

If you do not have the level of success that you want, and if you have done _everything_ you can with respect to a great cover, a great blurb, great keywords, appropriate category, a polished manuscript, some promotion, and you are still not selling books?

Going into a boxed set using shady techniques to hit a list is NOT the way to go.

If you have not achieved the level of success you desire and you have done everything possible to make your books commercially successful, maybe go back to square one and look at your craft. Maybe you need to work on storytelling.

It's a hard pill to swallow, but if you've done everything else right, maybe you don't yet have storytelling down.

Do more reading and studying of what sells. What is it that makes those bestsellers sell? I guarantee you it isn't doing shady things to get your book increased in rank, although certain shady techniques may work in the short term. Gifting copies may be useful when you run a promotion as a gift, but gifting copies in mass numbers will not make your book _sell_. I guarantee you it won't make your book become a bestseller to put USAT or NYT on the cover. Neither will any shady techniques to get people to click borrow just to improve rank and get more visibility. Keyword stuffing, etc. may help somewhat, but in the end, that book has to have appeal.

All the techniques of the book scammers will only work for a short time and only until Amazon cracks down. The money will be short term, and might even never come if Amazon discovers their scam.

The bottom line is this: If your book is not appealing to a large readership or not satisfying those readers who do pick it up, no amount of marketing, promotion and letters above your name will make it a success. Black hat techniques will move copies for a short term until you get caught and then you'll have to scramble to find a new scam.

Readers determine what books succeed. Focus on your target readers -- readers you want to buy your book. Figure out what they want and give it to them. Do it as professionally as you can. Don't cut corners.

The bottom line in self publishing is that to succeed, you have to focus on what matters: telling what readers consider is a cracking story and do it over and over again.

If you want to make a living as a story teller, someone claiming to have a secret sauce that you can buy to become a success is just a way for them to separate you from your money.


----------



## Anarchist

Alan Petersen said:


> I don't want to get into a big *brouhaha* over this.


+1 for using a word that always makes me laugh for some reason.

And for what it's worth, I completely agree with you regarding whether things posted in private groups should be shared publicly.


----------



## ......~......

Alan Petersen said:


> I agree. I didn't see that post on 20Booksto50K but the person above said the mods deleted it. So they're protecting 20Booksto50K members from that type of shady behaviors. I know that because it's a closed group doesn't really mean jack on the Internet. But If there is unethical stuff going on in a closed group we're asked to report it to the mods and even Facebook and they take care of it.


If they had banned the offending party from the group, I might agree. They didn't. That person still posts there.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

sela said:


> What I have learned is that there is no secret sauce.]
> 
> There really isn't, is there?


----------



## lilywhite

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I guess the issue there is that pretty much *everything* being said on the RH side of things, ie the stuff being shared in screenshots, is behind closed doors in either closed or secret groups. So the question is what do you do if someone uses (or abuses) the closed nature of a group to post things that are potentially against TOS or unethical? Do you respect the group rules and let it go, or not?
> 
> It's a tough choice, I agree. By acting on what you think is the greater good, one actively risks being alienated because others may think you're not trustworthy. It's a classic case of whistleblowing, which doesn't always work out well for the whistleblower themselves.


I'll also add that, for those of us who left that group in disgust over this incident, I have no loyalty to that group and if I'd taken a screenshot I'd have no compunction about sharing it. Michael A is a fantastic guy, smart and capable, and he appears to have a great deal of integrity -- but what happened there in that group was revolting. Wayne Stinnett is worth 400 of any one of those individual mods that attacked him for his principled response to what was a clear case of buying rank. In hopes of not being pruned, I'll say no more.


----------



## lilywhite

MyraScott said:


> When a person enters into a business contract, they should expect businesslike behavior, not personal sob stories and attacks. They certainly shouldn't expect months of nightmarish attacks, threats and legal hassles.
> 
> I guess the more money you have sunk into it and the better results you get, the easier it is to look the other way while authors are being hounded, blamed and bullied? Or do people think *everyone else* is lying and *only *the promoter is telling the truth?
> 
> Aside from tactics and buying your way to letters, I really don't know how people watch the dogs being let loose on an author who's run afoul of the organizer and thinks it's ok to keep doing business with that organizer. There are too many of these stories to convince yourself that every single one of them "deserved" it. There is too much evidence.
> 
> Or maybe it's just that everyone sees the torches and the pitchforks set loose and no one wants the mob set on them. I will tell you that I unpublished my books before posting in this thread because the threat is very real.


This. It took me literally one week of seeing how this person sends her [fans] after anyone she perceives as "against" her to know that I would NEVER work with her. I've had her and almost everyone who works with her blocked on all social media since at least last fall, if not earlier.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Alan Petersen

Krista D. Ball said:


> sela said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I have learned is that there is no secret sauce.]
> 
> There really isn't, is there?
> 
> 
> 
> About ten years ago I lost 80+ pounds. Everyone asked for my "secret". I cut out fast food. Watched my sugar intake. Ate healthier. And worked out at the gym, every day. The look on their face when I told them the "secret" was like I had just told a six-year-old there was no Santa Clause.
> 
> And as depressing as this entire thread has been it's great to see good people like Rosalind, Wayne, and others who kick butt financially by putting out one good book after another. So there's hope.
Click to expand...


----------



## blubarry

Alan Petersen said:


> I agree. I didn't see that post on 20Booksto50K but the person above said the mods deleted it. *So they're protecting 20Booksto50K members from that type of shady behaviors.* I know that because it's a closed group doesn't really mean jack on the Internet. But If there is unethical stuff going on in a closed group we're asked to report it to the mods and even Facebook and they take care of it.
> 
> I'm talking about third-party closed groups here. If there is a closed group actively involved in black hat stuff and shady stuff then I agree, those posts are fair game and should be screenshotted for evidence. But an innocent third-party closed group, I just don't believe it's right to share what happens inside a closed group. Especially in this situation where there already is a ton of evidence.
> 
> Anyway, that's my opinion on the matter. I don't want to get into a big brouhaha over this. It's just my opinion.


Several (many?) of the 20books mods are firmly in the RH camp. I doubt there is any protection _from_ shady behavior taking place.


----------



## lilywhite

Alan Petersen said:


> I agree. I didn't see that post on 20Booksto50K but the person above said the mods deleted it. So they're protecting 20Booksto50K members from that type of shady behaviors.


To be clear, the mods didn't delete that post to protect the members. They deleted the post because the original poster, one of the darlings of the group, posted an unethical call to action, Wayne called her out on it, fighting ensued on both sides, and they didn't want the rest of the membership to see that they had defended something unethical and driven a big seller with a heart of gold out of the group.

The original unethical call to action was reposted, with [MOD APPROVED] appended to the title. It was the dissent that was hidden. Quite the opposite of "protecting the membership."


----------



## lilywhite

sela said:


> What I have learned is that there is no secret sauce.
> 
> There is only:
> 
> 1) Writing a commercial book that has an audience, and,
> 2) Getting that book in front of its audience, and,
> 3 Doing that over and over again.
> 
> The first is a matter of craft and smarts.
> 
> The second is a matter of professional presentation and marketing.
> 
> The third is a matter of perseverance.
> 
> No secrets. All the information you need is out there if you want to read and watch and listen and study.


Brava.


----------



## Alan Petersen

lilywhite said:


> I'll also add that, for those of us who left that group in disgust over this incident, I have no loyalty to that group and if I'd taken a screenshot I'd have no compunction about sharing it. Michael A is a fantastic guy, smart and capable, and he appears to have a great deal of integrity -- but what happened there in that group was revolting. Wayne Stinnett is worth 400 of any one of those individual mods that attacked him for his principled response to what was a clear case of buying rank. In hopes of not being pruned, I'll say no more.


I had no idea. Seems like drama and crap everywhere. It's very disheartening to learn about this. I guess being too naive. I don't know.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Call me old fashion, but I prefer to have readers reading my stuff than getting my author friends to keep buying my books to inflate ranks for a few hours.

(With the exception of my writing guides. Those are for my author friends to buy  )


----------



## crow.bar.beer

Note to the mods: I'd like to suggest editing the title of the thread to reflect the particular services being discussed so authors can easily find it when vetting these services.


----------



## lilywhite

Alan Petersen said:


> I had no idea. Seems like drama and crap everywhere. It's very disheartening to learn about this. I guess being too naive. I don't know.


Drama. And crap. EVERYWHERE.

This is why the private FB group I'm in has such a tiny, capped membership. 30 people I know I can trust NO MATTER WHAT, and a safe haven to run to when everywhere else is overrun with loonballs.

((hugs)) to you. It really is feeling more and more grim these days.


----------



## lilywhite

Krista D. Ball said:


> Call me old fashion, but I prefer to have readers reading my stuff than getting my author friends to keep buying my books to inflate ranks for a few hours.
> 
> (With the exception of my writing guides. Those are for my author friends to buy  )


I love your writing guides, by the way! When I get back to Epic Fantasy......


----------



## Jim Johnson

Alan Petersen said:


> I had no idea. Seems like drama and crap everywhere. It's very disheartening to learn about this. I guess being too naive. I don't know.


Solicit opinions from lots of people, keep your BS filter set to high, and be aware who and what you're doing business with. What works for some doesn't work for others. Never assume a private group is actually private and that everyone in the group has each other's best interests in mind. That would be naive. As with any business, there are heroes and demons in indie publishing, along with a whole lot of folks somewhere in the middle.

Ultimately, the better informed everyone is, on all sides of an issue, the better off we'll all be.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Hugs to everyone who's been hurt. I've kept my experiences to myself, too, because I was afraid of further retaliation. Like others have said, this has been going on for years. I'm sorry that it's still happening but I'm kind of relieved that it's being talked about. As always, I'm so grateful for everyone here at Kboards. 💜


----------



## Thevoiceofreason

I will say this. 

1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks. 

2. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people. 

3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service. 

4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors. 

5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along. 

In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


----------



## Krista D. Ball

lilywhite said:


> I love your writing guides, by the way! When I get back to Epic Fantasy......


Aww thanks  People want me to write a 3rd one, and it was on the books to do, but my health was poorly in 2016, so I fell pretty behind in everything. I'll reevaluate when I'm back on my feet


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Good morning, everyone.

There's been a lot of back and forth since I went to bed and I need a little time to catch up. Thanks to all who have joined the thread and thanks again to the mods. It seems very clear to me that there is an attempt at baiting/getting the thread closed which I do not intend to take.

I do want to clear up something though. Much, much earlier in the thread I offered a screen shot to J Alex regarding Rebecca posting in the box set groups, begging (her word) for people to buy her new book on all platforms. She said she would reimburse the participants with an equal exchange of ad dollars for the set.

At the time, it wasn't clear if I was allowed to embed the shot, so I didn't. J Alex replied something to effect that since he didn't see that as rank manipulation (even though I provided a quote from Amazon wherein they said it was) that he wasn't going to argue the point. I assumed that meant posting a screen shot of it was unnecessary. As it turns out, a screen shot of this exact incident is posted in the middle of this page: http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html (right below the huge image of "Limited free copies on Kindle & Nook.") She ads $23 to the ad budget based on people posting their receipts.

I also mentioned that I have screen shots to prove that Rebecca knew full well that my novel was never in violation of KU's exclusivity terms. I did not say I would be sharing them, nor am I required to.

Having said that, with the very vile and baseless accusations being made, I will, of course, be using every available remedy to clear my name. Unfortunately, that will take more than one screen shot. It will take drafting a post that gives those screen shots context.

For instance, Rebecca is claiming that I planned to violate Amazon's KU TOS by being wide in the box set while my still in KU with the solo title. This is simply untrue. The conversation (the screen shot of which I had no intention of making public) took place in late summer or fall of last year. (I'm being vague b/c I'm not going to stop and check, but the date will be documented later)

At the time, I was signing up for Rebecca's $500 "new release" coaching. We were discussing launch dates. I expressed that this was the same book I planned to have in the Myths & Legends box set and asked when it needed to be out of KU by, b/c I planned to launch the book in KU and pull it out in advance of the wide week. I explicitly said that I would be planning the launch date around that.

Rebecca's answer was that it never had to come out and that you only get caught if ratted on. What isn't in that first screen shot is that she then followed up by saying she'd done it several times and only been caught once, and when she was, she told Amazon it was mistake and there was no penalty. This alone, disproves the headline of her first character assassination wherein she said she'd "almost done it" but didn't. (I understand some might not take me at my word that she said that, but it will be proven with a screen shot heavy post soon. Even with proof there are those who won't believe or care and that's fine too.)

My response was something like "Perfect! My lips are sealed."

Two things about that:

a) Even though I had no intention of breaking the KU/wide rule, the fact that she did it with regularity should have made me walk away right then. I totally own that.
b) I made sure to say I would keep quiet about it b/c she talked about people "ratting" on her and I wanted to make it clear that I had no intention of doing that.

I put my book on preorder in October for a January 12 release. The Myths & Legends box set, which is what my novel would have been in had I stayed, went up for preorder 4-5 days after that. So you can see that I never was in violation of the KU/wide rule, nor did I intend to be. (Just to be clear, back in this late/summer early fall conversation, I told Rebecca my witch book would go on sale Friday the 13th, proving my intention never to violate the rule. I switched it the 12th when I put it up for preorder simply to make sure I could adjust the price in time for my .99 promos the next day.)

Rebecca knows this. She has access to the same conversation I do. Yet she chose (twice) to say that I walked away from the sets because she would not "let me" break a rule she knows full well I never broke nor intended to.

More coming, but I need to get that out there as the attacks on my character continue.


----------



## 75814

I was there for the 20BooksTo50K post. And there were several mods who not only refused to take action against the thread, but even performed some pretty impressive mental gymnastics to try and claim that asking people to buy a book in exchange for a promo slot was somehow not a form of self-promotion. It was really shocking to see and I lost a lot of respect for the moderators of that group. Especially the way they chased off some extremely intelligent and successful members.


----------



## Stewart Matthews

Jeffery H said:


> I will say this.
> 
> 1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks.
> 
> 2. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people.
> 
> 3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service.
> 
> 4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors.
> 
> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


This is not a case of disgruntled customers unhappy with their results. Please re-read the testimonials posted by others in this thread.

If you've done that, and you choose to set the bullying aside, don't ignore her business practices. RH's loose interpretations of Amazon's TOS is troubling. If that doesn't get you to stay clear, please re-examine her use of Paypal. That she insists upon using F&F payments in Paypal is a huge red flag. Bilking 1099s is begging to be audited by the IRS.

_Edited quoted post. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## ......~......

Jeffery H said:


> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


In other words, ignore the mountain of evidence and leave the poor lady alone!

Very convincing argument, indeed. 

_edited -- Ann_


----------



## sela

Jeffery H said:


> I will say this.
> 
> 1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks.
> 
> 2. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people.
> 
> 3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service.
> 
> 4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors.
> 
> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


I've been in three boxed sets and have organized a couple.

1. If a boxed set is truly a collaboration, no one author should get paid unless they are doing a particular service, such as formatting or cover design. Those things can be contracted out and the services paid out of proceeds or upfront via a shared buy in. All of this can and should be decided on before hand, before the contract is signed, so that everyone knows what money is required and where the money is going and how much will be spent on what and when. There should be proof that the money is spent a particular way. If there is adequate knowledge of how the money will be spent beforehand -- before the contract is signed -- and if there is adequate proof of spending provided during the whole business, that's kosher.

2. From what I have seen, they _are_ disgruntled and for good reason -- they were harmed, mistreated and lost money which are reasons that the rest of us are wise to consider before we get mixed up in a similar project. I've seen enough proof of intent to do unethical behaviour and unethical behaviour and heard enough stories to conclude that they were victims on unethical practices and bad behaviour.

3. It's great that they are happy with their experience, but I have not heard from any but a couple of them. I would like to see how many of those involved in these boxed sets have gone on to hit another list on their own, have made x figures where they were not before, or who have had amazing read through and grown their mailing list, etc because of being in the boxed set. What I have heard is from many people who were harmed in public and private, were mistreated and lost money.

4. If there are so many award winning authors lining up to join, why are most of those who participate no-name?

5. People have a right to know about shady techniques that may harm them as a business person. If no one speaks up and informs the rest of us about shady techniques, unethical behaviour and problems with promoters, others will keep being harmed.

From what I have seen, this has been going on for YEARS. There have been intrigues and kerfuffles and scandals following this promoter for YEARS. Same story told again and again.

There comes a point in time when you have to admit that the problem is not with disgruntled authors, but with the promoter.

This level of smoke surrounding this promoter leads me to think that there's not only fire, there's a frickin conflagration.

_Edited quoted post --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

I'm so sorry, Christina. For what it's worth, I believe you (and the others who have come forward). I know from my own experiences and things I've seen over the years that what you and others shared here is not out of being disgruntled. I stand with you and everyone else who's come forward.


----------



## Romancer

Jeffery H said:


> I will say this.
> 
> 1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks.
> 
> 2. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people.
> 
> 3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service.
> 
> 4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors.
> 
> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


We can't all get along when someone has hurt people the way she has. HURT THEM. I am not talking about anything else. If you can read Silly Writer's post and just shrug and say "move along"... well. I don't even know what to say.

With the MOUNTAIN of people who have spoken against this person, how is this something so many can brush under the rug? Where there's smoke there's fire. In this case? A forest fire.

As far as the ethics goes of how her box sets are handled, whatever. (I mean, it's important, but that topic has been beaten to death and clearly people will not change their minds on how they feel) If screenshots aren't going to sway you, nothing will I guess.

But she has HURT PEOPLE. That's not being disgruntled. She has possibly (likely) caused people to leave this business because of her actions. Why is no one calling her to the carpet for this?

Oh that's right. Because people don't care as long as she can "sell" their books. They don't care who she goes after as long as it's not them.

Until one day, it will be.

_Edited quoted post. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

Jeffery H said:


> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along. The only purpose this thread serves is to publicly discredit and humiliate a legitimate (and quite pregnant I might add) author. Any continuation of this thread and others like it serve only the purpose to attack a person's character who is as fallible as the next human being and far from perfect but hasn't scammed or conned anyone. Please, stop with the hate, let the poor woman alone and allow the rest of us to get on with the business of writing without fear of being shamed or humiliated by people who do not know, or are willingly misreporting the facts.


This thread's contents are valuable and relevant information for those making decisions about their business. Knowing someone's documented business practices allows us to decide whether we want to do business with that person -- and the possible risks of doing so.


----------



## 75814

These "you're just jealous" or "leave her alone, she's pregnant" defenses are getting really tired.

There are people shining a light in this thread who are very successful and have never once done business with RH. They have no skin in the game. They're standing up because it's been made very clear that her victims who have spoken out have been bullied and had their reputations tarnished. But hey, their reputations don't matter, I suppose. Only the perpetrator's reputation does.

As for the "but she's pregnant" defense I refer you to Myra's earlier post, because she effectively dropped the mic on this defense:



MyraScott said:


> Personally, if I was worried about my family, I think I'd stop deliberately stirring up drama then telling people they had to take my children into account when calling out my business practices.
> 
> *Anyone who puts their family first should actually put their family FIRST and not use them as a guilt tool when the going gets rough. * Own your business practices. Own your decisions. Your kids didn't make your decisions. Your family only becomes part of this discussion when you bring them into it. If your business impacts your family, the only person responsible for that is you.
> 
> I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.
> 
> As someone who has children and a business, I find this really horrifying. Children are not shields. Do not throw them under the bus because you have run out of justifications.


----------



## MyraScott

Jeffery H said:


> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


Here's my problem- if people don't like her service, they should be able to walk away. But they aren't. They are blamed for "letting everyone down" and accused of doing terrible things and members of the group are encouraged to harass the people who walk away.

How do you, personally, justify that people actually have their livlihood destroyed by crossing her?

If everything were as simple as you say, the questionable business practices would probably be grumbled about. It's the full onslaught of harassment that people need to be made aware of _before_ they make the mistake of starting up business with her and then find that they can't get out without huge losses of money and reputation and for some, even the support of people they thought were friends.

How do people justify stepping over the bodies of other authors, even worse, taking part in hunting them down and making sure they are miserable... just to get "letters"? _

"I get good results so who cares if she's destroying other people?" _

Serious question. Do you believe the authors who are reporting harassment in this thread are _all _making it up? Did they all "deserve it"?


----------



## Mark Dawson

lilywhite said:


> Michael A is a fantastic guy, smart and capable, and he appears to have a great deal of integrity -- but what happened there in that group was revolting. Wayne Stinnett is worth 400 of any one of those individual mods that attacked him for his principled response to what was a clear case of buying rank. In hopes of not being pruned, I'll say no more.


I don't know what that post suggested, and I don't really care. But I've corresponded with Wayne and met him last year. And that's a man with a very finely calibrated moral compass.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Alan Petersen said:


> But what's prompted me to comment is that 20Booksto50K keeps getting dragged into this. I'm just a member there, I'm not a mod or admin, but it's very clear that what happens in a CLOSED Facebook group should stay there. Sharing info, asking for screenshots of private posts within a closed group violates the terms (rules) of just about every closed/private Facebook group and would probably get dot...dot..dot banned.


I was raised in a high demand religious environment. When you get older, secret information is shared with you (they call it "sacred," but same thing), and you are required to swear oaths before you get it that you will never share it with certain divine punishments promised if you ever do. But you're making promises with information being purposefully withheld from you until it's too late, then expected to hold to it. It's like if you got married, found out your spouse was already married to other people, and then being expected to hold to your side of the bargain, even though this information had been withheld from you.

So I see anything that says, "hey, don't you dare share confidential information even if it's unethical and possibly illegal" to sound like cult behavior.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

lilywhite said:


> This is why the private FB group I'm in has such a tiny, capped membership. 30 people I know I can trust NO MATTER WHAT, and a safe haven to run to when everywhere else is overrun with loonballs.


One of the reasons these private groups exist (and I belong to a couple as well) is because of some 1-star attacks that took place based on KB threads that voiced unpopular opinions. People needed a safe place to talk business where they didn't feel like they were at risk of being targeted by unethical actors.


----------



## lilywhite

Jeffery H said:


> 2. The people posting negative things in this thread and in other places are disgruntled. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't.


Wrong. I don't purport to know the business workings of everyone in this thread, but I can say that, for example, neither Rick nor Wayne uses or has ever used RH's so-called "services," both make a full-time living from their fiction without having to hustle anyone, and neither of them was affected one iota by the changes in TOS and/or enforcement of TOS that directly resulted from RH's TOS violations last year. They have NO personal damage from her, and they are speaking up. That's not disgruntled; quite the opposite. That's _concern for this community_ -- something RH talks about A LOT but never, ever actually displays while she's laying waste to it.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Jeffery H said:


> I will say this.
> 
> 1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks.
> 
> 2. The people posting negative things in this thread and in other places are disgruntled. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people.
> 
> 3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service.
> 
> 4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors.
> 
> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


I don't know how to do the fancy quote/respond quote/respond thing so forgive the clunkiness of this reply:

1. I don't recall anyone suggesting that.

2. I don't find this an accurate assessment for many reasons already outlined. Point of fact, no one need be flexible when contracts become voidable.

3. This may be be true but it is not a provable fact and does not reflect my personal experience. I have receive countless messages from people currently in box sets who are very unhappy and are too scared to speak out.

4. I might disagree with "hundreds" but agree with many. Which is one reason why it made no sense that when I rescinded my contracts (which I had every legal right to do) she gave away my spot rather than bringing in one of those who offered to pay. It would have made it simple to then return my money as required by law and there would have been zero impact on the other authors in the set.

5. I don't understand this argument at all. You cannot say she has never scammed or conned anyone. You can say you haven't seen evidence that rises to level for you, but such a declarative statement requires assumptions on your part. Also, the "poor woman" has been on a non-stop tirade about me for days, making accusations she knows to be lies--many of them very damaging. Live and let live? Really?

Edited to break large chunks of text.


----------



## lilywhite

MyraScott said:


> Here's my problem- if people don't like her service, they should be able to walk away. But they aren't. They are blamed for "letting everyone down" and accused of doing terrible things and members of the group are encouraged to harass the people who walk away.
> 
> How do you, personally, justify that people actually have their livelihood destroyed by crossing her?
> 
> If everything were as simple as you say, the questionable business practices would probably be grumbled about. It's the full onslaught of harassment that people need to be made aware of _before_ they make the mistake of starting up business with her and then find that they can't get out without huge losses of money and reputation and for some, even the support of people they thought were friends.
> 
> How do people justify stepping over the bodies of other authors, even worse, taking part in hunting them down and making sure they are miserable... just to get "letters"? _
> 
> "I get good results so who cares if she's destroying other people?" _
> 
> Serious question. Do you believe the authors who are reporting harassment in this thread are _all _making it up? Did they all "deserve it"?


This, my God, so much this. I'm actually getting emotional about this. I personally know two people who have run away from self-pub with their tails between their legs because of her. One has started a new top-secret pen name. One may never be back. That's A REAL THING THAT HAPPENED. It MATTERS.

I personally have 100% back-burnered my UF because that genre is so overrun with her [people] you can't even know who to trust. My life is awesome, so whatever, no real loss. I'll get to it eventually. But that is also a real thing, a real consequence, of her actions -- and I'm not the only one.

_Edited for homophone error. -T_

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Mari Oliver

blubarry said:


> Several (many?) of the 20books mods are firmly in the RH camp. I doubt there is any protection _from_ shady behavior taking place.


Really? I didn't see the post there either BUT I did read one from a moderator saying such behavior was not acceptable in the group. It's been my experience there that they do their best to keep the group clear of drama. I am, however, far off in time to everyone else and usually read conversations late. Due to all of this sickening behavior, I shut down my FB author account because I only had FB for marketing purposes anyway. So I may have missed something. (Michael A. strikes me as a man with serious integrity, so I don't think it's fair to link any of this shady shit back to him in any way)


----------



## Krista D. Ball

lilywhite said:


> Wrong. I don't purport to know the business workings of everyone in this thread, but I can say that, for example, neither Rick nor Wayne uses or has ever used RH's so-called "services," both make a full-time living from their fiction without having to hustle anyone, and neither of them was affected one iota by the changes in TOS and/or enforcement of TOS that directly resulted from RH's TOS violations last year. They have NO personal damage from her, and they are speaking up. That's not disgruntled; quite the opposite. That's _concern for this community_ -- something RH talks about A LOT but never, ever actually displays while she's laying waste to it.


I'm pretty sure Monique Martin hasn't used her services, either, but I do remember her making a slight disagreeing comment here last year and there being a public call out about her on RH's facebook page and made Monique (by her own admission) not come here anymore because of that? That's not disgruntled client nor jealousy. That's simply unprofessional behaviour in the best example here and targeted harassment in the worst.

(will I now been threatened with libel for having said that, since that is a part of the cycle when calling her out)


----------



## sela

MyraScott said:


> How do you, personally, justify that people actually have their livlihood destroyed by crossing her?
> 
> If everything were as simple as you say, the questionable business practices would probably be grumbled about. It's the full onslaught of harassment that people need to be made aware of _before_ they make the mistake of starting up business with her and then find that they can't get out without huge losses of money and reputation and for some, even the support of people they thought were friends.
> 
> How do people justify stepping over the bodies of other authors, even worse, taking part in hunting them down and making sure they are miserable... just to get "letters"? _
> 
> "I get good results so who cares if she's destroying other people?" _
> 
> Serious question. Do you believe the authors who are reporting harassment in this thread are _all _making it up? Did they all "deserve it"?


Like I have said, I have been involved in 3 boxed sets, two of which I organized and there is no controversy surrounding any of them. None. No people talking behind the scenes, no lawsuits threatened, no stink surrounding me or the sets or any of the authors.

Supporters of this promoter like to throw around the whole "people are jealous of her success" excuse but there are hundreds of _MUCH_ more successful authors out there who do not have this level of smoke and controversy surrounding them.

The mere fact that controversy has followed this promoter for YEARS suggests that there is a problem with the promoter and their business practices and personal behaviour.

When a business person leaves this much smoke and bodies in their wake, regardless of their own personal success, it's time to stand up and take notice, and it's time for the rest of us to speak up.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

MyraScott said:


> Here's my problem- if people don't like her service, they should be able to walk away. But they aren't. They are blamed for "letting everyone down" and accused of doing terrible things and members of the group are encouraged to harass the people who walk away.


So much this. There would no issues if this was a simple case of "sorry, let's just agree to both walk away", but we've seen several people chime in to this thread alone who haven't been seen on kboards in some time and all of them pointing to one person as the reason.

Those aren't the actions of people who are merely disgruntled.


----------



## MyraScott

lilywhite said:


> This, my God, so much this. I'm actually getting emotional about this. I personally know two people who have run away from self-pub with their tale between their legs because of her. One has started a new top-secret pen name. One may never be back. That's A REAL THING THAT HAPPENED. It MATTERS.
> 
> I personally have 100% back-burnered my UF because that genre is so overrun with her minions you can't even know who to trust. My life is awesome, so whatever, no real loss. I'll get to it eventually. But that is also a real thing, a real consequence, of her actions -- and I'm not the only one.


I have friends who are terrified of this whole thread. *Terrified. *

How does a promotional opportunity lead to having to change your pen name and hide on social media? Because you wanted out? That's your crime?

No one deserves to be manipulated, bullied, threatened or called a baby-killer for wanting out of a business contract that wasn't clear up front about the tactics being used or changes like swapping half the content out. No one deserves to be harassed because of fake death threats because they said no, this isn't how I want to do business.

She doesn't let people walk away, she scorches the earth behind them. If you are cool with that, just say so. If you get your rankings and your letters and it doesn't matter what happens to anyone else, go ahead and speak up. Because that is what you are defending.


----------



## Not any more

Krista D. Ball said:


> (will I now been threatened with libel for having said that, since that is a part of the cycle when calling her out)


Possibly, but I bought one of your books anyway because it looked interesting.


----------



## lilywhite

Mari Oliver said:


> (Michael A. strikes me as a man with serious integrity, so I don't think it's fair to link any of this shady [crap] back to him in any way)


I want to pull this out and reiterate: Michael A does indeed seem to be a really, really stand-up guy. I have literally never heard anyone say one bad thing about him -- nor about TSP, who I think also mods there?

I just think he may not be paying as much attention to that group as it needs to stay on the straight and narrow. A blatant trade for rank manipulation ("buy my book and I'll put you in my newsletter for no charge") should NOT have been posted, and it certainly should not have been reposted (after the kerfluffle, exodus, and deletion) as [MOD APPROVED].


----------



## Mari Oliver

lilywhite said:


> I want to pull this out and reiterate: Michael A does indeed seem to be a really, really stand-up guy. I have literally never heard anyone say one bad thing about him -- not about TSP, who I think also mods there?
> 
> I just think he may not be paying as much attention to that group as it needs to stay on the straight and narrow. A blatant trade for rank manipulation ("buy my book and I'll put you in my newsletter for no charge") should NOT have been posted, and it certainly should not have been reposted (after the kerfluffle, exodus, and deletion) as [MOD APPROVED].


Agreed, that he might not be as active on there as in the beginning. I'm glad I missed the post, actually. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Stinnett and authors like him who work hard and honest. This whole thing is craziness.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

MyraScott said:


> I have friends who are terrified of this whole thread. *Terrified. *


That's why I've been so heartened to see all of the "I am Spartacus!" behavior. There is strength in numbers.


----------



## lilywhite

MyraScott said:


> I have friends who are terrified of this whole thread. *Terrified. *


Yes. I've messaged about half a dozen people to say "Now looks like a good time for you to speak up?" and been shut down HARD. She terrifies people, real people that I care about. Point me to even ONE other person, currently selling services in this space, about whom that can be said.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

elizabethbarone said:


> I'm so sorry, Christina. For what it's worth, I believe you (and the others who have come forward). I know from my own experiences and things I've seen over the years that what you and others shared here is not out of being disgruntled. I stand with you and everyone else who's come forward.


Thank you, Elizabeth. It means a lot to me.



MyraScott said:


> Here's my problem- if people don't like her service, they should be able to walk away. But they aren't. They are blamed for "letting everyone down" and accused of doing terrible things and members of the group are encouraged to harass the people who walk away.
> 
> How do you, personally, justify that people actually have their livlihood destroyed by crossing her?
> 
> If everything were as simple as you say, the questionable business practices would probably be grumbled about. It's the full onslaught of harassment that people need to be made aware of _before_ they make the mistake of starting up business with her and then find that they can't get out without huge losses of money and reputation and for some, even the support of people they thought were friends.
> 
> How do people justify stepping over the bodies of other authors, even worse, taking part in hunting them down and making sure they are miserable... just to get "letters"? _
> 
> "I get good results so who cares if she's destroying other people?" _
> 
> Serious question. Do you believe the authors who are reporting harassment in this thread are _all _making it up? Did they all "deserve it"?


This is it exactly, Myra. It's a tacit endorsement of these naming/shaming/bullying tactics.



Mark Dawson said:


> I don't know what that post suggested, and I don't really care. But I've corresponded with Wayne and met him last year. And that's a man with a very finely calibrated moral compass.


Thank you for adding your voice here, Mark. I respect your career and success.


----------



## Fel Beasley

lilywhite said:


> I want to pull this out and reiterate: Michael A does indeed seem to be a really, really stand-up guy. I have literally never heard anyone say one bad thing about him -- not about TSP, who I think also mods there?
> 
> I just think he may not be paying as much attention to that group as it needs to stay on the straight and narrow. A blatant trade for rank manipulation ("buy my book and I'll put you in my newsletter for no charge") should NOT have been posted, and it certainly should not have been reposted (after the kerfluffle, exodus, and deletion) as [MOD APPROVED].


To be fair to Michael A, the group is huge now. 9k members and a lot of posts everyday. He's got a career, as do all of the admins, that he has to focus on. Being able to wrangle a group of that size would require more hours than anyone should have to do for something that is simply giving back to the community. I know no one in this thread has questioned his integrity, but there are plenty of people who are watching and not responding that may get the wrong idea. 20books isn't one of those close-knit groups with a few hundred members, it's massive now.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks, let's not sidetrack into a discussion of another forum/group here--that's WHOA territory, thanks (What Happens On Another site).

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## lilywhite

Felicia Beasley said:


> To be fair to Michael A, the group is huge now. 9k members and a lot of posts everyday. He's got a career, as do all of the admins, that he has to focus on. Being able to wrangle a group of that size would require more hours than anyone should have to do for something that is simply giving back to the community. I know no one in this thread has questioned his integrity, but there are plenty of people who are watching and not responding that may get the wrong idea. 20books isn't one of those close-knit groups with a few hundred members, it's massive now.


Totally agree. I'd hate to see him dragged through the mud. Nobody gets as big as he is and interacts with as many authors as he does, and retains the good reputation he has, if they're a black-hatter. I'm firmly in the "Michael's a stand-up guy" camp.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

brkingsolver said:


> Possibly, but I bought one of your books anyway because it looked interesting.


Thanks! It'll go towards paying for the lawyer fees. I know one with a coke habit. He'll give me a discount for sure 

I joke, but I seriously didn't speak up about the things I've seen because, well, I was a coward. I didn't want her to do to me what she was doing to others. I admit that. I can use all of the excuses in the book - I was sick, I was awaiting surgery, I was in a bad place physically - but bottom line, I was scared. So I stopped coming here. I seethed in private and watched her hurt people. Some of them were strangers to me, true, but it didn't matter. One of those days, that stranger could have been me. I'd seen it years ago on a critique group that we were both in. I have known her from pre-publishing days. And, yeah, I'm scared of her. She could have crushed my career last year because I wasn't well enough to have fought back.

So, yeah. It took others speaking out before I wasn't as afraid. And that's why it's important people talk about their fears and the things she has done directly to them. And the more people who speak up to what they've seen and witnessed, the easier it will be for those who have been harassed and bullied can have a big of a buffer around them to come forward.


----------



## lilywhite

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks, let's not sidetrack into a discussion of another forum/group here--that's WHOA territory, thanks (What Happens On Another site).


Of course.  I just don't want MA tarred with the same brush because that incident keeps getting brought up (also by me, so I'll drop it).


----------



## Honesty

Jeffery H said:


> I will say this.
> 
> 1. In the Rebecca Hamilton, box sets, the money is spent on advertising, not buying copies of her own book. Most of the advertising is done by the authors who sign up to do certain advertising tasks.
> 
> 2. Bad things happened last year because the 'Zon decided to start enforcing TOS. People needed to be flexible, and they weren't. Basically, SH. It is unfortunate, but statistically when you are upset about a product or service you tell twelve people.
> 
> 3. The overwhelming majority of people who are in her box sets are thrilled and happy with the service.
> 
> 4. Each box set has about a hundred authors lining up to be involved. Most of them are multiple award winning authors.
> 
> 5. Live and let live. You don't like her service, move along. If you do like it, move along.
> 
> In other words, can't we all just get along, please?


^THIS^ Especially point #5

People have invested in these sets, both in terms of money and hard work. These sets are now getting reported to Amazon in all sorts of novel and interesting ways. Fine, you don't agree with how they're run, but let Amazon handle what they think is a breaking of their TOS.

As for the screenshots that no one is willing to share, fine, keep them private, but if it were me, and someone scammed me out of $4000 (as Christina Garner apparently was) I'd want everyone to know that with absolutely no ambiguity associated with it. And as for retaliation, Christina has been sharing her personal testimonial on this thread for as long as this threat has been running, and her books are still one-star review-free. Just thought I'd state the obvious there, since a lot of people might be missing that side of the issue. As for Silly Writer, I don't know who you are, but I hope you're not getting bad reviews either.

However, an argument RH had with a reviewer of her first book five years ago really doesn't tell me anything about the way she runs her business today. I'm mentioning this, since 30+ pages into this thread, that's still the best proof you have to offer of your claims.

_Edited quoted post and response to bit now edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## MyraScott

sela said:


> Supporters of this promoter like to throw around the whole "people are jealous of her success" excuse but there are hundreds of _MUCH_ more successful authors out there who do not have this level of smoke and controversy surrounding them.


No one is jealous of her success. That's a lovely way for Rebecca Hamilton to pat herself on the back while distracting from the issues.

My friends won't post here because they are afraid of Rebecca Hamilton. Not jealous. Afraid. Afraid she will figure out who they are because they are friends with me. (One unfriended me, just to be safe.) Afraid she will just randomly start attacking them again, like she is with Christina, twisting everything in a sad, unbelievable series of half-truths ... and yet those who follow her will believe it. Not because it makes sense, but because they want to.

How do you honestly defend the bullying? Is it OK? Do you just deny it happens? Does anyone who crosses her deserve it? 
_
*edit to clarify who I was talking about_


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Honesty said:


> As for the screenshots that no one is willing to share, fine, keep them private, but if it were me, and someone scammed me out of $4000 (as Christina Garner apparently was) I'd want everyone to know that with absolutely no ambiguity associated with it. And as for retaliation, Christina has been sharing her personal testimonial on this thread for as long as this threat has been running, and her books are still one-star review-free. Just thought I'd state the obvious there, since a lot of people might be missing that side of the issue. As for Silly Writer, I don't know who you are, but I hope you're not getting bad reviews either.
> 
> However, an argument RH had with a reviewer of her first book five years ago really doesn't tell me anything about the way she runs her business today. I'm mentioning this, since 30+ pages into this thread, that's still the best proof you have to offer of your claims.


That is some really selective reading there.


----------



## Silly Writer

Honesty said:


> *As for Silly Writer, I don't know who you are, but I hope you're not getting bad reviews either. *
> 
> However, an argument RH had with a reviewer of her first book five years ago really doesn't tell me anything about the way she runs her business today. I'm mentioning this, since 30+ pages into this thread, that's still the best proof you have to offer of your claims.


Hmmm. That sounds like a threat.

_Pfft._

I'm tired of cowering in the corners.

Bring it.


----------



## sela

The purpose of this thread is to shed light on a dark dank corner of the indie publishing world -- unethical business methods and bad behaviour. 

There are dozens of screen shots of unethical behaviour and shady business practices for everyone to see and examine and consider. People have come forward, risking retaliation and harm to themselves, to tell their personal stories. 

There is more than enough material on this thread and linked to other places so that people can make up their own minds based on what they have read.

Those who still support the promoter in question are either deliberately ignoring those screenshots and testimonials because they are personally invested in this person -- it's called confirmation bias -- or they tacitly support unethical behaviour and don't care about the harm done to other authors. 

Five years of smoke and controversy suggests there is more going on that just a few dissatisfied customers. 

What happened five years ago is part of a track record. Yes, people can make a mistake and admit to it, learn from it and then move on to not make that mistake again.

People either learn from their mistakes and behave better or they don't learn and keep behaving badly. Or they don't care. Either way, it's important for this indie community to be aware of those among us who take advantage and fail to deliver on business contracts, etc. For that reason, this thread is of great value.


----------



## Pnjw

lilywhite said:


> I personally have 100% back-burnered my UF because that genre is so overrun with her minions *you can't even know who to trust*. My life is awesome, so whatever, no real loss. I'll get to it eventually. But that is also a real thing, a real consequence, of her actions -- and I'm not the only one.


I was trying to stay away and not post anything else here as I don't have a dog in this race, but I want to address the bolded part of this statement. There are a lot of us in the UF genre who have been watching this for a while and this is spot on. And I can tell you that a lot of us are hesitant to work with anyone new who has been involved in these sets because we see the ToS violations and the blatant bullying that has happened and don't want to get involved with anyone who is turning a blind eye to that sort of thing. That means we are hyper sensitive to who we invite to join in our projects. It's unfortunate because my core circle are all decent people I met back in the day here on Kboards.

As for testimonials, here is mine: I personally know three people who have been bullied by the publisher in question.


----------



## sela

MyraScott said:


> No one is jealous of her success. That's a lovely way to pat yourself on the back while distracting from the issues.
> 
> My friends won't post here because they are afraid of Rebecca Hamilton. Not jealous. Afraid. Afraid she will figure out who they are because they are friends with me. (One unfriended me, just to be safe.) Afraid she will just randomly start attacking them again, like she is with Christina, twisting everything in a sad, unbelievable series of half-truths ... and yet those who follow her will believe it. Not because it makes sense, but because they want to.
> 
> How do you honestly defend the bullying? Is it OK? Do you just deny it happens? Does anyone who crosses her deserve it?


I hope this is not directed at me.  If so, perhaps I wasn't clear in my post.

Let me reiterate that I am _dismissing_ the excuse that people are jealous of this promoter and that explains this thread.

It ain't so.

People are not jealous. People have been _harmed_. Many of them are afraid to come forward for fear or more retaliation.

There is smoke surrounding this promoter because of bad behaviour and unethical business practices. Not jealousy.


----------



## lilywhite

Deanna Chase said:


> There are a lot of us in the UF genre who have been watching this for a while and this is spot on. And I can tell you that a lot of us are hesitant to work with anyone new who has been involved in these sets because we see the ToS violations and the blatant bullying that has happened and don't want to get involved with anyone who is turning a blind eye to that sort of thing.


I'll mark you down as someone to bother for cross-promo when I eventually get off my butt on that series.


----------



## MyraScott

sela said:


> I hope this is not directed at me.  If so, perhaps I wasn't clear in my post.


Not directed at you- your post was just a good summary of what Rebacca Hamilton defenders say. I don't think even they believe it, honestly.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Silly Writer said:


> Hmmm. That sounds like a threat.
> 
> _Pfft._
> 
> I'm tired of cowering in the corners.
> 
> Bring it.


I am very much hoping that doesn't happen ... the bad reviews that is (I think it's awesome that you're fighting back).

One, as I said in an earlier post, this forum is public, so I think a case could be made for corroborating time of posts here vs a deluge of reviews, were one to occur.

Two, Amazon is a different place these days. They've gotten much more sensitive about reviews. I would hope (not trust, mind you) that many of the authors who might otherwise have gone on a bullying rampage in the past know that Amazon could very easily smack them down for revenge reviewing.

Of course, sadly, we all know that poor reviews aren't the only form of bullying. I doubt that will stop the snarky character assassinations that go on behind closed doors.


----------



## Honesty

Boyd said:


> I think the website spoke to you directly in this post-
> 
> http://insideindie.weebly.com/ask-and-ye-shall-receive.html
> 
> I am in no way affiliated or associated with the website. Just another writer, following along.


Oops, must have missed the helpful addition of screenshots following my posts this morning. But, I don't know, I think most people reading those with a critical eye and mind, must agree that all this "proof" is incredibly one-sided. She's saying something, and all the people in charge of the weebly site say is that she's lying, but with no backing up of their claims. And again, let Paypal enforce their own TOS.


----------



## Honesty

Silly Writer said:


> Hmmm. That sounds like a threat.
> 
> _Pfft._
> 
> I'm tired of cowering in the corners.
> 
> Bring it.


Really? That's all you got from my post? Intresting. But I'm not out to get anyone, and like I said, I don't know who you are.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I am honestly at the point of I don't care if people have invested in the sets. So what? People throw good money after bad money all the time.... sometimes that's called owning a boat... LOL. But like the latest boxed set says in the Look Inside "buy this book and send your order number in to get more books." Really? I'm sure Amazon loves the idea of authors encouraging people to send in their private information concerning their Amazon order to get on a mailing list. . . 

And here's how Amazon solves this kind of issue, for those who haven't been in this business long, it will get to where we can't have any links to mailing lists at all. That will be the repercussion. Just like when a FEW boxed set groups started breaking the KU exclusivity rule we got across the board enforcement of "exclusive right to publish" on ALL boxed sets in KU and single titles in KU. When Amazon moves on this kind of stuff, it punishes everyone, even people who had stories in boxed sets in KU and the boxed set was not in other places and their individual titles were in KU and not on other vendors. So even if you ran a boxed set the right way in KU where all content was exclusive to Amazon, you still just got punished for the bad acting of some. That's how Amazon solves problems.

This thread, for me, is not about dragging ONE organizer through the mud. It's about practices that have crept their way into our community as being business as usual and it's going to cause problems for us all.

Specifically those practices I want to see stopped are:

* Using Family and Friends on Paypal for anything other than a gift or personal loan. All business transactions need to go through invoices and business channels.
* Any book promoters running draconian refund policies. Refunds are a part of doing normal business, if you are denying all refunds, you aren't running a business.
* Companies that take authors' money should not name and shame individual clients on social media. If they do, that's not professional. If a business is truly a wonderful service, the positive and negative reviews will tell the score. Attacking people who have a negative experience for a negative review of the service is unethical. 
* Book promoter companies and services should not change terms after money is spent, and terms before payment should be clearly spelled out.


Mass gifting of books to make lists and then running around lording your bestseller status over others is in poor taste, but we can't stop anyone from doing that. Just don't expect anyone to fawn over your 1/20th of a title bestseller status.

At the end of the day, the only way we are going to get business practices to change is through the standards we set ourselves. That is why so many have taken a public stand to say "Nope, I won't do these things." It's not out of jealousy or that I don't want to make money. Quite the opposite . . . I like my money to be made in stable, tried and true, and measured growth intervals. I don't want to punch a lottery ticket and then slip into darkness when I can't reproduce the same results. I am not jealous of someone with a better rank than me with a .99 pricepoint well because math,


----------



## Monique

Just wanted say thank you to all of the kind words here and off-thread.


----------



## GeneDoucette

Honesty said:


> Oops, must have missed the helpful addition of screenshots following my posts this morning. But, I don't know, I think most people reading those with a critical eye and mind, must agree that all this "proof" is incredibly one-sided.


I think you'd be wrong in this assumption.


----------



## 75814

Honesty said:


> Oops, must have missed the helpful addition of screenshots following my posts this morning. But, I don't know, I think most people reading those with a critical eye and mind, must agree that all this "proof" is incredibly one-sided. She's saying something, and all the people in charge of the weebly site say is that she's lying, but with no backing up of their claims. And again, let Paypal enforce their own TOS.


How is the evidence of bullying one-sided? It's plain as day and it's been going on for years. A number of people have come forward to say they've personally been targets and you continue to profess ignorance.

If it were one person accusing Rebecca, then it would be questionable. Even if it were two. But there are a lot more than that and they've been coming forward for years, some of them at different points in their career. All of them with very similar stories. So either there's a massive conspiracy against RH, or you've bet on the wrong horse.

And as for "let PayPal and Amazon enforce their own TOS," there's a reason they have ways for users to report things to them. Because sometimes, things slip through the cracks and if it doesn't get reported, it doesn't get noticed.

If you witness a crime, do you just shrug when someone tells you to report it to the police and say, "hey, it's their job to enforce the laws, not mine"?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

People showing up anonymously demanding to be convinced... Sorry, but there's an entire society devoted to those who believe the earth is flat. Evidence to the contrary exists, but it's no one's duty to convince them it's round.

I laid out very carefully a few pages back exactly how Rebecca Hamilton twisted the meaning of my words to suit her agenda of taking me down. Believe it or don't. The messages I'm getting lead me to believe that the people I respect--people whose names I know--believe me.

And, as I said, proof of what was in my post is coming. (But on my timetable not anyone else's.)

_Edited. Quoted post removed at request of poster. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Honesty

Lydniz said:


> I (and a lot of other people) have been watching how Rebecca Hamilton operates for a long time now, and personally I would have reported her months ago but for this very reason. I thought that if she was closed down by Amazon then she would drag other people down with her, and I didn't want honest authors having their accounts closed because of their association with her. But people just keep on flocking to her, and at some point it has to stop. So far Amazon has shown no sign that it has any intention of shutting her down, but it's only fair that new people are told what they're getting involved with, so they can decide whether they want to take the risk.
> 
> _Edited quoted post. --Betsy/KB Mod_


That's very noble of you. But I'd say Amazon has their own reasons for not shutting her down, and that people flocking to her, as you put it, have minds of their own and perhaps don't need you to stop them from doing so. Just an idea...


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I am honestly at the point of I don't care if people have invested in the sets. So what? People throw good money after bad money all the time.... sometimes that's called owning a boat... LOL. But like the latest boxed set says in the Look Inside "buy this book and send your order number in to get more books." Really? I'm sure Amazon loves the idea of authors encouraging people to send in their private information concerning their Amazon order to get on a mailing list. . .


I did take a look at the latest set and the offer appears to be to get additional stories not advertised to be in the boxset. The set contains 20+ stories from the advertised authors at this time and the offer is for "additional books". I did not purchase it to see if the table of contents items were indeed all included.


----------



## 75814

Honesty said:


> So you're not clearly stating your side of this argument, becasue you're being asked to do so by someone anonymous? If I used my real name, you would be more than willing to offer up your side of the story? Complete and unfiltered?


Nice twisting of words. That's not at all what she said. The statement about your anonymity has nothing to do with why she hasn't provided any evidence herself. Those were separate statements. She even specifically said she will provide proof. My guess is she has to dig through messages to find it and needs the time to do so.

But since your reaction to every other bit of evidence has been to show off your best ostrich impression, my guess is you won't be convinced.



Honesty said:


> That's very noble of you. But I'd say Amazon has their own reasons for not shutting her down, and that people flocking to her, as you put it, have minds of their own and perhaps don't need you to stop them from doing so. Just an idea...


Maybe those people should get the opportunity to hear from all people who have had dealings with her, including those burned. Just an idea. Why are you against transparency?


----------



## PhoenixS

So, the "jealousy" taunt reminded me that here (in a now-deleted post from yesterday) and elsewhere too I've seen my name bandied about as the creator of the OP website. Really, has anyone known me to be *that* snarky?

Do I point out the vendor TOSs/T&Cs and try to clarify them/get clarification on them? _Yes. In many situations across the board._

Have I noticed Rebecca's shenanigans? _Who hasn't?_

Do they bother me? _I'm bothered by any non-white-hat practices. Ergo, what Rebecca does only bothers me to the extent her practices are non-white-hat. Above-board practices don't concern me at all. So, if I'm bothered by Rebecca's practices...well, you do the logic thing.
_
Did I spend days accumulating evidence and building a website and twitter account to bash someone whose services I've never even used? _As a matter of fact, no. But a thumbs-up for whoever did._

Am I one moment saddened and the next hornet-mad regarding the personal stories of harassment being recounted here? _You bet. And I'm incredibly proud of those who have spoken up._

Am I jealous because Rebecca/GenreCrave has been stealing my clients? _Uh, what?_

First, I pushed most of our former authors out of the nest after their contracts expired almost 2 years ago. Over 2 years ago (Jan 2015) I announced here I was moving away from doing box sets -- well before Rebecca started ramping up.
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,207688.msg2893757.html#msg2893757

And as a by-note, I never asked for a buy-in for the boxes I managed. Steel Magnolia fronted all production and advertising costs and was reimbursed through royalties. Other organizers that I knew and trusted did the same. Seriously, I just assumed that was the way business was done. I managed 36 box sets in my day. I turned down many more, including sets where I knew the authors would want to push the envelope, even if those sets were likely candidates for lists, because no...I have to live with myself 24/7. Other organizers might feel differently.

As for clients, I've only ever taken on 2 to 3 per year at most, short-term, who are established authors, usually in the mid-6-figure range who likely don't even know who Rebecca is. She isn't my competition.

/shrug


----------



## lilywhite

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> And here's how Amazon solves this kind of issue, for those who haven't been in this business long...That's how Amazon solves problems.


With a hammer, not a scalpel. So true.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

I was in one of the last box sets Phoenix did. I can attest that there was no buy in for it, and that we were provided regular, itemized updates on royalties as well as monies spent on ads.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Hi, Honesty. 

In reference to your now deleted offer to post your real name: Post your real name and some verifying info (link to FB, Amazon, or similar) and I'll move up the timetable on that post to no later than 3 hours. 

As to me not clearly laying out my case; I did. It's a few pages back. You can verify the launch dates of my book on Amazon as well as that of the box set. That certainly proves I was never in violation, and since I left the set after my book launch, clearly proves the falseness of the claim that I walked way because Rebecca wouldn't "let me" break a rule.


----------



## sela

Most of us here admire and want to emulate authors who succeed via legitimate sales and promotions. We want to be able to look ourselves in the mirror and feel good about our sales and rank and reviews.

We feel contemptuous towards authors who use black hat methods and bully other authors and blame everyone else for their failures.

We stand in solidarity with those authors who have backed out when seeing bad behaviour and have come forward to provide their experiences as a warning to unsuspecting authors.

_Edited quoted post and response to it. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Honesty

Perry Constantine said:


> Maybe those people should get the opportunity to hear from all people who have had dealings with her, including those burned. Just an idea. Why are you against transparency?


I'm all for transparency. How are you missing that from all the posts I've made here today? But all I'm seeing is screenshots on one side and hearsay on the other (sorry to use a legal term, I know this is not a court of law from pervious prods by the mods).


----------



## Thisiswhywecan&#039;thavenicethings

I'm sorry that screenshots have been shared without permission because that is a hurtful thing. I'm not sorry to have seen the screenshots, though, and to have the chance to look at what has been presented and sift through the evidence for myself. 

Coming from a position where I was aware of the allegations on both sides, but didn't have any real experience with the organizer myself, I can't look at those screenshots and not feel for the people who have been hurt. Who have lost or had their careers derailed for opting out of a situation that didn't feel like a good business decision. 

I have no doubt there are more people who would come forward if they felt safe enough to do so. How sad that they probably never will. And we're talking about business here, not the playground. Sad. Sad. Sad.


----------



## GeneDoucette

I've never been involved in a multi-author boxed set, and had no plans to be involved in one in the future. Most of the old disputes discussed here came before my time, both on this board and as a self-published author. 

Having said that, everything I've read about the organizer makes my skin crawl. We spend a lot of time on KBoards calling out the predatory practices of vanity publishers and expensive marketers. What's going on in this thread is just as important. I'm shocked that it's been going on since 2012.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

sela said:


> Again with the claims of jealousy...
> 
> There is noting to be jealous of. Nothing. What you are seeing, at least on my part, is contempt.
> 
> Most of us here admire and want to emulate authors who succeed via legitimate sales and promotions. We want to be able to look ourselves in the mirror and feel good about our sales and rank and reviews.
> 
> We feel contemptuous towards authors who use black hat methods and bully other authors and blame everyone else for their failures.
> 
> We stand in solidarity with those authors who have backed out when seeing bad behaviour and have come forward to provide their experiences as a warning to unsuspecting authors.


100% agreed. Think of all the big names who've come through kboards. Think of the ones still here. How often do you hear bad things about most of them? Answer: not often. Why? Because a lot of them are wonderful people who have given back tons to the indie community and most of us appreciate that.

Some would have us believe that kboards exists to tear down those who have succeeded. If anything, it's the opposite. I've seen celebration after celebration on these boards of others' successes.

If anything, it sucks that threads like this one have to occasionally be made, but those black hat techniques do exist and when discovered they need to be dragged out into the daylight and exposed. Nobody likes threads like these, but they're a necessity at times.


----------



## Honesty

Perry Constantine said:


> How is the evidence of bullying one-sided? It's plain as day and it's been going on for years. A number of people have come forward to say they've personally been targets and you continue to profess ignorance.
> 
> If it were one person accusing Rebecca, then it would be questionable. Even if it were two. But there are a lot more than that and they've been coming forward for years, some of them at different points in their career. All of them with very similar stories. So either there's a massive conspiracy against RH, or you've bet on the wrong horse.
> 
> And as for "let PayPal and Amazon enforce their own TOS," there's a reason they have ways for users to report things to them. Because sometimes, things slip through the cracks and if it doesn't get reported, it doesn't get noticed.
> 
> If you witness a crime, do you just shrug when someone tells you to report it to the police and say, "hey, it's their job to enforce the laws, not mine"?


I'm not seeing any real attack on her part against these people. Posting that someone left the boxed set over a disagreement on KU enrollment does not a personal and defamatory attack make. What I am reading on this thread is a personal and defamatory attack on RH and on the people who dare disagree with said attacks. I would be a traget if I used my real name, I know that, and that is why I am not using it.

As for Paypal, by all means, report away. And for the record, you will never see me turn away from wrongdoing. That's why I'm on this thread today, even though I have better things to do with my time.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Yup. I mean I just scrolled through Rebecca's PUBLIC facebook posts and say 2 different authors named publicly. If I keep scrolling, I'll find more KBoards author call outs. It's not like those are hidden posts. The bullying is easy to prove because she's made it public for all to see to rally the troops.

_Edited to remove quoted post and response. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## MyraScott

Honesty said:


> I'm not seeing any real attack on her part against these people. Posting that someone left the boxed set over a disagreement on KU enrollment does not a personal and defamatory attack make. What I am reading on this thread is a personal and defamatory attack on RH and on the people who dare disagree with said attacks. I would be a traget if I used my real name, I know that, and that is why I am not using it.
> 
> As for Paypal, by all means, report away. And for the record, you will never see me turn away from wrongdoing. That's why I'm on this thread today, even though I have better things to do with my time.


LOL- you don't want to be a target. You don't want to get one-stars. You'd hate to be on the receiving end of that sort of treatment, wouldn't you? * Because it's pretty awful. *

I don't blame you a bit. You are right, these are horrible, sneaky, nasty tactics aimed at people who don't deserve them. That's the point of the thread- I'm so glad we all agree that harassing people is a scary thing that can damage careers.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

OK, folks, I've done some pruning.  Please stop discussing each other.  If you have information concerning the topic, fine.  Personal comments about each other are not allowed.  There may be more pruning.

I'm also about this far *holds thumb and index finger about an inch apart* to putting a temporary lock on this thread so we can all take a break, I can get some quilting done and you can get some writing done.

If you've made your point, move on, no need to belabor it.  Also, a reminder that people are allowed to post anonymously here...and readers are allowed to consider that when weighing posts, as well as considering the content of the post.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Thetis

AliceW said:


> I've heard from a couple of people in different sets that the amount of copies gifted varies from 500 to 2,000 (depending on set obviously). It certainly does happen in huge numbers, there are loads of screen shots where she has stated that the 500, 1,000 or 2,000 goal of gifted copies has been reached. More disturbing is the math that doesn't add up. 2k buy in for 20 authors equals $40,000. Even if the organiser gifted 5,000 copies (which would be sufficient to hit the lists on low weeks) that still leaves $35,000...
> 
> With regard to gifting - Amazon doesn't care about it. Think of it from their point of view, you still have to buy a copy to gift it. There is talk that strictly speaking it is against TOS as "rank manipulation" but to counter that, Amazon even have a pop list now that shows the "top gifted" ebooks. So the more you gift, the better apparently
> 
> Quit apart from that issue, it's the bullying that's hard to stomach. You have to question why a promoter needs to use fear and intimidation tactics to shut anyone down if they dare ask basic questions. Customers problems, complaints, issues and refunds are simply a part of doing business. It's very telling* how* a business deals with day to day issues. If a customer asks a questions or requires a refund and the business owner immediately throws up a smoke screen, screams victimisation, threatens lawyers and sends their followers to harass the customers, it really makes me wonder what are they hiding?


Using gifting or Amazon giveaways alone isn't going to sell 15,000 copies. The rest of that money is spent on BookBub ads and release week ads. I booked some myself and was immediately reimbursed from the buy-in fund. Most days, there are about 100 BB ads running for a set, and within the private groups, evidence of the money spent is given.

If anyone doesn't feel comfortable working with this service provider then certainly don't do it. There has been enough drama to make a lot of people with no prior experience of this service step back so that I completely understand...but please keep in mind that when bashing one person some think is doing questionable things, it's calling into question the integrity of all of the participating authors as well and I have NEVER done anything to violate Amazon's TOS.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Krista D. Ball said:


> I was in one of the last box sets Phoenix did. I can attest that there was no buy in for it, and that we were provided regular, itemized updates on royalties as well as monies spent on ads.


I was in one, too, and I can attest that she has retired from that business, or at least that's what she told those of us who wouldn't stop pestering her to run another one.


----------



## Honesty

ChristinaGarner said:


> Hi, Honesty.
> 
> In reference to your now deleted offer to post your real name: Post your real name and some verifying info (link to FB, Amazon, or similar) and I'll move up the timetable on that post to no later than 3 hours.
> 
> As to me not clearly laying out my case; I did. It's a few pages back. You can verify the launch dates of my book on Amazon as well as that of the box set. That certainly proves I was never in violation, and since I left the set after my book launch, clearly proves the falseness of the claim that I walked way because Rebecca wouldn't "let me" break a rule.


I look forward to seeing your proof. Hopefully in 3 hours. Or later. It's clearly your timetable. I would be convinced by evidence of these "behind the scenes" PMs that RH sends to people, which are apparently so different than what she posts publicly.


----------



## Thetis

DexyDoo said:


> It's not (except for maybe affiliate link income), but who cares anyway? The amount of work the set coordinator does deserves to be paid for. I mean, do you work for free? I damn sure don't.


This.

I mean, for God's sake, doesn't she _deserve_ to make a little money?? It's a LOT of work...a LOT. So much so that out of the five sets I've participated in (not all of them with this organizer), I've decided I do NOT want to organize a boxset or anthology. Ever.


----------



## Honesty

MyraScott said:


> LOL- you don't want to be a target. You don't want to get one-stars. You'd hate to be on the receiving end of that sort of treatment, wouldn't you? * Because it's pretty awful. *
> 
> I don't blame you a bit. You are right, these are horrible, sneaky, nasty tactics aimed at people who don't deserve them. That's the point of the thread- I'm so glad we all agree that harassing people is a scary thing that can damage careers.


You are 100% correct. But that's pretty much all this thread has been from the start.


----------



## MyraScott

Thetis said:


> If anyone doesn't feel comfortable working with this service provider then certainly don't do it. There has been enough drama to make a lot of people with no prior experience of this service step back so that I completely understand...but please keep in mind that when bashing one person some think is doing questionable things, it's calling into question the integrity of all of the participating authors as well and I have NEVER done anything to violate Amazon's TOS.


Exactly the point, very well put!

You need to know who you are doing business with and the strategies being used should be clear to you, because you will be tarred with the same brush, should you run afoul of TOS rules or state laws, in the case of the lotteries.

As a businessperson, you trust that someone you are doing business with is doing everything aboveboard. But when things seem weird, like readers having to produce receipts or authors having to find x number of people to claim a gift, you aren't ignorant anymore of what's going on. If you watch an organizer bully, shame and harass another author and continue to do business with that person, then you are condoning that behavior.

Heads have been conveniently buried in the sand for too long and honest people are being bullied, manipulated and harassed. If you are OK with that, be very aware that you endorse it.


----------



## Honesty

Thetis said:


> If anyone doesn't feel comfortable working with this service provider then certainly don't do it. There has been enough drama to make a lot of people with no prior experience of this service step back so that I completely understand...but please keep in mind that when bashing one person some think is doing questionable things, it's calling into question the integrity of all of the participating authors as well and I have NEVER done anything to violate Amazon's TOS.


^THIS^ has also been my point all day.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

When Amazon finally acts, and the ban hammer starts swinging around and crushing every little indie bug in sight, do you really want your argument to be that you didn't _personally_ violate any ToS, even though your publisher and others in your box set did?


----------



## MyraScott

Honesty said:


> ^THIS^ has also been my point all day.


Cool. Let's recap:

We all agree that who you do business with can reflect on your own business. 
People who want to steer clear of drama and tricks should know what they are getting into. 
People continue in that business- if they didn't know before but do now - are OK with those tactics.

Bullying sucks. Doing business with bullies hurts innocent people.

No disagreement anymore, good job.


----------



## Andie

So I questioned the wisdom of posting here, mostly because I hate confrontation. But hopefully, I can avoid angering anyone by simply stating what I've experienced. 

I can't speak to bullying or some of the services as I don't pay all that much attention to Facebook happenings and haven't used any Genrecrave services, save one newsletter blast. I honestly feel like we're looking at two issues here. How people feel about Rebecca as a person, and how people feel about her services. While Rebecca has always been nice and polite to me (the few times I've spoken with her directly), I can't speak to other people's experiences. But I have participated in a set so I thought I'd share that experience here. 

1) Gifting - this has been minimal. A couple hundred copies maybe, to help push B&N/iBooks to 500 (I don't think this was actually necessary in this set but was done as a buffer and to help build some excitement). In the set I am in, this was not something done by the coordinator or with the box set funds. It was something done by separate author donation (and not all authors donated). None, to my knowledge, were gifted on Amazon.

2) Buy-in versus expenses - I can only speak to USAT seeking sets. $500 buy-in which seemed quite reasonable given the ad, cover, and formatting costs. The cover artist alone is around $500/cover, if I recall correctly. And just doing some quick math, release week newsletter-style ads (eg My Romance Reads, Bargain Booksy, etc.) were over 2k. Add to that three months of AMS, Facebook, and BB ads...I haven't demanded proof that the buy-in was 100% spent on ads and such, but I trust that it was (I'm a pretty trusting person, ymmv). And honestly, I think it's reasonable for the coordinator to be compensated.

3) I don't think anyone is looking at this as a career changer (I could be wrong). I participate in a lot of box sets (some with a buy-in, others without one, some with publishers) in order to get new eyes on my work, and to have fun working with other authors. I personally viewed this as a more coordinated effort to pool money to get as many eyes as we could on the books. Since, percentage-wise, there has been almost no gifting, I would view it as a success in that regard. 

4) I don't recall specifically if I was asked to pay via Paypal via F&F in this case, but it's possible. I have had quite a few service providers request that I hadn't thought much of it. I will definitely avoid doing so in the future. 

5) I think it's important to remember here that a lot of authors join sets for many different reasons. Villainizing people as desperate for letters isn't cool, especially since that isn't the goal for everyone in these sets. Also, not everyone will think through things like gifting and decide they are wrong, especially given that decision tends to be made more in a vacuum. Personally, I wouldn't have thought anything of it, especially given the small amount, and the fact that it has been done in trade publishing for a long time. I have had a solo title hit over 7k sales in one week and not make the USAT, so I can definitely understand the frustration associated with people "buying" sales. I'm still not sure that I see a small amount as a big deal (especially as it isn't on Amazon where rank seems most important), but I will definitely consider this more carefully in the future given the points of view shared in this thread. 

Also remember that the authors in these sets are people, too. Ones who have worked their butts off to make these sets a success. These sets aren't about paying $500 for easy letters. There is a ton of work that goes into them, most done by the authors themselves, so in my opinion, the authors who earn letters really do earn them.

Again, all just my experience and opinions. I'm not here to defend or argue, just to share what I've actually seen.


----------



## 41419

PhoenixS said:


> Am I jealous because Rebecca/GenreCrave has been stealing my clients? _Uh, what?_
> /shrug


I can 100% vouch for the truth of this. I know for a fact that several big name authors have approached Phoenix to manage promos for them and she has refused because she retired to write her own stuff.

Furthermore, I can state unequivocally that I was in two box sets that Phoenix managed and there was no buy in. Not one penny.

This is fact and anyone saying otherwise is totally full of it.

It should be very revealing to everyone that long-term, trusted members of this community are willing to stand up and be counted and call out this behavior - at great personal risk to themselves it should be added.

Or you could just believe the anonymous person who is saying black is white.


----------



## wheart

Boyd said:


> re: paypal. It's in their TOS what is and isn't allowed. Authors doing business with the promoter who've paid her via F&F have also broken TOS. It's one thing to let paypal enforce their own TOS, it's another to know that everyone else involved with said promoter broke TOS too (whether or not they realized it) and have put their account in jeopardy.


I agree with Boyd here. It is our responsibility and choice to not get involved with an organizer/promoter if something doesn't sit right with us. On this PayPal issue, I am assuming an organizer/promoter might feel it's 'reimbursement' if they are not making a profit on the transaction thus wanting to get paid via F&F, but in my opinion, because the project is a business deal, it should be handled as such. The organizer/promoter can then claim the amount under 'reimbursements' for tax purposes.

Also, if even a small portion of it is not just for reimbursements but rather in services for mentoring, etc. then that is also a reason not to treat it solely as reimbursement.

Due diligence is very important so we all need to always do that and look into the TOS of both Amazon, PayPal, and whatever other entity is involved before agreeing to something, especially if we weren't comfortable with in the first place.

There is a LOT to learn here in this thread for both organizers/promoters and authors in regards to avoiding major issues in projects of this nature in the future.


----------



## Honesty

dgaughran said:


> I can 100% vouch for the truth of this. I know for a fact that several big name authors have approached Phoenix to manage promos for them and she has refused because she retired to write her own stuff.
> 
> Furthermore, I can state unequivocally that I was in two box sets that Phoenix managed and there was no buy in. Not one penny.
> 
> This is fact and anyone saying otherwise is totally full of it.
> 
> It should be very revealing to everyone that long-term, trusted members of this community are willing to stand up and be counted and call out this behavior - at great personal risk to themselves it should be added.
> 
> Or you could just believe the anonymous person who is saying black is white.


Sorry, maybe go and reread my posts, since you're clearly missing my point. I'm not saying black is white. I just want some concrete proof that what all these people are claiming is actually as black as they're saying. So far, I was refused at every turn. And I have no idea who Phoenix is or what boxed sets she's done. I thought this post was about RH's boxed sets.


----------



## 75814

wheart said:


> I agree with Boyd here. It is our responsibility and choice to not get involved with an organizer/promoter if something doesn't sit right with us. On this PayPal issue, I am assuming an organizer/promoter might feel it's 'reimbursement' if they are not making a profit on the transaction thus wanting to get paid via F&F, but in my opinion, because the project is a business deal, it should be handled as such. The organizer/promoter can then claim the amount under 'reimbursements' for tax purposes.
> 
> Also, if even a small portion of it is not just for reimbursements but rather in services for mentoring, etc. then that is also a reason not to treat it solely as reimbursement.
> 
> Due diligence is very important so we all need to always do that and look into the TOS of both Amazon, PayPal, and whatever other entity is involved before agreeing to something, especially if we weren't comfortable with in the first place.
> 
> There is a LOT to learn here in this thread for both organizers/promoters and authors in regards to avoiding major issues in projects of this nature in the future.


Again, while due diligence is important, that absolutely does _not_ excuse the person behind the black hat tactics in the first place. Unethical practices are still unethical. I don't care how much or how little diligence the wronged party did.

Unethical practices are unethical. _*Period.*_

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## 41419

Honesty said:


> Sorry, maybe go and reread my posts, since you're clearly missing my point. I'm not saying black is white. I just want some concrete proof that what all these people are claiming is actually as black as they're saying. So far, I was refused at every turn. And I have no idea who Phoenix is or what boxed sets she's done. I thought this post was about RH's boxed sets.


There is a mountain of proof - screenshots, emails, testimonials - but you just dismiss everything as irrelevant, and then claim there is no proof. Disrupt, dismiss, deny, obfuscate. I know your game.

How's about this: I've seen her break KU rules repeatedly with my own eyes. I've seen her call out other authors on her Facebook page - naming them, and encouraging retaliation. My own friends have been harassed by her and her associates.

And there are tons of people saying the same thing - some of whom had the foresight to screenshot this stuff.

No proof indeed.


----------



## Becca Mills

Honesty said:


> Sorry, maybe go and reread my posts, since you're clearly missing my point. I'm not saying black is white. I just want some concrete proof that what all these people are claiming is actually as black as they're saying. So far, I was refused at every turn. And I have no idea who Phoenix is or what boxed sets she's done. I thought this post was about RH's boxed sets.


Honesty, we've repeatedly asked members to bring concrete information and personal experiences to this thread. Thetis's information about Bookbub ad purchases is a great example of the kind of post we'd like to see. So is Andie's narrative of her experience as a boxed set participant. You, on the other hand, have spent several dozen posts saying the same thing, which is that you're not convinced. Endless repetition of that straightforward idea does not forward the conversation. Further such posts won't be approved.


----------



## ........

If you're in the genrecrave Facebook group already do a search for PayPal - you'll find Rebecca offering to pay anyone who gifts Shadow Marked. Authors with street teams gifted the titles and Rebecca sent money via PayPal.

Fall into Magic made USA Today and there is hard evidence in the comments of that post that some of the iBooks copies were gifted just to make the numbers required.

The posts are still there, you can read them if you're a member.

_Edited to remove quoted material. - Becca_


----------



## Stewart Matthews

MonkishScribe said:


> When Amazon finally acts, and the ban hammer starts swinging around and crushing every little indie bug in sight, do you really want your argument to be that you didn't _personally_ violate any ToS, even though your publisher and others in your box set did?


Seems air tight to me.


----------



## Diamond Eyes

J.A. Sutherland said:


> I did take a look at the latest set and the offer appears to be to get additional stories not advertised to be in the boxset. The set contains 20+ stories from the advertised authors at this time and the offer is for "additional books". I did not purchase it to see if the table of contents items were indeed all included.


There are reviews from verified purchasers mentioning weird stuff going on with the contents in this box set and the set is now a "second edition" whatever that means:

https://www.amazon.com/Wicked-Legends-Second-Rebecca-Hamilton-ebook/dp/B01KJNAGHE

https://v44i.imgup.net/BOX-SET-RE6423.jpg

And that is just on the first page of reviews of the only box set like this I cared to look at. Maybe it was just a mistake on the part of whoever put this set file together, but considering all the other info coming out about these types of box sets, I'm skeptical. Not sure what this has to do with file sizes and additional content offerings and such, but some readers are even noticing strangeness with the content of the sets they bought.

I'm just glad a lot of legit, established people here and elsewhere are standing up, calling out, and warning about any shady stuff going on in this community so others can be wary of any possible landmines in the future.


----------



## Guest

Since I'm not allowed to comment on RH being that I don't know her and have only seen the results of her devotees when they attack a writer who dares speak unkindly about her, I will keep my comments to box sets.
If anyone asked me for money to have my work included in a box set, I would spew a line of profanities that I am not allowed to say here. I would then warn my friends about a scammer on the loose. (better?)You should never have to pay to have your content read. The idea is to get paid. Not the other way around. If someone tries to convince you otherwise, they're as shady as it comes. It's one thing to deduct costs from royalties earned (the amounts would be laid out clearly in the contract). Another to have costs paid by the authors in advance.

_Edited for profanity and name-calling. No more of this, please. - Becca_


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

KennySkylin said:


> There are reviews from verified purchasers mentioning weird stuff going on with the contents in this box set and the set is now a "second edition" whatever that means:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Wicked-Legends-Second-Rebecca-Hamilton-ebook/dp/B01KJNAGHE


I had seen that one and another in the same time frame with "editions", so was only really responding the most recent set.

The swapping out of content is one of the aspects of this kerfuffle that concerns me the most, because it's essentially a bait-and-switch from the consumer's point of view.

What I haven't seen from the discussion is whether that's habitual or isolated to a couple sets with "reasons".


----------



## Stewart Matthews

Andie said:


> So I questioned the wisdom of posting here, mostly because I hate confrontation. But hopefully, I can avoid angering anyone by simply stating what I've experienced.
> ...
> ...
> ...


Thank you for posting your experience. While working with Rebecca Hamilton appears to have been a net positive to you, this thread was not started to villainize authors who have participated in Rebecca Hamilton's box sets. It was started as a warning that her business allegedly participates in manipulating Amazon ranks and breaks Paypal's ToS.

Manipulating Amazon's rankings may or may not get authors who participated in her business's box sets banned from Amazon--even if they were not aware they were breaking the rules. Using Paypal's F&F payment option may also be cause for an IRS audit.

Amazon and the IRS do not care that you didn't know.

No one cares about the reasons why people bought Rebecca's services. This thread is here because no one wants other people to get caught in any potential blowback.


----------



## wheart

Perry Constantine said:


> Again, while due diligence is important, that absolutely does _not_ excuse the person behind the black hat tactics in the first place. Unethical practices are still unethical. I don't care how much or how little diligence the wronged party did or what state of pregnancy the organizer is currently in.
> 
> Unethical practices are unethical. _*Period.*_


Did I say that black hat tactics were excusable? My comment was strictly about making sure we don't agree to something we're uncomfortable about and to always check the TOS before doing so.



dgaughran said:


> and encouraging retaliation.


David, are you saying that you've seen her firsthand (not hearsay) telling people to retaliate against other authors? If her fans are doing that on their own, she can't be held responsible for that (and if she knows about it, should put a stop to it), but if you've actually seen her encouraging people to do that, then that's a big thing.


----------



## AllyWho

wheart said:


> David, are you saying that you've seen her firsthand (not hearsay) telling people to retaliate against other authors? If her fans are doing that on their own, she can't be held responsible for that (and if she knows about it, should put a stop to it), but if you've actually seen her encouraging people to do that, then that's a big thing.


She "names and shames" authors on her page/groups, which is how her followers know who to attack. This is why so many authors have simply disappeared, they are terrified of being next on the hit list and having her followers mobilised against them. Yes it happens, just re-read the tiny sampling of authors coming forward in this thread with their stories of retaliation, or go to the weebly page, which has a sampling of screen shots under Case Study #2 - Bullying. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There is a larger number of prawny authors staying well away and keeping quiet in case their stories gets outed and they have to re-live the attacks all over again.

Sometimes it works in reverse, with the kerfuffle over Annie Bellet's book being copied she was telling followers to put fake 5-star reviews on Jason's book.


----------



## Stewart Matthews

Also, RH is not stupid. She wouldn't explicitly say "go upvote bad reviews on this author's books." That is obvious review manipulation and clearly violates Amazon's ToS.

All she has to do is mention their name, mention how unfair and jealous they are, and, oh look at that, the top review on their book is a 2-star with thirty upvotes.


----------



## 75814

Stewart Matthews said:


> Also, RH is not stupid. She wouldn't explicitly say "go upvote bad reviews on this author's books." That is obvious review manipulation and clearly violates Amazon's ToS.
> 
> All she has to do is mention their name, mention how unfair and jealous they are, and, oh look at that, the top review on their book is a 2-star with thirty upvotes.


And she never once calls out her followers for her behavior. If this wasn't her intention, the very first thing she would do would be to issue a public apology to the author being targeted and tell her followers this is not behavior she condones.

She has never done this. Which suggests if not intention, then at the very least a tacit endorsement of this behavior.


----------



## CeeCee2

Confession: I just made an account here. I have never joined this site and honestly, even after publishing for over 5 years do not often visit. I did feel as though I wanted to comment here even though I'm sure I will regret it in a dozen ways, once I press submit. But that's pretty standard for how I operate (See: below)

I have been a participant in several of RH box sets over the last few years and I wanted to share some insight that is not to defend anyone (including myself) but to possibly provide some clarity.

On Box Sets:

I had participated in several box sets before getting involved with RH. The goal at all times, always, was to find new readers. I did a few that did okay. Another that did pretty well and all the money went to charity. I did join another with an author that now does very well that was an absolute disaster. Like, $$ and otherwise a total clusterbang compared to anything with RH. But a friend emailed me one day and said, "I saw this set opportunity and thought you may be interested." Because everything I do is fly by the seat of my pants I submitted an application and promptly forgot about it. Six months later (SIX MONTHS) I got an invite to a group and tried desperately to remember what I had signed up for and why and with who.

That first set cost $100 to join in. We sold an incredible number of preorders. I truly do not think we were asked to put in any more $$ for marketing at the time. This was right before KU 2.0 (which none of us saw coming) and the set was very profitable. My entire goal of doing the set was not to make a list. I am sure some people had that goal. Personally I had an extensive backlist that was DOA and needed to help revive them. Box sets were the perfect way to use my back list.

So yes, I joined another. Then one or two more. None did as well as that first set. And yes, the price continued to go up. Gifting was not a big deal in these early sets. At times there may have been a conversation like, "We need X number of books sold on this--gift some!" to which I could never figure out how to find more than about five people to give Nook books too since no one I know reads on Nook. Seriously.

I personally viewed the $150-$250 buy in as marketing/advertising. I learned a lot from my collaborators and it was a very positive experience (until it wasn't.) Yes, on one of these books I earned a Best Seller status. Guess what? It didn't change my life. In fact, I felt a little awkward about it and didn't do much with it because I know that building a brand and establishing your readership is much much more than this. But at the same time, it didn't hurt (okay, now it may hurt.) One reason I felt awkward about it is that the sets you think you will maybe hit a list with do not make it. Eleven thousand pre-orders + 5 more release week and nope. Not a single list. Then there would be one with 3k preorders +2 on release week and it would.

Things in publishing are weird.

By mid 2016 I found myself signed up for another set that I was sort of iffy about, but I was floundering a bit with my process so I liked having something scheduled and did one more. That was one of the ones that ended up having some issues. (not the big ones that seem to be having issues and not one of the ones that made a list) The gifting thing got weird. People were asked to contribute more and more funds for ads and gifting books. Various "PA's" that I did not know took over these parts of the collection. To be honest, I was one foot out the door and ready to be done with it all. I was not paying attention. Amazon was pulling books left and right for all kinds of things at the time (plus the October page flip situation) and things were a bit unstable. I didn't know if it was RH fault, Amazon's fault or really just my fault for not paying more attention.

That set left a bad taste in my mouth but I am not aware of any inner author drama or bullying IN THAT SET with RH. That's the thing about R. She has A LOT going on. There are so many sales and sets and giveaways and groups and promos and this and that and everything else that it's very easy to tune her out as white noise. It's also possible to have an okay experience with her and not be aware of the specifics with other authors or activities.

Bullying:

I did not become super involved with FB as an author until January 2017 (hence my never coming to k-boards or being in any real author groups. I'm one of those people that reads posts that say "I'm sick of all the drama!" and never have any clue what anyone is talking about.) But even with my limited involvement I was aware of some of the situations between RH and other authors. Of course, because FB shows you what you don't want to see, I was also aware of [other things she'd post about] and oh, by the way, that one person said something vague about me so I'm going to incite a social media war and take them down.

Which, by the way, is awful. Did i ignore it? Yes. I realized early on there was a level of catfish-y crazy going on there that I didn't want any part of. This coincided with my realizing I REALLY just wanted to get out of these sets with no drama and walk away. Like, at the end that was all I, and a few other authors wanted. Just to sneak away. Sigh. Wishful thinking.

Bullying is wrong. It's awful. I hate that people went up against her and lost. But that's what a bully does right? They intimidate everyone into silence. I never really knew any of the people she was going up against and it was always so random. It's not an excuse. It's just a fact. It didn't happen in the groups I was in so there was no way to interject myself (like now.)

Genrecrave: I've only done a couple of list list building events. I never did any promo so nothing to say there. I do know that most people who participate seem to do badly which is why I was always wary. The gifting thing makes sense now as to why they flopped. I also know that if anyone complained about not doing well the excuse usually was, "your cover is bad and it's your fault your book doesn't do well." That part was always done in the genrecrave group publicly. No one wants to hear that so most people don't complain.

TOS Violations:

I don't really want to touch this one because I am sure I am to blame for my own part in this. I don't know about the gifting one. There seem to be some vague terms and I was never a fan of it or a participant anyway. 20 authors in a set is A LOT of people. Some never even comment. You don't even realize they are there. In the last set I was in one or two authors pretty much spearheaded the gift giving. I don't know if this was their motivation or if they were urged by Rebecca. I suspect their own.

Additionally, people in the set often would "forget" to pull their book from KU. And yes, R would actually come in and tell us to get our act together. Everything really started going downhill this past fall. Before that we didn't have as many problems. And yes, Amazon adjusted their rules several times and we adjusted with it.

That whole instafreebie thing? I'm not even sure how to explain how that worked. Let's just say that if you were one of the authors whose book got put in the instafreebie you were p*ssed.

Finally: One interesting thing about being in these sets is you could tell when one was going to be a hit or not. The not's all had one thing in common. RH had little to no interest in it (usually if her own book was not included) Those sets were less likely to make a list or even break even. She was very hostile in these groups and blamed the authors for the fact the sales were so low. This is when things get shady with the money, gifting became more common and strange attitudes would start to flare. Ultimately besides being a little unstable and picking fights all over the internet RH is has too many irons in the fire. Things slip by and mistakes are made (or cracks are more visible?)

That's it. I just wanted to share my experience. I am sure I could say a million more things but I know there are rules here and I'm sure I broke, like twenty. Please know I accept my own responsibility for not speaking up or violating any TOS and being generally trusting when I shouldn't have. This is situation is not black and white. It's muddied and involves many, many people. Believe the people that say they were wronged. I have no doubt about it. But also believe that there were a lot of moving parts.

Cc


_edited to remove reference to personal comments on other sites -- Ann_


----------



## sela

Here's one of my issues with these boxed sets that are intended to try to hit the USAT or NYTs lists. 

It's issue #1 and is why people should be very wary of attempts to do this, especially if there are any ethical issues involved and if you have to pay a lot of money to take part. 

I checked one of the authors who now can claim USAT designation due to being in two of the boxed sets this year. She also is in the current top 100 authors in a specific genre category. She has about 8 novels out. All were released within the past two years. They rank from 290,000 to 1.3 million in the Kindle store. They have few if any reviews. Some have no reviews. A few have 3 reviews.

By my estimation, with eight books out each selling about 1 copy every week, well, she's not making a living and barely making any money.

In other words, going into a boxed set and making the list has not benefitted her career, from what I can see. None of her books on their own are even close to any bestseller's list on Amazon let alone one of the big lists. She has a couple of preorder books, but that USAT designation has not helped get rank for the books. I doubt they are visible anywhere on any list so the USAT designation was no help to sales of the preorders. 

Given her book ranks and the number of reviews, and the fact she is making barely any money in sales, it must feel really strange to claim that designation.

Which brings me back to my original point: yes, you can make a run at a list with a boxed set priced 99c, and if you use black hat techniques, and unethical methods, you may be able to sell enough combined with gifting, to hit a list.

BUT if it doesn't help you in terms of sales, if you don't get more readers, if there's no sell through, if your books do not sell even a single copy a day, and if you don't get a boost for new books on preorder, no mailing list signups, where's the benefit? And it puts you at risk of losing your credibility and accounts. 

It's like printing a fake diploma from Harvard and putting it up on your wall when you only attended one non-credit class and dropped out and now work at the local grocers. 

You're only fooling yourself.

I understand the dream to have those bestseller designations on top of your name. I really do. 

But to have meaning, it should come from something you did using ethical means. Not from gifting copies to qualify, not from paying people to buy your book, and not by paying thousands of dollars up front. 

Do it to gain new readers. Do it to learn from the experience of organizing a set. Do it to meet other authors and form networks. Do it ethically and if the designation comes through ethical means that do not skirt or break TOS, great! 

But your real focus if you want to be a bestseller is to BE A BESTSELLER.

In other words, focus on writing a bestseller. That means, writing a book that satisfies a whole shedload of readers. Do it over and over again. 

That's the secret sauce.


----------



## DexyDoo

Andie said:


> 2) Buy-in versus expenses - I can only speak to USAT seeking sets. $500 buy-in which seemed quite reasonable given the ad, cover, and formatting costs. The cover artist alone is around $500/cover, if I recall correctly. And just doing some quick math, release week newsletter-style ads (eg My Romance Reads, Bargain Booksy, etc.) were over 2k. Add to that three months of AMS, Facebook, and BB ads...I haven't demanded proof that the buy-in was 100% spent on ads and such, but I trust that it was (I'm a pretty trusting person, ymmv). And honestly, I think it's reasonable for the coordinator to be compensated.
> 
> 3) I don't think anyone is looking at this as a career changer (I could be wrong). I participate in a lot of box sets (some with a buy-in, others without one, some with publishers) in order to get new eyes on my work, and to have fun working with other authors. I personally viewed this as a more coordinated effort to pool money to get as many eyes as we could on the books. Since, percentage-wise, there has been almost no gifting, I would view it as a success in that regard.
> 
> 4) I don't recall specifically if I was asked to pay via Paypal via F&F in this case, but it's possible. I have had quite a few service providers request that I hadn't thought much of it. I will definitely avoid doing so in the future.
> 
> 5) I think it's important to remember here that a lot of authors join sets for many different reasons. Villainizing people as desperate for letters isn't cool, especially since that isn't the goal for everyone in these sets. Also, not everyone will think through things like gifting and decide they are wrong, especially given that decision tends to be made more in a vacuum. Personally, I wouldn't have thought anything of it, especially given the small amount, and the fact that it has been done in trade publishing for a long time.
> 
> Also remember that the authors in these sets are people, too. Ones who have worked their butts off to make these sets a success. These sets aren't about paying $500 for easy letters. There is a ton of work that goes into them, most done by the authors themselves, so in my opinion, the authors who earn letters really do earn them.


I can only speak for the set I am in, but I agree with the above comments. Also, just an FYI, I didn't care about the letters. (It was cool to see the set on the USA Today list though.) For me, it was about fun, networking, exposure, and the hope to make a few dollars.

I know some people said they couldn't remember if they were required to pay through friends and family. I do remember, and for the set I am in, it was NOT REQUIRED.

On another note, I completely understand people, who have had personal experience with the boxed sets and/or the organizer and were unhappy, felt they got screwed, etc. and telling people to beware. Nothing wrong with that. But to discount other authors (and throw around words like cult, unethical, immoral)- who have been happy with the boxed set experience, authors who didn't find anything unethical about the practices-is a little crappy. :-(

Last thing&#8230; I don't see the issue with doing giveaways/gifting copies. Lots of authors set their books to free and then pay Bookbub or Freebooksy, etc. to blast their free book to readers. That also influences rank. If the book is free, to me that's basically a gift/giveaway, and I simply don't see the difference. (I'm sure plenty of people will disagree, but again, this is simply my opinion.)

Again, I have no knowledge of the practices in other sets. I'm only speaking about the one I have first-hand experience with.


----------



## Andie

Stewart Matthews said:


> Thank you for posting your experience. While working with Rebecca Hamilton appears to have been a net positive to you, this thread was not started to villainize authors who have participated in Rebecca Hamilton's box sets. It was started as a warning that her business regularly participates in manipulating Amazon ranks and breaks Paypal's ToS.
> 
> Manipulating Amazon's rankings may or may not get authors who participated in her business's box sets banned from Amazon--even if they were not aware they were breaking the rules. Using Paypal's F&F payment option may also be cause for an IRS audit.
> 
> Amazon and the IRS do not care that you didn't know.
> 
> No one cares about the reasons why people bought Rebecca's services. This thread is here because no one wants other people to get caught in the blowback.


Very true about abiding by Amazon's rules, and I will say that I was told very specifically that I had to unpublish my book during the KU period to abide by KDP terms (no idea what happened in earlier sets).

As far as Paypal payments, taxpayers are required to claim all income whether or not they are issued a 1099. So while the expense might be questioned if it came down to it, showing the amount was paid through Paypal should still allow you to deduct it (if you paid someone less than $600 cash you aren't required to issue a 1099 regardless). Although it's definitely best to do it the right way and pay for the service as such.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Andie said:


> Very true about abiding by Amazon's rules, and I will say that I was told very specifically that I had to unpublish my book during the KU period to abide by KDP terms (no idea what happened in earlier sets).
> 
> As far as Paypal payments, taxpayers are required to claim all income whether or not they are issued a 1099. So while the expense might be questioned if it came down to it, showing the amount was paid through Paypal should still allow you to deduct it (if you paid someone less than $600 cash you aren't required to issue a 1099 regardless). Although it's definitely best to do it the right way and pay for the service as such.


The issue with F&F vs Business, as I see it, has to do with whether the recipient is going to report the income. Yeah, they should, even without the document. . . but if there's no document, will they? And I don't like that implication. 

There's another thread on potential tax implications on both sides of such payments: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250612.0.html Probably best to take any questions about that over there . . . . .


----------



## ChristinaGarner

CeeCee,

Thank you so much for sharing your story. I agree there are many sides to things, and I know firsthand about getting caught up before realizing just how "off" things were. I empathize, and don't blame any of the authors who want to ride it out and walk away. (Though I am so heartened by the number of people stepping forward.)

I do take issue with people who repeatedly witness Rebecca's behavior/tactics and continue to endorse it with their dollars. They have every right to do so, just as I have a right to hold an opinion about it.


----------



## thesmallprint

Credit to the mods for keeping so many plates spinning with a fair hand, to Alice W for her brave stance and work in uncovering backstory and to those who've come out into the open with great courage to tell their tales.

It seems to have taken a long time and caused a hell of a lot of grief, rage and sadness. Hopefully this thread will serve for many years as a beacon when new Indies with optimism and hope in their hearts go googling for guidance.


----------



## Stewart Matthews

DexyDoo said:


> Last thing&#8230; I don't see the issue with doing giveaways/gifting copies. Lots of authors set their books to free and then pay Bookbub or Freebooksy, etc. to blast their free book to readers. That also influences rank. If the book is free, to me that's basically a gift/giveaway, and I simply don't see the difference. (I'm sure plenty of people will disagree, but again, this is simply my opinion.)


Books that are free (the stuff you see on Bookbub and Freebooksy) are ranked in Amazon's free rankings--a completely different set of rankings from the paid store. Gifting copies of a paid book from Amazon accounts other than the book author's account influences rankings of that book on the Paid store.

Buying copies of your own book (or another's book), and gifting it from puppet accounts, or PA accounts, or accounts of friends with the hope of "increasing" its sales or visibility is rank manipulation.


----------



## CeeCee2

ChristinaGarner said:


> CeeCee,
> 
> Thank you so much for sharing your story. I agree there are many sides to things, and I know firsthand about getting caught up before realizing just how "off" things were. I empathize, and don't blame any of the authors who want to ride it out and walk away. (Though I am so heartened by the number of people stepping forward.)
> 
> I do take issue with people who repeatedly witness Rebecca's behavior/tactics and continue to endorse it with their dollars. They have every right to do so, just as I have a right to hold an opinion about it.


No, I don't get the people still supporting her business. It's a terrible, awful way to do business. That's probably my biggest issue.

*I don't think we were in any sets together. Sorry yours turned out so bad! It's a total crapshoot!


_edited, please PM if you have questions --Ann_


----------



## DexyDoo

Stewart Matthews said:


> Buying copies of your own book (or another's book), and gifting it from puppet accounts, or PA accounts, or accounts of friends with the hope of "increasing" its sales or visibility is rank manipulation.


So, if I gift copies or do Amazon giveaways (from my account), of a set I'm in...you're saying there is something wrong with that? If so, why do the retailers (Amazon, BN, iTunes), allow me to do that? Actually, in the case of Amazon, they encourage me to do giveaways. (And I'm not in any way being snarky. I'm truly trying to wrap my head around this.)


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

DexyDoo said:


> So, if I gift copies or do Amazon giveaways (from my account), of a set I'm in...you're saying there is something wrong with that? If so, why do the retailers (Amazon, BN, iTunes), allow me to do that? Actually, in the case of Amazon, they encourage me to do giveaways. (And I'm not in any way being snarky. I'm truly trying to wrap my head around this.)


"from puppet accounts, or PA accounts, or accounts of friends "


----------



## Thetis

MonkishScribe said:


> When Amazon finally acts, and the ban hammer starts swinging around and crushing every little indie bug in sight, do you really want your argument to be that you didn't _personally_ violate any ToS, even though your publisher and others in your box set did?


Not a concern because in the set I was in, nobody did.


----------



## Logan R.

DexyDoo said:


> So, if I gift copies or do Amazon giveaways (from my account), of a set I'm in...you're saying there is something wrong with that? If so, why do the retailers (Amazon, BN, iTunes), allow me to do that? Actually, in the case of Amazon, they encourage me to do giveaways. (And I'm not in any way being snarky. I'm truly trying to wrap my head around this.)


Just because Amazon allows you to do something doesn't mean it's right. It's like using sock puppet accounts to give yourself 5 star reviews, or having a friend do it for you. Technically, yes, it's possible to do it. It's an abuse of the system though and not what Amazon intended. Same goes for gifting books for the purpose of boosting your sales rank. Manipulation is manipulation. You can do it, but sooner or later you're probably going to get in trouble for it.

As for the Amazon giveaways, those are of paperback copies of your book and don't affect your sales rank.

ETA: If you're gifting from your _own_ account to friends just because you're being nice and want to give them something to read for free, that's totally fine of course and what the system was intended for. It's all about the intent though.


----------



## CeeCee2

I was never asked to set up a puppet account, to use a PA or a friend's account. I maybe gifted ten copies over a couple of sets to a few friends that are readers via amazon gifts with my account. 

Now, I do think that some authors have their own PA's and used them to do this service. Again, there are so many people and moving parts it's hard to know sometimes.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie

I have no horse in this race... but here's my concern. 

Whenever a storm like this arises there are always consequences. Amazon and Paypal both have acted unreasonably in the past. So my fears are: 

- Amazon is going to put an end to multi-author box sets (just from indies of course)
- Paypal is going to implement something draconian when it comes to authors. 
- USA today is going to say "no more indies" or make other drastic changes to the list. 

File this under "this is why we can't have nice things".


----------



## DexyDoo

Logan R. said:


> Just because Amazon allows you to do something doesn't mean it's right. It's like using sock puppet accounts to give yourself 5 star reviews, or having a friend do it for you. Technically, yes, it's possible to do it. It's an abuse of the system though and not what Amazon intended. Same goes for gifting books for the purpose of boosting your sales rank. Manipulation is manipulation. You can do it, but sooner or later you're probably going to get in trouble for it.
> 
> As for the Amazon giveaways, those are of paperback copies of your book and don't affect your sales rank.


I didn't gift/do giveaways from sock puppet accounts. It was from my account. And again, Amazon ENCOURAGES me to do giveaways.

Amazon giveaways are for eBooks too. I have no clue about paperbacks.


----------



## Diamond Eyes

DexyDoo said:


> So, if I gift copies or do Amazon giveaways (from my account), of a set I'm in...you're saying there is something wrong with that? If so, why do the retailers (Amazon, BN, iTunes), allow me to do that? Actually, in the case of Amazon, they encourage me to do giveaways. (And I'm not in any way being snarky. I'm truly trying to wrap my head around this.)


I'd be interested to know this too. What are the legitimate reasons and ways to gift multiple copies and setup giveaways for ebooks that are not permafree? Would it be the send to reviewers or to offer for mailing list signups or something? I'm trying to understand why Amazon allows the gifting and why it would be factored into rank? Are these "gifts" an actual free ebook or is it basically just a gift card or code for the price of the ebook with a suggestion to buy it?


----------



## Monique

They encourage you to do them as way of drawing attention to/marketing your book NOT to manipulate ranks. A few gifted copies is pretty normal stuff. Dozens? Hundreds? That's rank manipulation.


----------



## Stewart Matthews

DexyDoo said:


> I didn't gift/do giveaways from sock puppet accounts. It was from my account. And again, Amazon ENCOURAGES me to do giveaways.
> 
> Amazon giveaways are for eBooks too. I have no clue about paperbacks.


Sorry, I was mistaken. It is not specifically against ToS to buy copies of your own book en masse and gift them. However, it seems a poor business practice, regardless of ethics.


----------



## Logan R.

DexyDoo said:


> I didn't gift/do giveaways from sock puppet accounts. It was from my account. And again, Amazon ENCOURAGES me to do giveaways.
> 
> Amazon giveaways are for eBooks too. I have no clue about paperbacks.


I didn't realize you could do ebook giveaway now, so thanks for the info. And I edited my original post right as you posted your response, but I clarified that if it's from your own account and not for the purposes of rank manipulation it's fine.


----------



## Monique

*Misuse of sales rank:
*
The best seller rank feature allows buyers to evaluate the popularity of a product. Any attempt to manipulate sales rank is prohibited. You may not solicit or knowingly accept fake or fraudulent orders, including placing orders for your own products. You may not provide compensation to buyers for purchasing your products or provide claim codes to buyers for the purpose of inflating sales rank. In addition, you may not make claims regarding a product's best seller rank in the product detail page information, including the title and description.

emphasis added


----------



## DexyDoo

Monique said:


> They encourage you to do them as way of drawing attention to/marketing your book NOT to manipulate ranks. A few gifted copies is pretty normal stuff. Dozens? Hundreds? That's rank manipulation.


I hear what you're saying, but ANY gifting/giveaway is going to change the rank. If I gift, say, 10 copies of my book, it IS going to change the rank. If Amazon didn't want you to gift/giveaway 200 (or whatever number) copies of your book, why would they allow it?


----------



## 75814

My understanding is that if you gift a book from the same account that published the book, it doesn't count towards rank. Can anyone else confirm this?


----------



## Guest

CeeCee2 said:


> Genrecrave: I've only done a couple of list list building events. I never did any promo so nothing to say there. I do know that most people who participate seem to do badly which is why I was always wary. The gifting thing makes sense now as to why they flopped. I also know that if anyone complained about not doing well the excuse usually was, "your cover is bad and it's your fault your book doesn't do well." That part was always done in the genrecrave group publicly. No one wants to hear that so most people don't complain.


Totally this! Thank you for bringing it up, CeeCee, I had forgotten about the times an author was told their cover/editing/writing was the reason their book didn't do well during a promotion and it was all done publicly to make authors think twice about complaining.

On other occasions, authors were told they were lying about the promotion not being successful because RH apparently had seen the screenshots of people purchasing the book. I wasn't sure how that worked then but now with all the information about gifting the books and demanding proof of download, it finally makes sense.


----------



## Justawriter

DexyDoo said:


> I didn't gift/do giveaways from sock puppet accounts. It was from my account. And again, Amazon ENCOURAGES me to do giveaways.
> 
> Amazon giveaways are for eBooks too. I have no clue about paperbacks.


It doesn't matter if Amazon encourages giveaways. Giveaways are great! But not when they are used to land on a national list. Buying gift cards which are then used on your book manipulates the sales numbers and if it's being done to hit a list, to make it to that 150 spot on USA today for instance.....you are buying your way onto the list and bumping out someone else who deserves to be there.

That's cheating for one thing and really sucks for the person you bump. Imagine if you were that person and if not for someone in a boxed set who gifted copies, you'd be on the USA Today or even NYTimes list.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Monique said:


> *Misuse of sales rank:
> *
> The best seller rank feature allows buyers to evaluate the popularity of a product. Any attempt to manipulate sales rank is prohibited. You may not solicit or knowingly accept fake or fraudulent orders, including placing orders for your own products. You may not provide compensation to buyers for purchasing your products or provide claim codes to buyers for the purpose of inflating sales rank. In addition, you may not make claims regarding a product's best seller rank in the product detail page information, including the title and description.
> 
> emphasis added


Yes, exactly. So if you book a promotion that involves the service provider to gift your books en masse and incentivizes people to claim the "gift" so it counts, it's rank manipulation. And it could get your account shut down.

Same with reimbursing those who buy your book. Since there is no profit motive, the motive is strictly to manipulate rank and is not allowed.


----------



## Monique

DexyDoo said:


> I hear what you're saying, but ANY gifting/giveaway is going to change the rank. If I gift, say, 10 copies of my book, it IS going to change the rank. If Amazon didn't want you to gift/giveaway 200 (or whatever number) copies of your book, why would they allow it?


Amazon provides lots of facilities: you can technically leave reviews for competitors, gift your book, giveaway your book, upvote/downvote, give people gift cards, etc. It's the abuse of these that matters.

The giveaway feature is available for anyone on any product (nearly, I think). It's not a tool for authors. It's a tool for Amazon to increase their sales. Some people use it (and the other facilities) for purposes for which it was not intended. A handful of sales here or there doesn't matter. Dozens or hundreds is an attempt to manipulate ranks and is clearly against TOS.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Perry Constantine said:


> My understanding is that if you gift a book from the same account that published the book, it doesn't count towards rank. Can anyone else confirm this?


It does count toward rank if it's claimed within 24 hours. I posted a TOS link about 15 pages back, lol, but it's definitive.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

DexyDoo said:


> I hear what you're saying, but ANY gifting/giveaway is going to change the rank. If I gift, say, 10 copies of my book, it IS going to change the rank. If Amazon didn't want you to gift/giveaway 200 (or whatever number) copies of your book, why would they allow it?


The gift option wasn't designed as an author tool, it's a way to give someone a gift. i.e. I think my buddy would like this book I just read or this shirt I just bought and I'm going to give it to him.

Likewise the giveaway option is to promote the product and collect info from those entering the drawing.

I'm dubious of anyone who says they're going to "gift" 200 copies of their book via Amazon for anything other than manipulating rank, as that throws away 30% x 200 of the funds to Amazon.

Now, yes, trad pub has done this forever ... I have the same opinion of the practice when done by them.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Gifting is really totally fine. Especially if YOU are gifting from your own account, gift away! The vendors can see what you're doing free and clear and will handle any issues they have.

Coordinating gifting from multiple accounts to mask rank manipulation is bad and not encouraged by any vendor. Putting in an incentive to control when a gift is claimed (turn your receipt in by midnight) is bad and not encouraged by the vendors in any way and could be breaking the law with an illegal lottery (not a lawyer, but the guidelines on giveaways including proof of purchase is pretty clear). 

This is just like Paypal Family and Friends . . . by itself it's not a bad thing at all. It's FINE to use Paypal's Familya nd Friends to send money to um friends and family. It's not okay to run business transactions through it.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

DexyDoo said:


> I hear what you're saying, but ANY gifting/giveaway is going to change the rank. If I gift, say, 10 copies of my book, it IS going to change the rank. If Amazon didn't want you to gift/giveaway 200 (or whatever number) copies of your book, why would they allow it?


Speaking for myself, I don't have an issue with 10 copies. I always buy myself a copy so I can check the formatting exactly as the customer sees it.

I have a huge issue with 1700+ copies, however.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Monique said:


> Amazon provides lots of facilities: you can technically leave reviews for competitors, gift your book, giveaway your book, upvote/downvote, give people gift cards, etc. It's the abuse of these that matters.
> 
> The giveaway feature is available for anyone on any product (nearly, I think). It's not a tool for authors. It's a tool for Amazon to increase their sales. Some people use it (and the other facilities) for purposes for which it was not intended. A handful of sales here or there doesn't matter. Dozens or hundreds is an attempt to manipulate ranks and is clearly against TOS.


I'm not arguing with your whole point, but I do believe it is a tool for authors. Under the TOS that is specific to gifting copies of books, Amazon says this: Customers can gift all titles available through KDP on Amazon.com, through wish lists or book detail pages. The only current exception is for titles that are not available in the country where the customer lives.

Your royalties will be based on the price and royalty option selected at the time the Kindle gift was purchased. After the gift recipient downloads your title, your royalties will accrue, and the sale will show on your reports. A gift sale counts toward a sales rank only if it is redeemed within 24 hours by the recipient.

You are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you like to help promote it. Be aware that gift recipients have the option of choosing a gift certificate instead. Also, as with all Kindle sales, gift recipients have the option to return the gift within 7 days of downloading. Learn more on the Amazon Help page, Give and Receive Kindle Devices and Books.

https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A2SPN65RHEW2G

So we have two conflicting parts of TOS, so either gifting books isn't considered rank manipulation (and I have no idea) or intent matters. But how do you prove intent? By number of copies? How many is considered intending to manipulate rank? They say themselves that you are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you want (for promotional purposes). My guess is the line is incentivising people to claim your gifted book rather than the gift card that they can choose. That arguably shows intent. However, Amazon gets to decide what violates their TOS and what doesn't. If someone isn't comfortable gifting copies of their book, they shouldn't do it or be pressured to do it, but they should also be aware of what the TOS says in its entirety.

*edit: Didn't realize Christina already posted the TOS.


----------



## Monique

That is conflicting. I tend to be conservative on these things and think that any attempt to blatantly manipulate rank is a no-no. It's unethical, too. 

For me, using it as a tool to promote your book is okay. If your goal is to manipulate rank, it's not okay. Intent is a wiggley worm.


----------



## DexyDoo

Okay. I’m not going to quote everyone who replied to the gifting/giveaway thing, but I have read the responses.

Let me give examples and see if I understand.

If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to build buzz/excitement around a book, that is okay.

If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to better the rank, that is not okay.

If I set up 5000 giveaways because my intention is nothing more than I feel like it, I want to get my book in front of as many people as possible, or whatever the reason other than bettering the rank, that is okay.

So, it basically comes down the intention of the person doing the giveaways?


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Monique said:


> That is conflicting. I tend to be conservative on these things and think that any attempt to blatantly manipulate rank is a no-no. It's unethical, too.
> 
> For me, using it as a tool to promote your book is okay. If your goal is to manipulate rank, it's not okay. Intent is a wiggley worm.


For me, the key was the "make sure to do it by midnight" combined with the comments about how those who don't are kicked out of the group. Add to that Christina's comment previous about how rank is affected by the 24 hour window. So this isn't about promoting or gaining readers or doing a fun contest. This is about rank manipulation.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Krista D. Ball said:


> For me, the key was the "make sure to do it by midnight" combined with the comments about how those who don't are kicked out of the group. Add to that Christina's comment previous about how rank is affected by the 24 hour window. So this isn't about promoting or gaining readers or doing a fun contest. This is about rank manipulation.


So is saying that by claiming said book by midnight you'll be entered to win a gift card.


----------



## jaehaerys

Maybe there needs to be a separate thread about morality for indies? I don't understand the argument of 'well, if we're not supposed to do x, why does Xcompany/Xperson even allow the possibility for me to do x in the first place?'

Principles matter, personal responsibility matters. Just because it's possible to do the wrong thing doesn't make the doing of it somehow okay. 

You have to be willing to ask yourself if what you're doing is objectively, morally right, instead of justifying your actions based on what others may or may not be doing or allowing for as a possibility. That this even needs to be said is sad in and of itself. Suddenly I understand why the remote control for a motel TV is nailed to the nightstand and all the furniture in the room is chained to the floor.


----------



## Diamond Eyes

Felicia Beasley said:


> A gift sale counts toward a sales rank only if it is redeemed within 24 hours by the recipient.
> 
> You are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you like to help promote it.


That is crazy. This seems so open to manipulation. I mean I'm guessing the intent is that an author might gift 10, 50, 100 or whatever copies of their own book to maybe some friends and reviewers and such, but this really opens a hole for large pools of authors to boost ranks. A single author would probably have a hard time gifting enough copies to do much, I don't know. But with 10-20+ or more authors each able to gift however many copies towards the same product and influence rank that seems like a big oversight of the gifting system. Amazon allowing the gifts to count for rank, even if only for 24 hours, really seems strange to me.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

ChristinaGarner said:


> So is saying that by claiming said book by midnight you'll be entered to win a gift card.


*nod* It's all about skirting around about the rules.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

DexyDoo said:


> Okay. I'm not going to quote everyone who replied to the gifting/giveaway thing, but I have read the responses.
> 
> Let me give examples and see if I understand.
> 
> If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to build buzz/excitement around a book, that is okay.
> 
> If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to better the rank, that is not okay.
> 
> If I set up 5000 giveaways because my intention is nothing more than I feel like it, I want to get my book in front of as many people as possible, or whatever the reason other than bettering the rank, that is okay.
> 
> So, it basically comes down the intention of the person doing the giveaways?


I think there's more than intent here. See Monique's post after yours. There's also the way you go about it.

Are you sending them out Willy Nilly and going on your merry way, no strings attached, and not caring?

Or are you trying to put caveats in there, like "claim by midnight" or "show me proof you got it for XYZ".


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

DexyDoo said:


> Okay. I'm not going to quote everyone who replied to the gifting/giveaway thing, but I have read the responses.
> 
> Let me give examples and see if I understand.
> 
> If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to build buzz/excitement around a book, that is okay.
> 
> If I set up 100 Amazon giveaways because my intention is to better the rank, that is not okay.
> 
> If I set up 5000 giveaways because my intention is nothing more than I feel like it, I want to get my book in front of as many people as possible, or whatever the reason other than bettering the rank, that is okay.
> 
> So, it basically comes down the intention of the person doing the giveaways?


Gifting or giveaways, as they're two different things.

If you're gifting any of those, I'd question it because why not just send them the file? The only value from paying the 30% is to buy rank.

If giveaways, is it really the random drawing intent or is it some "100 copies given to the first 100" and then the link's only given to 100 people? If the latter, again, there's only value from the rank boost.

Many ethical questions come down to intent.


----------



## 75814

ChristinaGarner said:


> It does count toward rank if it's claimed within 24 hours. I posted a TOS link about 15 pages back, lol, but it's definitive.


Thanks, Christina. I knew there was something about this, but couldn't remember what.

So what it comes down to then, as Monique said, is intent and how you're using or abusing these tools. If you're running a giveaway and providing free copies of your books for a reader contest, that's one thing. But if you're buying books in the four or five digits, then you're clearly engaging in rank manipulation. Ten books won't really affect your rank all that much. A thousand will. If you're looking to send out a lot of free copies, then why would you use the giveaway feature instead of just a free run?

And like Elizabeth pointed out, if you're gifting a thousand copies from your own account, KDP will probably notice something like that. But with box sets, when you're telling other authors in the set to gift copies, it might not be clear to the bots that those authors are gifting their own book because it's coming from a different account. So in essence, the organizer is turning the box set participants into sock puppet accounts.

Also, doing things like asking for receipts of purchases in order to enter a contest is definitely against the rules and illegal.

These services are available, but the way you use them is what matters.


----------



## AllyWho

dn8791 said:


> Maybe there needs to be a separate thread about morality for indies?


I don't think that would be terribly productive simply because morals and ethics are deeply personal. It's not a black/white area and there are so many shades of grey (over 50 I hear  ) The takeaway from all of this is be aware of how a business operates. If you don't understand, ask questions. Look at how a business owner deals with question, complaints and refunds.

For example there is nothing wrong with boxed sets. They are a great tool to find new readers or reach a certain goal, like USAToday. Just do your research and ensure that a boxed sets goals and operating methods are consistent with *your goals and ethics*.

There's nothing wrong with using a promotional service, but again know how it works and figure out if the methods are consistent with your personal goals and ethics. For example GenreCave doesn't operate a newsletter but rather has an incentivised Facebook group where members download a promoted title to go in the draw to win a prize. Decide for yourself if that's how you want to spend your advertising dollars.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

J.A. Sutherland said:


> Gifting or giveaways, as they're two different things.
> 
> If you're gifting any of those, I'd question it because why not just send them the file? The only value from paying the 30% is to buy rank.
> 
> If giveaways, is it really the random drawing intent or is it some "100 copies given to the first 100" and then the link's only given to 100 people? If the latter, again, there's only value from the rank boost.
> 
> Many ethical questions come down to intent.


As a GENERAL statement, I don't mind gifting over emailed file. Some readers aren't very techy and side-loading is confusing. Or they don't have a computer and it's even more confusing trying to use a tablet. Or they prefer all books in their Amazon cloud account to transfer between devices.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I think there's more than intent here. See Monique's post after yours. There's also the way you go about it.
> 
> Are you sending them out Willy Nilly and going on your merry way, no strings attached, and not caring?
> 
> Or are you trying to put caveats in there, like "claim by midnight" or "show me proof you got it for XYZ".


Exactly.

Also, you put your account at risk by hiring someone to do that on your behalf. (Even if you didn't know that's what you were doing.)


----------



## lilywhite

DexyDoo said:


> And again, Amazon ENCOURAGES me to do giveaways.


Books gifted through the Giveaway function on the product page (below the reviews) don't count toward rank.

Having someone else gift them from THEIR account, using the Give as a Gift button (under "Send a Sample"), and requiring the recipient to redeem it within 24 hours DOES affect rank, and IS rank manipulation. _EDITED TO ADD_: Apparently doing this from your own account ALSO gives a rank boost. I would say, though, as EAW mentioned, there's no subterfuge there and at least if Amazon has an issue with it you weren't trying to hide anything.

I think the two things are getting conflated here. Amazon encourages the first. They do not encourage the second.


----------



## lilywhite

SummerNights said:


> On other occasions, authors were told they were lying about the promotion not being successful because RH apparently had seen the screenshots of people purchasing the book. I wasn't sure how that worked then but now with all the information about gifting the books and demanding proof of download, it finally makes sense.


I have seen this with my own eyes, no hearsay. RH told two separate friends of mine on two occasions that she knew they had X number of sales because she saw screenshots from purchasers; meanwhile I saw screenshots of the dashboards showing a very different result.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

J.A. Sutherland said:


> If you're gifting any of those, I'd question it because why not just send them the file? The only value from paying the 30% is to buy rank.


For most people who have Kindles, the ease of simply downloading from one's Amazon account is part of the joy of the device. Many never explore any other option.

Betsy


----------



## Fel Beasley

J.A. Sutherland said:


> Gifting or giveaways, as they're two different things.
> 
> If you're gifting any of those, I'd question it because why not just send them the file? The only value from paying the 30% is to buy rank.
> 
> If giveaways, is it really the random drawing intent or is it some "100 copies given to the first 100" and then the link's only given to 100 people? If the latter, again, there's only value from the rank boost.
> 
> Many ethical questions come down to intent.


Here's one very good reason NOT to just send a file. I'm exclusive. It is against Amazon TOS for me to send a file. Now I can argue it's a review copy or an ARC, but they've tightened up their language regarding that as well. Add to the headache of actually sending the file and then walking someone through how to get it on their e-reader or phone. Can't upload it to IF or BF, because that's against TOS as well. It's so very murky and I'm not going to chance my account. So my options are gift through Amazon, potentially break TOS by sending the file, or not gift at all. So why don't I just do a giveaway? Well, sometimes I'll gift a copy to a specific reader as a thank you. I did that yesterday.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

Betsy the Quilter said:


> For most people who have Kindles, the ease of simply downloading from one's Amazon account is part of the joy of the device. Many never explore any other option.
> 
> Betsy


Granted, but the numbers I was responding to were 100, 200, 500 ... paying 30%, 70% if $0.99, to gift like that is a steep price to pay for the recipients' convenience. If I was sending a copy to my mother I'd eat the cost, but I don't like 100 people that much.


----------



## Fel Beasley

lilywhite said:


> Books gifted through the Giveaway function on the product page (below the reviews) don't count toward rank.
> 
> Having someone else gift them from THEIR account, using the Give as a Gift button (under "Send a Sample"), and requiring the recipient to redeem it within 24 hours DOES affect rank, and IS rank manipulation. _EDITED TO ADD_: Apparently doing this from your own account ALSO gives a rank boost. I would say, though, as EAW mentioned, there's no subterfuge there and at least if Amazon has an issue with it you weren't trying to hide anything.
> 
> I think the two things are getting conflated here. Amazon encourages the first. They do not encourage the second.


*lol I didn't realize you modified your post while I was typing  *

Just to further clarify, an author CAN use the give as gift button to send a copy of their book to a reader (through email). Requiring anything for them to accept it either by a certain time or even just claiming the book over the GC is NOT okay, not necessarily because of AMZ TOS, but because it's considered an illegal giveaway.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Felicia Beasley said:


> *lol I didn't realize you modified your post while I was typing  *
> 
> Just to further clarify, an author CAN use the give as gift button to send a copy of their book to a reader (through email). Requiring anything for them to accept it either by a certain time or even just claiming the book over the GC is NOT okay, not necessarily because of AMZ TOS, but because it's considered an illegal giveaway.


Except it IS a TOS violation to incentivize someone to claim a gift. I heard this directly from Amazon. It's at their discretion to do anything about it, but it is a violation. So a blast service that does this on your behalf is playing fast and loose with YOUR account.


----------



## PermaStudent

Outside of the ethical issue of "how many copies is too many" or intent, I think gifting high numbers of ones' own book just because "Amazon allows it" also falls under This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things. Let's review things Amazon used to "allow":

- Under KU 1, when it was a flat payout per read, people would upload 10 page phamplets (termed "scamphlets" at the time, because many--though not all--were often plagiarized articles from the web or just gibberish) because they would get paid every time someone even opened it. But hey, Amazon allowed it, so no problem, right?

- Under KU 2, when Amazon stopped "allowing" the afforementioned and started paying per page read, people would upload massive compilations of all of their books to KU (like, ALL of their books in one enormous edition) and then put a link to the TOC located at the end at the beginning, thereby triggering a full read payout every time that link got clicked. Amazon allowed it, so all good, right?

Under new rules, Amazon has now stopped "allowing" the afforementioned and caps payouts at 3k pages. Links to the back in that fashion are no longer allowed. But when they stopped paying a flat rate, many writers of shorter works were harmed with drastically cut payouts. When they stopped allowing payouts greater than 3k, a lot of box set payouts plummeted. Everything would have been fine except for those people gaming the system under the idea that "Amazon allows it, therefore it's okay" even when doing so clearly wasn't the intended function of whatever feature.

When you game the system, other indies will care. The ones who do the gaming get it taken away for everyone.

And gifting aside, I'm much more concerned about the potential illegal lottery aspect of this. I believe GenreCrave offers entry for a prize using proof of purchase to enter, am I right (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong)? If an author is knowingly paying someone to advertise their book using an illegal lottery-type system (i.e. where a proof of purchase is required), can the author be held accountable?

For reference, Illegal Lottery thread is here: https://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=250477.0


----------



## ........

Rebecca is paying via PayPal other people to gift copies *purely* for the purpose of getting the numbers. It's right there in the open in her GenreCrave facebook page. Do the search for "PayPal" and you can see it. 

She explicitly tells people that she will send them money, and they do the gifting. For those who are outside the US, her assistant was doing the gifting. 

These gifts were for iBooks, which counts them as a sale. Not the same as Amazon where it must be redeemed within 24 hours to count on rank.

This isn't just standard gifting which is a promo strategy. It is explicitly described as getting the numbers to make the list. They need to hit that minimum figure or no USA Today Bestseller. 

I think the intent here is quite clear given it is explicitly described.

So those authors in the boxset it pertains to have their "letters" in part due to some unknown number of gifted copies that were given *purely* to meet the minimum number requirements. Do they know this? I can't be sure. I didn't know the truth behind the BookBlasts until recently. 

There is certainly an odd awkward silence over all this outside of RH's facebook page (which is almost 100% support of what she is doing). Many of these boxsets had 20ish authors in them... who now have been putting "USA Today Bestselling Author" on their book covers... and are posting in forums where their peers are discussing how a particular box set *only* hit the list because RH paid for gifted copies to make the minimum numbers. 

I honestly don't know if they're afraid to speak up, feel duped, feel guilty or are just keeping quiet and hoping they won't get tangled up into it.

I do hope some of them come forward and make a statement given there is clear proof minimum numbers were only met via gifted copies bought by RH or by someone else that she directly paid for.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Except it IS a TOS violation to incentivize someone to claim a gift. I heard this directly from Amazon. It's at their discretion to do anything about it, but it is a violation. So a blast service that does this on your behalf is playing fast and loose with YOUR account.


I do understand that and I believe you that Amazon told you that it was a direct TOS violation. However, Amazon reps are notorious for saying some things are okay and others aren't and then someone else says that thing the other person said was okay is not okay, etc, etc, etc. The TOS is vague and I wouldn't trust a rep that says it's okay to do this. So I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't pay for a service that I knew did it, either. Because I'm not going to skirt a gray area. I'm definitely not recommending anyone else do so either.


----------



## Andie

Just to clarify, from what I've seen in the box set I participated in, there were *zero* Amazon copies given away. Some Nook and iBooks, but not Amazon. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think rank does nearly as much for visibility on those platforms as it does on Amazon (but I'm not really a nonAmazon buyer, so I may be misunderstanding that).

Again, just the set I'm in. No idea about any others.


----------



## Justawriter

Felicia Beasley said:


> I do understand that and I believe you that Amazon told you that it was a direct TOS violation. However, Amazon reps are notorious for saying some things are okay and others aren't and then someone else says that thing the other person said was okay is not okay, etc, etc, etc. The TOS is vague and I wouldn't trust a rep that says it's okay to do this. So I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't pay for a service that I knew did it, either. Because I'm not going to skirt a gray area. I'm definitely not recommending anyone else do so either.


Aside from it being an Amazon TOS violation, doesn't it just seem wrong to gift copies of a boxed set for the purpose of making enough sales to hit a list? What about the person who is bumped out of hitting, who honestly just sold books? How could that feel right?


----------



## Fel Beasley

I've been trying to find the place in the TOS about the rank manipulation, but I can't atm. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

I did just see this, though:
https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A35X707K01AW78

Third-party promotional sites
You're welcome to promote your book through third-party websites and other services, but we encourage you to keep a close eye on the tactics they use to promote your books. You are responsible for ensuring that no tactics used to promote your book manipulate the Kindle platform and/or Kindle programs. We advise against using any sites that "guarantee" a return on your investment.

We support our authors' efforts to promote their books worldwide, but at the same time we work to prevent any manipulation of the Kindle platform.

_Edited to add link to quoted Amazon info. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Pnjw

Andie said:


> Just to clarify, from what I've seen in the box set I participated in, there were *zero* Amazon copies given away. Some Nook and iBooks, but not Amazon. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think rank does nearly as much for visibility on those platforms as it does on Amazon (but I'm not really a nonAmazon buyer, so I may be misunderstanding that).
> 
> Again, just the set I'm in. No idea about any others.


Actually, I'd argue rank on the other vendors actually helps more there than it does at Amazon because iBooks and BN are not as volatile as Amazon. But that's besides the point isn't it? Gifting copies for the sole purpose of making the bestseller list is unethical in my book. And if the gifted copies came with a proof of purchase lottery, then than is likely illegal. I say likely because I haven't seen the details, only heard the chatter here in this thread.


----------



## Becca Mills

........ said:


> There is certainly an odd awkward silence over all this outside of RH's facebook page (which is almost 100% support of what she is doing). Many of these boxsets had 20ish authors in them... who now have been putting "USA Today Bestselling Author" on their book covers... and are posting in forums where their peers are discussing how a particular box set *only* hit the list because RH paid for gifted copies to make the minimum numbers.
> 
> I honestly don't know if they're afraid to speak up, feel duped, feel guilty or are just keeping quiet and hoping they won't get tangled up into it.
> 
> I do hope some of them come forward and make a statement given there is clear proof minimum numbers were only met via gifted copies bought by RH or by someone else that she directly paid for.


It may well be that some boxed sets sold very well right out of the gate, so no gifting happened. We've asked posters to stick to their own experiences and to avoid hearsay; some may not have witnessed any of these alleged problems and thus feel they have nothing to report.

The other much sadder possibility is that people who've worked with Rebecca fear being ostracized by those who avoided her -- fear receiving from the rest of the community a subtler version of the kind of treatment Silly Writer and others describe having received from Rebecca.

We must not allow that to happen.


----------



## Fel Beasley

PamelaKelley said:


> Aside from it being an Amazon TOS violation, doesn't it just seem wrong to gift copies of a boxed set for the purpose of making enough sales to hit a list? What about the person who is bumped out of hitting, who honestly just sold books? How could that feel right?


Not saying it's right. Not even saying it isn't against TOS. I simply don't want misinformation to be spread. I don't have all the answers. I thought this thread was about sharing and making clear what is and isn't allowed, so authors aren't misled. To be frank, RH isn't the only box set organizer, she's just the one that always gets named.

Perhaps I'm wrong, and if I am, I apologize, but I thought this discussion was about box set scams in general and not specifically about one person.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Felicia Beasley said:


> I've been trying to find the place in the TOS about the rank manipulation, but I can't atm. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
> 
> I did just see this, though:
> 
> Third-party promotional sites
> You're welcome to promote your book through third-party websites and other services, but we encourage you to keep a close eye on the tactics they use to promote your books. You are responsible for ensuring that no tactics used to promote your book manipulate the Kindle platform and/or Kindle programs. We advise against using any sites that "guarantee" a return on your investment.
> 
> We support our authors' efforts to promote their books worldwide, but at the same time we work to prevent any manipulation of the Kindle platform.


This is a change that happened I believe last summer in response to click farms and other unscrupulous promotions. The onus 100% got shifted to US the author/publisher to know and understand the tactics. If your book has suspicious behavior on it, it's your fault by default. There have been people that have taken it up the chain to remove a shut down, and we don't really know how many didn't get restored etc. because we don't have like a centralized place for them.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Felicia Beasley said:


> I do understand that and I believe you that Amazon told you that it was a direct TOS violation. However, Amazon reps are notorious for saying some things are okay and others aren't and then someone else says that thing the other person said was okay is not okay, etc, etc, etc. The TOS is vague and I wouldn't trust a rep that says it's okay to do this. So I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't pay for a service that I knew did it, either. Because I'm not going to skirt a gray area. I'm definitely not recommending anyone else do so either.


Can't argue with that. 

And I agree, I'm not looking to skirt gray areas, and services that do (and don't disclose to unwitting customers) are not OK with me.


----------



## Justawriter

Felicia Beasley said:


> Not saying it's right. Not even saying it isn't against TOS. I simply don't want misinformation to be spread. I don't have all the answers. I thought this thread was about sharing and making clear what is and isn't allowed, so authors aren't misled. To be frank, RH isn't the only box set organizer, she's just the one that always gets named.
> 
> Perhaps I'm wrong, and if I am, I apologize, but I thought this discussion was about box set scams in general and not specifically about one person.


I didn't mention anyone. I was talking generally about what is and isn't allowed. My point was gifting to make a list seems unethical.


----------



## Monique

Felicia Beasley said:


> Not saying it's right. Not even saying it isn't against TOS. I simply don't want misinformation to be spread. I don't have all the answers. I thought this thread was about sharing and making clear what is and isn't allowed, so authors aren't misled. To be frank, RH isn't the only box set organizer, she's just the one that always gets named.
> 
> Perhaps I'm wrong, and if I am, I apologize, but I thought this discussion was about box set scams in general and not specifically about one person.


She's the subject of the link in the OP. Of course, the subject is broader than any one organizer, but her behavior and methods are at the heart of the issue.

To whomever was looking for the rank manipulation link:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200414320


----------



## spellscribe

For those debating semantics:
Amazon does allow gifting. 
Amazon specifically does not allow rank manipulation 
Amazon specifically does NOT allow incentivising buys or gift claims. That is where the line is being crossed: gift recipients are, as far as the screenshots show, being incentivised to claim said gifts (rather than trade them for a gift voucher) and to do so on a timeline (before midnight, assuredly so it counts as a sale and rank boost) 

We have seen evidence linked in this thread of it happening and screenshots of the TOS where it shows it's not allowed. Why is there a debate? Doesn't matter if it's 1000 books or 1, if it hits anlust or not. It is a clear violation of TOS and risks the accounts of all involved.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

spellscribe said:


> For those debating semantics:
> Amazon does allow gifting.
> Amazon specifically does not allow rank manipulation
> Amazon specifically does NOT allow incentivising buys or gift claims. That is where the line is being crossed: gift recipients are, as far as the screenshots show, being incentivised to claim said gifts (rather than trade them for a gift voucher) and to do so on a timeline (before midnight, assuredly so it counts as a sale and rank boost)
> 
> We have seen evidence linked in this thread of it happening and screenshots of the TOS where it shows it's not allowed. Why is there a debate? Doesn't matter if it's 1000 books or 1, if it hits anlust or not. It is a clear violation of TOS and risks the accounts of all involved.


Precisely.


----------



## Jake Kerr

I think one of the things confusing people is that we are focusing entirely on Amazon, but to get on the USA Today list, you need sales in other vendors. I think it is entirely plausible that Bookbub ads and other things can get the movement for the box sets to sell enough in Amazon, but that is orders of magnitude harder on iBooks or Google Play. To do that, I can see someone "buying books." Interestingly, this isn't even buying "rank," as the requirement isn't to reach a certain rank but to move a certain number of units at other vendors (for USA Today, at least).

To my mind, I absolutely can see individuals (like the person most mentioned in this thread) buying books specifically to generate the volume outside of Amazon. In fact, the post on 20kto50K explicitly was about hitting non-Amazon purchases.

So what do the other vendors think? I was curious, so I asked a friend of mine who is the former head of iTunes about it. He said, unequivocally, that his friend at iBooks would consider buying books to generate a minimum sell through to hit a list as against the spirit of what iBooks book rankings are all about, _even if the goal wasn't to generate a high iBooks rank_.

I haven't asked him to connect me to the current head of iBooks because I'm talking to a high level editor at USA Today, which I think is a better approach.

Just don't hate me if USA Today bans box sets soon.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Becca Mills said:


> The other much sadder possibility is that people who've worked with Rebecca fear being ostracized by those who avoided her -- fear receiving from the rest of the community a subtler version of the kind of treatment Silly Writer and others describe having received from Rebecca.
> 
> We must not allow that to happen.


I can't pretend to be happy with anyone who either condoned or joined in with the bullying that's been talked about here. But at the same time this isn't the Nuremberg Trials. I don't want to see anyone hurt. All I really want to see is an end to blatant gaming of the system and an end of authors terrifying other authors at the say so of any ringleaders. Let's compete with our stories and our marketing savvy, not with loopholes and fear.


----------



## PhoenixS

For those stating there was never any funny business with their particular box, let me point out that every single one of those boxes with 20+ "full-length" novels were over 3MB and were forced price-matched to 99 cents during the entire preorder and for at least the week after. Forced price-matching is a violation of the T&Cs. While it may seem like a minor violation, it still provides an advantage over those in box sets that were playing by the rules. Like doping in sports.


----------



## AllyWho

Another issue I haven't seen raised yet is the issue of a book promoter/box set organise reviewing your FB friends list. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it's another tactic used to drive a wedge between indies and let's face it, its not a standard business practice. 

Authors are being told they will not be accepted into a boxed set or have promo run until they unfriend certain people. 

Is this hearsay? No. Fact. 

I have received a number of pms from people that start off, "I'm really sorry, but I have to unfriend you to stay in the boxed set..." or "Rebecca says I have to unfriend you if I want my promo to run..."

And before the naysayers start screaming for screen shots as "proof". No. The authors who have pm'd me are scared the impact any fallout will have on their books and careers. To me, it would be unethical to breach their confidence and share those private pms. 

This is where authors need to exercise just a modicum of common sense. Why on earth should a book promoter/boxed set organiser be at all concerned who you are friends with? It's not a normal business practice. If you're told to unfriend someone before you can book a promo or join a set, ask yourself "huh?"


----------



## ChristinaGarner

jakedfw said:


> I think one of the things confusing people is that we are focusing entirely on Amazon, but to get on the USA Today list, you need sales in other vendors. I think it is entirely plausible that Bookbub ads and other things can get the movement for the box sets to sell enough in Amazon, but that is orders of magnitude harder on iBooks or Google Play. To do that, I can see someone "buying books." Interestingly, this isn't even buying "rank," as the requirement isn't to reach a certain rank but to move a certain number of units at other vendors (for USA Today, at least).
> 
> To my mind, I absolutely can see individuals (like the person most mentioned in this thread) buying books specifically to generate the volume outside of Amazon. In fact, the post on 20kto50K explicitly was about hitting non-Amazon purchases.
> 
> So what do the other vendors think? I was curious, so I asked a friend of mine who is the former head of iTunes about it. He said, unequivocally, that his friend at iBooks would consider buying books to generate a minimum sell through to hit a list as against the spirit of what iBooks book rankings are all about, _even if the goal wasn't to generate a high iBooks rank_.
> 
> I haven't asked him to connect me to the current head of iBooks because I'm talking to a high level editor at USA Today, which I think is a better approach.
> 
> Just don't hate me if USA Today bans box sets soon.


Such a great point about other vendors. There have been posts in several places about about gifting (or swapping--box set buy for box set buy among members) on the specific venues they need the numbers on in order to hit USA today.

Speaking with them directly is a great idea. I look forward to hearing what you learn.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I can't pretend to be happy with anyone who either condoned or joined in with the bullying that's been talked about here. But at the same time this isn't the Nuremberg Trials. I don't want to see anyone hurt. All I really want to see is an end to blatant gaming of the system and an end of authors terrifying other authors at the say so of any ringleaders. Let's compete with our stories and our marketing savvy, not with loopholes and fear.


I am of the optimistic hope that the vast majority of authors don't want to see anyone hurt. I certainly don't.

I will say that since this thread and everything that has happened, at least in the box sets I'm in, everyone is holding everyone accountable for staying within TOS of Amazon, the other retailers, pay pal, as well as with giveaways. That includes the box sets I'm in run by Rebecca. She herself is telling people not to do anything illegal or against TOS. I don't know how things are going to play out in the long run and I can only relate my own experiences which doesn't negate anyone else's.


----------



## Patty Jansen

AliceW said:


> Another issue I haven't seen raised yet is the issue of a book promoter/box set organise reviewing your FB friends list. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it's another tactic used to drive a wedge between indies and let's face it, its not a standard business practice.
> 
> Authors are being told they will not be accepted into a boxed set or have promo run until they unfriend certain people.
> 
> Is this hearsay? No. Fact.
> 
> I have received a number of pms from people that start off, "I'm really sorry, but I have to unfriend you to stay in the boxed set..." or "Rebecca says I have to unfriend you if I want my promo to run..."
> 
> And before the naysayers start screaming for screen shots as "proof". No. The authors who have pm'd me are scared the impact any fallout will have on their books and careers. To me, it would be unethical to breach their confidence and share those private pms.
> 
> This is where authors need to exercise just a modicum of common sense. Why on earth should a book promoter/boxed set organiser be at all concerned who you are friends with? It's not a normal business practice. If you're told to unfriend someone before you can book a promo or join a set, ask yourself "huh?"


I can attest to this.

I will say again, on the record, and not in a private FB group (from where I'm sure it got passed on):

If you endorse this, if you actually let a person have so much control over your life that you go to your friends list and unfriend people because someone says so, beware that the "unfriend" button plays a jingle that goes "Coward, enabler, coward, enabler".

I do understand that you can't see an option but to do this if you've already invested money you really cannot afford to lose, but really? How old are we all? How can we be so blinded by something we want that we forget our individual sense or right and wrong.

What is this?

_Edited. - Becca._


----------



## Becca Mills

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I can't pretend to be happy with anyone who either condoned or joined in with the bullying that's been talked about here. But at the same time this isn't the Nuremberg Trials. I don't want to see anyone hurt. All I really want to see is an end to blatant gaming of the system and an end of authors terrifying other authors at the say so of any ringleaders. Let's compete with our stories and our marketing savvy, not with loopholes and fear.


To be clear, I would not advocate giving a free pass to anyone who has bullied, terrifed, or been cruel to others.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Becca Mills said:


> To be clear, I would not advocate giving a free pass to anyone who has bullied, terrifed, or been cruel to others.


And yet kboards still doesn't have a "like" button.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

One bit of coolness: I've been getting PMs from people who are watching this thread, both large players and small. All I can say is I'm hearing tales of people asking questions, talking to reps, and re-evaluating some of their business decisions. 

So for those who have been brave enough to come forward and share, know that your stories are being read and they're opening a lot of eyes.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> One bit of coolness: I've been getting PMs from people who are watching this thread, both large players and small. I'm sure the naysayers will cry "names or you're lying!" but I won't share anything that anyone doesn't want me to. All I can say is I'm hearing tales of people asking questions, talking to reps, and re-evaluating some of their business decisions.
> 
> So for those who have been brave enough to come forward and share, know that your stories are being read and they're opening a lot of eyes.


Ditto--they've been pouring in and it's so heartening. I have an inbox full of PMs from the past few hours that I haven't even gotten to yet!

Personally, it's made this recent attack on my character more bearable and has mobilized me into definitive action. Globally, I think it will help so many others for this light to be shined--for which I am very grateful.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

It's in this thread actually about the whole "you can't be friends with so and so" RH herself stated she did it with me because of Death threats. When I pointed out the utter ridiculousness of her claim, she tried to say she wasn't talking about that (problem is before that Facebook post in February, she and I had zero interactions anywhere but here on Kboards in a handful of threads).



Elizabeth Ann West said:


> [I posted about she quoted 5300 in the marketing group but it was at 5265 and she edited out the 5300, shortened my quote because I know I won't erase my posts to help readability, it's page 9-12 on this thread]
> 
> When she demanded everyone unfriend me or her a few months ago, I actually gained friends... ::shrug::
> 
> At this point I think enough has been put out there that people should make their own decisions. The risk is theirs to take or not. But no one can say now they did so out of ignorance of what was really hapepning behind the scenes whether you agree or don't agree, which wasn't the case just a year ago.


Weird to quote myself....



TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> It said almost 5300, and it just tipped. anyone IN the group can see it's 5300 even now. (Yes, this thread DID turn into a huge advertisement for my group - apparently a lot of people want the facts - who knew?) I got a LOT of new joins today from people who want the truth. REPOSTING nearly 300 screenshots takes too much time, and I don't feel obligated to do that for people who are willfully ignoring the truth
> 
> And yes, when I received DEATH THREATS a few months ago, I was advised to unfriend anyone who was friends with the person inciting the death threats. I did explain the reason for unfriending those people, that it wasn't personal, and that I would still be available to them if they needed anything - but for the safety of my family, the change needed to be made.
> 
> Some were p*ssed at me. Others understood. However anyone reacted, I don't hold it against them. But I did what I needed to do for my family.


And so I responded sharing the link to my Facebook post which has not had any edits to it,



Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Lest anyone think I sent "the organizer" a death threat . . . when I posted publicly 2/19/17 that I would never work with Rebecca Hamilton, a friend of mine who is a former police officer made the joke "I don't know anything about this, but I have your back girlie. And you know I know how to hide the bodies. " all as completely separate comments. Funnily enough, I NEVER tagged "the organizer" in my post, she just up and decided the Rebecca Hamilton I was talking about was her. She picked up that shoe and put it on.
> 
> And you don't have to join a private group and out yourself on Facebook to see "my proof." I use my real name online and my professional Facebook is public.
> 
> So here you go . . . https://www.facebook.com/elizabethann.west.7/posts/1207835562658589
> 
> So there you go. And it's now 1:28 AM my time.


and then her explanation was:



TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> Elizabeth, not that I think your friend was being funny (though I respect you do) that wasn't the death threat I was referring to. But I'm glad it gave you a giggle when your friend said that. Everyone deserves joy in their life.


And this is what infuriates me and I know others. I have zero money on the line with her. But this is what happens, she uses shock and awe like "Oh, I had to tell people to unfriend you or me because I got DEATH THREATS!" It wasn't remotely a death threat, but a very common exaggeration used about friendship. . . and yes, I have a daughter who is autistic since I know RH also states she is on the spectrum, and if that's the case, she really should have someone she trusts to help her read social media posts. Then again, I know she understands sarcasm as she does use it on her own personal profile.

And funnily enough, she never blocked me at all, I can see all of her public posts on both profiles. But that's the pattern of behavior over and over again, way worse when there's money on the line. Apologies mods if you would rather not have this sequence posted, I just thought it interesting that no, the topic of her forcing people to unfriend on Facebook is one RH addressed on this thread herself. And people can judge the sequence for themselves.


----------



## David VanDyke

jakedfw said:


> Just don't hate me if USA Today bans box sets soon.


I would applaud you if your influence made that happen.

Cheap box sets with, in essence no floor due to printing costs, have turned a semi-individual sport into a total team sport, even if nothing unethical is in play.

It's as if a tennis pro (who does have trainers and sponsors and assistants and so on, so there is some team aspect, like an author with a good publisher) had to compete against 20 people on the other side of the court, all with rackets, willing to do ANYTHING so they could claim they placed at Wimbledon, and somehow got to keep that title, even though they were 1/20th of a team.


----------



## Not any more

Some zombie guy a couple of pages up said:

"Whenever a storm like this arises there are always consequences. Amazon and Paypal both have acted unreasonably in the past. So my fears are: 

- Amazon is going to put an end to multi-author box sets (just from indies of course)
- Paypal is going to implement something draconian when it comes to authors. 
- USA today is going to say "no more indies" or make other drastic changes to the list. 

File this under "this is why we can't have nice things"."

Growing pains. Back in the 90s after the Soviet Union fell apart, Russia was the wild, wild west. St. Petersburg, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, was labeled "hit capital of the world" due to the number of contract murders. 

Again, referring to ancient history, I was teaching in a business program at a major university in the mid-eighties. A guy named Michael Miliken  was the "junk bond king", the first Wall Street trader to take home $200 million in a single year. Two years later he was in prison for manipulating the system. His "secret sauce" turned out to have some toxic ingredients. The group that accredits business schools decided that schools should inject ethics into their curriculum, and I was given the task of developing a minimum set of ethics guidelines that could be incorporated in all of the classes in the business school.

We are independent operators. We deal with Amazon's and Apple's and Google's TOS, but we largely operate in our own little bubbles. And when the big boy publishers and the sales platforms decide to turn right, we often get blind sided. On the other hand, we represent a large economic presence in the publishing industry. At some point, we need to think about our collective welfare and not just our own narrow self interest.

Long term, we need to regulate ourselves and protect ourselves, and promote ourselves. What we don't need to do is fight among ourselves and present an unprofessional image to the world.


----------



## sela

brkingsolver said:


> Some zombie guy a couple of pages up said:
> 
> "Whenever a storm like this arises there are always consequences. Amazon and Paypal both have acted unreasonably in the past. So my fears are:
> 
> - Amazon is going to put an end to multi-author box sets (just from indies of course)
> - Paypal is going to implement something draconian when it comes to authors.
> - USA today is going to say "no more indies" or make other drastic changes to the list.
> 
> File this under "this is why we can't have nice things"."
> 
> Growing pains. Back in the 90s after the Soviet Union fell apart, Russia was the wild, wild west. St. Petersburg, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, was labeled "hit capital of the world" due to the number of contract murders.
> 
> Again, referring to ancient history, I was teaching in a business program at a major university in the mid-eighties. A guy named Michael Miliken was the "junk bond king", the first Wall Street trader to take home $200 million in a single year. Two years later he was in prison for manipulating the system. His "secret sauce" turned out to have some toxic ingredients. The group that accredits business schools decided that schools should inject ethics into their curriculum, and I was given the task of developing a minimum set of ethics guidelines that could be incorporated in all of the classes in the business school.
> 
> We are independent operators. We deal with Amazon's and Apple's and Google's TOS, but we largely operate in our own little bubbles. And when the big boy publishers and the sales platforms decide to turn right, we often get blind sided. On the other hand, we represent a large economic presence in the publishing industry. At some point, we need to think about our collective welfare and not just our own narrow self interest.
> 
> Long term, we need to regulate ourselves and protect ourselves, and promote ourselves. What we don't need to do is fight among ourselves and present an unprofessional image to the world.


Amen. *applauds*


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Quick reminder: several of you have reported getting supportive and positive PMs . . . which is great! But if you get any that are, well, NOT. . . please do report them to us via the link on every PM. 

Back to your regularly scheduled thread . . . . . with a big thank you to the many folks on all sides of the topic who have maintained civility, courtesy, and a general tone of maturity.


----------



## Dpock

Summer Aarons said:


> After reading the entirety of this thread, plus many discussions on FB, I feel the need to chime in. (Anonymously. Sorry. I'm a kboards member most would recognize. I have over 2k posts and this is an account I created when I had planned to use this name as a pen name back in 2014.) I've done a LOT of business with RH. Box sets (no letters earned there, happy to say) and countless promos with Hungry Author and GenreCrave.
> 
> To my recollection, my first interaction with her was through a list-aiming box set, which I already stated didn't hit. One major complaint I had (kept to myself) was that it wasn't made clear what was expected of people prior to joining. (That would give away all the good secrets.) Another one was that those in the set who "already had their letters" did nothing while it was all the people without their letters who had to do all the work. The people with the letters basically donated their book to be a part of the set and never showed up beyond that. I had thought they would be there to help with their expertise, but nope. I don't remember any gifting going on back then, but we were required to purchase the box set on every retailer - not just that but on a very specific day. Same with our newsletters. We had to send emails on specific dates regardless of what we'd promised our subs (new releases only, every other week only, whatever). We were also heavily encouraged to swap purchases with authors in other sets or to flat out purchase other sets to pay it forward.
> 
> As has been mentioned in this thread, she only seems to work hard on a set if one of her books is in it. Hers was not in ours, and we did not make the list. (Again, in retrospect, I'm glad we didn't.) She had reasons why our set didn't hit, but I have my doubts that was the actual reason.
> 
> Thankfully I am not in any of the current sets. I feel bad for the authors involved, and I know many of them.
> 
> As far the GC promos I've been in.... Most have had great results. A few, meh, but those are the exceptions. Now that I know how those results were obtained, it makes me sick! Also, when you pay $100 to join some multi-author promo you HAVE to share it with your newsletter. I've always had a problem with that!! When we pay that much for a promo, we shouldn't have to do anything else! Much less try to get OUR subscribers onto HER list. She gets the emails of everyone who enters the giveaways - that us participants are required to share with our subscribers. Don't ask me why I continued doing these after the first round. I guess it was the results. Again, it makes me sick that I sold myself and my list out like that.
> 
> That's my story. I wish I had the nerve to post under my own name, but I've seen the public callings out. The demandings to unfriend. The shamings and bullying. I just wanted to share my story. Maybe it will help someone wavering on what to think.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


Wow... I just looked at her Facebook page. She seems pretty unfazed by the uproar here -- it's business as usual. I'm glad, as a newbie, that you're all sharing your stories. It's the Wild West out there.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Silly Writer said:


> Good timing! I have rec'd many messages of support--thank you to everyone--but I just accidentally deleted a few msgs that I hadn't read yet and don't know who they're from. Is there a trash can or somewhere I can dig those back out of? My Surface Pro was throwing up random messages all at once and freaking out and I must've hit delete?


Sorry . . . . if you deleted them, I think they're gone, assuming you mean you deleted them via Kboards vs just deleted the email notice that you had one. You can delete the email messages and not delete the actual PMs. They can be accessed directly from kboards via the My KBoards menu item above; the first choice is My messages.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Ann in Arlington said:


> Sorry . . . . if you deleted them, I think they're gone, assuming you mean you deleted them via Kboards vs just deleted the email notice that you had one. You can delete the email messages and not delete the actual PMs. They can be accessed directly from kboards via the My KBoards menu item above; the first choice is My messages.


But if you deleted the posts on the boards, there are still the emails, and you can retrieve them out of your deleted folder.


----------



## LadyStarlight

MyraScott said:


> Personally, if I was worried about my family, I think I'd stop deliberately stirring up drama then telling people they had to take my children into account when calling out my business practices.
> 
> *Anyone who puts their family first should actually put their family FIRST and not use them as a guilt tool when the going gets rough. * Own your business practices. Own your decisions. Your kids didn't make your decisions. Your family only becomes part of this discussion when you bring them into it. If your business impacts your family, the only person responsible for that is you.
> 
> I lose a lot of respect for people who blatantly use children to distract people from issues they've created. It's incredibly manipulative and disrespectful to anyone who does business with you, that you expect people (who have their own children, personal situations and lives) to cut you extra slack for your own business practices by claiming that your children give you a special exemption.
> 
> Thank you SO much for saying this.
> 
> As someone who has children and a business, I find this really horrifying. Children are not shields. Do not throw them under the bus because you have run out of justifications.


----------



## TinyDancer

Personal experience here. I'd speak up publicly if I hadn't already invested money into a Charmed Legacy project with her before her rampage started back in October, and I can't afford to walk away. Thankfully that money partially goes to the cover and editing.

I was in one of her first sets to make the USA Today last and it was legit. We weren't gifting copies out of our a**es. We just worked really hard, made our money back plus a good chunk, and had really strong sell through. It was a legit bestselling title.

After that? It went down hill quickly. The purpose of the sets became about making the lists and the massive amounts of gifting began. Anyone who says she doesn't tell her boxset authors to gift is lying or never checks the FB group for their set. I've been in enough of them to know.

Demands for additional funds starts about 2-3 weeks BEFORE the set goes live to pay for BB ads and FB ads. There is NEVER any accounting showing how money is spent, and she NEVER posts Bookreport graphs showing sales & reads because she says they are too easy to falsify (unlike her typing the totals in to a post). She started paying PAs to do ad work, but we never see an accounting of their hours, the work they completed, and because we have no idea how the money is being spent we don't know what budget they have for the hours they are being paid. How do you have $10K or more in marketing money and not have a record of where the money went? Asking her to provide prrof of money flow shouldn't be an issue if she was using it legit. She should just be able to upload the spreadsheet to the FB group. Authors don't need 300+ screenshots of her BB account (some of which were duplicates although they showed the page from a different position whether intentionally or not) to feel confident in her marketing spending, they need a budget, and an accounting of what amount was paid, to who, for what, and when it was paid.

Since making the USA list, none of the sets I've been in made more than our money back. Of course, we only get paid for 3 months. No idea what's happening to the reads that come in after the book comes down (and reads can come in for months after).

I've witnessed her bullying my friends and been a victim of her bullying. I've seen people unfriended and blocked by her and her "friends" for the simple fact that they didn't join in her bullying of their friends.

What scares me now is she has a group of authors who she as worked very closely with co-authoring and managing sets with who are stepping right in line behind her. They praise her for helping them, but what they're missing is that it's their writing skills and honest marketing that made them successful and she's simply riding the coattails of their legit success. They're starting up courses on marketing using the same tactics she does, and they join in on her bullying (though I haven't seen them start it). It's the second wave.


----------



## 75814

AliceW said:


> Another issue I haven't seen raised yet is the issue of a book promoter/box set organise reviewing your FB friends list. Sounds ridiculous I know, but it's another tactic used to drive a wedge between indies and let's face it, its not a standard business practice.
> 
> Authors are being told they will not be accepted into a boxed set or have promo run until they unfriend certain people.
> 
> Is this hearsay? No. Fact.
> 
> I have received a number of pms from people that start off, "I'm really sorry, but I have to unfriend you to stay in the boxed set..." or "Rebecca says I have to unfriend you if I want my promo to run..."
> 
> And before the naysayers start screaming for screen shots as "proof". No. The authors who have pm'd me are scared the impact any fallout will have on their books and careers. To me, it would be unethical to breach their confidence and share those private pms.
> 
> This is where authors need to exercise just a modicum of common sense. Why on earth should a book promoter/boxed set organiser be at all concerned who you are friends with? It's not a normal business practice. If you're told to unfriend someone before you can book a promo or join a set, ask yourself "huh?"


This kind of crap is really just beyond the pale. Telling people who are in your boxed set that they have to unfriend those you don't like if they want to stay in the set is stuff we all should have left behind in high school. We're supposed to be adults and this is just flat-out childish.

If someone tells you to do this and your first reaction _isn't_ "that sounds like something straight out of Mean Girls," then you really need to reevaluate your priorities.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

TinyDancer said:


> Since making the USA list, none of the sets I've been in made more than our money back. Of course, we only get paid for 3 months. No idea what's happening to the reads that come in after the book comes down (and reads can come in for months after).


Back the truck up.

Are you saying that you are only paid during the time period that the box set is live on Amazon (3 months) and you are not updated and paid any trickle income down the road? i.e. there are no quarterly updates even if it's just a $5.00 payment?

Wow.

Just...wow.

I'm speechless.


----------



## TinyDancer

Krista D. Ball said:


> Back the truck up.
> 
> Are you saying that you are only paid during the time period that the box set is live on Amazon (3 months) and you are not updated and paid any trickle income down the road? i.e. there are no quarterly updates even if it's just a $5.00 payment?
> 
> Wow.
> 
> Just...wow.
> 
> I'm speechless.


yep.

And those who were in the sets where there was a second edition? If they were only in the first edition, they ONLY get paid for the preorders and the 1st week of sales and reads, despite the fact that a set could have been borrowed on day 6 but read two months later. I think the only exception was the initial sets that were already live when amazon's hammer fell and the sets were pulled partway through their 3 months. Those people were paid out up to the date the set was pulled. Everything else supposedly went to the authors in the 2nd edition


----------



## Krista D. Ball

TinyDancer said:


> yep.
> 
> And those who were in the sets where there was a second edition? If they were only in the first edition, they ONLY get paid for the preorders and the 1st week of sales and reads, despite the fact that a set could have been borrowed on day 6 but read two months later. I think the only exception was the initial sets that were already live when amazon's hammer fell and the sets were pulled partway through their 3 months. Those people were paid out up to the date the set was pulled. Everything else supposedly went to the authors in the 2nd edition


That is gross on so many levels.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

In fairness, are the terms of the payouts agreed to in advance, or imposed after monies are collected? That's the hard part . . . I was in a boxed set with 3 other people and we agreed to let the person who hosted the set to get the residual page reads .  . . but the boxed set was only listed for 90 days in KU (the material was not published single until AFTER the set ran, prior to the crack down, we just thought that made sense since the goal was making it a marketing vehicle) and it was agreed to in advance.

If it was made clear BEFORE people signed up there would be no disbursements of any royalties or page reads after 90 days, (well 150 days for the 60 day hold on), that's one thing. It that was instilled after monies were paid, and just people were afraid to push back because of the draconian no refunds rule, then that's different. 

All the more reason to not let fear that opportunity will pass you by if you don't act NOW NOW NOW to make you agree to projects and programs without reading all of the contract/terms. ***

Editing to add : speaking generally, I have my own hardknocks wisdom too,  not judging anyone who jumped too fast and got in over their heads. Happens to all of us.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> That's the hard part . . . I was in a boxed set with 3 other people and we agreed to let the person who hosted the set to get the residual page reads . . . but the boxed set was only listed for 90 days in KU (the material was not published single until AFTER the set ran, prior to the crack down, we just thought that made sense since the goal was making it a marketing vehicle) and it was agreed to in advance.


I think it depends, right? I mean, if the person hosting doesn't even get a percentage and no one paid into it, I can see it being "you keep it after X date." If a person has collected tens of thousands of dollars to run the set...well...I admit I'd be less than impressed.

But, like you say, the agreements also make a difference, too, especially if things keep changing. (I still think the edition waves payments are scummy no matter how I look at it).


----------



## susabella

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> In fairness, are the terms of the payouts agreed to in advance, or imposed after monies are collected?


It was not mentioned in the contract.

The following agreement regarding The Work has hereby been made between The Author and QBW Services, LLC:

The Author grants permission to QBW Services, LLC to publish their work as part of the Dark Fates Boxed Set as a PreOrder for a 3 month period and as a Live Publication for 3 months and 1 week for a total of 6 months and 1 week..

The Author agrees that the boxed set may stay up beyond that point ONLY with their written consent, and that if they agree for it to stay up longer, on a month to month basis, they can request their inclusion removed at any time and it will be removed within 14 working days, but that the collection may still remain live without their title's inclusion.

The boxed set will be priced $0.99 for the PreOrder period and first week live, though QBW Services, LLC is not liable for fluctuations in price set by third party venders such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, or Apple.

The boxed set may be enrolled in Kindle Unlimited at the discretion of QBW Services anytime after the preorder period and for the remaining duration of the collections Live Publication Dates.

The Author will receive an equal share of all royalties earned. Ex: If there are 20 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/20th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 10 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/10th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 25 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/25th after accounting fees are paid. Etc.

The Author will share about the boxed set offer on the dates instructed by the boxed set organizer.


----------



## TinyDancer

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> In fairness, are the terms of the payouts agreed to in advance, or imposed after monies are collected? That's the hard part . . . I was in a boxed set with 3 other people and we agreed to let the person who hosted the set to get the residual page reads . . . but the boxed set was only listed for 90 days in KU (the material was not published single until AFTER the set ran, prior to the crack down, we just thought that made sense since the goal was making it a marketing vehicle) and it was agreed to in advance.
> 
> If it was made clear BEFORE people signed up there would be no disbursements of any royalties or page reads after 90 days, (well 150 days for the 60 day hold on), that's one thing. It that was instilled after monies were paid, and just people were afraid to push back because of the draconian no refunds rule, then that's different.
> 
> All the more reason to not let fear that opportunity will pass you by if you don't act NOW NOW NOW to make you agree to projects and programs without reading all of the contract/terms. ***
> 
> Editing to add : speaking generally, I have my own hardknocks wisdom too,  not judging anyone who jumped too fast and got in over their heads. Happens to all of us.


Contract says:

"The Author will receive an* equal share of all royalties earned*. Ex: If there are 20 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/20th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 10 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/10th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 25 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/25th after accounting fees are paid. Etc."

"QBW Services, LLC agrees to pay The Author any monies owed for The Work's share in the Boxed Set Collection *within three months of receiving those funds from vendors*, provided that The Author has provided adequate payment reception details and that the author is not in breach of contract."

*bold emphasis is my own


----------



## Not any more

What are accounting fees?


----------



## TinyDancer

brkingsolver said:


> What are accounting fees?


Your guess is as good as mine. As I said, she never gave an accounting of any money in or out. I always took it to mean the reimbursement of additional money people paid in for ads, but now I wonder if it wasn't her way of having the wiggle room to pay herself additionally


----------



## Krista D. Ball

I have no issue with box set organizers paying themselves. You just need to know how much it is upfront...


----------



## TinyDancer

Krista D. Ball said:


> I have no issue with box set organizers paying themselves. You just need to know how much it is upfront...


Same. But according to her she doesn't get paid and is doing all of these sets out of the goodness of her heart.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

TinyDancer said:


> Same. But according to her she doesn't get paid and is doing all of these sets out of the goodness of her heart.


True enough. There should be a detailed accounting, especially when this kind of money is flying about.


----------



## susabella

Rick Gualtieri said:


> All I really want to see is an end to blatant gaming of the system and an end of authors terrifying other authors at the say so of any ringleaders. Let's compete with our stories and our marketing savvy, not with loopholes and fear.


Exactly. And if you want to be proactive, below are the sites that are working hard to do this. Friend them. Share their posts, tell them your story.

And thank you, Sir, for taking the active role that started the ball moving. After drive by 1star reviews, tons of click comments on other reviews, a 15 day rant in December because I'd had enough of her non-transparency I pulled out of two sets and her Isa Fae collection (with a 65k WIP complete), and losing friends when Rebecca threatened to drop anyone one who did not unfriend me (I felt like I was back in the 4th grade), I appreciate it greatly.

http://www.thepassivevoice.com/2017/04/the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig/

http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.300.html#lastPos

https://twitter.com/IamScamilton/status/858475081416224768

https://m.imgur.com/dvmHoRa

http://blog.rafflecopter.com/2015/04/no-purchase-necessary-giveaways/


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

That's insane. I'm sorry but yeah passing all kinds of judgement from over here, people need to understand this is NOT a contract you sign. No I'm not a lawyer, but you do this job long enough you learn vague language either hurts you or hurts all the parties involved, never is it a good thing.

Accounting fees should be defined. I don't know how many of you are out there, but it might be time to seek representation for a full accounting... I have books out of KU for 2 years still getting a trickle here and there of page reads.... I can imagine the trickle on boxed sets that had major marketing pushes (assuming those even happened..)

I am just disgusted at this point. So many bad words... I'm walking away before I get myself out on post moderation!


----------



## TinyDancer

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> That's insane. I'm sorry but yeah passing all kinds of judgement from over here, people need to understand this is NOT a contract you sign. No I'm not a lawyer, but you do this job long enough you learn vague language either hurts you or hurts all the parties involved, never is it a good thing.


You won't get an argument from me about this. I've called myself a few names over my lack of judgement.


----------



## susabella

brkingsolver said:


> What are accounting fees?


I assumed it was for formatting fees, and the money she got from the other author's for extra BB ads or to buy and gift the set during the .99 days to make a list was taken off the top of any royalties made. And it was a sizable amount. She is and was extremely nontransparent but always said we could ask - when someone did, she went on day or week long rants, so the majority of authors feared being booted without refund for even asking small things like totals.

Want to mention, there are several sites who are posting screen shots with her face to back up anything said here in this 37 page thread. Here are 2:

http://insideindie.weebly.com/case-1-the-bestseller-list-box-set-gig.html

https://twitter.com/IamScamilton/status/858475081416224768


----------



## susabella

TinyDancer said:


> You won't get an argument from me about this. I've called myself a few names over my lack of judgement.


Amen - but fool me once.... problem is, we can't beat ourselves up about our immaturity. Indie publishing is learn as you go, and Rebecca preys on newbies. Exudes fear, commands authority, and flaunts experience. And we learn. Now we expose.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Tiny Dancer, I just want to say thank you for stepping into the thread. I understand your need to be anonymous and it does not take away from your story at all.

Like others, I am gobsmacked at this "no money after 3 months" thing. I don't even have words for that. But I will say there certainly could be recourse for those who wanted to pursue it.


----------



## spellscribe

ChristinaGarner said:


> Tiny Dancer, I just want to say thank you for stepping into the thread. I understand your need to be anonymous and it does not take away from your story at all.
> 
> Like others, I am gobsmacked at this "no money after 3 months" thing. I don't even have words for that. But I will say there certainly could be recourse for those who wanted to pursue it.


Christina would you or another person here be willing to act as a point of contact for those affected and considering action? This may be a strength in numbers deal, and if each individual had a way to enquire safely, maybe once numbers are known they may be able to connect and work from there.


----------



## thesmallprint

It looks like these public stories are just the tip of the iceberg and that there's a lot going on through PM.  

With every new declaration my sense of wonder is stretched another notch:  surely there is legal recourse here? Aside from the distribution of money aspect, isn't there a law in the US regarding the limits of online behaviour when communicating, even by private message?


----------



## 41419

brkingsolver said:


> Some zombie guy a couple of pages up said:
> 
> "Whenever a storm like this arises there are always consequences. Amazon and Paypal both have acted unreasonably in the past. So my fears are:
> 
> - Amazon is going to put an end to multi-author box sets (just from indies of course)
> - Paypal is going to implement something draconian when it comes to authors.
> - USA today is going to say "no more indies" or make other drastic changes to the list.
> 
> File this under "this is why we can't have nice things"."


Of course this is exactly the kind of thing which will happen. When scammers were abusing KU1, instead of cracking down on scammers, Amazon switched to a shoddy Page Read model. When scammers used tricks to pad out their books and force readers to flip to the back, Amazon cracked down on real authors who legitimately had a TOC in the back. When authors gaming the system used tricks to bend and break exclusivity rules, Amazon tightened the rules on all box sets in KU. When authors bought reviews en masse, instead of punishing those authors, Amazon instituted a dumb automated system which killed lots of genuine reviews.

This is what always happens.


----------



## MyraScott

From a business standpoint, I don't trust someone who, after ten years of being a promotional organizer,_ insists she does it all for free._ Why? After all this time, if she hasn't found a way to pay herself, then she needs to get out of the business.

Either she's making a healthy profit from this business (most likely since she won't account for how these large sums get spent and she can afford to hire people to do the work) or she's a terrible businessperson who honestly doesn't understand how to pay herself. If she can't do that through book promotion, it's time to find another job.

None of it makes sense. She's not the victim, she's the aggressor and pretending she doesn't make any profit simply makes her look like someone who falsifies her claims or a really bad business decisionmaker, neither of generates a lot of confidence when making a decision for your own business. If you are handling tens of thousands of other people's money, this isn't a hobby. It's a business and it needs to be treated as one, which includes paying bank fees (Paypal) and paying yourself. Pretending it is some sort of charity work then begging for personal funds is suspect. It just doesn't make sense.

_*spelling_

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca or Betsy_


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

What I find a bit disconcerting is that if anyone speaks up on any of what I now just group together as the "scam pages", it seems there are several others, who immediately start taking screen shots. How do they know a sh!t storm is coming? The same way Pavlov's dogs knew food would come out, when the bell rang. They've been conditioned to it. This is not normal behavior. A bell shouldn't make your mouth water.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

Does this contract not allow for any accounting request if there's a dispute? What are the resolution terms? (arbitration, state of settlement)


----------



## Thetis

TinyDancer said:


> Personal experience here. I'd speak up publicly if I hadn't already invested money into a Charmed Legacy project with her before her rampage started back in October, and I can't afford to walk away. Thankfully that money partially goes to the cover and editing.
> 
> I was in one of her first sets to make the USA Today last and it was legit. We weren't gifting copies out of our a**es. We just worked really hard, made our money back plus a good chunk, and had really strong sell through. It was a legit bestselling title.
> 
> After that? It went down hill quickly. The purpose of the sets became about making the lists and the massive amounts of gifting began. Anyone who says she doesn't tell her boxset authors to gift is lying or never checks the FB group for their set. I've been in enough of them to know.
> 
> Demands for additional funds starts about 2-3 weeks BEFORE the set goes live to pay for BB ads and FB ads. There is NEVER any accounting showing how money is spent, and she NEVER posts Bookreport graphs showing sales & reads because she says they are too easy to falsify (unlike her typing the totals in to a post). She started paying PAs to do ad work, but we never see an accounting of their hours, the work they completed, and because we have no idea how the money is being spent we don't know what budget they have for the hours they are being paid. How do you have $10K or more in marketing money and not have a record of where the money went? Asking her to provide prrof of money flow shouldn't be an issue if she was using it legit. She should just be able to upload the spreadsheet to the FB group. Authors don't need 300+ screenshots of her BB account (some of which were duplicates although they showed the page from a different position whether intentionally or not) to feel confident in her marketing spending, they need a budget, and an accounting of what amount was paid, to who, for what, and when it was paid.
> 
> Since making the USA list, none of the sets I've been in made more than our money back. Of course, we only get paid for 3 months. No idea what's happening to the reads that come in after the book comes down (and reads can come in for months after).
> 
> I've witnessed her bullying my friends and been a victim of her bullying. I've seen people unfriended and blocked by her and her "friends" for the simple fact that they didn't join in her bullying of their friends.
> 
> What scares me now is she has a group of authors who she as worked very closely with co-authoring and managing sets with who are stepping right in line behind her. They praise her for helping them, but what they're missing is that it's their writing skills and honest marketing that made them successful and she's simply riding the coattails of their legit success. They're starting up courses on marketing using the same tactics she does, and they join in on her bullying (though I haven't seen them start it). It's the second wave.


I don't question your experiences, but you really can't speak for ALL sets. The set I was in released last year and that simply wasn't the case for mine...screenshots from ad spend, BookReport showing earnings, etc. were all provided. And people were paid royalties for the entire duration the set was live.

As for gifting, we were asked to gift copies to any of our readers who wanted an iBooks copy...if I recall correctly, we had the sales needed, but it was close and it was to make sure we still had enough sales if some of those pre-orders were canceled or didn't go through. It was never a requirement just as the Amazon giveaways (again, no Amazon gifting occurred...some of us set up GIVEAWAYS and ultimately, they weren't that many...) were not required of anyone. It was a suggestion, something like, "One way to get the word out about the set is to setup Amazon giveaways and post to social media. Specify you're giving away ten copies and it's first come, first served." *Not everyone did and it was totally fine*. We were not trying to get artificial sales numbers because the amount of giveaways set up were extremely insignificant compared to the pre-orders we already had...but I'll just say this again: I was in a set that did well with pre-orders and we knew we'd hit USAT. There was absolutely no need to do tons of giveaways on Amazon to hit USAT...whether that happens in other sets, I don't know because I've only done one boxset with her and it was NOT necessary for that set.

We were given frequent accounting on ad spend (which did include screenshots) and frequent updates on royalties earned.

I am NOT saying others experiences aren't true because I can only speak for mine...and I think it's best if everyone who has actual experience rather than repeating hearsay only report on their experiences and not generalize about every other boxset.


----------



## unkownwriter

Jake, what ever comes out of your talks, it won't be your fault. Amazon is known to read this forum. I believe Kobo and other sites have done so. I'm sure Zon people are scrambling to figure out how to make a bot that will stop this sort of thing from happening again. I am fearful about what they come up with, because I know it's most likely going to hurt the innocent more than the scammers/questionable business practice people. That's how it always works. The scams just morph and go on, often getting more profitable.

Also, anyone who's reading all of this and are players in the game, however innocently it began, you need to stop right now. Stand up, admit you are wrong, and take the consequences. If you've bullied people, named and shamed people, downvoted, wrote bad reviews, whatever, just know you aren't going to get a pass. But you can make it right and begin to build your reputation back up again.

People need to keep coming forward, telling their stories, bringing light to the dark corners. If you don't, this sort of thing will continue to flourish. It will get to the point there are no other ways to do business but to get in bed with the black hats. Sooner or later, the government will get involved. Charges can be brought for any illegal activity, or anything against civil law. We've already seen Amazon drilling down on TOS. It will only get worse. Amazon drops nukes, the MOAB, they don't do surgical precision strikes. NYT and USA will once again filter out indie books. That helps no one.

A line in the sand has been drawn. Which side will you be on?


----------



## GeneDoucette

waitaminnit.

20 book boxed sets are put into KU for a limited time. 

Contributors only get paid for page-reads for three months. 

This boxed set can live on a Kindle forEVER, and again, it has twenty books in it.

Even if RH spends every last cent of the up-front money, and even if every dime earned in the three month window is distributed appropriately, there's going to be enough page-reads after the three months are up to make this profitable. 

Outrageous.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

she-la-ti-da said:


> If you've bullied people, named and shamed people, downvoted, wrote bad reviews, whatever, just know you aren't going to get a pass. But you can make it right and begin to build your reputation back up again.


I would add one more to this - Anyone who's been in one of her groups and claimed not to see any evidence of bullying please maybe take a bit of time to look more critically or carefully.

That's it.

I know there's been a few posts on here along the lines of "I didn't see anything like that" or "How could you miss that?" I was thinking about it a bit last night and I think it's quite plausible.

It's a combination of how FB works and what we're looking for.

On the first - even in a relatively small group, say 20 or 30 people, there will still be times I'll be scrolling through and notice a thread that's days old that I never saw before. I mean, even in my own group I'd be hard pressed to tell you everything going on at any given time. Multiple that by groups with tens, hundreds, or thousands more and I think it's easy to miss something simply because the algos on FB didn't think we'd be interested.

Secondly is us ourselves. Here's an example: how many us trained ourselves during the last election to scroll through our newsfeeds and ignore anything that even remotely resembled politics? Well, it's no different here. And I don't even mean purposely ignoring drama. For example, if I'm in a marketing group and I only care about XYZ way of marketing, I might easily ignore anything that doesn't have to do with it after reading maybe a line or two, much less a whole thread of comments.

Upon thinking on it, I can easily see how someone can be in an online community for some time and not notice anything awry.

So, in that case, all I would ask would be this: perhaps keep your eyes open a bit more for this sort of thing, maybe click on the group and scroll through the topics a bit more too. It might be a moot point to do so retroactively, because I have heard tales of mass deletions of FB threads as a result of this topic here. However, even if that's the case, it behooves us all to keep a closer eye out for anything amiss such as this going forward.


----------



## ALurker

Summer Aarons said:


> As far the GC promos I've been in.... Most have had great results. A few, meh, but those are the exceptions. Now that I know how those results were obtained, it makes me sick!


Another person dragging out my anonymous account. I've been reading with interest--have never been in a boxed set and never had any interest, but I was looking at the GC Book Blast, since I've generally heard good things about it. So I was startled to see this reference. Did I miss something earlier in the thread, or is there more that hasn't been mentioned? Is the Genrecrave Book Blast shady too? (I guess it's more likely than not if run by the same person, but I guess I was hoping that wasn't the case, since it didn't seem like any of the boxed set tricks would work for it. i.e. Nobody's going to buy a Book Blast only to gift their own book, right? Or would they?)


----------



## Not any more

ALurker said:


> Another person dragging out my anonymous account. I've been reading with interest--have never been in a boxed set and never had any interest, but I was looking at the GC Book Blast, since I've generally heard good things about it. So I was startled to see this reference. Did I miss something earlier in the thread, or is there more that hasn't been mentioned? Is the Genrecrave Book Blast shady too? (I guess it's more likely than not if run by the same person, but I guess I was hoping that wasn't the case, since it didn't seem like any of the boxed set tricks would work for it. i.e. Nobody's going to buy a Book Blast only to gift their own book, right? Or would they?)


It is discussed several times during this thread. It appears the Book Blast uses the same techniques as the boxed set promos.


----------



## jcalloway

she-la-ti-da said:


> Jake, what ever comes out of your talks, it won't be your fault. Amazon is known to read this forum. I believe Kobo and other sites have done so. I'm sure Zon people are scrambling to figure out how to make a bot that will stop this sort of thing from happening again. I am fearful about what they come up with, because I know it's most likely going to hurt the innocent more than the scammers/questionable business practice people. That's how it always works. The scams just morph and go on, often getting more profitable.


It's possible this has already started. I know an author who was asked to prove her USA Today bestseller status earlier this year. She had "USA Today Bestselling Author" on the cover of a book she was trying to publish. The book wasn't published until she sent screencaps and links of the USA Today list showing her name.

She'd hit the list via a multi-author boxset (not one of Hamilton's), so that didn't seem to be an issue. They still published the book even though she didn't hit the list on a solo title.

I haven't heard of this happening to anyone else. I would imagine vetting bestseller statuses requires a lot manpower that Amazon isn't willing to fund (until they develop a bot that will hurt more authors than intended, of course). But unless her case was a one-off, relatively random occurrence, this issue could already be on Amazon's radar.


----------



## ALurker

brkingsolver said:


> It is discussed several times during this thread. It appears the Book Blast uses the same techniques as the boxed set promos.


Sorry. I remembered someone asking if the GenreCrave stuff could be broken into another thread a few days ago (and how much I liked that idea), but missed that the specific scam elements had been discussed. I just did a search and found a post from the 29th. I guess I still don't understand how it works--for GC, there's a separate FB group just to download the books in exchange for gift cards...or something?--but obviously much of this eludes me.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Pretty much the litmus test should be this:

If you not 100% crystal clear how a promotion works such as where it's advertising (a FB group you can be in, a newsletter you can sign up for) don't buy the promotion. We are responsible now for the tactics of book promoters we use.

That goes for any company, because if you buy an ad and it ends up being a click farms or some other thing Amazon objects to, it's your publishing account that's held accountable.


----------



## PermaStudent

Rick Gualtieri said:


> [...]
> 
> Upon thinking on it, I can easily see how someone can be in an online community for some time and not notice anything awry.
> 
> [...]


I've never been involved in any of these box sets or used the GenreCrave promotion, and I'm not a member of the Facebook group in question so I cannot comment on what goes on there. I have (over time) noticed some disagreements or strange behavior between authors (and specifically Rebecca) on Kboards. I brushed it all off as grumpy isolated incidents and personal disputes... Until this thread.



PhoenixS said:


> [...]
> 
> Have I noticed Rebecca's shenanigans? _Who hasn't?_
> 
> [...]


Me, and I bet quite a few others. Sometimes you need to be looking for the pattern to it to see it, I think. Especially when it's so easy to take that kind of bullying to non-public places or other sites (like email, private groups, PMs, anonymous ratings or comments, etc.).

I wouldn't want to be involved with anyone who was a participant in the bullying and shaming described here. It actually really bothers me to wonder who was involved in this and how, and if I'm friends with any of them. Such is the nature of secret groups. I may never know, and I don't intend to start a witch hunt. It's just very troubling.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

PermaStudent said:


> Me, and I bet quite a few others. Sometimes you need to be looking for the pattern to it to see it, I think.


Pretty much my point. I'm sure we've all purposely passed by the occasional post while thinking "I don't need this drama today", but I think more often we just have on the blinders that are our lives. We're looking for what interests us at the time and everything else falls into a bit of a blind spot. And sometimes it's a major "holy crap!" moment when someone grabs you by the proverbial back of the head, points, and says "Look!"


----------



## CassieL

she-la-ti-da said:


> It will get to the point there are no other ways to do business but to get in bed with the black hats.


Just to clarify: for some of us getting into the bed with the black hats would never ever be an option. And for anyone who thinks, "well everyone else is doing it so I have to, too," I'd advise against that mindset. It's an ugly path to walk down.

(And not attacking you at all she-la-ti-da, just saw that comment and had to chime in.)


----------



## PhoenixS

PermaStudent said:


> _Have I noticed Rebecca's shenanigans? Who hasn't?_
> 
> Me, and I bet quite a few others. Sometimes you need to be looking for the pattern to it to see it, I think. Especially when it's so easy to take that kind of bullying to non-public places or other sites (like email, private groups, PMs, anonymous ratings or comments, etc.).


My comment wasn't actually meant to be in reference to all the cyberbullying but to the shenaniganizing ways the box sets have been put together, priced, presented and marketed -- from the Pandora box and "Vampire" being listed as a USA Today bestselling author onward to the present.

Although I have been quite aware of the other too since I've also had friends who've been named and shamed by her.


----------



## Calista Cage

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Pretty much my point. I'm sure we've all purposely passed by the occasional post while thinking "I don't need this drama today", but I think more often we just have on the blinders that are our lives. We're looking for what interests us at the time and everything else falls into a bit of a blind spot. And sometimes it's a major "holy crap!" moment when someone grabs you by the proverbial back of the head, points, and says "Look!"


Cognitive Dissonance? or maybe just apathy?

I also agree totally in how you used the political example. I know even now, I tend to ignore things that I don't want to hear about. But that is just because I am so damn busy with other things that I literally don't have time to follow every single drama.

Sometimes, it's hard to take off the blinders because most of us don't want to see the truth. But once the truth has been revealed, the harder decision is what to do about it.

I applaud everyone here who's stuck their necks out to rectify this horrible behavior. I don't have skin in this game, but I'd be peed off if I did.


----------



## PermaStudent

PhoenixS said:


> My comment wasn't actually meant to be in reference to all the cyberbullying but to the shenaniganizing ways the box sets have been put together, priced, presented and marketed -- from the Pandora box and "Vampire" being listed as a USA Today bestselling author onward to the present.
> 
> Although I have been quite aware of the other too since I've also had friends who've been named and shamed by her.


I apologize for pulling that out of context. I wasn't aware of ANY of it--the bullying or the box sets. I haven't done any multi-author box sets, but I was looking at getting into one and watching for organizers. All I knew about Rebecca until this thread was that she did a lot of box sets and they seemed to consistently sell well. Maybe I would have found out about the shenanigans as I started to research more and ask around. Maybe I wouldn't have found out until I was in over my head (probably not, because a 2k up front is too much for me).

Thank goodness for Kboards, though.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

J.A. Sutherland said:


> Does this contract not allow for any accounting request if there's a dispute? What are the resolution terms? (arbitration, state of settlement)


This is the contract in its entirety. You'll so no terms of resolution nor how to request information on how monies were spent. (The Charmed Legacy contract stipulates such a request can take six weeks to process.) The first lawyer a spoke with--one who practices out of state and was not representing me, just giving an opinion--told me I was foolish to sign a contract so heavily skewed in her favor. I heartily agree with him.

As well, it clearly states the author will receive an equal share of royalties--no provision is included that says those royalties will stop at any point. If those royalties have been withheld, that is an issue the authors could take action on if they chose to. Collectively.

The following agreement regarding The Work has hereby been made between The Author and QBW Services, LLC:
The Author grants permission to QBW Services, LLC to publish their work as part of the Myths and Legends Boxed Set as a PreOrder for a 3 month period and as a Live Publication for 3 months and 1 week for a total of 6 months and 1 week..
The Author agrees that the boxed set may stay up beyond that point ONLY with their written consent, and that if they agree for it to stay up longer, on a month to month basis, they can request their inclusion removed at any time and it will be removed within 14 working days, but that the collection may still remain live without their title's inclusion.
The boxed set will be priced $0.99 for the PreOrder period and first week live, though QBW Services, LLC is not liable for fluctuations in price set by third party venders such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, or Apple.
The boxed set may be enrolled in Kindle Unlimited at the discretion of QBW Services anytime after the preorder period and for the remaining duration of the collections Live Publication Dates.
The Author will receive an equal share of all royalties earned. Ex: If there are 20 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/20th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 10 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/10th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 25 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/25th after accounting fees are paid. Etc.
The Author will share about the boxed set offer on the dates instructed by the boxed set organizer.
The Author has paid or will pay $500 toward expenses of running the boxed set, and this payment is non‐refundable.
The Author retains Copyright Ownership of The Work.
The Author affirms The Work is not libelous or slanderous and that it does not infringe on any existing copyrights and has in no way been pirated or stolen from another source; they assume responsibility for any legalities regarding The Work.
QBW Services, LLC agrees to pay The Author any monies owed for The Work's share in the Boxed Set Collection within three months of receiving those funds from vendors, provided that The Author has provided adequate payment reception details and that the author is not in breach of contract.
QBW Services, LLC agrees to send any tax documents in a timely fashion and in accordance with the law.
The Author agrees to manage all book‐keeping related to the title and to report any income paid to them by QBW Services, LLC to the appropriate agencies.
The Author affirms The Author is the current publisher of this work.
The Author understands that in the event of breach of contract, monies owed may be withheld and legal action may be taken.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

ChristinaGarner said:


> This is the contract in its entirety. You'll so no terms of resolution nor how to request information on how monies were spent. (The Charmed Legacy contract stipulates such a request can take six weeks to process.) The first lawyer a spoke with--one who practices out of state and was not representing me, just giving an opinion--told me I was foolish to sign a contract so heavily skewed in her favor. I heartily agree with him.
> 
> As well, it clearly states the author will receive an equal share of royalties--no provision is included that says those royalties will stop at any point. If those royalties have been withheld, that is an issue the authors could take action on if they chose to. Collectively.
> 
> The following agreement regarding The Work has hereby been made between The Author and QBW Services, LLC:
> The Author grants permission to QBW Services, LLC to publish their work as part of the Myths and Legends Boxed Set as a PreOrder for a 3 month period and as a Live Publication for 3 months and 1 week for a total of 6 months and 1 week..
> The Author agrees that the boxed set may stay up beyond that point ONLY with their written consent, and that if they agree for it to stay up longer, on a month to month basis, they can request their inclusion removed at any time and it will be removed within 14 working days, but that the collection may still remain live without their title's inclusion.
> The boxed set will be priced $0.99 for the PreOrder period and first week live, though QBW Services, LLC is not liable for fluctuations in price set by third party venders such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, or Apple.
> The boxed set may be enrolled in Kindle Unlimited at the discretion of QBW Services anytime after the preorder period and for the remaining duration of the collections Live Publication Dates.
> The Author will receive an equal share of all royalties earned. Ex: If there are 20 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/20th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 10 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/10th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 25 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/25th after accounting fees are paid. Etc.
> The Author will share about the boxed set offer on the dates instructed by the boxed set organizer.
> The Author has paid or will pay $500 toward expenses of running the boxed set, and this payment is non‐refundable.
> The Author retains Copyright Ownership of The Work.
> The Author affirms The Work is not libelous or slanderous and that it does not infringe on any existing copyrights and has in no way been pirated or stolen from another source; they assume responsibility for any legalities regarding The Work.
> QBW Services, LLC agrees to pay The Author any monies owed for The Work's share in the Boxed Set Collection within three months of receiving those funds from vendors, provided that The Author has provided adequate payment reception details and that the author is not in breach of contract.
> QBW Services, LLC agrees to send any tax documents in a timely fashion and in accordance with the law.
> The Author agrees to manage all book‐keeping related to the title and to report any income paid to them by QBW Services, LLC to the appropriate agencies.
> The Author affirms The Author is the current publisher of this work.
> The Author understands that in the event of breach of contract, monies owed may be withheld and legal action may be taken.


Editing to say the final time I downloaded this contract--months after signing it--it had still not been signed by Rebecca Hamilton. The lawyer had choice words about a service provider failing to provide a fully executed contract and the problems that can arise from such a situation.


----------



## Not any more

ChristinaGarner said:


> The Author understands that in the event of breach of contract, monies owed may be withheld and legal action may be taken.


It doesn't specify breach by whom.  In this case, that's kind of like saying, "The sky is blue."


----------



## ChristinaGarner

spellscribe said:


> Christina would you or another person here be willing to act as a point of contact for those affected and considering action? This may be a strength in numbers deal, and if each individual had a way to enquire safely, maybe once numbers are known they may be able to connect and work from there.


My first response to this question is to say yes, of course. But then I started thinking of how an offer to help might mean different things to different people... Well, there are definite limits to the help I can offer, including keeping my own legal strategy close to the vest.

However, anyone who is out money (either in back royalties from this "stops at 3 months" situation or, as I am, for refusing to sign no contracts, etc.) is welcome to reach out. Depending on the volume I might not be able to reply immediately, but with a thumbnail sketch of who is out what amount of money and what steps they are willing to take to get it back, I would be happy to speak with my lawyer about options. She has many years experience in entertainment contracts and I trust her advice. (Benefit of living in Los Angeles--lots of people who specialize in this field.)


----------



## Susanne123

Monique said:


> That is conflicting. I tend to be conservative on these things and think that any attempt to blatantly manipulate rank is a no-no. It's unethical, too.
> 
> For me, using it as a tool to promote your book is okay. If your goal is to manipulate rank, it's not okay. Intent is a wiggley worm.





Monique said:


> That is conflicting. I tend to be conservative on these things and think that any attempt to blatantly manipulate rank is a no-no. It's unethical, too.
> 
> For me, using it as a tool to promote your book is okay. If your goal is to manipulate rank, it's not okay. Intent is a wiggley worm.


I so agree with this. The day that I finally hit publish, I want my book to sink or swim based on merit -- my storytelling ability. To artificially manipulate my rank would make my hard work meaningless.

On another note, Monique, I've missed your clarity of thinking and how you express yourself. To now read why you've been silent on KBoard (up until now) just makes me sad.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

brkingsolver said:


> It doesn't specify breach by whom.  In this case, that's kind of like saying, "The sky is blue."


It's an ish show from beginning to end.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## writemore

I see no mention of how a book and or author bonus is paid for the time it's in KU if it should earn one.  Which, I'd imagine, at least some of them have.


----------



## eleutheria

Mods, feel free to delete if this is too off-topic.

I've seen a fair number of people post about how baffled they are by how this whole thing has gone down (with people taking sides and defending what seems indefensible). Personally, I think it all comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups or the 'us vs them' mentality. Our natural inclination, generally speaking, is to defend those in our 'ingroup' even if rationally they don't deserve it. Just think of someone defending a member of a political party, even if that member has done something against the party line. If that member frames the pointing out of wrongs as persecution, that makes it even easier for those in the ingroup to defend him/her. "Everyone does it! So and so did it worse! Stop bullying so and so for something trivial! But they're really a good person, I swear!" Etc etc.

That's no defense, of course, but I think it makes people's behavior a little more comprehensible. Reasoning out that the person in your ingroup, that you were loyal to, is not the person you thought they were can be very difficult, psychologically speaking.


----------



## Becca Mills

ALurker said:


> Sorry. I remembered someone asking if the GenreCrave stuff could be broken into another thread a few days ago (and how much I liked that idea), but missed that the specific scam elements had been discussed. I just did a search and found a post from the 29th. I guess I still don't understand how it works--for GC, there's a separate FB group just to download the books in exchange for gift cards...or something?--but obviously much of this eludes me.


ALurker, it's becoming difficult to find stuff in this thread. I think these posts cover the specific allegations regarding GenreCrave: 
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488006.html#msg3488006
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488011.html#msg3488011
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488060.html#msg3488060


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Becca Mills said:


> ALurker, it's becoming difficult to find stuff in this thread. I think these posts cover the specific allegations regarding GenreCrave:
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488006.html#msg3488006
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488011.html#msg3488011
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488060.html#msg3488060


You're so right, Becca. Thanks for looking this up and thanks once again to all the mods for working overtime to keep the thread open.


----------



## ALurker

Becca Mills said:


> ALurker, it's becoming difficult to find stuff in this thread. I think these posts cover the specific allegations regarding GenreCrave:
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488006.html#msg3488006
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488011.html#msg3488011
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488060.html#msg3488060


Thank you! (And sorry for the hassle. I really have been following the thread since the weekend, thought I'd caught everything between visits, but obviously missed some pages along the way.)


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

ChristinaGarner said:


> This is the contract in its entirety. You'll so no terms of resolution nor how to request information on how monies were spent. (The Charmed Legacy contract stipulates such a request can take six weeks to process.) The first lawyer a spoke with--one who practices out of state and was not representing me, just giving an opinion--told me I was foolish to sign a contract so heavily skewed in her favor. I heartily agree with him.
> 
> As well, it clearly states the author will receive an equal share of royalties--no provision is included that says those royalties will stop at any point. If those royalties have been withheld, that is an issue the authors could take action on if they chose to. Collectively.
> 
> The following agreement regarding The Work has hereby been made between The Author and QBW Services, LLC:
> The Author grants permission to QBW Services, LLC to publish their work as part of the Myths and Legends Boxed Set as a PreOrder for a 3 month period and as a Live Publication for 3 months and 1 week for a total of 6 months and 1 week..
> The Author agrees that the boxed set may stay up beyond that point ONLY with their written consent, and that if they agree for it to stay up longer, on a month to month basis, they can request their inclusion removed at any time and it will be removed within 14 working days, but that the collection may still remain live without their title's inclusion.
> The boxed set will be priced $0.99 for the PreOrder period and first week live, though QBW Services, LLC is not liable for fluctuations in price set by third party venders such as Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, or Apple.
> The boxed set may be enrolled in Kindle Unlimited at the discretion of QBW Services anytime after the preorder period and for the remaining duration of the collections Live Publication Dates.
> The Author will receive an equal share of all royalties earned. Ex: If there are 20 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/20th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 10 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/10th after accounting fees are paid. If there are 25 books in the collection, The Author will receive 1/25th after accounting fees are paid. Etc.
> The Author will share about the boxed set offer on the dates instructed by the boxed set organizer.
> The Author has paid or will pay $500 toward expenses of running the boxed set, and this payment is non‐refundable.
> The Author retains Copyright Ownership of The Work.
> The Author affirms The Work is not libelous or slanderous and that it does not infringe on any existing copyrights and has in no way been pirated or stolen from another source; they assume responsibility for any legalities regarding The Work.
> QBW Services, LLC agrees to pay The Author any monies owed for The Work's share in the Boxed Set Collection within three months of receiving those funds from vendors, provided that The Author has provided adequate payment reception details and that the author is not in breach of contract.
> QBW Services, LLC agrees to send any tax documents in a timely fashion and in accordance with the law.
> The Author agrees to manage all book‐keeping related to the title and to report any income paid to them by QBW Services, LLC to the appropriate agencies.
> The Author affirms The Author is the current publisher of this work.
> The Author understands that in the event of breach of contract, monies owed may be withheld and legal action may be taken.


It's not the worst contract I've ever seen and pretty much in line with laymen's attempts to come up with something.

There's _a lot_ uncovered in it, though. And I see no clause that royalties shouldn't be paid no matter how long after the boxset ends they come in.

Personally, though, I'd rather go on a handshake than this mess -- it'd be easier to get out of.


----------



## MyraScott

eleutheria said:


> Mods, feel free to delete if this is too off-topic.
> 
> I've seen a fair number of people post about how baffled they are by how this whole thing has gone down (with people taking sides and defending what seems indefensible). Personally, I think it all comes down to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups or the 'us vs them' mentality. Our natural inclination, generally speaking, is to defend those in our 'ingroup' even if rationally they don't deserve it. Just think of someone defending a member of a political party, even if that member has done something against the party line. If that member frames the pointing out of wrongs as persecution, that makes it even easier for those in the ingroup to defend him/her. "Everyone does it! So and so did it worse! Stop bullying so and so for something trivial! But they're really a good person, I swear!" Etc etc.
> 
> That's no defense, of course, but I think it makes people's behavior a little more comprehensible. Reasoning out that the person in your ingroup, that you were loyal to, is not the person you thought they were can be very difficult, psychologically speaking.


I think this needs to be said.

Not only us vs them (which Rebecca Hamilton is using now to whip her followers into a frenzy) but I think the bigger issue is that all of these women she's victimized are good people. I think we, as women, have a little more resistance to making a scene or locking horns with someone,_ especially someone that everyone else seems to like. _ I think we are more inclined to blame ourselves, more likely to be sucked into emotional manipulation and more worried about putting our own standing at risk.

She plays the BFF card, the mommy card and the poor-me card so often, they may be the only ones left in the deck. Who falls for it? The kind. The soft-hearted. The good people.

It's sinister on so many levels because it makes good people question themselves and throws choices in front of them which have no winning hand. Women are challenged that if they go against her, it will be personal. Not only to her, but to all her followers.

My friends who got caught up in all of this are miserable. Miserable if they move forward, scared to pull back.

*This shouldn't happen to anyone because they were trying to promote a book! *

There is no reason to think that buying into a promotion is going to cost you time, money, friends and reputation. It is hard to say, "people should have known better" because we don't expect this sort of drama from a business person and once you are sucked in, there's not an easy way back out.

Making this all public is a huge step towards helping people who want out of the drama to find support so they can.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

I have had some simply contracts for the box sets I've been in (note: none with Rebecca). However, they do have a consistent theme. They identify how much the authors will be paid, and how, and when, and in what currency. They identify how much the organizer will be paid. Then, things like advertising and/or admin are explained. THEN we have either a facebook group or an email update from the organizer who lets us know what ads are running when, plus updating us on sales figures from each outlet, AND the total royalties due to authors minus our ad costs which are all tallied up (and we knew about ahead of time). Then we're paid accordingly (some are monthly, some are quarterly).

You don't need a complicated contract to spell out these things. You just need transparency and regular updates...and then follow through.


----------



## Monique

Susanne123 said:


> I so agree with this. The day that I finally hit publish, I want my book to sink or swim based on merit -- my storytelling ability. To artificially manipulate my rank would make my hard work meaningless.
> 
> On another note, Monique, I've missed your clarity of thinking and how you express yourself. To now read why you've been silent on KBoard (up until now) just makes me sad.


Aww, thank you.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Not getting alarmed at one or two posts might seem reasonable. Or hearing a stray rumor about illegal giveaways or rank manipulation--could be chalked up to just talk.

But a repeated, traceable pattern of behavior is something to be aware of, and probably a good idea to let it inform your decisions about doing/not doing business with a person.

Anyone who is not troubled by what they've read in this lengthy thread, or on her Facebook rants these past few days... Well, I honestly don't know what would bother you.

I empathize with those who feel trapped, but anyone who defends this behavior? I can only shake my head.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## lilywhite

ChristinaGarner said:


> Anyone who is not troubled by what they've read in this lengthy thread, or on her Facebook rants these past few days... Well, I honestly don't know what would bother you.
> 
> I empathize with those who feel trapped, but anyone who defends this behavior? I can only shake my head.


I'm sure it's been said in this thread at least a handful of times, but ... those of you keeping your heads down, trying not to see, trying to pretend it's okay, trying to convince yourself the person she's attacking probably did deserve it? It might be you next time. It WILL be you, one of these times.

And the crazy part is, so many of us will be here to help you pick up the pieces, because that's what this community does. But how many people/friendships/careers will she destroy in the process?


----------



## lilywhite

I'm actually shutting off notifications for this post. I'm that upset about it. Keep fighting the good fight. I've found some new heroes these last few days.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Posting this here since you've blocked my PMs. Sorry to hear you're disappointed. I'm also disappointed you chose to throw out a personal attack against me without even bothering to ask me what my involvement is. Please don't presume to know my reasoning for entering a box set opportunity. Throwing empty accusations around does no one any good.

_Edited to remove quoted post. Personal attacks on those who have come to the thread to describe their interaction with RH in positive terms will not be tolerated. - Becca_


----------



## Monique

Jim Johnson said:


> Posting this here since you've blocked my PMs. Sorry to hear you're disappointed. I'm also disappointed you chose to throw out a personal attack against me without even bothering to ask me what my involvement is. Please don't presume to know my reasoning for entering a box set opportunity. Throwing empty accusations around does no one any good.


Jim,

Considering what's come to light, do you feel differently about your involvement in the most recent set than you did before the thread started?


----------



## Jim Johnson

Monique said:


> Jim,
> 
> Considering what's come to light, do you feel differently about your involvement in the most recent set than you did before the thread started?


Yes. Feel free to PM me or email with other questions. I'm not hard to find.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Jim Johnson said:


> Yes. Feel free to PM me or email with other questions. I'm not hard to find.


For whatever it's worth, (could be nothing, and that's ok) I'm very glad to hear that.


----------



## AllyWho

With regard to residual pages read being kept by the organiser after 3 months... yes this is of concern. Especially as pointed out these are huge sets which easily exceed the 3,000 KENPC limit, which would probably keep the organiser up to date with mortgage and insurance payments. But we are overlooking one thing... people are assuming there *are* pages read.

Possibly this ties back to *how* numbers are achieved for the boxed sets. With gifting, incentivised downloads, paying people to buy, purchase circles etc. How many genuine readers actually spontaneously bought the set and sat down to read it? I've seen some numbers bandied around for pages read while sets are up and they are low.. really, really low.

For me, lack of pages read is further proof that numbers are basically bought to hit a list, but not actually getting into the hands of readers. It's also consistent with the grumbling I have heard from authors of very low, to ZERO read through to other books in their catalogue.


----------



## Monique

Jim Johnson said:


> Yes. Feel free to PM me or email with other questions. I'm not hard to find.


Thank you! PM sent.


----------



## Not any more

AliceW said:


> For me, lack of pages read is further proof that numbers are basically bought to hit a list, but not actually getting into the hands of readers. It's also consistent with the grumbling I have heard from authors of very low, to ZERO read through to other books in their catalogue.


Which begs the question of if these large box sets, put together by anyone, are truly effective. I have a few of them on my Kindle, all bought at 99 cents or free, because I was interested in the authors in the set. But really, how many of you ever opened a 10 or 20 book boxed set and read it? And how many people sit down and read 3,000 pages from end to end?


----------



## Guest

brkingsolver said:


> Which begs the question of if these large box sets, put together by anyone, are truly effective. I have a few of them on my Kindle, all bought at 99 cents or free, because I was interested in the authors in the set. But really, how many of you ever opened a 10 or 20 book boxed set and read it? And how many people sit down and read 3,000 pages from end to end?


They can be effective. I've participated in six, two of them for charity. From the remaining four, three made it to the USA Today list. With each one I got hundreds of new subscribers so I know at least some people must have read them.

Having said that, there was no buy-in in any of those sets and we barely spent $500 in ads for each one. We did not set out to make lists, rather to expand our readership which we did. So the idea that you have to spend tens of thousands of dollars is not necessarily true. What we did was include brand new stories our readers wanted to read as they were part of our most successful series.


----------



## David VanDyke

It occurs to me that anyone who's been the victim of anything illegal or unlawful, whether civilly or criminally, should be filing complaints with the places like the BBB and Consumer Affairs. See this thread:

http://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=250696.msg3490236#msg3490236

Clearly it can take years, but if enough complaints build up, sometimes the government will step in and prosecute, or at least do something to hold bad actors liable. But from my 30 years of government service, I know that a lot of evidence has to build up before it rises to the actionable level.

There's 40 pages of discussion here in this thread: how much effort has been made to lodge complaints in places where it might do some effective good?


----------



## David VanDyke

brkingsolver said:


> Which begs the question of if these large box sets, put together by anyone, are truly effective. I have a few of them on my Kindle, all bought at 99 cents or free, because I was interested in the authors in the set. But really, how many of you ever opened a 10 or 20 book boxed set and read it? And how many people sit down and read 3,000 pages from end to end?


There are actually many voracious readers on fixed and limited incomes. We get fan mail from them all the time, middle-aged or elderly people, thanking us for our free or inexpensive books, talking about how they can only afford to read free books or buy one full-priced book a month, how wonderful it is that someone gave them a Kindle and they can read for free, etc. And we don't even have much Romance in our lineup. I imagine some of the Romance readers are happy to get these box sets and can easily read a book a day, if they're not too long.


----------



## Becca Mills

brkingsolver said:


> Which begs the question of if these large box sets, put together by anyone, are truly effective. I have a few of them on my Kindle, all bought at 99 cents or free, because I was interested in the authors in the set. But really, how many of you ever opened a 10 or 20 book boxed set and read it? And how many people sit down and read 3,000 pages from end to end?


Assuming they land in the hands of real readers, boxes can be really effective. I doubt most people read them cover to cover. Personally, when I download one, I read the first few pages of each book, looking to be grabbed by a new-to-me author. But considering there are likely tens or hundreds of thousands of people checking out at least some of the books, there can be a big read-through impact, especially for the authors near the front of the box.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

David VanDyke said:


> It occurs to me that anyone who's been the victim of anything illegal or unlawful, whether civilly or criminally, should be filing complaints with the places like the BBB and Consumer Affairs. See this thread:
> 
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php?topic=250696.msg3490236#msg3490236
> 
> Clearly it can take years, but if enough complaints build up, sometimes the government will step in and prosecute, or at least do something to hold bad actors liable. But from my 30 years of government service, I know that a lot of evidence has to build up before it rises to the actionable level.
> 
> There's 40 pages of discussion here in this thread: how much effort has been made to lodge complaints in places where it might do some effective good?


When I first spoke with PayPal months ago about getting my money back, they informed me that because I'd paid via F&F they could not help me get the money back. However, they were very concerned with the volume of money being moved via a channel dedicated to non-business payments.

After the call, I received an email from one of the supervisors with this link, directing me to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center: https://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Just to expand a little on the box set comments. They are a great tool for readers and authors, and can be done very legitimately. I have a number of readers on limited incomes, and they came to me from 99c box sets. They can't afford to spend a lot of money on books or writers they won't like, and reading is their entertainment. I have some with vision impairment, so they exclusively read on tablets or e-ink, and adjusts fonts, and so on. Limited library lending in their area means they are stuck with purchasing books.

The box sets give them an opportunity to cheaply try out new books and new series with little to no risk. It's good for them, as it allows them a chance to read without worry. It's good for me, because they do end up buying the rest of my books. And, if they can't, they either wait for sales or ask if they can have a review copy (many then buy later when the book is on sale).

There is room for box set promotions in this business. However, RH has made it challenging for others who run legitimate sets.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Krista D. Ball said:


> There is room for box set promotions in this business. However, RH has made it challenging for others who run legitimate sets.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


I can see how this would be the case and it's a shame. I don't find anything inherently wrong with box sets. I think they could be great tools to find new readers. It's a shame if legit organizers are being affected.


----------



## suliabryon

I cannot say enough how disappointed I am in some of the things being talked about in this thread. I'm aware that very few people here are going to be open to what I'm about to say, but I feel it needs to be said. I've looked at both sides of this debate extensively, and I don't care at all for the bullying tactics employed by many people who claim to be professionals in this business. Everyone wants to accuse Rebecca of bullying, but I've read all of her posts on this subject, and every one has been sharing information and stating what is going on - obviously her tone is not going to be 100% objective, but I defy anyone's to be 100% objective when they are being targeted as she has been. She has not "sent" anyone after anyone else. She has not called them names, or personally attacked them, or built entire websites devoted to hating on them (as they have done to her).

Let me tell you what IS bullying. Because I spoke at length with the author who started this mess. As someone with a lot of knowledge about how Rebecca's sets are run, I tried offering a few facts to her. She admitted to me privately that she didn't have her facts straight when she posted her accusations, and that in fact she was incorrect in several of her implications. When asked if she would admit to this publicly, she said heck no. She said she would only consider taking down her posts - still not admitting to any falsehoods or incorrect suppositions - if Rebecca first took down hers, AND if anyone who had posted on her behalf also took their posts down (as if Rebecca has control of other people). When Rebecca posted about this and said she wasn't willing to submit to this sort of blackmail, this woman sent me a message filled with vile, abusive language that called Rebecca all sorts of names and basically devolved to swearing and name calling. Then she made a post on her personal page which implied Rebecca was a thief and that her only tactic for success was gifting copies, and that the courses Rebecca teaches only teach gifting copies (as someone has taken them, gifting is never even mentioned. Not once.) When I commented on her post and pointed out very calmly that she was making implications and claims that could effect someone's business without any evidence or proof, my comment was immediately deleted and I was blocked. In all of my communications with Rebecca, in all of her posts and comments, I have never seen her descend to that level of vitriol and language against someone else. Not even in a private PM. Does she roll her eyes and make fun of their tactics? Sometimes. But I suppose people here expect her to remain stoic and quiet and say nothing about what is happening or why, or the people behind it. I think that is a completely unrealistic expectation.

This whole "the boxed sets are shady" business is really getting old. The contract being shown on this thread has long since been updated and revised, so it isn't reflective of the contract available now. The fact that nowhere does the old contract have a stipulation for showing proof of where the money goes seems to be bothering people - but Rebecca has still offered proof whenever asked, so I fail to see why that is such a sticking point. The main problem people seem to have is the "gifting" of copies. The boxed set I was in sold 15,000 copies. I didn't gift any. I think a handful of authors in the set may have gifted some to their street teams, but a laughable number when you consider our total sales. Also, gifting is NOT against Amazon's TOS and they address it directly, if you care to bother to read that part: "You are welcome to gift your book to as many people as you like to help promote it. Be aware that gift recipients have the option of choosing a gift certificate instead. Also, as with all Kindle sales, gift recipients have the option to return the gift within 7 days of downloading. Learn more on the Amazon Help page, Give and Receive Kindle Devices and Books." So I'm really tired of hearing people say gifting a hundred books, a thousand books, whatever number they feel like is "against Amazon's TOS". It isn't. Also, trad publishers have used this strategy for literally years upon years. Move on.

When has Rebecca ever said she makes no money from her services? She HAS specifically stated that she makes no money from the boxed set buy in, because she doesn't. She screencapped every ad spend for the set I was in so people could see how she spends - those are available to anyone who bothers to join her FB group and look, btw. The boxed sets are the only promotional service where she only makes money on affiliate income to do them, because she sees them as her way of "giving back" to the author community. And even if she WAS taking a percentage (but she isn't) why would that be a bad thing? She puts a ton of work into those sets. Most people would want to be compensated.

I've used many of Rebecca's services, including her boxed sets. She doesn't promise people to "get their letters". She's not stealing the money. She has admitted publicly to the mistakes made in previous sets that she no longer does, which is more than I can say for many other people. The lengths to which the campaign against her seems willing to go is eye opening in and of itself. I know of another promoter who is highly thought of in various author groups, who routinely steals promotion ideas and wording, down to the actual sign up form language, from other promoters, and who has sold email subscriber lists without permission, and yet people still talk like this person's promotions are so great. I don't go around bad mouthing them. I had a disappointing experience, and resolved to take my money and business elsewhere. I know others have also had bad experiences with this promoter, and yet I don't see hate campaigns launched, as they are against Rebecca.

I truly don't understand why people would devote themselves so thoroughly to trying to destroy someone else. Here is the simple truth: if someone truly is engaging in unethical, violating behavior, they will eventually sink themselves. I've seen it time and time again in life. There is no need to target them and spend so much time and effort attempting to destroy them. And if your goal IS to destroy someone else's livlihood and business, I think it's time to look in a mirror and ask yourself a few hard questions. Hate begets hate. Love begets love. If you can't support someone and their business practices, fine. I choose not to shop at Walmart for this reason. Take your business elsewhere.

I have been in this business - the publishing business - for a long, long time. Long before indie was a thing. I remember following a wonderful site called Predators and Editors. They watched out for authors by posting warnings regarding vanity publishers or shady agents. But they did this AFTER fully and thoroughly researching. They posted references, links and legal documents, not carefully cropped screencaps, assumptions, and guesswork. So if you are telling yourself that you are campaigning against Rebecca and her services in a bid to warn "newbie authors", I suggest you actually fully research it and post actual evidence. And by that I don't mean out of context quotes or quoting authors who have their own agendas.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Jim Johnson

suliabryon said:


> I have been in this business - the publishing business - for a long, long time. Long before indie was a thing. I remember following a wonderful site called Predators and Editors. They watched out for authors by posting warnings regarding vanity publishers or shady agents. But they did this AFTER fully and thoroughly researching. They posted references, links and legal documents, not carefully cropped screencaps, assumptions, and guesswork. So if you are telling yourself that you are campaigning against Rebecca and her services in a bid to warn "newbie authors", I suggest you actually fully research it and post actual evidence. And by that I don't mean out of context quotes or quoting authors who have their own agendas.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


Thank you for this post. I want to add that while Preditors and Editors is largely defunct now (and writers are the poorer for it), one heavy-duty organization that works their asses off to protect writers is Writer Beware, part of SFWA, and I encourage everyone with a genuine grievance and the proof to back it up to get over there and start reporting. The good folks running it take [crap] from no one and will get to the heart of any wrong-doing in due course.

I'd add that some of the people involved in this thread and others who I am confident have eyes on this thread and aren't posting should know that because they're members too.

And if you're an author not involved in any of this at all, or a newbie writer feeling overwhelmed at all of this, use Writer Beware as a resource to help yourself in your career. It's what it's there for. Better information leads to better decisions.


----------



## David VanDyke

ChristinaGarner said:


> When I first spoke with PayPal months ago about getting my money back, they informed me that because I'd paid via F&F they could not help me get the money back. However, they were very concerned with the volume of money being moved via a channel dedicated to non-business payments.
> 
> After the call, I received an email from one of the supervisors with this link, directing me to the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center: https://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx


Good point. This is interstate commerce in most cases, so the FBI may consider any fraud a federal matter.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

suliabryon said:


> I cannot say enough how disappointed I am in some of the things being talked about in this thread. I'm aware that very few people here are going to be open to what I'm about to say, but I feel it needs to be said. I've looked at both sides of this debate extensively, and I don't care at all for the bullying tactics employed by many people who claim to be professionals in this business. Everyone wants to accuse Rebecca of bullying, but I've read all of her posts on this subject, and every one has been sharing information and stating what is going on - obviously her tone is not going to be 100% objective, but I defy anyone's to be 100% objective when they are being targeted as she has been. She has not "sent" anyone after anyone else. She has not called them names, or personally attacked them, or built entire websites devoted to hating on them (as they have done to her).


So let me just clarify. Are you saying everyone here who has come forward with tales of being targeted by her, of being *afraid* of her, are lying?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Sulia,

I appreciate you adding your voice to the thread.

I am baffled by your assertion that Rebecca's posts are strictly "what is going on." She accused me of plagiarism which is a lie and therefor not "going on." She said that I left her box sets because she would not allow me to violate Amazon's rules, something else she knows to be a lie. Perhaps you've missed those posts--but to say she has not personally attacked me (or many others in this thread) is simply untrue.

Also, declarative statements such as "She has not "sent" anyone after anyone else" are problematic because that is beyond your scope of knowledge. She may not have asked you to go after anyone, but that does not mean she hasn't done it, and assuming your experience is everyone's simply does not hold up.

I'm glad you've had good experiences with her. But your experiences don't negate those of the dozens of others in this thread.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Diamond Eyes

I see this in the front of one of these box sets. What exactly are the rules of what you can put in front/back matter to get mailing list signups? And what are the rules about offering things for purchases and order numbers?


----------



## TravisKline

ChristinaGarner said:


> When I first spoke with PayPal months ago about getting my money back, they informed me that because I'd paid via F&F they could not help me get the money back. However, they were very concerned with the volume of money being moved via a channel dedicated to non-business payments.


If a person at PayPal said this to you, and his supervisor had found out, he would've been fired. He breaches an account holders privacy by giving you information about someone else's account. This is a huge no-no.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

KennySkylin said:


> I see this in the front of one of these box sets. What exactly are the rules of what you can put in front/back matter to get mailing list signups? And what are the rules about offering things for purchases and order numbers?


I don't think there's any issue of gift with purchase. Also, plenty of people have free reader magnets for their signups.

Asking for the order number is kinda tacky, but that's about as far as I would take it.


----------



## 75814

TravisKline said:


> If a person at PayPal said this to you, and his supervisor had found out, he would've been fired. He breaches an account holders privacy by giving you information about someone else's account. This is a huge no-no.


No information was given out about anyone else's account.

Christina more than likely told the rep the amount of money _she_ paid through F&F and that it was for a book boxed set. As it was in reality a commercial transaction and thus not F&F, the rep wouldn't have been violating any privacy by telling Christina being told to pay that much money for a commercial transaction via F&F was worrying.


----------



## Jake Kerr

> Thank you for this post. I want to add that while Preditors and Editors is largely defunct now (and writers are the poorer for it), one heavy-duty organization that works their asses off to protect writers is Writer Beware, part of SFWA.


Ah, I'm an idiot. I totally have overlooked Writer Beware. Time for me to point Victoria to the Weebly site. Will be nice to have the SFWA also posting warnings. Thanks for reminding me, Jim! Writing her now. She's been very receptive to these kinds of things in the past when I bring her attention to them.


----------



## IreneP

suliabryon said:


> I cannot say enough how disappointed I am in some of the things being talked about in this thread. I'm aware that very few people here are going to be open to what I'm about to say, but I feel it needs to be said. I've looked at both sides of this debate extensively, and I don't care at all for the bullying tactics employed by many people who claim to be professionals in this business. Everyone wants to accuse Rebecca of bullying, but I've read all of her posts on this subject, and every one has been sharing information and stating what is going on - obviously her tone is not going to be 100% objective, but I defy anyone's to be 100% objective when they are being targeted as she has been. She has not "sent" anyone after anyone else. She has not called them names, or personally attacked them, or built entire websites devoted to hating on them (as they have done to her).


I haven't chimed in here, basically because I don't need the drama. Why would I worry about drama? Because I was a HA client. I noticed some of those "patterns of behavior" then and they are ongoing, now.

I don't have anything against promotion, box sets, etc. etc. If some of the allegations are true, the scale of the methods she's using to reach her numbers is appalling. I'll leave it up to each author to determine what promotional strategies are right for them and in their comfort zones.

But I really, really, did have a problem with the way she defended herself on this board and in other places by attacking anyone who disagreed with her or dared to give anything other than a glowing review of her services.

You might want to look back at past behavior before you take sides on who is being bullied. I'm sorry I didn't take more heed at the time.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## ChristinaGarner

TravisKline said:


> If a person at PayPal said this to you, and his supervisor had found out, he would've been fired. He breaches an account holders privacy by giving you information about someone else's account. This is a huge no-no.


Modifying my post because others said it better than I did.

Also, it was a supervisor who sent the email and she was a woman.


----------



## suliabryon

ChristinaGarner said:


> Sulia,
> 
> I appreciate you adding your voice to the thread.
> 
> I am baffled by your assertion that Rebecca's posts are strictly "what is going on." She accused me of plagiarism which is a lie and therefor not "going on." She said that I left her box sets because she would not allow me to violate Amazon's rules, something else she knows to be a lie. Perhaps you've missed those posts--but to say she has not personally attacked me (or many others in this thread) is simply untrue.
> 
> Also, declarative statements such as "She has not "sent" anyone after anyone else" are problematic because that is beyond your scope of knowledge. She may not have asked you to go after anyone, but that does not mean she hasn't done it, and assuming your experience is everyone's simply does not hold up.
> 
> I'm glad you've had good experiences with her. But your experiences don't negate those of the dozens of others in this thread.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


Okay, let me amend my statement that I have never seen her publicly send people after anyone. In fact, I have seen her encourage people to keep buying the books of authors who have targeted her, that their personal issues with her do not affect their abilities as writers. And no, she has never personally sent me after anyone.

Christina, I have not seen her accuse you of plagiarism. I did see her posts regarding why you left her boxed sets, but no one has true and direct knowledge of that besides the two of you. I don't know one way or the other the reason for your leaving. Her posts were more about the accusation people were making regarding her violating Amazon's TOS, and she was stating that yes, she did wrongly consider doing so in the past, and these are the conversations that prove it, but it was wrong to do so and something she is not proud of. I think a lot of authors out there can say they've flaunted the line of Amazon's TOS one time or another, and probably a lot of them wouldn't admit it, or even think that is was anything wrong considering how many authors seem to believe that Amazon is both an ally and an enemy. Do I think that's right? No. But I applaud Rebecca for admitting it, and I can say with personal knowledge that it wasn't an option or strategy in the boxed set I was in. I understand you feel you were grievously wronged. Maybe you were. I know you have a lawyer and so does Rebecca, so I'm not going to debate who was right and who was wrong. That's between the two of you and your lawyers.

Rick - to address your question, obviously no I don't think everyone who has a negative experience with Rebecca and her services is lying. I do think it is unrealistic to expect any business to have a 100% satisfaction rate, and I'm not surprised that people have had disagreements with her. I used to sell jewelry online, and let me tell you, disagreements, miscommunications, and disappointments happen. I even had someone accuse me of "stealing her designs" once. These were stud earrings, mind you, which amount to buying settings from wholesale suppliers and setting stones in them, something any jeweler worth their craft can and does do. The real issue turned out to be my pictures, which I took outdoors on my deck in natural sunlight, after the advice of a pro-photographer friend of mine. Turned out, this other jeweler ALSO took her photos outside in her yard in natural sunlight, and she livd about 45 minutes from me. So naturally, our pictures had a similarity as we both had similar foliage, lighting, etc. I had never even heard of her before she sent me a cease and desist. I got the feeling at the end of our conversation that she still believed I was somehow "copying" her designs, but I wasn't going to change my business just to make her happy. Just an example of how conflict can arise, and how perspectives of the disagreeing circumstances can be very different.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## MyraScott

suliabryon said:


> Christina, I have not seen her accuse you of plagiarism.


I have. And she's blocked me. Weird that you didn't see it... did you look?



suliabryon said:



> Rick - to address your question, obviously no I don't think everyone who has a negative experience with Rebecca and her services is lying. I do think it is unrealistic to expect any business to have a 100% satisfaction rate, and I'm not surprised that people have had disagreements with her.


Wow.

It's like you just don't want to believe that people are telling the truth. Or, just for example, you really think it's fine for a promotional organizer to go through a business partner's friends' lists and tell them who they have to unfriend in order to participate, after they've paid money for a service?

Is that just business? Perfectly acceptible and businesslike?


----------



## mdrake

brkingsolver said:


> Which begs the question of if these large box sets, put together by anyone, are truly effective. I have a few of them on my Kindle, all bought at 99 cents or free, because I was interested in the authors in the set. But really, how many of you ever opened a 10 or 20 book boxed set and read it? And how many people sit down and read 3,000 pages from end to end?


I've been following this thread with interest, and while I get the concern of "if there's no page reads, does that draw into question the legitimacy of sales?" (it's a reasonable logical progression) I think there's an equally plausible explanation. I'd just hate to see this get too far off track with a lot of wild speculation about "well, if this, then that, surely"

I am a KU subscriber BUT if I see a box set (10+ books) for 99 cents, I'll buy it, not borrow it. Yes, I do read at least some of the offerings.

Here's why

KU allows 10 slots for books. It sounds like a lot, and maybe if you are a person who reads what they check out, then returns it, this works. But I'm one of those book hoarders (for better or worse) and my KU slots are usually full.

I find juggling the slots and return process a little aggravating, so if I see a 10+ book boxset for 99 cents, it's worth it to me to buy it and throw it on my pile for later.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

mdrake said:


> KU allows 10 slots for books. It sounds like a lot, and maybe if you are a person who reads what they check out, then returns it, this works. But I'm one of those book hoarders (for better or worse) and my KU slots are usually full.


I never thought of that. Thanks!


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

suliabryon said:


> Rick - to address your question, obviously no I don't think everyone who has a negative experience with Rebecca and her services is lying. I do think it is unrealistic to expect any business to have a 100% satisfaction rate, and I'm not surprised that people have had disagreements with her. I used to sell jewelry online, and let me tell you, disagreements, miscommunications, and disappointments happen. I even had someone accuse me of "stealing her designs" once. These were stud earrings, mind you, which amount to buying settings from wholesale suppliers and setting stones in them, something any jeweler worth their craft can and does do. The real issue turned out to be my pictures, which I took outdoors on my deck in natural sunlight, after the advice of a pro-photographer friend of mine. Turned out, this other jeweler ALSO took her photos outside in her yard in natural sunlight, and she livd about 45 minutes from me. So naturally, our pictures had a similarity as we both had similar foliage, lighting, etc. I had never even heard of her before she sent me a cease and desist. I got the feeling at the end of our conversation that she still believed I was somehow "copying" her designs, but I wasn't going to change my business just to make her happy. Just an example of how conflict can arise, and how perspectives of the disagreeing circumstances can be very different.


I appreciate the clarification, thanks.

What strikes me as different is we have posts here on kboards all the time about various businesses, including ones that people have felt have done them wrong. It's pretty common.

Not common are people coming forward, who haven't been here in a while, claiming they left because of either harassment or fear of harassment by a particular individual. One person doing so, even two, might be a fluke. But there's been a good half dozen in this thread alone and many of us have been PM'd by many further still.

It's a very worrisome thing to see since I can't think of any other book marketing company that elicits such a response


----------



## suliabryon

MyraScott said:


> I have. And she's blocked me. Weird that you didn't see it... did you look?
> 
> Wow.
> 
> It's like you just don't want to believe that people are telling the truth. Or, just for example, you really think it's fine for a promotional organizer to go through a business partner's friends' lists and tell them who they have to unfriend in order to participate, after they've paid money for a service?
> 
> Is that just business? Perfectly acceptible and businesslike?


I like to have proof of wrongdoing. Thus far, I've seen very little in the way of "hard evidence" against Rebecca. For example, someone commented on the Passive Voice post that authors have "had their kdp accounts shut down" because of Rebecca. Who are these people? When? Why? And how exactly is Rebecca responsible and where is the proof? As to your example, I remember when she had to remove anyone from her list who had a particular person friended, because this person has spearheaded an attack against her that actually included personal threats. She told people up front she was going to have to do this, and she was sorry about it and would add people back as soon as the situation resolved and settled. Unfortunately, it is still ongoing. She didn't tell people they had to unfriend her. She said she had to remove anyone who did have her friended just to protect herself and feel safe, and she was sorry to have to do it. One author I know who totally understood this choice and was unwilling to unfriend this other person willingly removed herself from Rebecca's list without taking it personally. And she and Rebecca still get along in various author groups just fine, they just aren't on each other's friends lists. Which is how a professional would handle something like that. Equating it to a middle school "You can't be friends with her if you're friends with me" mentality ignores that more serious reasons behind Rebecca's decision.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Monique

suliabryon said:


> I do think it is unrealistic to expect any business to have a 100% satisfaction rate, and I'm not surprised that people have had disagreements with her.


This isn't about unsatisfied customers; it's about a shady way of doing business, of personal bullying, and manipulation.


----------



## MyraScott

suliabryon said:


> I like to have proof of wrongdoing before I engage in a witch hunt. Thus far, I've seen very little in the way of "hard evidence" against Rebecca. For example, someone commented on the Passive Voice post that authors have "had their kdp accounts shut down" because of Rebecca. Who are these people? When? Why? And how exactly is Rebecca responsible and where is the proof? As to your example, I remember when she had to remove anyone from her list who had a particular person friended, because this person has spearheaded an attack against her that actually included personal threats. She told people up front she was going to have to do this, and she was sorry about it and would add people back as soon as the situation resolved and settled. Unfortunately, it is still ongoing. She didn't tell people they had to unfriend her. She said she had to remove anyone who did have her friended just to protect herself and feel safe, and she was sorry to have to do it. One author I know who totally understood this choice and was unwilling to unfriend this other person willingly removed herself from Rebecca's list without taking it personally. And she and Rebecca still get along in various author groups just fine, they just aren't on each other's friends lists. Which is how a professional would handle something like that. Equating it to a middle school "You can't be friends with her if you're friends with me" mentality ignores that more serious reasons behind Rebecca's decision.


So the people who claim she made them unfriend others after they had paid are making it up. Or, are you saying this is a reasonable business requirement?


----------



## Guest

MyraScott said:


> So the people who claim she made them unfriend others after they had paid are making it up. Or, are you saying this is a reasonable business requirement?


Who did this happen to? This is the first time I'm hearing it in this long thread.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

WildRose said:


> Who did this happen to? This is the first time I'm hearing it in this long thread.


Re-read the thread. It's around page 20 forward, if I recall.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

WildRose said:


> Who did this happen to? This is the first time I'm hearing it in this long thread.


Then you haven't read it in its entirety.


----------



## wheart

As an objective observer looking at this issue from both sides, people involved do need to make sure that you're telling the 'whole' story when posting your complaints.

Why I had asked questions to Christina and Patty earlier on about if they were told about the terms/conditions and what was going to be involved before signing the contract (like being refunded with royalites (for Christina) and if the particular days slotted for the mailing list newsletters was for a reason (for Patty)) was because the 'whole' picture needs to be told in fairness to all involved.

Why is this important to me? Because I've experienced this firshand myself. I'm going to share this only to prove my point about why it's important ... Many eons ago I sold one of my product divisions to a company. They couldn't pay for it upfront, so I had the contract made where they could pay me incrementally every month for a certain period of months. When the company couldn't pay what was agreed upon on time, I amended the contract to something they said they could better handle. But again they couldn't keep their commitment after a few months had gone by, so I amended the contract YET another time. Finally, after MANY months (well past the agreed upon dates) had past, I had to terminate the contract since they just couldn't follow through and I didn't feel they ever would. Another company heard about the fallout and wanted to buy it, so that worked out in the end.

However, that second company told me that the first company had spread rumors that the deal fell through because I changed the contract on them multiple times. Of course, they never mentioned WHY I had to do so (which was for their benefit, giving them smaller payments within a wider time period) and probably gained sympathy from those who believed the fault was 100% mine. Back then, there wasn't a forum where I could tell my side of the story, so it's good that nowadays both sides can be heard.

This is why I ask questions when I only hear one side of the story being told, so that everyone can get the 'whole' picture and not just a part of it.

Most of those here who have been posting their firsthand experiences (on both sides) are doing so amicably. Some admitting to their mistakes, which is honorable. Not many people will post objectively, being totally open about their own mistakes, when stating their case. 

So please let your conscience be your guide, and if we're leaving out information that is important and pertinent to the 'whole story,' we need to ask ourselves ... are we being honorable and acting with integrity when we do that?

So please, be totally honest with telling the 'whole' story when disclosing your claims. It's the right thing to do.


----------



## Becca Mills

Perry. 

WildRose, anything resembling another personal attack and you will be banned from further posts in the thread.


----------



## MyraScott

WildRose said:


> Who did this happen to? This is the first time I'm hearing it in this long thread.


Tiny Dancer
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3489720.html#msg3489720
Susabella
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3489754/topicseen.html#msg3489754
AliceW
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3489627.html#msg3489627
Summer Aarons
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3489672.html#msg3489672
Elizabeth Ann West
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3486108.html#msg3486108
Patty Jansen
https://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3488206.html#msg3488206

Are you guys saying all of these were justified business reasons? Or all of these people have had run in's with Rebecca Hamilton because they are the ones who are at fault and deserved this treatment?

Seriously, if you believe that, go ahead and say yes, all these people brought this on themselves and this is what people who do business with Rebecca Hamilton should expect and it's perfectly ok.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

She literally got into it with me about why she demanded people unfriend me on Facebook. Said it was because of Death Threats. People I've been friends with for YEARS PM'd me to tell me they had thousands tied up and risked losing promotions they've paid for and could I understand. We still talk on other forums and I totally understood. that's on page 9-12 of this thread, and I even put together the whole sequence on page 38 or 39 quoting her responses so they couldn't be edited later as many threads here become (and I'm not talking about mod edited stuff, that happens but they always put a note).

Even if her biggest flaw is just bad contracts, from the boxed set contracts that state all royalties will be disbursed and provisions that all royalties can be withheld on breach on contract (with no definition of that is breach of contract or by whom), to the "shared world" fiascos waiting to happen the second someone wants to sell secondary rights to their stories in her world . . .it's a flaw we would not tolerate any publisher doing to indie authors.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## suliabryon

MyraScott said:


> So the people who claim she made them unfriend others after they had paid are making it up. Or, are you saying this is a reasonable business requirement?


Hi Myra, I have no personal knowledge of people who were forced to unfriend her to keep services they paid for. Did this happen to you personally, or is it hearsay? As far as I remember, Rebecca specifically stated that services already paid for would continue to happen, communication would just be through email vs. Facebook. If people were unhappy with that, I'm not sure what else they expected Rebecca to do? From what I saw, Rebecca was as accommodating as she could be while doing what was necessary to protect herself. Honestly, I can't say that I wouldn't have made the same choice if I was experiencing online threats. I watched the horrendous situation that was GamerGate go down, as women in gaming were threatened and stalked. I know I wouldn't let it get that far before I took steps to protect myself.

You keep asking me if I think people are lying. I'm not accusing anyone of lying, but I do think people are less than objective in their perspectives, and I do ask for actual proof before condemning someone.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## PhoenixS

suliabryon said:


> Christina, I have not seen her accuse you of plagiarism. I did see her posts regarding why you left her boxed sets, but no one has true and direct knowledge of that besides the two of you. I don't know one way or the other the reason for your leaving. Her posts were more about the accusation people were making regarding her violating Amazon's TOS, and she was stating that yes, she did wrongly consider doing so in the past, and these are the conversations that prove it, but it was wrong to do so and something she is not proud of. I think a lot of authors out there can say they've flaunted the line of Amazon's TOS one time or another, and probably a lot of them wouldn't admit it, or even think that is was anything wrong considering how many authors seem to believe that Amazon is both an ally and an enemy. Do I think that's right? No. But I applaud Rebecca for admitting it, and I can say with personal knowledge that it wasn't an option or strategy in the boxed set I was in. I understand you feel you were grievously wronged. Maybe you were. I know you have a lawyer and so does Rebecca, so I'm not going to debate who was right and who was wrong. That's between the two of you and your lawyers.


On the weebly site is a screenshot of the accusation against Christina regarding their discussion around the propriety of having a book in Select in the box set when it's wide. Rebecca admitted to "almost" crossing that line. Yet in the comments on that site, a number of Select books are listed that were in the box sets that were wide during preorder and on launch. Some of those books named are Rebecca's. Those assertions don't tally.

And I'll bring the discussion back again from the topic of cyberbullying and ask about Amazon TOS violations, such as the practice of pricing each set at 99 cents (it even says that's what they'll be priced right in the contract terms that have been shared here) when anyone running these sets would know in advance that 20 full-length books would go well over the 3MB threshold, along with the practice of putting half the file on instafreebie, when the T&Cs for files clearly state that linking offsite for the balance of content is a violation.

As for hard evidence, the box set that went live on Tuesday is clearly price-matched. It is RIGHT NOW in clear violation.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/

I haven't seen one person in any of the sets address these issues -- neither to refute nor defend these violations. Why is that?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I am right here raising my hand happened to ME! :waves: Ya'll keep saying hearsay, but I don't think that word means what you think it means . . .

And multiple people witnessed the PUBLIC POST Rebecca Hamilton made stating people had a few hours to unfriend me, Patty Jansen, Susan Stec, and Jeni Decker. 

I'm sure the mods are going to be stepping in soon.... so I will keep this civil. But I am right here. It happened to me. I literally had to comfort people who had been my Facebook friend since 2010 when we were aspiring authors together.


----------



## Michelle Hughes

I find it somewhat disgusting that this information is up on Kboards and people have decided to become Judges without any tangible proof being given.  This is a person's livelihood we're talking about and if there is a legal dispute then it belongs in a court and not on a public board.  I'm a very fair person and I can only say that I've been very happy with the work I've paid for. I have seen no sign of manipulation.  Unless you have personal knowledge that pertains to you then I'd say take any of this with a grain of salt and consider why dirty laundry is being aired on a public forum about a person's business.  It's not professional, and without legal proof, it's all hearsay.  I'd feel really bad if I were the one sharing rumors without a court document to back up my information.  Have a great day


----------



## suliabryon

PhoenixS said:


> On the weebly site is a screenshot of the accusation against Christina regarding their discussion around the propriety of having a book in Select in the box set when it's wide. Rebecca admitted to "almost" crossing that line. Yet in the comments on that site, a number of Select books are listed that were in the box sets that were wide during preorder and on launch. Some of those books named are Rebecca's. Those assertions don't tally.
> 
> And I'll bring the discussion back again from the topic of cyberbullying and ask about Amazon TOS violations, such as the practice of pricing each set at 99 cents (it even says that's what they'll be priced right in the contract terms that have been shared here) when anyone running these sets would know in advance that 20 full-length books would go well over the 3MB threshold, along with the practice of putting half the file on instafreebie, when the T&Cs for files clearly state that linking offsite for the balance of content is a violation.
> 
> As for hard evidence, the box set that went live on Tuesday is clearly price-matched. It is RIGHT NOW in clear violation.
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/
> 
> I haven't seen one person in any of the sets address these issues -- neither to refute nor defend these violations. Why is that?


If you use Pronoun to upload, you can price the large boxed sets at $0.99 and NOT be in violation of Amazon's TOS. Or so I have heard from several different people (not Rebecca). Perhaps that is the case here.


----------



## Krista D. Ball

Michelle Hughes said:


> Unless you have personal knowledge that pertains to you


There is plenty of personal knowledge in this thread.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

Why do people keep throwing out the term "hearsay" while denying all of the _first hand accounts_ on this very thread? It's the opposite of hearsay.


----------



## sela

> I truly don't understand why people would devote themselves so thoroughly to trying to destroy someone else. Here is the simple truth: if someone truly is engaging in unethical, violating behavior, they will eventually sink themselves. I've seen it time and time again in life. There is no need to target them and spend so much time and effort attempting to destroy them. And if your goal IS to destroy someone else's livlihood and business, I think it's time to look in a mirror and ask yourself a few hard questions. Hate begets hate. Love begets love. If you can't support someone and their business practices, fine. I choose not to shop at Walmart for this reason. Take your business elsewhere.


I have an undergrad degree in science. One of the things we're taught is skepticism. We always look for possible sources of error so that we can be aware of how they might affect the conclusions we draw about experiments.

So, it's always good to take a skeptical stance when it comes to any issue, especially internet kerfuffles.

I always stop myself and ask, "Is it possible I'm wrong about what I'm thinking on this matter? Where could I be wrong? What could I see that would make my conclusion more firm / less firm?"

I don't know Rebecca Hamilton from a hole in the ground. I have never had anything to do with her. I didn't even know she existed until the stories started coming in last year.

I've have stopped myself several times to ask those questions: what proof is there to any of this? Who is believable? Who is suspect? How good is the evidence?

For me, the biggest guide in this is Occam's Razor.

Occam's Razor states that if there are two (or more) explanations for something, the simpler one is usually better. The more complicated an explanation becomes, the more likely it is to be less likely.

For example, when we see patterns in wheat fields, the simplest answer is that pranksters have used wooden boards to make them. The more complex answer is that aliens from outer space have visited our earth in ships that are invisible to human radar and have left patterns in crops using antigravity devices as signals to other aliens that... that...

I don't why but I hope you get my drift.

So, when it comes to this matter, on the one hand I have the explanation that:

RH is the innocent aggrieved party in this matter. She is merely the victim of jealous people who want to hurt her and destroy her career. It's all because she is so successful that others envy her and hate her and want to destroy her career. For the past 5 years at least, she has been the ongoing target of nasty jealous people who have left wrong bad reviews on her books and/or service website. Those people have lied and cheated and tried to repeatedly bring her down out of malice. She has behaved selflessly through it all, and when she did do something wrong, it was purely by accident or because she is so giving and tries too hard to please everyone. Any problems with her business were all due to Amazon changing its TOS or other mix ups. She also has a very hard life, various mental and physical difficulties or disabilities and children with disabilities, is financially strapped, pregnant, and needs help with buying a house despite a close to seven figure income for one year. She only does it all for others. She is a saint, really. A practical martyr. The haters will hate but why anyone would hate such a saintly person is beyond our ken. They are all just bad people, all those calling her names and accusing her of black hat methods, of fraud and lying and bullying. In other words, there is a massive conspiracy against her from a large group of angry jealous people who will not leave her alone.

The other option is that she used shady methods to reach bestsellers status and run promotions, lied about it afterwards, named and shamed people when she was caught or wanted sympathy, and has some deep-seated issues that have led to a 5+ year-long pattern of behaviours that suggests the problem is with her, not all those who have come forward at personal risk to claim that she has harmed them.

Frankly, Occam's Razor tells me the second option is simpler and I have to do fewer mental gymnastics to believe.

What I do know are several people she has harmed through her methods and through her bullying. People I have come to know on other forums who have lost thousands of dollars and who have felt abused and threatened, and have withdrawn from a more public life because they felt so terrible and were embarrassed by what happened to them.

What I also have discovered via the screenshots and links is that there has been smoke following RH for years. There are reports of her harassing reviewers, and other examples of authors behaving badly, since 2012. When someone continually has smoke surrounding them, controversy and conflict for years, it is a clear pattern. It suggests that there is something deeper wrong.

Now, she may have also treated some people well during that time. She may have organized some boxed sets that did well during that time using legitimate methods.

Those don't negate the examples of using shady techniques to get a boxed set bestsellers designations, such as group gifting and buying. It doesn't negate the bullying reported and that she encouraged others to engage in towards other authors who have questioned her methods or have wanted to pull out of boxed sets because they didn't feel comfortable with her tactics. It doesn't negate the times she has clearly breached TOS and knowingly broken the rules.

So, yes, I believe that you may have been treated well. You may have only seen one side of her. You may not believe the reports of others that she has harmed them and taken their money and treated them badly. BUT you have to believe that there is this huge massive conspiracy against her out of jealousy to think that all these reports and screenshots and testimonials are lies.

Why would anyone go to all that trouble to band together to destroy one single author/promoter if there is no reason?

Does she really deserve that much professional jealousy that dozens of authors would come forward to relate their personal stories of being harmed or seeing shady methods?

I know a dozen authors who are much bigger sellers than her who got their designation of NYTs and USAT from their own single title books at full price, thankyouverymuch. You don't see this level of smoke and controversy surrounding the really big sellers.

No one is jealous of her success because frankly, it's all smoke and mirrors. What they are is aggrieved and harmed and wanting to warn others to stay the frick away.


----------



## MyraScott

suliabryon said:


> If you use Pronoun to upload, you can price the large boxed sets at $0.99 and NOT be in violation of Amazon's TOS. Or so I have heard from several different people (not Rebecca). Perhaps that is the case here.


Rebecca stated herself that she splits the set in order to slide under the .99 size requirement.

If you like proof, here you go:

insideindie.weebly.com/rank-manipulation-tactics.html

The whole second section of that discusses how to get around the size limitation because Amazon REFUSES to change the rules for Rebecca Hamilton, even though she kept calling to try and get a different customer service rep who would bend the rules. For some reason, they kept routing her to the same rep who said "no" so just forcing it in anyway isn't working.

_*Added the requested proof in Rebecca's own words_

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Guest

PhoenixS said:


> On the weebly site is a screenshot of the accusation against Christina regarding their discussion around the propriety of having a book in Select in the box set when it's wide. Rebecca admitted to "almost" crossing that line. Yet in the comments on that site, a number of Select books are listed that were in the box sets that were wide during preorder and on launch. Some of those books named are Rebecca's. Those assertions don't tally.
> 
> And I'll bring the discussion back again from the topic of cyberbullying and ask about Amazon TOS violations, such as the practice of pricing each set at 99 cents (it even says that's what they'll be priced right in the contract terms that have been shared here) when anyone running these sets would know in advance that 20 full-length books would go well over the 3MB threshold, along with the practice of putting half the file on instafreebie, when the T&Cs for files clearly state that linking offsite for the balance of content is a violation.
> 
> As for hard evidence, the box set that went live on Tuesday is clearly price-matched. It is RIGHT NOW in clear violation.
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01N18NFS9/
> 
> I haven't seen one person in any of the sets address these issues -- neither to refute nor defend these violations. Why is that?


No, the plagiarism is about the book by the box set organizer that was uploaded to Kobo (by a random person, not the author/organizer) and then reported as being plagiarized. And just FYI, having a book wide and in KU is not considered plagiarism.


----------



## AllyWho

suliabryon said:


> You keep asking me if I think people are lying. I'm not accusing anyone of lying...


Yes you are. You have already stated that the unfriending didn't happen. As Elizabeth replied, it has happened to a number of us in this thread. I was one of them and I have numerous pms from former friends who told me they *had *to unfriend me or lose money.

You have also stated the bullying didn't happen, but again I have numerous pms from authors who were bullied and hounded so bad, some went into hiding because they thought their careers were over. They received abusive messages, books 1-starred etc Just because you've never experienced it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Keep in mind this is a *business*. Why on earth should a business care who you are friends with, this isn't high school? Why would a business construct an atmosphere of fear and intimidation to keep people from speaking out?

Nobody here is telling you who to do business with, we're just pointing out do your due diligence. Know how a promotion or services operates. Personally, I don't want to use a service that runs a secret FB group of incentivised readers to manipulate rank. If you're fine with a business's practices and it fits with your business model, go for it. Others run their businesses differently. Everyone has a different "nope" tolerance.


----------



## PhoenixS

suliabryon said:


> If you use Pronoun to upload, you can price the large boxed sets at $0.99 and NOT be in violation of Amazon's TOS. Or so I have heard from several different people (not Rebecca). Perhaps that is the case here.


That box is not uploaded through Pronoun. It would say Macmillan on it. As do the preorders that ARE uploaded through Pronoun.


----------



## PhoenixS

WildRose said:


> No, the plagiarism is about the book by the box set organizer that was uploaded to Kobo (by a random person, not the author/organizer) and then reported as being plagiarized. And just FYI, having a book wide and in KU is not considered plagiarism.


That's a completely different discussion and has zilch to do with any of what I posted.


----------



## Becca Mills

Okay, sorry, give me 10 minutes. I stopped to look some stuff up earlier in the thread and suddenly there are 20 unread posts.


----------



## Becca Mills

Michelle Hughes said:


> I find it somewhat disgusting that this information is up on Kboards and people have decided to become Judges without any tangible proof being given. This is a person's livelihood we're talking about and if there is a legal dispute then it belongs in a court and not on a public board. I'm a very fair person and I can only say that I've been very happy with the work I've paid for. I have seen no sign of manipulation. Unless you have personal knowledge that pertains to you then I'd say take any of this with a grain of salt and consider why dirty laundry is being aired on a public forum about a person's business. It's not professional, and without legal proof, it's all hearsay. I'd feel really bad if I were the one sharing rumors without a court document to back up my information. Have a great day


Michelle, I hope you read enough of the thread to see that we have disallowed hearsay and have been deleting it. There may still be some objectionable material here, especially from the thread's first evening, when I was the only one awake to moderate and probably missed stuff. If you come across material that strikes you as hearsay, please use the reporting feature to let the moderators know.

Okay, folks, carry on. Please remember to refute those you disagree with in a calm and rational manner.


----------



## TinyDancer

Her sharing screenshots of how boxset money is spent must be new (as in the last few months), because it never happened in any of the sets I was in. If you're talking about the 300+ pics she posted of her BB account, that isn't the same as accounting for. Anytime either I or another author asked for sales updates we were either told she doesn't have time to be constantly posting results or she says she'll post and doesn't. Once, possibly twice a month is what we had in terms of sales updates and never screen shots.

You're right that there is nothing wrong with boxset organizers making money off the sets, but when there is zero transparency as to how money is spent, how much is collected, and how much is earned, there's an issue. The contracts I signed all the way up to the beginning of 2017 weren't any different in their vagueness than the ones shared already in this thread. I accept that it was partly my fault for signing them, but that doesn't excuse her from the bullying or the shady dealings.

As for her having special needs children, so do a lot of other families. That doesn't mean their business ethics should be held to a different standard. I frankly have never had any interest in Rebecca's personal life, or her children's lives. I'm not her personal friend. I'm a client. I paid her money to do something (whether it was a Book Blast, newsletter building, promo, course, or boxset) and I expected her to hold up her end of the bargain without saying I'm a meanie and that I'm picking on her or that I'm causing her to have cramps and now she might lose her baby (*and I say that last part as someone who _has _lost a baby). If I go to a restaurant and order a large ham & pineapple pizza but they give me a small pepperoni and olive, I'm going to question them about it. If they say "I'm so sorry, my kid has ... and I was up all night dealing with them, let me fix this" I'll show compassion and wait for my order to be fixed. If they tell me that's what I'm getting even though it's not what I paid for and follows up with rants about my unrealistic high expectations for pizza, I don't call that good business practice, I'm not going to recommend them, and yes I'm even going to publicly complain. Compassion goes out the window when someone doesn't admit they screwed up, apologize and do what they can to fix it, all while keeping money I could have spent on _my _ special needs kid.

I'm glad for you that you've found success. Kudos to you for working hard. Just know that you probably could have done it without watching Rebecca bully people or spending hundreds/thousands of dollars buying copies of your books (or on BB ads that have been shown to be less than effective).

To those thinking of involving themselves with Rebecca, I would caution this: *If you paid a person to do something for you, that does not a friendship make. That is a business deal. If you paid them, they did not help you out of the goodness of their hearts. They did it because they benefited by making a profit.* There's nothing wrong with a person making a profit from their business, but when they represent it as a "friendship with benefits" they muddy the waters. It gives a different sort of leverage to the party not emotionally invested in the deal, allowing them to use personal details of their life or yours to manipulate you without feeling anything for you who they see only as a client.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

WildRose said:


> No, the plagiarism is about the book by the box set organizer that was uploaded to Kobo (by a random person, not the author/organizer) and then reported as being plagiarized. And just FYI, having a book wide and in KU is not considered plagiarism.


Quite true, but having seen Rebecca's posts on the matter, I believe she was the one who started using that particular P word first, probably knowing it has a special place in the hearts of authors.

I believe the correct phrasing is Pirated, copied, uploaded without consent etc


----------



## Guest

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Quite true, but having seen Rebecca's posts on the matter, I believe she was the one who started using that particular P word first, probably knowing it has a special place in the hearts of authors.
> 
> I believe the correct phrasing is Pirated, copied, uploaded without consent etc


Well, to be fair, it was reported as being Plagiarized, so the term was appropriate to use.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Quite true, but having seen Rebecca's posts on the matter, I believe she was the one who started using that particular P word first, probably knowing it has a special place in the hearts of authors.
> 
> I believe the correct phrasing is Pirated, copied, uploaded without consent etc


She also claimed I plagiarized a tag line.

A. Tag. Line.

For the record--even if that were a thing, it would be an untrue accusation.


----------



## TinyDancer

Michelle Hughes said:


> I find it somewhat disgusting that this information is up on Kboards and people have decided to become Judges without any tangible proof being given. This is a person's livelihood we're talking about and if there is a legal dispute then it belongs in a court and not on a public board. I'm a very fair person and I can only say that I've been very happy with the work I've paid for. I have seen no sign of manipulation. Unless you have personal knowledge that pertains to you then I'd say take any of this with a grain of salt and consider why dirty laundry is being aired on a public forum about a person's business. It's not professional, and without legal proof, it's all hearsay. I'd feel really bad if I were the one sharing rumors without a court document to back up my information. Have a great day


Do you read reviews of hotels or restaurants before you making a booking? That's what this entire thread is. Reviews from people who have used Rebecca's services and/or viewed her business practice via social media. This is not a personal attack on her. If you have a positive experience with her, then please share it. Give details about how it worked and the success you had so that people looking for information can see it. But telling people who have fallen victim to her practices is unfair. If I'd seen all of her posts and known details about gifting books and naming and shaming clients before getting involved with her I wouldn't have gone anywhere near her.


----------



## David VanDyke

Note: for all those who do not understand the difference, a first-person account ("this happened to me, I saw this with my own eyes) is testimony. 

Heresay is "I heard XXXX say..." or "XXXX told me that..."

That's why courts bring in and swear in witnesses to give testimony in person.

It doesn't matter how much you trust or believe the second person, if you didn't see it yourself, it's not testimony.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Folks, the reports and posts are coming in faster than we can read them.  

Locking so I can go through while I finish dinner.  Come back in a bit...help someone with a cover or something in the mean time.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Ann in Arlington

Thread locked . . . . there are way too many reports for us to go through and more come in before we can deal with the ones already made.

Give us time to catch up a bit -- you know, like when you dump too many coins in the coin star. 

eta: great minds. 

_[size=8pt]_


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Dear Members,

We are reopening this thread for additional comments, but in doing so, want to clarify the guidelines for posting:

1) There will be no personal attacks to include personal comments about members or members' private lives outside the topic under discussion.

2) No name-calling. Posters should not aim terms like "scammer," "black hat," "witch hunt," and "haters" and particular people or groups. By all means, post evidence and analyze other people's to support your views -- but without the labels. Labels such as the ones we've quoted have been edited out of many people's posts, and we'd like to stop having to do that. It adds to what's already a heavy moderation load.

3) No hearsay. Hearsay from both sides has been removed. We encourage people from both sides of this debate to come forward and share their own experiences. There are already a number of fine examples of such sharing on this thread from both sides.

4) Let's remain tightly focused the issues raised in this thread's OP. We understand the desire to show a larger "pattern of behavior," as someone put it, but casting a wider net has its downsides as well -- knowledge is less certain, evidence thinner, consensus less likely. We have decided against allowing such material, and it has been edited out of the thread.

5) If someone shows up angry and looking for a fight, do not engage. Report. Let's work together to keep this thread open through the weekend so that it can become a repository of good and bad experiences, allowing future authors to educate themselves and come to their own decisions.

We plan to keep this thread open as much as possible between now and the end of the weekend, but it may close temporarily when moderators are not home to keep an eye on the discussion. As of late Sunday, we will lock it for the time being, but we do recognize the importance of the issue and thus will either allow new threads or reopen this one as the need arises. Please PM Ann in Arlington, Becca Mills, or Betsy the Quilter if you have something to share in the future. We can decide at that point whether reopening this thread or beginning a new one is the best choice.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Thanks Betsy, Ann, and Becca. I apologize that some of my posts had to be modified, I will take extra care in the future. And thank you for giving everyone on both sides a voice on this issue.

It's kind of a dark day for me, probably due to weather. My thoughts and support are with everyone directly affected by all of this. I know what it's like to have that nervous energy of anxiety and fear of what's going to happen next. 

In the meantime, I have office organization videos to watch and cleaning to do (I am seriously contemplating moving the books on my book shelf I so rarely use to the cabinets and the art and craft supplies in the cabinets I use ALL the time to the shelves . . .  being a rebel like that).  I got a lot of writing done yesterday and I'm really happy how many people have learned what are serious red flags because of this post.

Thank you all.


----------



## sela

I have a thought about the issue of pirating/plagiarism and the boxed set accusation.

I understand that it was mis-labeled as plagiarism. It was clearly not someone copying the work and claiming it as their own. 

If it occurred as is being reported, it was likely that a copy was inadvertently not pulled from a retailer rather than someone uploading it with nefarious intent among the group of authors. 

If it was pulled from wide distribution so it could be put in KU, timing is everything. Those of us familiar with this process know that some retailers like Kobo distribute to a number of other smaller international retailers and they can be very slow to pull a book when it is delisted. While Kobo itself is very fast, the other retailers can be slow. I have had that happen to me when I pulled books off wide distribution for a term in KU. That's why I stopped using a particular distributor because my books were listed on obscure retailers without my knowledge and they were not responsive to delisting, potentially leading to missed promotional opportunities.

So I'm wondering if this whole "plagiarism" claim is really just the same thing as I experienced. One of those obscure retailers that Kobo distributes failed to pull a copy quickly, the set went into KU, and Amazon bots eventually discovered it in its tireless search of the net for illegal copies.

Back again to Occam's Razor, that's what I suspect happened. It's the simpler explanation and is based on personal experience. I'm sure shared experience for a lot of us who move in and out of KU and into wide distribution.

In other words, it may be a tempest in a teapot and recklessly throwing around accusations of plagiarism or pirating is likely completely erroneous. Doing so could get a person in trouble...


----------



## lilywhite

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Thanks Betsy, Ann, and Becca. I apologize that some of my posts had to be modified, I will take extra care in the future. And thank you for giving everyone on both sides a voice on this issue.


Same. I don't want to see this post go into lockdown again, and I'll do my part to keep it on the straight and narrow. Thank you again.


----------



## BiancaSommerland

I think I messed up when I posted this in the other thread, so sorry about that!

I think it fits this topic so I'll try again. If it doesn't, I'll go back to reading and just wish everyone involved the best! <3

Writer's Beware is looking for direct accounts of this situation. Here's the link to the tweet of the request.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/860591252655484928
Thank you to everyone who shared/collected information. I love how strong this community can be and know many who've been helped because of this information.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

I want to thank the mods for their willingness to once again reopen this thread. 

Something I've been thinking about is how it didn't have to be this way. Business disputes happen. They can (and should) be kept private. However, in my case, immediately after I sent an email with my concerns, I was publicly blasted on Facebook. It was several paragraphs about hoping I would be "a woman of my word" and how she hated that I was letting 70 other authors down. There were tear-filled emojis--it was completely inappropriate. 

Her private email response might not have been what I wanted to hear--and not based in the law as she did owe me my money back--but I did not voice my anger publicly. 

A day or two later when I was kicked out of the Spellbound set, I only found out because I was told she was posting about me. She said I'd publicly announced my intention to leave the set. But I had done no such thing--at that point I was still weighing my options. Again, there was the public shaming about me letting others down. This was the same post wherein people offered to pay for my slot but she chose to give it away. 

This is not how business should be conducted. It was damaging to my reputation and completely unnecessary.


----------



## MyraScott

On this topic, WriterBeware is asking for personal experiences. 

"I'm seeing multiple posts about this box set promoter. None name names but it's easy to figure out who it is. I'd like to know more
but I need names & documentation. If you're a victim, contact me in confidence at #WriterBeware: [email protected]"

They will protect your identity.  If you don't want to post publicly consider reaching out to WriterBeware.


----------



## unkownwriter

Glad to see the thread reopened. I hope others will still be able to find the courage to share their experiences, anonymously or not, as they feel capable. And do talk with Writers Beware, as they are a respected voice in the community.


----------



## TinyDancer

So glad this thread is open again. I truly believe that being able to share our experiences (whether positive or negative) with Rebecca (and her book promotion service GenreCrave) will help other authors decide if that want to invest with her or even be associated with her. Because of my personal experiences with her it saddens me to think that there are unsuspecting people investing in her business and relying on her to know if the business practices she is using are legit and expecting her to conduct her business professionally in regards to settling disputes with clients. If an author reads this thread and still decides to work with her, that is their choice to make, but at least they'll go in with their eyes open.

I'm also glad Writer Beware is looking into this. I actually did search their site for info about Rebecca and her services before getting involved with her, but found nothing. I had thought that if there'd been issues with her services I would have found it on there. Knowing now how scary it is to be in her crosshairs, I'm not surprised there was nothing.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

TinyDancer said:


> So glad this thread is open again. I truly believe that being able to share our experiences (whether positive or negative) with Rebecca (and her book promotion service GenreCrave) will help other authors decide if that want to invest with her or even be associated with her. Because of my personal experiences with her it saddens me to think that there are unsuspecting people investing in her business and relying on her to know if the business practices she is using are legit and expecting her to conduct her business professionally in regards to settling disputes with clients. If an author reads this thread and still decides to work with her, that is their choice to make, but at least they'll go in with their eyes open.
> 
> I'm also glad Writer Beware is looking into this. I actually did search their site for info about Rebecca and her services before getting involved with her, but found nothing. I had thought that if there'd been issues with her services I would have found it on there. Knowing now how scary it is to be in her crosshairs, I'm not surprised there was nothing.


Agree with everything you've said here.


----------



## Learning by lurking

ChristinaGarner said:


> I want to thank the mods for their willingness to once again reopen this thread.
> 
> Something I've been thinking about is how it didn't have to be this way. Business disputes happen. They can (and should) be kept private. However, in my case, immediately after I sent an email with my concerns, I was publicly blasted on Facebook. It was several paragraphs about hoping I would be "a woman of my word" and how she hated that I was letting 70 other authors down. There were tear-filled emojis--it was completely inappropriate.
> 
> Her private email response might not have been what I wanted to hear--and not based in the law as she did owe me my money back--but I did not voice my anger publicly.
> 
> A day or two later when I was kicked out of the Spellbound set, I only found out because I was told she was posting about me. She said I'd publicly announced my intention to leave the set. But I had done no such thing--at that point I was still weighing my options. Again, there was the public shaming about me letting others down. This was the same post wherein people offered to pay for my slot but she chose to give it away.
> 
> This is not how business should be conducted. It was damaging to my reputation and completely unnecessary.


Just to get clarification here, this is what I believe you are saying. Please correct me if I have this wrong.

You signed up and payed to be in a box set. Where there were 70 authors participating? After she begins focusing on deadlines to line everything up between formatting, cover, promotions etc you reach out and tell her what, you are no longer sure you want in ( I am assuming this because you say you found out you were out kicked out because she posted about it).

If this is what I am reading, which is how it looks what was she expected to do? Just hang on as you let her and the other authors hang in the wind waiting? Timing is crucial in this business.

Also curious, did she put any time into you for being in the box set? Like dealing with your emails, handling your book and paying someone to put it with the others, creating the ads for the box set that included your book at the time she placed the order. How much effort did she already have invested in you before you told her you "may not want" to participate anymore?

Do you believe if it would have set everything back the other 70 participants you mentioned would think "oh well, it was only my hard earned money. No big deal if things fall apart?"

Reading your post right now as I am understanding it would not make me sympathetic if I was on a jury.


----------



## lilywhite

If anyone needs help with the "Ignore" function, please PM me. And remember that getting drawn into arguments over facts that have already been laid out many times in this thread could get it locked again.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

This is more theory in terms of flags because I think like Christina talks about many of us are feeling like "How did we get to here?"

For years, this board has been a pretty reliable warning about vanity presses and the like. And because we have a word to call them, we can use that pretty easily to spot the criteria. For example, AuthorSolutions offered writers what? Editing. Covers. Marketing/Promotion. Publishing. And it was all for a pretty price tag.

I am not saying all cottage businesses setting up to help indies are bad, once upon a time I formatted ebooks for authors for $25 a title back when you had to use either the meat grinder or an early version of Jutoh or paid someone hundreds of dollars to do the HTML coding. There are so many easy buttons that have come along in the last 5 years. When it became easier to format books, I pointed my few clients that still wanted me to do it towards those tools. And some people for whatever reason still prefer someone else to do things like formatting or covers etc.

My point is that we still have elements of vanity presses that are disrupting our industry and I think that's how too some of these things like boxed sets and other projects go awry so quickly. At the base skill level these projects are someone stepping up to arrange these things : editing, formatting, marketing, book cover, and publishing to a vendor. Right? So identifying this NOW it's really imperative as a community that we keep up the same calls we do for vanity presses:

either there needs to be a solid contract and transparent accounting of the funds you pay and how they are spent

OR

the person is acting in the stead of a publisher and needs to take on said risks and recover their expenses from the success of the project.

Where so many of this gets blurred is when people say "oh we can keep this just as a friend helping someone out . . ." or someone is taking on the role of a publisher, which is what someone uploading a boxed set IS doing, and they need to behave 100% like one.

And this is unrelated to the original post's specific example, but another trend that's coming and is already here are AGENTS working as publishers/expediters of publishing services for some clients and that's a whole new kettle of fish too.

*Bottomline for us as creators has to be if someone wants to publish our words in any way, shape or form, there needs to be a good contract in place for everyone's protection.*

And if there's a buy in on a project there needs to a pre-approved budget by all of those involved. The situations that claim everything has to be right now, right now, or you'll miss your spot etc. hurts everyone. And make sure unless you truly intend to sell your words away forever, grant a license of exclusive or non-exclusive with a clear time's up. Otherwise, a simple contract for a boxed set you sign could end up being a much bigger headache than you ever anticipated . . .


----------



## ChristinaGarner

lilywhite said:


> If anyone needs help with the "Ignore" function, please PM me. And remember that getting drawn into arguments over facts that have already been laid out many times in this thread could get it locked again.


A very good reminder. I've never actually needed the feature before this thread but it does come in handy.

Learning by Lurking, I'd suggest reading the thread in its entirety as the way you've laid it out does not reflect my story at all. There's much more to it, and this thread isn't about me, but this will get you started: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3487945.html#msg3487945


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Elizabeth makes some great points. Especially about a person taking on the role of publisher and what that entails.

As for contracts--it was said well earlier in the thread--if you can't afford to hire a lawyer to vet it, you can't afford to sign it. And demanding payment before providing a contract?

That is not standard business practice and should be a huge red flag. I wish it had been enough of one for me.


----------



## Not a Regular

(Note: I contacted the moderators and they have given me permission to share this experience.)

I first heard about Rebecca Hamilton via Kboards. Last year, a few Urban Fantasy authors I respect(ed) were singing her praises. Because I trusted their reviews in her services thread (and elsewhere around the Writers' Cafe), I felt okay with shelling out for some of her wares.

I wish this thread had existed a year ago. I would have saved myself money and irritation.

I was never a part of Rebecca's box sets (by the time those were really rolling, I'd already decided to never work with her again), but I signed up for one of her list-building programs and her Street Team-building program.

I might as well have set my cash on fire. It would have accomplished the same thing. Her newsletter lists are full of giveaway addicts who will report you as spam/send horrifically rude replies because they feel their email address has been abused. I've had several of these people tell me they don't know of Rebecca Hamilton, never signed up for mailing lists, and never entered giveaways, either.

And you know what? I am inclined to believe them. Especially after I downloaded one of the Instafreebie box set halves and soon after began receiving a deluge of emails (on a personal address that I never used for her services) from authors I've never heard of. Funny, that. I suspect Rebecca didn't simply use Instafreebie to skirt Amazon's rules, but also to capture Amazon customers' emails.

Funny, also, that the address I use for my Paypal account (which I used only to pay for Rebecca's services and do not use for correspondence) has also been spammed by newsletters I never signed up for.

That's my history with Rebecca Hamilton. It began last spring and ended by the end of the summer when my services were completed.

Certain people refuse to believe she is a bully. They claim to have never seen such a thing happen, which surprises me. If you've friended her (friending her seems to be a stipulation of the list-building programs), her schtick is almost always on your dash. It was certainly on mine.

One instance happened right in the Street Team building group. I watched it unfold.

The post (and thus its many comment threads) was deleted from the Street-Team building group before I thought to take screenshots, but I have screenshots of Rebecca taking this private issue onto her personal Facebook profile where she used a series of public posts to shame the author in question.

Context: Rebecca was supposed to send our 200 Street Team members in waves. It was something like ten authors would receive their team in week one, ten authors would receive their team the week after that, and so on until all the teams were built.

(FYI: these Street Teams are based in Facebook groups created by the authors. Rebecca "building" the teams = she apparently sent a mailing list blast telling people to join the groups.)

The formation of the teams took place around the time Rebecca was moving, so she was late with the first (and subsequent) builds. Most people weren't too bothered by this from what I could tell, maybe because they knew she was moving via her profile updates. But as I recall, she never actually came into the group to say there might be a delay. She just expected everyone to know, I guess.

She was testy over some in-group posts/PM. People were asking why their team builds were late, and she took issue with their "impatience." So she was already fired up when she started sending her "readers" to the first batch of author Facebook groups.

One author in particular became suspicious early on. They noticed that many of the profiles asking to join their group were only a few months old.

The claim of the Street Team-building service was that Rebecca had a bank of super dedicated, super active readers who just LOVE finding new authors to befriend and help out via spreading the word about their books.

If they were so dedicated and active, why were the accounts so young? Were they real accounts? Or were some of the accounts created by Rebecca to artificially inflate her numbers?

The author asked these questions, and all hell broke loose. The thread went crazy. Rebecca lashed out, her PAs lashed out. Authors were confused.

One of the PAs became so involved with the situation, the author wondered if the PA was one of Rebecca's screen names.

Naturally, the author in question went on the defensive. They started questioning Rebecca's entire operation.

The two of them fought it out in the group before the thread was deleted, and then Rebecca started posting about it for the world to see. Only, she skewed the situation so it appeared that the author was calling "real, genuine readers" frauds.

Smart, right? Immediately get the readers on your side because THEY'VE been "attacked."

(Spoiler alert: My guess is that many of my Street Team members' accounts are "side accounts" used primarily for entering giveaways [so as not to clutter the feed on their real accounts]. I discovered that the Rebecca Hamilton method of running a Street Team is not to give away copies of your books or spend too much time with the group. No, post once a week featuring a $5+ Amazon gift card in exchange for social media shares/likes [which is a violation of Facebook's terms of service.] My Street Team is collecting dust. I'd offer giveaways for books and attempt to "get to know" the members, but only 8-10/200 people would ever see the posts and never responded. They weren't interested in books or getting to know me or the other members of the group. They just wanted to maybe win gift cards whenever they remembered to check their side accounts.)

So, Rebecca engaged in a public tar-and-feathering. The author was named in the comments a few times. One of Rebecca's PAs went so far as to name-and-shame the person on her own profile, too.

How did Rebecca and co. shame this person? Oh, they publicly speculated that the author was either A) a drunk B) mentally ill or C) rabid.

You read that right. Rabid. The author apparently works with animals in their day job, and they'd recently dealt with a raccoon. So, clearly it wasn't that they were dissatisfied with Rebecca's services. No, they were probably just RABID.

Rebecca's so-called "concern" for the author was revolting to me.

As far as I could tell, this author used their real name for publishing. Just imagine someone Googling your name before a job interview and one of the results is a Facebook post claiming you have rabies.

That's what happens when you question Rebecca Hamilton's services. I saw it time and again and wished I'd never given her a dime. I was more than happy to be done with her after I received my (useless) list of email addresses.

I'd like to share screenshots of this event so you can really see her bullying tactics in action. I know the mods said screenshots were permitted as long as they were off-site links, so I hope this is okay:

- Rebecca is not obscured, but I have hidden the names and profile pics of all other participants.
- Red = general person
- Orange = PA #1
- Blue = PA #2
- Green = someone who is now on Rebecca's bad side.

1 http://imgur.com/qSjUG7r
The call to action. Vague, tantalizing post to get people curious/offend readers.

2 http://imgur.com/YAM3lsU
Orange PA replies. She's already been active within the Street Team group AND PMing/Facebook stalking the author in question.

3 http://imgur.com/gOywpMi
Rebecca reveals she was accused of operating a scam. She drops the first "drunk" reference. Orange PA continues to mock the author in question. Says author is just "setting up for a refund."

4 http://imgur.com/ncxTeVD
Another drunk reference, now mixed with "Maybe rabies?!" via Orange PA, who has moved on to Facebook stalking the author's family.

Also, curious readers/authors begin asking for the author's name. Rebecca sends it via PM to anyone who asks.

5 http://imgur.com/VO7xwes
And this is where you really see how her posts suck people--authors and readers alike--into her drama. The stakes are so high. The situations so outlandish. The curiosity is just too much. They have to know more.

6 http://imgur.com/UHWdPVJ
We have people wondering if the author in question is just crazy. Orange PA has managed to track down the author's daughter and husband. Because that's a totally normal part of business, right?

7 http://imgur.com/lyu7t87
The first post wasn't enough. She had to bring more attention to the issue the next day (when more people were online, by chance?)

I can't comment on the claims here, as they all supposedly occurred via PM. But the general purpose of the post is especially gross. It's almost as if she sets up the conversation as a way to get one of her loyal followers to reveal the name she'd widely shared via PM. And they did.

8 http://imgur.com/NKVBJZ4
Orange PM is "all for" outing the author. Uses the phrase "return with equal force" as her solution for the issue. Scary.

9 http://imgur.com/mhCknzQ
Rebecca backpedals on the rabies claim. But the raccoon incident is very amusing to one of her commenters.

10 http://imgur.com/i8VGvyL
Close-up of the screenshot Rebecca shared. Author is upset that Orange PA invaded their personal life and has fired the other PAs associated with Rebecca (they offered their services for helping to co-run the Street Teams).

This is the only "proof" Rebecca was willing to offer re: the author's supposed behind-the-scenes antics.

11 http://imgur.com/JsJlh3s
Orange PA is back with more rude comments about the author's mental health and still advising "self defense" via publicly naming the author.

12 http://imgur.com/wd81SlD
13 http://imgur.com/nLRBymq
Earlier in this thread, someone made the point that the people who defend Rebecca think this sort of thing will never happen to them.

Check out Green. Throughout this Facebook tirade, Green defended Rebecca. Urged her to out the person to protect herself. Green wanted to make sure they were able to block the author so that the author can't spy on/hurt Rebecca via the Facebook friend connection.

Green has posted in this very KBoards thread. And not in Rebecca's defense, mind you. They are apparently on Rebecca's Naughty List now.

The earlier poster was exactly right: it doesn't matter if you defend Rebecca. She will turn on you. Your loyalty means nothing to her.

14 http://imgur.com/HeQTgrJ 
Creepy Orange PA makes ominous statements about knowing where the author lives. She knows the "exact address" in fact.

This is the company Rebecca keeps (and hires). Do you want to work with someone who uses PAs that make these kinds of statements?

15 http://imgur.com/vxLXZVJ
16 http://imgur.com/eaSCdej
Returning to speculation about rabies and mental health.

17 http://imgur.com/kYQCDQ1
It has been stated that a few members here have been victims of Rebecca's "unfriend them or else" practices. Some of Rebecca's supporters don't believe these accounts.

Maybe they should also consider the times when Rebecca hasn't outright asked someone to unfriend an author. Maybe they should consider the times when Rebecca oh-so-casually tags someone in a public Facebook post to shine a spotlight on their social media connections with her foes.

This is like something out of a low-rent production of Mean Girls.

"I saw you sitting with Cady during assembly, Gretchen."
"Regina, I swear I was sitting there first and she sat down beside me." 
"Oh, I'm not mad. I just thought you should know people noticed."
"If it happens again, I'll move. I won't sit by her again, promise. Sometimes I'm, like, so not-fetch."
"You'll do better next time. And stop trying to make fetch happen. It's embarrassing."

18 http://imgur.com/yF3jaCF
At last, the reveal. Blue PA took the heavy burden off Rebecca's shoulders and named-and-shamed the author on her own Facebook profile. As a result, a few people tagged the author in Rebecca's comments section. And Rebecca never had to get her hands dirty. Convenient.

***

I unfollowed her groups and unfriended her on Facebook once I had my .CSV file because I just could not stand with her daily drama. The name-and-shame game was sickening. I have no interest in trawling Rebecca's Facebook profile to check if this series of posts is still live (and public), but I'm sure they are as she never bothers to delete these endless attacks. They're there for you to peruse in chronological order.

If you don't believe that Rebecca bullies other authors, maybe take a minute to think back to all the times she's posted similar "rants" about her clients, often claiming they're being hostile by asking for refunds. Think of all the times she's accused these authors of stealing depriving her of needed funds.

Be open to the idea that the stories she presents on her public Facebook posts are, more often than not, twisted versions of events that usually center around her knee-jerk, aggressive responses to dissatisfied clients. And she has a LOT of dissatisfied clients.

As someone else said in this thread, these are patterns of behavior. They are not isolated events. She knows exactly how to manipulate her Facebook followers in these situations. She knows how to get them riled up. She knows how to get them to ask questions until she simply *has* to tell them more. She knows her PAs will roll up their sleeves and do the real dirty work. She knows the authors who want to stay in her good graces (and maybe land a spot in the next box set) will offer condolences and commiserate. She also knows authors who have become wary of her antics will stay quiet lest they end up as the next public target of her tirades.

Tirades that could actually damage a pen name AND a real life.

I'll leave you with this, because it's always my thought when I see fresh drama with Rebecca Hamilton: http://imgur.com/Ps30Hv3


----------



## AllyWho

Not a Regular - thank you for sharing. That is an eye opening account. Do you recollect what the street team building service cost? How much are authors paying for 200 foundation members in a team?


----------



## Patty Jansen

Posting this with identification about all except myself removed:

"Physical threats"?

Has anyone noticed where I live? Hint: it's under my userpic



> Note: Those being tagged are NOT a problem. I am just making them aware of the situation so they can understand what I need to do. The only 3 people involved in a leadership level with this problem are named in the post. Those tagged in the comments are not guilty of anything. I'm just making them aware because this situation affects their connection with me.
> ***
> This will take too long to PM individually. So I am posting here and will tag if it applies to you. Action will be taken in the next 24 hours to remove people from my account for the physical safety of myself and my family.
> Under advisement of my lawyer, due to "joking" threats on my life made by one of {redacted}'s friends in response to one of her posts, I am blocking anyone who is friends with {redacted}, or their new partner in a public campaign against me that has been garnering death threats toward me, Patty Jansen.
> I am very sorry. If you need to remain friends with these people for professional reasons, I completely understand. I hope you won't take it personally that I need to do this for the safety of myself and my family. I hate that it has come to the point I have to block people I care about to protect myself from this group, and I hope you understand.
> Please understand also where my lawyer is coming from with their advisement. How can they make a case that I have done everything to get this woman to stop, when they can see clearly that my friends and social media connections are friends with someone who is inviting people to hate to me to the point of death threats? I have done EVERYTHING for it not to get to this point, but it's crossed that line now. I have to do this.
> To those who are remaining friends with her, please, do not engage her involving me. Everyone on her friends list may end up under investigation due to the nature of this attack - people are sharing info with her for the intention of inciting people to hate me, which has led to physical threats. So anyone connected to her is at risk of investigation. This is one reason I did not want to take legal action. But I have tried as hard as I could not to, and now it's a physical threat. I have to &#128542; and I'm very sorry to anyone who is involved with her if t means they end up under investigation as a result. That is not my intention. I feel I've been put in an impossible situation where I have to do this, though. &#128542;
> Please know that once it blows over, I would absolutely add you back. This is just something I have to do in the meantime. Thank you for understanding.


Someone challenged the above, and the reply was:



> Rebecca Hamilton {redacted} read the post. It's the nature of it. Death threat resulting from inciting posts that are being fueled by a mutual friend sending information to my harasser. Those who choose to stay friends are sending a message right now. I did NOT want it to come to this. That is why I am blocking people who are mutual friends to try to protect them from this while I get it sorted.


Also this, after someone asked further info:



> Those who want to help or show support re: the hate campaign toward me and death threats. Please read this, it's important.
> Do not make violent comments about them as their "crew"'have made about me. We are better than that. I haven't seen anyone do that &#128588;&#127995; just saying let's keep it that way &#128157;
> Do not make comments or take action against their books. This hurts readers. Their books are just fine, and I support reading of all books that interest a reader, no matter what kind of person the author is. If their books sound good to you, READ THEM! They're great books &#128588;&#127995;
> Do not hold it against anyone who chooses to remain friends with them. Some people see what is going on and are afraid they will be targeted next. They have seen this has gotten to level of death threats and just don't want to end up on their radar by disconnecting. People who are friends with them are not automatically involved, *I* am disconnecting from their friends because I need to for my safety, so that doesn't really apply to anyone else ❤
> For those who are being targeted by her to get to me, such as boxed set authors whose sets they want taken down and readers whose accounts they are trying to shut down, don't stress. You aren't doing anything wrong, and although Amazon is a strike first, investigate later company, trust that in the end any damage they do will be temporary and will be restored. Also, if they are targeting you to get to me, I have screenshot evidence of all of that and it will be included in the case.
> If you have screenshots, please don't send them to me. I don't need to see if. I've already seen over a dozen attempted lies and dismantled each and every one of them with the truth. It's a waste of time. But you can PM me and ask for the screenshot folder link to load screenshots there for the police and my lawyer to go through.
> Thank you for all the support and kind words. I know some feel bad about this attack on my business, but the business side of things remains the same as before. The only issue that concerns me is the level of hate that has been incited if it has gotten to the point of their followers making joking death threats. That will addressed. Thank you &#128157;


----------



## Not a Regular

AliceW said:


> Not a Regular - thank you for sharing. That is an eye opening account. Do you recollect what the street team building service cost? How much are authors paying for 200 foundation members in a team?


Alice, it cost $50. I believe there were fifty authors in the group.


----------



## AllyWho

Not a Regular said:


> Alice, it cost $50. I believe there were fifty authors in the group.


Thank you


----------



## wheart

Actually, 'ignoring' posts would not be wise on either side. I would think everyone needs to read every single post in this thread regardless of who posted it. Valid points are being raised all around.

Also, according to the contract Christina posted, it says this ...



> QBW Services, LLC agrees to pay The Author any monies owed for The Work's share in the Boxed Set Collection within three months of receiving those funds from vendors, provided that The Author has provided adequate payment reception details and that the author is not in breach of contract.


For this particular boxed set contract, the above clause doesn't state that royalties will stop or won't further be paid after 3 months, it just states that it will be paid _within_ 3 months of receiving funds from the vendors, which could mean that those involved might receive royalties more than once (every time the vendor pays the organizer). The organizer is committing to paying those funds_ within _3 months of receiving it and that's all that clause states as far as I can see.

And in one of the screenshots posted on the weebly site, there's one that says this ...



> The Donate A Spot option means that the author can GIVE their spot to another author (without requesting a refund). Instead of getting the $500 back immediately, they would get an equal share of the royalties once royalties begin to pay out, up until that $500 is returned to them. So let's say a set makes $20,000 between 20 authors. Each author would get $1000 normally. If one of those spots are donated, the donating author would get $500, the person they donated to would get $500, and everyone else would get $1000. This way the buy in is not completely lost.


Letting the courts settle this is the best way to give this matter closure (as Christina has initiated). The justice system will uphold who legally is owed what. Those of you who were told the above, should still be able to get your money back in that manner if you're not granted it upfront.

The courts will make their verdict based on evidence and not emotion, as how it should be.

As far as bullying/shaming goes, nobody wants to have/see that happen. But one also has to make sure they're making a fair distinction because sometimes what seems like bullying/shaming is just parties countering/defending their positions. It could even be because either side felt they were bullied/shamed first. I'm not saying bullying/shaming didn't go on (I don't have firsthand evidence to determine that or not, and snippets here and there aren't showing me the 'whole' picture of all the dialog/discussions/circumstances that led up to it, but those who have access to those need to keep them for evidence when time comes for whose ever side calls you as a witness needs them), but what I'm trying to convey is that many times someone claiming they were bullied/shamed, might not always make it so.

Again, the courts will consider all the evidence presented and make their sound judgment based on that.

I hope closure to this issue can be accomplished from it.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

AliceW said:


> Thank you


Pretty sure mine cost $100 a few months back


----------



## wheart

Everyone, please make sure you read ALL the screenshot images that 'Not a Regular' posted. Don't just read their verbiage. I take it those snapshot convos will be used as evidence? Now, to which side might be some people's question.


----------



## Escapee

After reading this thread over the past few days, I feel like I've dodged a bullet when I decided not to use RH's services last year. When I read through the info on her website, it just seemed a bit off, so I quietly slunk away. Since this thread was created, I've received an email from her enticing me to book one of her questionable schemes because I've 'used her services' before. I haven't and now I never will, but I'm hesitant to unsubscribe from her mailing list in case she targets me next (shudders).


----------



## Usedtoposthere

wheart said:


> Everyone, please make sure you read ALL the screenshot images that 'Not a Regular' posted. Don't just read their verbiage. I take it those snapshot convos will be used as evidence? Now, to which side might be some people's question.


Whose question? I handed my phone to hubby with no explanation and he was gobsmacked.

I think this is one of those times when you are offered an opportunity to see beneath the surface (on the folks who haven't hidden their identities). It's been pretty enlightening. Like support of a presidential candidate, when you discover that things that seem like bedrock values to you aren't necessarily shared one bit.

Interestingly, the people I respect most in this unregulated Wild West of a business haven't surprised me much at all.


----------



## barbie888

Nekroza said:


> The reason she still has more supporters than detractors is because she seems to over-all have good intentions and has helped lots of people.
> 
> Says who? Follow the history.


----------



## MyraScott

Nekroza said:


> Most of the rest of the stuff about ethics where people who don't even agree with each others points (and conveniently don't debate against each other) band together to attack the organizer, or the stuff about who unfriended who is incredibly distasteful and seems out of place in an otherwise professional forum. For the record, no adult can _force_ another adult to stop being your friend. They stopped being your friend because they picked sides between two people whom hated each other and you lost out.


It is really disingenuous to talk about this forum being "incredibly distasteful" for discussing unprofessional behavior. The harassment and manipulation is a huge part of why _so many people_ are motivated to see it ended.

In many ways, this post sums it all up. If a person uses emotional manipulation on you, well, shame on you. Be stronger than that!

The double standard is so glaring that you would think it's obvious, but it's emotionally motivated posts like this one -which pretends to be above it all while casting blame on those who dare to point out unprofressional practices- that are dishonest at heart.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Not a Regular,

Thank you for this post. I know the time it takes, and it so clearly displays the twisting of words. I've seen it firsthand and the dog pile that happens.

Right now there is a twitter account attacking the @insideindie account because they believe it's me. It isn't. I am not responsible for/running neither the website nor any twitter accounts associated. But it doesn't matter because whoever it is has become convinced. They are tweeting negative reviews of my books, and tagging posts with my name.

This is why people stay silent and why I'm not going to be anymore. And I'd caution anyone from misrepresenting what I've said. It will all be part of discovery, and courts don't necessarily blank out identities. Anyone wants to say the don't like me? That's fine. But I'm reading a post from someone who says I've claimed Rebecca took money from my Spellbound replacement. I never said that. I said she gave it away even though people offered to pay. (which made no sense to me.)

Facts matter, and they are all coming out.


----------



## Becca Mills

MyraScott said:


> It is really disingenuous to talk about this forum being "incredibly distasteful" for discussing unprofessional behavior. The harassment and manipulation is a huge part of why _so many people_ are motivated to see it ended.
> 
> In many ways, this post sums it all up. If a person uses emotional manipulation on you, well, shame on you. Be stronger than that!
> 
> The double standard is so glaring that you would think it's obvious, but it's emotionally motivated posts like this one -which pretends to be above it all while casting blame on those who dare to point out unprofressional practices- that are dishonest at heart.


Myra, we're headed toward another thread lock if someone who is not 100% critical of RH is not able to come here and say their piece without being called disingenuous and dishonest. Instead of the name-calling, point out what you see as the flaws in Nekroza's reasoning, and leave it at that. Readers of the forum can decide who they think is right and wrong, honest and dishonest.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Nekroza said:


> The problem is that a lot of the charges are incredibly exaggerated or just flat-out bogus.


Can you please give examples of charges you believe to be bogus?


----------



## Silly Writer

Nekroza said:


> Good post. Your example is similar to what's happening here. If you investigate both sides and apply some common sense you realize that what is being posted in this thread is NOT entirely accurate. I prefer when people post both sides of an issue, honestly, and allow others to come to their own conclusions.


What is not accurate? Someone can point you to the screenshot links. And the thread was open so everyone could post and discuss. RH is more than welcome to come give her side. She's not banned from Kboards AFAIK, right?



Nekroza said:


> *The most important information that came out was how the genreCRAVE promotion worked.
> 
> *


*

No, the most important thing that came out of this is that we were given a space to voice ALL our concerns about doing business with RH, how hard it is to get out of doing business with RH and the proof as to why (i.e. alleged naming/shaming/bullying lying about her customers and fellow writers). Also, MOST importantly, this thread has served a notice to ALL PROMOTERS and or Indie Services that no longer will this community of readers and writers stand back and let our industry be stained. We've fought a hard fight to be viewed equal to trad by the best-selling lists AND the readers. We've crawled over that wall with bloody fingers and we're nearly there. And most of us did it ethically, or intended to. Now, it's time to take a stand and defend our positions.


Edited. - Becca*


----------



## MyraScott

Sorry.

I'll try again.

When someone says essentially, "You have paid me money, and I require you to be on Facebook in order to receive communications about the services you've purchased, but you will have to unfriend this person and this person" it's not a who-hated-who moment.

To boil it down to personal pettiness trivializes the fact that this situation has been created _by the service provider_ who is now making demands on people's loyalty in exchange for providing business services.

I believe it is a real concern and not personalities that "don't get along." So, I disagree with your characterization, not because of sides, but because it puts people in situations where they are forced to choose between the money they've already spent and the promotion they are counting on for business, and their own personal preferences of who to associate with which I believe is inappropriate.

But as always, people have their own opinions on this sort of thing.


----------



## Becca Mills

Silly Writer said:


> RH is more than welcome to come give her side. She's not banned from Kboards AFAIK, right?


She is still a member.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

To Myra's point, I'd like to say that I've heard nothing about those people being given the choice of a refund. As distasteful as I find it to require someone to unfriend another, what if someone refused? I don't see an offer of, if you chose not to unfriend, I'll need to terminate my services before they are complete and will refund you. 

If it wasn't in the contract, a person's FB friends aren't up for debate. Period. Therefore, failing to provide a service for that reason is a breach.


----------



## wheart

Nekroza said:


> I prefer when people post both sides of an issue, honestly, and allow others to come to their own conclusions. The accused party that this thread is speaking about is guilty of a lot of things, some of them "minor", some not so minor. ...


I agree with you, and as I've said in previous posts, I do hope Rebecca makes changes to her programs so as not to have issues (no matter if a rep said it wasn't an issue, because the fact that it's being questioned as an issue should make it an issue) with the TOS. Better to play it safe and create a program that doesn't cross boundaries and especially incite controversy.

Maybe she has already and these are past concerns being brought up? I don't know firsthand that answer.

And as I've mentioned in another post, when people don't tell the 'whole' story and leave out important info, then is that being fair, honorable, and in integrity? Everyone needs to be their own judge on that one. For me, I let my conscience be my guide.


----------



## AllyWho

wheart said:


> And as I've mentioned in another post, when people don't tell the 'whole' story and leave out important info, then is that being fair, honorable, and in integrity?


Sorry if I am being dense, or if this is covered elsewhere (it's a long thread, it needs a TOC! Lol) but what information is being left out? You say people aren't telling the "whole story". I for one am interested as to what has been omitted. Since you imply that you know the "whole story" and the idea of this thread is to lay out both sides, perhaps you would be so good as to outline what pertinent information has been omitted?


----------



## Becca Mills

wheart said:


> And as I've mentioned in another post, when people don't tell the 'whole' story and leave out important info, then is that being fair, honorable, and in integrity? Everyone needs to be their own judge on that one. For me, I let my conscience be my guide.


The difficulty is in knowing when you have and haven't heard the whole story. Sometimes you think you haven't heard the whole story, but actually, you have. It's just not the story you were hoping to hear.

This is why accumulating concrete evidence is more effective, IMO, than arguing about situations in a vague or general way.

So, pushing the conversation toward concrete evidence, what _exactly _do you think has been left out, wheart?


----------



## Randall Wood

AliceW said:


> Sorry if I am being dense, or if this is covered elsewhere (it's a long thread, it needs a TOC! Lol) but what information is being left out? You say people aren't telling the "whole story". I for one am interested as to what has been omitted. Since you imply that you know the "whole story" and the idea of this thread is to lay out both sides, perhaps you would be so good as to outline what pertinent information has been omitted?


Moving the Goalpost I believe its called.

Demanding more proof, despite the mountain of evidence that already exists, does two things. It implies that the mountain is somehow untrue, while also branding those that produced it as making false claims.

In other words, if you don't like the standards by which the argument is presented, demand that they be changed to fit standards you wish to have.

This isn't Calvinball, you don't get to make up new rules if you don't like the ones already there. If you want more evidence you first have to disprove whats already been presented.


----------



## sela

I think it's important to collect as much info and evidence as possible in one place so that new authors can come here and judge for themselves. 

For the rest of us with skin in the game, with friends who have been harmed, realize this: research shows that once we commit to a side in a debate or argument, we are much less likely -- almost completely unlikely --  to consider evidence that potentially undermines that position or side. In fact, evidence that challenges our position often ends up reinforcing it. We humans are strange that way. We're very tribal and tend to protect our membership in our groups even against our own better judgement and against the evidence. It's called confirmation bias. 

For those who haven't already made up their mind, this place is important so that people see the evidence themselves and decide. 

For the rest of us who have already decided, perhaps there is no use debating with our opponents. As I said, research suggests those debates really only end up reinforcing our own positions. We should encourage people to come and provide their testimony and evidence and leave it at that.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

wheart said:


> And as I've mentioned in another post, when people don't tell the 'whole' story and leave out important info, then is that being fair, honorable, and in integrity? Everyone needs to be their own judge on that one. For me, I let my conscience be my guide.


What is it that you feel has been left out?


----------



## Kate.

Not A Regular's post highlighted something:

Hamilton never revealed the author's name. I believe that was deliberate. It was a way to hold a threat over the author; if they pushed too hard or argued too much, she would name them "for her safety", and all of those damning posts would crash onto their head.

Imagine being in that situation. People are discussing your mental health, vilifying you and raging at you. They don't know your name yet, but at any moment Hamilton could post it. Would you keep arguing with her?

You see that exact same tactic being used by businesses and politicians. It's an incredibly effective way to silence people.


----------



## Thevoiceofreason

Why is, "Don't do business with her" not enough for everyone? This is how a free market works. You don't like someone's business, you don't do business with them. You (whoever) had a bad experience. Others have not. I don't see anyone starting lawsuits against Apple for using Chinese slave labor to build their phones. You're not filing lawsuits against agents who steal %15 of writers income. When a person or business acts in a way you disagree with, you, the person, chose not to do business with them. You don't like Genrecrave, stop using them. You think they're in violation of Amazon ToS? Report them and let Amazon deal with it. Report them to Itunes and Kobo and everywhere else. If they're in breach of contract, take them to small claims court. That is what you would do if this were a beef with the business.

_Edited. Either read and abide by the thread guidelines or don't post again. - Becca_


----------



## wheart

AliceW said:


> Since you imply that you know the "whole story"


I never implied any such thing. I surely don't know the 'whole' story, and that's my point . Those of us on the sidelines need the 'whole story'.



AliceW said:


> Sorry if I am being dense, or if this is covered elsewhere (it's a long thread, it needs a TOC! Lol) but what information is being left out? You say people aren't telling the "whole story". I for one am interested as to what has been omitted.





AliceW said:


> and the idea of this thread is to lay out both sides, perhaps you would be so good as to outline what pertinent information has been omitted?


I've stated it in this thread already, and in my questions previously. Go read through my profile since I don't think people want to reread the same things over and over . One is where I've asked Patty a question that she still hasn't answered regarding if she knew in advance (before signing the contract) that they would be asked to send to their mailing list on certain days and if it was vital to the strategy of project that they do so. Now, if her answer is 'yes' and she knew this ahead of time, then all I'm saying is, would it be fair to blame Rebecca for 100% of the fault? Those of us who wouldn't know the 'whole story' behind that, would want/need to know those things, don't you think?

I am just hoping that when people post their claims here, that they post 'objectively' what their side of it was that might've been part of the issue too. I'm not saying Rebecca is not at fault for some of the issues, but in many cases, she's not 100% at fault either.

So this is why I'm asking for the 'whole story'


----------



## Fel Beasley

There is a screenshot in the GenreCrave group about this situation between Christina and Rebecca. Could you please clarify a few things? I might have misunderstood what you meant by certain things.

1) When did you withdraw from the box sets? 
2) Were you removed from a set before you withdrew from the others? 
3) Did you see a copy of the revised contract before you withdrew from any of the sets?


----------



## Becca Mills

wheart said:


> I've stated it in this thread already, and in my questions previously. Go read through my profile since I don't think people want to reread the same things over and over . One is where I've asked Patty a question that she still hasn't answered regarding if she knew in advance (before signing the contract) that they would be asked to send to their mailing list on certain days and if it was vital to the strategy of project that they do so. Now, if her answer is 'yes' and she knew this ahead of time, then all I'm saying is, would it be fair to blame Rebecca for 100% of the fault? Those of us who wouldn't know the 'whole story' behind that, would want/need to know those things, don't you think?
> 
> I am just hoping that when people post their claims here, that they post 'objectively' what their side of it was that might've been part of the issue too. I'm not saying Rebecca is not at fault for some of the issues, but in many cases, she's not 100% at fault either.
> 
> So this is why I'm asking for the 'whole story'


That doesn't seem like an unreasonable question to have asked Patty.

At the same time, in any situation, it's usually possible to find a series of increasingly small unknowns, always digging up a new one once the last gets answered. If judgment is forever suspended because we still "don't know everything," when in fact we have all the major moving pieces of the story in place, that can become a sort of cop-out to avoid making decisions or pursuing change.


----------



## Anonymously Anonymous

Becca Mills said:


> That doesn't seem like an unreasonable question to have asked Patty.
> 
> At the same time, in any situation, it's usually possible to find a series of increasingly small unknowns, always digging up a new one once the last gets answered. If judgment is forever suspended because we still "don't know everything," when in fact we have all the major moving pieces of the story in place, that can become a sort of cop-out to avoid making decisions or pursuing change.


THIS.

This this this.

Thank you.


----------



## wheart

Silly Writer said:


> Why is this any different from the Book Butterfly thread when there were problems with that promoter?


Actually, Books Butterfly is another one where people complain about not getting a refund (in cash) but if we did our due diligence, the Books Butterfly's website states right there on the bottom under their name and contact info (see 'Refund Policy') they state clearly that they give their prorated refund in credits. This issue comes up time after time regarding the 'prorated credit refund' so by now you'd think that everyone who has been on these forums for a while knows that if you don't want your refund in credits, don't book with that vendor 

But going back to the main issue, there's some responsibility that we need to take for our actions too. Again, I'm not excusing Rebecca's responsibilities/actions in these issues, but we just all need to be fair, that's all.


----------



## Patty Jansen

Nope, there was no indication of the date, not when the contract was signed. Not even long after that. Then when there was talk about when the set would be live, we all had to sign up for tasks. I did. You know I run a cross-promo and I was going to dedicate a weekend's promo to it. At the time, we were getting about 1200 sales in these promos and about 60,000 page visits.

Then the date was set. We agreed that we would post about it. I was going to do so several times.

The morning I logged on, it was a Friday, literally five minutes after my autoresponder had fired. There were several messages in the line of "where are you, huh, huh?" Well, I was asleep, for those who don't understand the concept of time zones. Then I saw this message about having to post NOW NOW NOW. I was kinda half awake and posted "ack, I just sent to my list. Can I do this on Monday". I literally had another response ready, saying that "hang on, I'll see if I can work something out." when I received the notification from paypal that I'd been refunded, and a message that I'd been booted. Literally all within five minutes.

There was nothing in the contract about OMG having to drop everything and post within five minutes of when I say so or else at an yet unspecified date.

Anyway, I made the quoted "Pffft whatever" comment and went to get coffee. It was all so incredibly surreal. There had been no disagreement about the set prior to this. Just nothing.

ETA. I did not post this before because while the story is really weird, it really has nothing on the gobsmacking stories being shared by others.

ETA2. To complete the story:

After this happened a lot of people came to me wanting to know what happened, and a few days later asking how I got out. I told them what I said above. Things died down for a bit. Nothing happened for a number of months.

But during this time, a few fellow writers told me stories to do with mailing lists similar to the one related to the one posted on p.43. I had a story like that from 2015. But the thread is about box sets, so I haven't posted it yet.

Then in February, someone put together a Facebook post that contained the material about how the book blasts work that is also in the Inside Indie post quoted in the top of the thread. I read it, and when I finished picking my jaw off the floor, I re-posted it. That was the crime that led to the quotes I posted on page 43.

To be clear, IDGAF what anyone says about me. IDGAF about letters. I was probably wrong, but I was in this for readers. Yeah, I was dumb.

I do care that *my friends were threatened to break off contact with me*. You can see where this happened. My crime was to re-post a post containing damning evidence that left me gobsmacked. I posted the threat on the previous page.

To be clear: disagreements happen all the time. You only have to shout "Write To Market" and duck the flak. Disagreements, no matter how severe, should never be a reason for someone else to tell you that you can't maintain a contact with someone else.

*If someone is telling you who you can be friends with, they're gaslighting you.*

This is why I'm here. To stand up against this sort of BS. No. One. Tells. My. Friends. Who. They. Can. Be. Friends. With.

End. Of. Discussion.


----------



## Becca Mills

The staff has agreed not to leave this thread open when no one's up to moderate. I was sure I could make it 'til midnight, but I'm running out of steam. I blame middle age. The thread will open back up when Betsy or Ann gets back online, so check back in three to five hours.

_Yeah, thought I'd be up later, too. Anyway, reopened!. --Betsy_


----------



## TravisKline

Can I just say I have never been a victim of RH, because I have never used her "cutting edge" marketing methods? All victims are former clients who were looking forward to her using some of her magic to turbo charge their book sales. I'm happy I'm leaving this writing thing. Writers should not be publishers. It takes different skills and characters to do either well. Seacrest out!


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

sela said:


> For the rest of us who have already decided, perhaps there is no use debating with our opponents. As I said, research suggests those debates really only end up reinforcing our own positions. We should encourage people to come and provide their testimony and evidence and leave it at that.


I would disagree on this point a bit. Looking at the comments on Christina's donation page, and from PMs some of us have gotten, I think some folks who had previously made up their minds are reconsidering in light of all the stories being shared here.

That said, wholy agreed otherwise. This thread has had proponents of both sides speak up. I'd love to see more.

For those who support Rebecca, come here and tell your side. This is NOT a revenge thread despite what some have speculated. The goal here is not to ostracize and it is definitely not to bully ... and if anyone takes it as such we as a whole should speak out against it.

For those who don't, the same. We want your stories and experiences.

And for any who have felt they have previously been bullied to keep their silence, please know this is your time to speak out, even anonymously. Bullies are strongest in the shadows and behind closed doors. Every person who speaks up causes that strength to diminish ever so slightly. You may feel alone, but you're not. This thread has shown that over and over again. You're among people who will hear you out without judgement. Kboards is a place of friends and community. Please know that.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

Jeffery H said:


> Why is, "Don't do business with her" not enough for everyone? This is how a free market works. You don't like someone's business, you don't do business with them. You (whoever) had a bad experience. Others have not. I don't see anyone starting lawsuits against Apple for using Chinese slave labor to build their phones. You're not filing lawsuits against agents who steal %15 of writers income. When a person or business acts in a way you disagree with, you, the person, chose not to do business with them. You don't like Genrecrave, stop using them. You think they're in violation of Amazon ToS? Report them and let Amazon deal with it. Report them to Itunes and Kobo and everywhere else. If they're in breach of contract, take them to small claims court. That is what you would do if this were a beef with the business.


No, what I do when I have a beef with a business, assuming they don't make it right in a professional manner, is post reviews of that business absolutely everywhere I can and tell everyone I know about my experience. In particularly egregious examples, I'd hope the press picked it up and others with similar experience came forward to voice their experience. So this thread is working exactly as the free market should.

_Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Patty Jansen

J.A. Sutherland said:


> No, what I do when I have a beef with a business, assuming they don't make it right in a professional manner, is post reviews of that business absolutely everywhere I can and tell everyone I know about my experience. In particularly egregious examples, I'd hope the press picked it up and others with similar experience came forward to voice their experience. So this thread is working exactly as the free market should.


Agree. There were many occasions. Many, many occasions, where the promoter could have made it right. It's called customer relations and it is why Amazon allows returns, even if we grumble about it. What would happen if Amazon said "Tough your $100 watch didn't work, and for the privilege, we will force Ebay, iTunes and Netflix to cancel your accounts with them." Can you imagine the outrage?

That's the outrage you're seeing.


----------



## MyraScott

This is definitely making a difference.  Some of the private messages I have gotten have made me cry and I understand why people feel like they can't come forward... but there is such a feeling of relief that these issues are finally being discussed.  It is validation for a lot of people that their concerns matter and that others support them. 

The rallying in the community really is a beautiful thing to watch.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

thisisscary said:


> And apparently I don't know how to handle punctuation here....sorry! How do I make the question marks go away?


You can use the "modify" to go back through your post, which it appears you drafted in a word processor or something similar, and replace the smart quotes and apostrophes with the plain text versions that the forum uses. So just backspace out the offending character and type in the plain text version. You can use "Preview" to make sure you get them all.

Betsy


----------



## Patty Jansen

thisisscary:

I understand how it can happen that some people never notice anything. If the groups you're in happen to be free of conflict and if your life is too busy to pay much attention to the other groups, totally. No one is here to negate your experience.

There is no need to be scared. Even for those who have stood by and watched weird stuff happen, it's understandable that you might not want to get involved or didn't have time to get involved or didn't think much of it at the time. I get it.

I run two Facebook groups and I can swear, hand on my heart, that I will not remove anyone from either of those groups based on this discussion or whether or not they're in contact with anyone else. 

P.S. the weird punctuation happened because you copied & pasted from your computer.


----------



## 75814

Jeffery H said:


> Why is, "Don't do business with her" not enough for everyone? This is how a free market works. You don't like someone's business, you don't do business with them. You (whoever) had a bad experience. Others have not. I don't see anyone starting lawsuits against Apple for using Chinese slave labor to build their phones. You're not filing lawsuits against agents who steal %15 of writers income. When a person or business acts in a way you disagree with, you, the person, chose not to do business with them. You don't like Genrecrave, stop using them. You think they're in violation of Amazon ToS? Report them and let Amazon deal with it. Report them to Itunes and Kobo and everywhere else. If they're in breach of contract, take them to small claims court. That is what you would do if this were a beef with the business.


Because when an indie is engaged in black hat marketing techniques, it reflects poorly on all of us. Because it's not right that someone should have to experience the kind of harassment many have reported. Because it's important that other people know the story so they don't become victims as well. Because lawsuits are long and costly endeavors that not everyone has the resources to afford. Because as we've seen countless times, sometimes one report is not enough.

_Edited quoted post and response to now removed bit. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

thisisscary said:


> I thought a lot about posting and honestly I'm anxious to post, but I felt compelled to share my experience and how it feels to watch this unfold. Yes, I created an anonymous account here to post. Please don't judge me for that. At this point, I'm anxious about blowback from both sides of this situation. Maybe I should be braver, but I'm not that big of an author, and it's scary.
> 
> ****
> 
> Trust me, I have learned a lot in the last few days, enough to cause me to rethink and step back. But I can't lie and say I was bullied or asked to do shady things. To those who have been, I am so, so, so sorry. It's awful and scary. This ended up being a lot longer than I intended, but there you go. I won't use her services going forward.


Hey Thisisscary. Thank you for sharing.

I'm sorry if you feel that perhaps you're stuck between two sides. Unfortunately, in any scenario I think there's going to be a few whose first instinct is to match force with force, i.e. they see someone getting pushed and then decide to shove the alleged attacker and everyone around them. It's kind of a knee jerk reaction. But it's definitely a cause of concern, as has been discussed here and elsewhere. Thankfully, I don't for one second think the vast majority of us believe in doing that. I don't want to see anyone punished for their simple association with a business or person. If there's ire to be had it should be saved for the instigators, the ringleaders so to speak.

Bullying is wrong, but you don't fight one wrong with another.

As for not using her services going forward, I sincerely hope that's your own choice - borne of perhaps the first hand stories shared here - and you're not doing it out of fear of reprisals. I'll repeat: I don't like seeing anyone who feels they've been silenced by their treatment by her. However, I likewise do not want to see anyone silenced because they fear a backlash from the other side.


----------



## unkownwriter

> Why is, "Don't do business with her" not enough for everyone?


Because people won't just say, Oh, okay then. I won't. Proof must be offered and verified. For those who don't want to believe it, nothing will be enough.

You may not like it, but people have been hurt. Their careers have been threatened, if not outright ruined. Do you seriously believe that's okay? That nothing should be said?

Those who have honestly not seen any of these issues, I'd say you have been lucky. And not every box set was mishandled, not every promo was unethical. In the beginning, maybe everything was all above board. I don't know.

But even I, who is barely ever on FB has heard about these issues, over the past few years, and seen the evidence presented (except those last imgur posts, because for some reason I can't see the screen caps), and this isn't really anything new, hints have been showing for years. _Years_, folks. Not, oh, one author is feeling cheated, so let's tear down someone. Years of this, with many authors involved.

You know, I had an upsetting episode with eBay yesterday, and it's left me feeling hurt and confused. I totally get how some folks feel when they have that WTF? experience, wondering what the heck they did to deserve such a response. It throws you, because you know you didn't do anything wrong, and the reaction you get is so off the wall it just makes no sense.


----------



## SerenityEditing

sela said:


> For me, the biggest guide in this is Occam's Razor.
> 
> Occam's Razor states that if there are two (or more) explanations for something, the simpler one is usually better. The more complicated an explanation becomes, the more likely it is to be less likely.
> 
> For example, when we see patterns in wheat fields, the simplest answer is that pranksters have used wooden boards to make them. The more complex answer is that aliens from outer space have visited our earth in ships that are invisible to human radar and have left patterns in crops using antigravity devices as signals to other aliens that... that...
> 
> I don't why but I hope you get my drift.
> 
> ... Frankly, Occam's Razor tells me the second option is simpler and I have to do fewer mental gymnastics to believe.


Before I share some thoughts on Sela's post above, I just wanted to say that I admire and respect everyone who's speaking up. It takes courage to admit to being taken advantage of or victimized, and it also takes courage to go against the tide and state a position knowing that the majority will disagree with it. I have a strong and definite inclination to believe one side over the other, but I do recognize the courage needed to share personal experiences from both sides. Also, I am in awe of the ability and determination of most people posting here (on all sides) to remain polite, civil, and calm in these discussions even against heated and often inaccurate statements. Well done.

On to Sela's post: 
I wonder if the ability to apply Occam's Razor might be impeded to some extent by virtue of the fact that most of (all?) the people involved are authors.

Occam's Razor says that the crop circles are most likely to be two dudes with 2x4s and a couple of beers under their belt - but most books written about crop circles will involve the aliens coming to earth and leaving the messages to signal to other aliens that The Time Has Come and the child who will save the universe has been born and is under threat from the forces of evil and an intergalactic coalition has to come together and be sure that the child survives and invents time travel and and and and.

There's no way I could even count the number of books I've read, from my school-age years until the present, in which a large part of the plot comes from the MC not being taken seriously because "there's no such thing as monsters" or "no one can just vanish into thin air, Sarah" or "you can't be a wizard, Harry, magic isn't real" or "what makes you think this is an international ring of occultists trying to summon timeless forces of darkness? These murders were clearly committed by random, individual crazy people who are not in any way linked to one another." But we all know how those stories go.

Even places where Occam should clearly hold sway, a lot of authors tend to flip it on its head: If the FBI profiler in real life says the serial killer is a white male aged 25-40 who lives alone, I'm going to take that at face value. But if the FBI profiler in a _book_ says that, I, as a reader, am immediately suspicious of the little old lady in the nursing home and the high school cheerleader and maybe the neighbor's housecat.

I suspect authors and other ravenous readers may be more inclined to bypass Occam's Razor in favor of the more option that's more conflict-rich, more ripe for plot twists and suspension of disbelief and hidden motives and astonishing reveals. Just food for thought for the 'how can you look at all this smoke and swear there's no fire' question.


----------



## IreneP

thisisscary said:


> I want to share that some of the posts here made me scared to post. Whether that was the intent or not, at points it felt like - if you don't see how horrible she is, you're an idiot. When Kboards is the very place that led me to her services, that's a hard pill to swallow. I know I'm not the only one who hasn't been bullied or had shady stuff happen because others have reached out to me. Now we're scared from both sides. Authors I highly respect have made comments to the effect of 'should've known better.' How are we supposed to know better when respected authors recs led many of us to her services?


You are right. About a year ago her services had glowing reviews here. A lot of people were signing up - way more than are posting in this thread now.

I was one of those authors and to some extent I could be you. I didn't have a horrible experience. It wasn't great, but I didn't spend more than I might have spent elsewhere with poor returns. She didn't guarantee anything - so there were no specific metrics I could say she didn't meet. (You'll notice there are never any guarantees. Lots of hype, but no guarantees). Because I bought a release package and didn't follow her preferred release strategy, she stated upfront that the results wouldn't be as spectacular (and this was one of my first clues about her methods, btw).

What I did notice later was that she wasn't professional in a lot of her communications - especially publicly to those had used her services. I also started figuring out how she was achieving some of the ranks - and I wasn't 100% comfortable with the techniques. I figured I would chalk it up to experience and walk away.

Then I found this thread.... I know exactly how you feel. When I bought that package, everything sounded above-board.

I don't have a horror story, but I've seen her responses. I'm not discounting any of the stories here.

For anyone who has had a positive experience - I think you would be better served posting your story than tearing down others.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

IreneP said:


> (You'll notice there are never any guarantees. Lots of hype, but no guarantees).


In all fairness, no marketing service in their right mind would ever give any guarantees (other than perhaps money back if not satisfied).


----------



## C. Gockel

> To the people who don't understand why people aren't leaving in droves, you have to understand what it's like for a new author to have someone tear you down because you asked a question. Especially when you've witnessed that person go after others. YES, I could walk, but I have more than the money on the line at this point. This sort of thing could ruin my career before it ever starts.


Okay, first of all, I don't think you should leave the set if you've not been asked to do anything wrong. You signed a contract, fulfilling your end of the bargain doesn't say anything bad about you unless you become one of those people encouraging bullying behavior or using blackhat techniques.

That said, I think it's sad that so many people believe these sets will make or break their careers. Frankly, that's not how this works. Lot's of people have not been in these sets and have been fine. Lots of people have been in these sets and their careers have gone absolutely nowhere.

The sets are one way to get your work onto readers devices but there are a hundred different ways to have that happen, and there are lots of very ethical promotional services to help you do it A LOT CHEAPER: BookSends, EreaderNewsToday, FKtips, Freebooksy, bknights, BookBarbarian, RobinReads, Patty's Promos, Instafreebie Promos, FussyLibrarian, MyBookCave, ReadCheaply, ManyBooks.net, Kindle Highlighter.

Most *READERS* don't care or know about this drama, and ultimately the relationship you build with your readers is the most important one.

I started this thread to give encouragement to people like you: http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250701.0.html


----------



## Fel Beasley

I believe bullying anyone in this business is wrong. I'm starting to see a lot of ugliness directed at people associated with Rebecca Hamilton. It's been stated several times in this thread that it won't be tolerated. So I urge those who stand by that to call out when someone in your circle does something that isn't okay, rather than retweeting it, reposting it, or ignoring it.

We have to hold up everyone to the same standards, especially when it involves harming someone's career. I don't want to post this because I don't want to cause more stress on the person this is about, but I also think it needs to be removed and apologized over and the people that continue to name and shame authors/providers need to be stood up to.

_link to Twitter post removed by moderator. --Betsy_


----------



## KarmaIsA...

Keeping My Head Down said:


> I don't think the set will make or break anything. I am concerned about the bad reviews, hits to my reputation, loss of my Amazon account etc. I have been told if I don't leave the set, there could be fall out in the future if Amazon gets involved. At the same time, I've been told I'm joining the wrong side, RH is the victim, etc. There is no win here.
> 
> I joined the set in hopes of gaining exposure and learning about marketing. The former participants touted they became better marketers after working to promote a box set. I guess I've learned.


This. All of this. All that has been posted by NotARegular, and Thisisscary, and Keepingmyheaddown. I joined a set after doing a couple of small promos, and seeing positive reviews of the boxed sets here on Kboards and elsewhere.

Now I am reading that I am part of a group of scammers, a gamer, a cheater, and lots of other things. I joined a set because it seemed to be a good marketing opportunity. I have never thought anything would make or break my career. Everything I do is to help me learn, take a couple of steps forward, and get a better idea of things I can do to help my business.

It seems that at this moment, however, if I don't take a side, I am going to have a make or break career moment. If I drop out of the set, I'm an enemy of one camp. If I stay in the set, I'm an enemy of the other, and a cheat to boot. Regardless of whether my set makes a list, I obviously joined and am staying because I want to take a shot at gaming the system.

None of that is true. I have had no personal issues with Rebecca. All my interactions with her have been pleasant. I am going to be honest, and say that the only negative interaction I have had is with someone who was once her good friend, and big defender, and is now one of her loudest critics. That author responded to my questions and concerns in a really negative manner. It was made clear that I was not to ask questions, that I must be stupid to do so, and that should I continue, things would get worse. And now, that author has put a white hat on their head and pinned a victim badge the size of my backside on their chest.

There's nowhere for me to go. I have expressed my concerns and dismay to those close to me, and privately. I won't do business with Rebecca again. Not because I have a personal beef with her but I do with the way I see business conducted. With the way people who act in her name behave. With things that need to be addressed being quashed. As the owner, it's on her to shut down the horrible behavior that others do in her name. I don't see that happening.

But like I said, I feel like, for the first time, if I don't take a side, my career will take a hit. No matter what, my career is going to take a hit from one of the opposing sides in this mess.

I am so so sorry to those that I have read that have been quashed in the past year and felt that they also had nowhere to go. I appreciate you speaking out. I have nothing to complain about in comparison, but I understand not feeling supported, and wondering if you are the crazy one, and wondering how in the heck you got to this point when all you were trying to do was expand your marketing.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Hi All,

I've read through the new responses and have a quick response and one that will take some time to compile.

I think a distinction needs to be drawn between those who show up asking legitimate questions and/or offering a POV that is supportive of Rebecca and those who have made barbed comments and questions meant to make a negative statement more than gather new information. I feel like most of us, when the questions were raised respectfully, have treated the one asking with equal respect.

To Becca's earlier point about never knowing the FULL story. Of course she's right. This reference dates me but it's what comes to mine: I don't know what Nicole Brown Simpson ate the night she died nor how Ron Goldman's breath smelled. I do believe with every fiber of my being that OJ Simpson killed them both. At a certain point a person must decide who and what they believe, and endless demands for more can be seen as a delay tactic.

Having said that, I've seen the questions asked of me and am preparing a response. I do want to say, however, that a screen shot of the email I sent (At first glance it looks like it is legitimate, but I have not studied it. I cannot say for sure it has not been altered, but at this point I'm assuming it has not) asking for a refund is not equal to a declarative statement of leaving. That is a twisting of events.


----------



## 75814

No one has to take a side if they don't feel comfortable. I have some very good friends who have been following this but have remained 100% silent in public because they don't want to get mixed up in it. 

And that's fine. If you signed up for one of these promos or sets and you weren't aware of this other stuff, no one's asking you to break your contract. If you choose to participate in other promos or sets, that's your business. The information is out there and what you choose to do with that information is up to you.

As long as you aren't participating in the bullying and harassment, I doubt anyone in this thread will hold anything against you.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Just adding that no one should feel it necessary to withdraw from sets they want to stay in. I get feeling stuck, and I get that many have not had a negative experience and might not have been fully aware of some of the tactics that are coming to light.

More than anyone, I understand the price of taking a stand--as I know most of you have seen. I do believe that for those who want to step forward but have been afraid, now is the time. For those who don't, they should feel no pressure to. 

We each must do what's right for us.


----------



## sela

I want to say to all those authors who are currently doing business with RH and are feeling torn because of the whole conflict that I, personally, do not blame you. 

You were trying to improve your author business, improve your visibility, and so you joined the boxed sets or promotions for that purpose. 

I am sure that most of you had no idea or any expectation that there were shady business practices or bad behaviour going on when you signed on. 

I feel terrible for those who have been harmed in this and who are now concerned and anxious about their business and their position in the community because of their association with RH.

I don't and won't be naming and shaming anyone who has become involved in this and had no idea what was going on behind the scenes. 

I won't be going through the boxed sets and unfriending anyone because I assume they are defending RH or any bad behaviour by being in the set or part of a promotion. 

I am always open and available for advice on indie publishing or if you need an ear or shoulder to cry on.

I am sure I speak for many other authors in this. We only want to see people succeed because your success is proof that I can be a success as well. 

A rising tide lifts all boats.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Concerned said:


> I believe bullying anyone in this business is wrong. I'm starting to see a lot of ugliness directed at people associated with Rebecca Hamilton. It's been stated several times in this thread that it won't be tolerated. So I urge those who stand by that to call out when someone in your circle does something that isn't okay, rather than retweeting it, reposting it, or ignoring it.
> 
> _link to Twitter post removed by moderator. --Betsy_


I agree. I think others have spoken up about it here and I've also seen discussions popping up elsewhere about it, and so far it's been encouraging. When this thread first hit, I think there was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, but now that it's had time to mature and people have had time to think, I'm hoping cooler heads prevail. But you're right. If we see any counter-bullying going on, it is all of our duty to speak up against it.


----------



## C. Gockel

> I don't and won't be naming and shaming anyone who has become involved in this and had no idea what was going on behind the scenes.


Ditto.


----------



## Taking my troll a$$ outta here

Keeping My Head Down said:


> I've lurked here for several days. As you can see, I do not want to share my name for fear of the repercussions.
> 
> I am an author in a current RH box set and find myself in an untenable situation. I want out, but $500 is a lot of money to walk from. I understand my spot will be gifted, and I may see a payback once the royalties come in. However, I'm concerned that leaving now looks like taking sides. Not a bad thing, but the stakes have been raised as a result of the blow-up.
> 
> YES, I have seen the naming and shaming first hand. YES, I saw the post where we were told to unfriend people for RH's safety. None of the people were on my friend's list, nor did I know any of the history/players. At the time I had several services booked with RH and decided to ride it out and walk away.
> 
> To answer the question above and shed some light on how this all works, this is the process for signing up for a box set.
> 1. An announcement is made in the GC group.
> 2. Authors are required to comment with their BS status & awards, a link to their best-selling book, and the number newsletter subscribers.
> 3. IF you're chosen, you are given hours to send payment. YES, It was required to send the money via F&F, though now RH is charging a fee to cover the Paypal fees. This is still in violation of the TOS, but it at least provides some CYA for the author that the rest of us did not get.
> 4. Once payment is received you're put into a FB group. When I joined, the following posts were already there: a release schedule, sign-up sheets for tasks, and pre-release/release week ad schedule. Everyone is required to sign up. Nowhere is it mentioned that you have to share with your NL on specific dates, but we aren't far enough into the process to send anything out. No preorder links available.
> 5. Contracts are signed in an on-line form and tax information is sent to an accountant.
> 6. A couple of weeks in, authors are required to submit a formatted (GC provides a template) novel. However, most don't have their book finished and are told to upload anything as long as it is formatted and not in KU. The expectation is that the authors will upload a final version of the actual novel by the pre-load deadline. BTW, she is using Pronoun.
> 7. The authors come up with extra things to do to promote the set. There has been little input from the organizers at this point.
> 
> That's as far as we have gone in the set. RH hadn't posted much in the group, until this blew up. With the exception of the contracts, her PAs handled everything.
> 
> As for the other services. I've had some good experiences and some not so good. I had a blast go out after my sale ended because of a technical issue on their end. When I asked (not complained), I was told I was not entitled to a refund. When I pushed, I received a series of long responses in rapid succession telling me the "rules" and insinuating I was wrong to ask. I tried to ask questions in the middle of the barrage, but the messages kept coming. She never answered my questions or concerns.
> 
> I was stunned. I showed the conversation to my husband. He thought the messages were canned and pointed out the "strong-arm" marketing techniques used. In one PM, she said something like, I understand. Not everyone wants to do what it takes to be a professional author. I'm paraphrasing, but you get the idea.
> 
> To the people who don't understand why people aren't leaving in droves, you have to understand what it's like for a new author to have someone tear you down because you asked a question. Especially when you've witnessed that person go after others. YES, I could walk, but I have more than the money on the line at this point. This sort of thing could ruin my career before it ever starts.
> 
> Think I'm exaggerating? I've watched people argue and leave groups over this issue. I made the mistake of talking to ONE person about my experience under my name, was unfriended by several, and PMed by more. YES, I am a grown woman, and these are people I have never met, nor care to, but dang it, normally nice reasonable people are losing their minds over this issue. There IS a certain amount of brainwashing in GC. A lot of people believe GC is the only game in town because their rank moves down a few thousand notches. People rally behind RH in a way I haven't seen since middle school. I think a lot of this comes from the way people are chosen to participate in certain promos and the box sets.
> 
> I'm thankful for this community and that all of this is coming out. I thought I was nuts for months.
> 
> On another note: Christina, there is a photo of a computer screen with an email from you to RH where you ask to be removed from all three sets. I don't quite know what to make of it. Because it goes against what's been posted here. I don't mean to call you out, but I can see where people see things like that and cling to the woman handing out the golden tickets.


I'm sorry to hear of your experience. I'm glad you are here at KBoards and hope you stick around.

As for what you asked about Christina? There is a distinct pattern to the way that particular organizer manipulates situations. She changes details to get her followers up in arms. Christina stated very clearly that she sent a professional, private message to Rebecca:


ChristinaGarner said:


> I want to thank the mods for their willingness to once again reopen this thread.
> 
> Something I've been thinking about is how it didn't have to be this way. Business disputes happen. They can (and should) be kept private. However, in my case, immediately after I sent an email with my concerns, I was publicly blasted on Facebook. It was several paragraphs about hoping I would be "a woman of my word" and how she hated that I was letting 70 other authors down. There were tear-filled emojis--it was completely inappropriate.
> 
> Her private email response might not have been what I wanted to hear--and not based in the law as she did owe me my money back--but I did not voice my anger publicly.
> 
> A day or two later when I was kicked out of the Spellbound set, I only found out because I was told she was posting about me. She said I'd publicly announced my intention to leave the set. But I had done no such thing--at that point I was still weighing my options. Again, there was the public shaming about me letting others down. This was the same post wherein people offered to pay for my slot but she chose to give it away.
> 
> This is not how business should be conducted. It was damaging to my reputation and completely unnecessary.


Note that she sent a private, professional message, and was immediately blasted on Facebook. Christina asked to be released and expressed to resolve it amicably. She never said she donated her spot, nor did she say she quit anything. She explained her position and wanted to resolve it. It was then immediately stated on facebook that Christina "donated" the spots (which she did not), and then it was changed to Christina was seeking a refund and screwing over the rest of the authors in the set. I saw it happen exactly the way Christina said it did. That's why I'm not in any of those groups anymore. Getting followers up in arms now appears to be intended to deflect from the fact that Christina tried to handle the situation in a professional, private manner, and then was publicly blasted and maligned on Facebook.

Christina can choose to share the email with KBoards if she wants. I've seen it, and it was nothing but completely professional and appropriate. The interaction should never have been brought out onto Facebook, and she did not do anything to deserve the attacks and retaliation against her character, such as the very recent accusation of plagiarism where she was named by her first name as the likely source.http://insideindie.weebly.com/uploads/1/0/4/9/104935491/published/forgetful.png?1494018808

And just for the record, I know a lot of authors that I consider friends caught up in this. My opinion of you has not dimmed; I don't fault you. I think that many of you were caught up in something and simply cannot get out of it.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Yeah, most of us who knew the shenanigans going on (like I wrote off working with Rebecca Hamilton and Jasmine Walt years ago because to me when the first boxed set went down back two summers ago and they didn't seem to understand many of the things voices of experience were explaining it was like okay, they're not experienced enough for me to want to work with them.) In other words, for the people who wouldn't jump to work with you now because all of this coming out that was true before everything came out. I've always steered clear of the authors who were vocal supporters of the RH and JW methods and I never hid that. 

Everyone makes mistakes in business and maybe those currently working with Rebecca and other similar indies don't feel they are making a mistake. But we are all judged on the company we keep, just like I am for sure positive there those in Rebecca's camp who would never work with me at this point either. ::Shrug:: 

It doesn't really matter, people only have so much power over you as you grant them. I learned that the hardest myself when I was a newbie. 

There are ways to insulate yourself from being "blacklisted" with promotion services and cover artists etc and that is it's a big big world of publishing out there. Google ads and Facebook ads don't care who you are friends with on social media. Cover artists who do a bunch of different genres and are just gifted in the world of art don't make themselves beholden to one client's whims and moods to determine who they can work with. I mean just the very fact people are like I can't​ speak out or leave the boxed set because I lose my investment goes to the heart of what's wrong with all of this.

Refunds are a part of doing business. And if someone is really signing up for any service that says no refunds and plans to honor that then they shouldn't go into it unless they were 100% willing to lose every penny with nothing in return. Because that's what you are really signing up for when you agree to no refunds, that the other actor can do anything and you have zero recourse at all.

True story, I have posted publicly before when everyone had stars in their eyes about Bookbub that it wasn't a secret how they built their lists. They made a shill blog post to look like a 3 Rd party endorsement of their service (the book insider) and sent Google ads and yahoo ads to it in droves. It still exists. I had shared that not so flattering observation of their service many times. Didn't stop them from selling me a spot in July 2015. It's really not normal for any business to lash out at a critical review or observation. They let the quality of their product or service stand on its own.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I've read through the new responses and have a quick response and one that will take some time to compile.
> 
> I think a distinction needs to be drawn between those who show up asking legitimate questions and/or offering a POV that is supportive of Rebecca and those who have made barbed comments and questions meant to make a negative statement more than gather new information. I feel like most of us, when the questions were raised respectfully, have treated the one asking with equal respect.
> 
> To Becca's earlier point about never knowing the FULL story. Of course she's right. This reference dates me but it's what comes to mine: I don't know what Nicole Brown Simpson ate the night she died nor how Ron Goldman's breath smelled. I do believe with every fiber of my being that OJ Simpson killed them both. At a certain point a person must decide who and what they believe, and endless demands for more can be seen as a delay tactic.
> 
> Having said that, I've seen the questions asked of me and am preparing a response. I do want to say, however, that a screen shot of the email I sent (At first glance it looks like it is legitimate, but I have not studied it. I cannot say for sure it has not been altered, but at this point I'm assuming it has not) asking for a refund is not equal to a declarative statement of leaving. That is a twisting of events.


Thank you for taking the time to make a response to the screenshot. I think it's important for both sides that are affected to be able to clear up misunderstandings or respond to questions raised that they wish to answer. I don't want anyone silenced.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Perry Constantine said:


> No one has to take a side if they don't feel comfortable. I have some very good friends who have been following this but have remained 100% silent in public because they don't want to get mixed up in it.
> 
> And that's fine. If you signed up for one of these promos or sets and you weren't aware of this other stuff, no one's asking you to break your contract. If you choose to participate in other promos or sets, that's your business. The information is out there and what you choose to do with that information is up to you.
> 
> As long as you aren't participating in the bullying and harassment, I doubt anyone in this thread will hold anything against you.


I agree with this sentiment. My concern and the concern that Karmaisa and Keepingmyheaddown is that there is no way to know who bent the line ethically and who broke the TOS in any of the sets. Simply having their named link to any of her sets is enough proof in some people's eyes that they are responsible for bad behavior. In this thread, most have said that those who were unaware before now can't be blamed for something they didn't know about. But what about those who are in sets now, who are being targeted as scammers and bullies?

I have a lot of respect for you and many others in this thread and I fully believe that the last thing any of you would do is punish, harass or bully another author. To the best of my recollection, I've never named or shamed anyone. I know I've never asked my friends/followers/readers to harass or hurt anyone.

So, honest question, how do you know whether a person in a set has behaved dishonestly? It really feels like guilt by association. It's been stated that there's a line drawn in the sand, that it's us vs them, and that breaks my freaking heart. There are those on the sides of those speaking out against Rebecca who I've witnessed cause harm, rally their followers to cause harm, and twist information to do so. I've seen the naming and shaming from that side, does that mean I should lump everyone in the same category just because they've supported and backed up this person?

I've read the site that's up. I've seen the twitter handle and I can not in good conscience condone some of what is being said and done. I don't agree with all of Rebecca's business decisions and I don't agree with how she handles things sometimes. I've spoken out about it in the past and so have others and we weren't targeted. Fear of speaking out works on both sides.

Those who've been afraid to speak out in the past against Rebecca because they were worried that the majority would disagree with them or go after them (or even did), I am so sorry. My heart breaks for you. It does. I hope that those who have stood up and said no more will have the same compassion for the other side. Because let's face it, the opinion has shifted. Let's rise above calls for sides to be taken.

I have a deep respect and close friendships with people on both sides of this and I refuse to choose sides, either of them. I will not purge my friends list. If someone decides to distance themselves from me because of it, that's okay. No hard feelings. We all have to do what we feel is best.

I will continue to seek the truth, specifically about TOS violations or any gaming the system. I won't participate in those things, either. But if I remain in the current sets I'm in, or join any future promotions, it might not matter if I'm innocent or guilty. It will be assumed.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I agree. I think others have spoken up about it here and I've also seen discussions popping up elsewhere about it, and so far it's been encouraging. When this thread first hit, I think there was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction, but now that it's had time to mature and people have had time to think, I'm hoping cooler heads prevail. But you're right. If we see any counter-bullying going on, it is all of our duty to speak up against it.


This gives me a lot of hope and I thank you.


----------



## Evenstar

I think it is being stated over and over by one "side" that they do NOT want to criticise or alienate anyone who continues to do business with Rebecca or even people who support her. That counts for a lot and really should be noted.

As someone who is not involved I can openly say that this truly doesn't appear to be horrible and vindictive, but an outing of bad business practice by someone who runs a business that involves authors.


UNRELATED STORY WITH A MORAL:
Many years ago in the UK the Sun newspaper decided to "name and shame" paedophiles. They posted photos.
On a rough council estate lived a man who bore a distinct resemblance to one of the photos. A mob formed on the estate. His house was burned down and he was beaten to death (?) when he arrived home from work. He was completely innocent.
The press didn't take any responsibility, they claimed it was a case of "Mass Hysteria."

The whole story affected me to such an extent that I remember it even now, 20 (?) years later.  I would be the first person to try to squash anything that seemed like a witch hunt or a case of mass hysteria. And yes, we should all remember that Rebecca is a real person, with a family who love her and could be hurt.

BUT, Kboards works at it's best when members go out of their way to help each other, to keep each other informed, it is a very socially responsible site. It does that a lot. People are given advice on covers, on blurbs, on advertising and yes, also on businesses that are under performing or not what they seem.

I like think that my level of impartiality, and my desire not to see anyone being victimised, should give me the right to an opinion. I don't have a "testimony" but I do think that this situation should absolutely be discussed here, and as many people as possible should be encouraged to share their personal experience so that everyone, involved or not, feels more informed.  Which is precisely why the people who are trying to bring it all to light are the same people who are saying "no one will hate you, no one will go after you" if you disagree with them.  Doesn't that tell you something?? It speaks volumes to me.


----------



## 75814

Concerned said:


> So, honest question, how do you know whether a person in a set has behaved dishonestly? It really feels like guilt by association. It's been stated that there's a line drawn in the sand, that it's us vs them, and that breaks my freaking heart. There are those on the sides of those speaking out against Rebecca who I've witnessed cause harm, rally their followers to cause harm, and twist information to do so. I've seen the naming and shaming from that side, does that mean I should lump everyone in the same category just because they've supported and backed up this person?


It's pretty simple--if I've seen them behave dishonestly or defend dishonest practices. There are only a few people that I'd currently consider enablers. Even then, I'm not going to launch any campaigns against them, and if they're participating in the same promotion I'm in, I won't withdraw. I won't force mutual friends to choose sides, won't encourage people to one-star bomb them, won't even mention them. As far as I'm concerned, they simply just don't exist and I won't engage with them in any way.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

ebbrown said:


> I'm sorry to hear of your experience. I'm glad you are here at KBoards and hope you stick around.
> 
> As for what you asked about Christina? There is a distinct pattern to the way that particular organizer manipulates situations. She changes details to get her followers up in arms. Christina stated very clearly that she sent a professional, private message to Rebecca:Note that she sent a private, professional message, and was immediately blasted on Facebook. Christina asked to be released and expressed to resolve it amicably. She never said she donated her spot, nor did she say she quit anything. She explained her position and wanted to resolve it. It was then immediately stated on facebook that Christina "donated" the spots (which she did not), and then it was changed to Christina was seeking a refund and screwing over the rest of the authors in the set. I saw it happen exactly the way Christina said it did. That's why I'm not in any of those groups anymore. Getting followers up in arms now appears to be intended to deflect from the fact that Christina tried to handle the situation in a professional, private manner, and then was publicly blasted and maligned on Facebook.
> 
> Christina can choose to share the email with KBoards if she wants. I've seen it, and it was nothing but completely professional and appropriate. The interaction should never have been brought out onto Facebook, and she did not do anything to deserve the attacks and retaliation against her character, such as the very recent accusation of plagiarism where she was named by her first name as the likely source.http://insideindie.weebly.com/uploads/1/0/4/9/104935491/published/forgetful.png?1494018808
> 
> And just for the record, I know a lot of authors that I consider friends caught up in this. My opinion of you has not dimmed; I don't fault you. I think that many of you were caught up in something and simply cannot get out of it.


Thank you for this! It really does explain it. It's starting to feel like Sisyphus with this line of questioning. But for those who feel that me asking for a refund is equal to quitting, I'm not sure what to say. But for those who realize they are not the same, I'll be posting something that should make the timeline of events 100% clear.


----------



## Monique

If the set you're involved with isn't using any of the shenanigany methods to move copies and isn't breaking any other TOS, just see it through. Uphold your end of the bargain, then walk away and consider it a lesson learned. For those who are just now seeing the reality of it all, it's what you do next that matters.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Monique said:


> If the set you're involved with isn't using any of the shenanigany methods to move copies and isn't breaking any other TOS, just see it through. Uphold your end of the bargain, then walk away and consider it a lesson learned. For those who are just now seeing the reality of it all, it's what you do next that matters.


100% this ^^


----------



## C. Gockel

> If the set you're involved with isn't using any of the shenanigany methods to move copies and isn't breaking any other TOS, just see it through. Uphold your end of the bargain, then walk away and consider it a lesson learned. For those who are just now seeing the reality of it all, it's what you do next that matters.


So, so, so much this.


----------



## Fel Beasley

thisisscary said:


> Thanks to all who are sharing that those of us who caught on too late won't be named and shamed. I feel caught about the best way forward - whether to stay quiet and just get through my remaining commitment or not. Today, I don't have it in me to put myself up to be publicly attacked, Maybe tomorrow I will, or another day. What says it all to me is that I shouldn't be nervous. It's not even about the refund. If I booked an ad somewhere reputable and backed out late, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't get a refund. That's not even what I'm worried about. It's the online attacks. I wish I wasn't seeing the attacks from those who don't support her, but they are happening too - all in all it's plain terrible.


For what it's worth, if you do decide to drop out of a set, I won't blame you. I won't attack you. And if someone else does, I will stand up against them. No one should be punished or harassed or even outed in an ugly way for either staying or leaving. People should have the support to make the decision that is best for them and not be shamed for it.

I know there have been a few people who have been dropping out of the sets since this came to light. I haven't seen any of them attacked publicly or in the private groups. Doesn't mean it isn't happening. I can't see everything. But as someone who is still involved with these sets, I don't want people to be afraid to leave if they choose to. As for the refund policy, I don't agree with it, and I can't know what was discussed prior to my involvement, but it is stated very clearly that there is a no refund policy right on the threads about applying for the sets. So I agree, if you choose to join a set, expect that you won't get a refund if you have to drop out. Is it a good business practice? Not really. But it isn't being hidden at least not at this time. And I knew when I signed up that there was no guarantee I'd see a cent back. I was okay with it because I understood the risk and decided it was worth it. Of course that was before some of this came to light which is why I don't blame anyone for not wanting to participate.


----------



## C. Gockel

I want to add, I don't think that being in a set is going to hurt you long term. But participating in the bullying and encouraging it? Yes, of course people are watching that and are going to be wary.


----------



## GeneDoucette

To the concerns expressed: we're not making an enemies list here. KBoards is a community, not a business enterprise. Also, aside from Nixon, adults don't keep enemy lists. Speaking for myself, I wouldn't know who is and isn't (or was/wasn't) involved with RH, and if I did, I wouldn't know what to do with that information.


----------



## Morgan Worth

Long-time lurker here. I just want to say how important it is that this conversation is happening here, on Kboards.

I've had no involvement with or exposure to RH outside of seeing her posts here. Her posts just struck me as having a scammy vibe. I couldn't put my finger on exactly why. Maybe it was the way she often remarked that she was doing so many labor-intensive promotional activities strictly out of good will? But everyone here seemed so impressed with her, I thought I was being too cynical.

If I felt I could benefit from her services, I might have been tempted to put my reservations aside and jump in. I have so much respect for this community, and I tend to trust that if a service is fishy, I'll find a warning here.

I know this situation is messy, and I'm sure it's not fun for the mods. But it's so important that we talk about it here. Thanks, mods!


----------



## sela

ChristinaGarner said:


> Yes, exactly. I am seeing the same people who have privately messaged me about how sorry they are for what's being said about me, also commenting to Rebecca that I "must be confused" about the Spellbound box set being told we could have super steamy content and I "didn't read the contract" etc. I have kept them to myself, but I most certainly have opinions about that. That's different than "keeping low." That's playing both sides.
> 
> With regards to Spellbound, let's clear that up right now.
> 
> The original call for entries in the GenreCrave group clearly state "clean" and "appropriate for all ages." Right after the group formed, people began listing the book they would be including and some raised concerns b/c of the adult content. Instead of addressing the concerns calmly, people were told to "chill out" and a long post ensued that stated "super steamy" content was allowed.
> 
> http://imgur.com/TSYmd0w
> http://imgur.com/KxUiZ9a
> http://imgur.com/OtcGbr9
> 
> Editing b/c I forgot 2 links.


Thank you for posting that.

IANAL but I think it clears up two things:

1) The original CTA was that Spellbound was to be "Clean" and "appropriate for all ages."

Simply put, super steamy / erotic content is not "clean" or "appropriate for all ages."

So, if super steamy erotic content was to be included, the original contract would be broken. It would be kosher for any involved in Spellbound and who signed up based on the original CTA to ask for a refund because the contract was broken by the organizer / promoter.

2) It's clear from the tone of the two posts linked to that the organizer was dismissive of anyone questioning the change in content / rating for the boxed set.

It's totally unprofessional to change terms in mid-stream and then dismiss people's legitimate concerns about the changes. Anyone who understands clean romance or clean anything knows how upset those readers get when they buy something they think is clean only to find erotic content or swearing, etc. They get REALLY upset and leave bad reviews and report to the retailer and ask for refunds. That's something a professional business person takes into serious consideration.

What people not involved can take into consideration is:

1) Breaking of terms of the contract without notice, and;
2) Dismissing concerns of participants when terms are broken.

What a truly professional organizer would have done is sent an email to all those who signed contracts and paid stating that the original terms were going to be changed for these reasons and if those who signed up based on those terms wished to no longer participate, they could withdraw with a refund, no prejudice.

The fact that wasn't done and that those questioning the changes were dismissed publicly is totally unprofessional.

Buyer beware.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Yes, exactly. I am seeing the same people who have privately messaged me about how sorry they are for what's being said about me, also commenting to Rebecca that I "must be confused" about the Spellbound box set being told we could have super steamy content and I "didn't read the contract" etc. I have kept them to myself, but I most certainly have opinions about that. That's different than "keeping low." That's playing both sides.
> 
> With regards to Spellbound, let's clear that up right now.
> 
> The original call for entries in the GenreCrave group clearly state "clean" and "appropriate for all ages." Right after the group formed, people began listing the book they would be including and some raised concerns b/c of the adult content. Instead of addressing the concerns calmly, people were told to "chill out" and a long post ensued that stated "super steamy" content was allowed.
> 
> http://imgur.com/TSYmd0w
> http://imgur.com/KxUiZ9a
> http://imgur.com/OtcGbr9
> 
> Editing b/c I forgot 2 links.


Thank you for sharing these screenshots. I can understand that it's frustrating to even have to do so. No one wants to have to defend themselves against claims, so I appreciate the openness, even if I don't expect it. I'm not accusing you of lying with what I'm about to say. It's perfectly clear from the last two screenshots that the set in question was allowing both steamy and clean material.

The screenshots don't indicate where this was posted, just that it is what was said. If it was posted and directed to those in the Spellbound set, then yes it is changing the agreement made when the set was posted and it's completely understandable that someone wouldn't want their YA, clean story in a set that has a lot of steaminess. I know if I wrote clean or sweet, I wouldn't feel comfortable marketing a set that included sexier content to my readers who would be expecting something else entirely. So I understand your stance on this.

I looked up Spellbound on Amazon. It states that the set is clean and for all ages. I haven't read it, but it seems like at some point, and quite possibly after you were removed from the group, the decision was made to keep the set clean. I have friends in the set who are pretty sure the set was always supposed to be clean, but things get missed all the time.

I don't know if a link to Amazon is allowed in this thread. I apologize if it isn't. The set in question: https://www.amazon.com/Spellbound-Limited-Paranormal-Romance-Collection-ebook/dp/B01N18NFS9/


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

I'm glad to see this thread is still up. I'm honestly relieved that all of this has come to light and that so many have joined the discussion.

I don't begrudge anyone still working with her, though I have long removed myself from anyone participating in bullying and unprofessional behavior. I'm sorry that so many feel caught in the middle. I don't think you're doing anything wrong by carrying out your contract.

I'm also glad Writer Beware is looking into this. I'll be submitting my story to them. I've been wary of sharing publicly but I also don't want to see anyone else hurt. When people I've long respected are saying enough is enough, I know I wasn't wrong for trusting my gut.

The indie author community is a lot like a small town. How we conduct ourselves reflects not only on our own reputations, but also our town's. It's important to maintain our integrity because as others have pointed out, questionable behavior and practices only eventually hurt us all when the retailers we work with implement tighter guidelines. We indies have worked so hard to overcome stigma and prove ourselves legitimate businesses.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Concerned said:


> Thank you for sharing these screenshots. I can understand that it's frustrating to even have to do so. No one wants to have to defend themselves against claims, so I appreciate the openness, even if I don't expect it. I'm not accusing you of lying with what I'm about to say. It's perfectly clear from the last two screenshots that the set in question was allowing both steamy and clean material.
> 
> The screenshots don't indicate where this was posted, just that it is what was said. If it was posted and directed to those in the Spellbound set, then yes it is changing the agreement made when the set was posted and it's completely understandable that someone wouldn't want their YA, clean story in a set that has a lot of steaminess. I know if I wrote clean or sweet, I wouldn't feel comfortable marketing a set that included sexier content to my readers who would be expecting something else entirely. So I understand your stance on this.
> 
> I looked up Spellbound on Amazon. It states that the set is clean and for all ages. I haven't read it, but it seems like at some point, and quite possibly after you were removed from the group, the decision was made to keep the set clean. I have friends in the set who are pretty sure the set was always supposed to be clean, but things get missed all the time.
> 
> I don't know if a link to Amazon is allowed in this thread. I apologize if it isn't. The set in question: https://www.amazon.com/Spellbound-Limited-Paranormal-Romance-Collection-ebook/dp/B01N18NFS9/


The first post was made inside the GenreCrave marketing group. The second, inside the Spellbound box set group after people had paid. The "drama" (Rebecca's word) created by the authors questioning the switch was quickly deleted.

It's certainly possible the ones I shared were too, and your friends missed them. The fact remains, people signed up for a clean set and were then told they were involved in a set that included "super steamy."

But hey, "no refunds." (A term which does not apply in the case of breach or a contract becoming voidable, as I've tried to make clear many times.)


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Agreed, Sela. As a romance author, I can second how important it is to properly market clean or steamy romance. Readers looking for clean romance would, understandably, be very upset if a clean box set suddenly included steamy content.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

ChristinaGarner said:


> The first post was made inside the GenreCrave marketing group. The second, inside the Spellbound box set group after people had paid. The "drama" (Rebecca's word) created by the authors questioning the switch was quickly deleted.
> 
> It's certainly possible the ones I shared were too, and your friends missed them. The fact remains, people signed up for a clean set and were then told they were involved in a set that included "super steamy."
> 
> But hey, "no refunds." (A term which does not apply in the case of breach or a contract becoming voidable, as I've tried to make clear many times.)


Exactly. I can understand a change in content. It happens. But when it does, that's still a breach of contract.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> The first post was made inside the GenreCrave marketing group. The second, inside the Spellbound box set group after people had paid. The "drama" (Rebecca's word) created by the authors questioning the switch was quickly deleted.
> 
> It's certainly possible the ones I shared were too, and your friends missed them. The fact remains, people signed up for a clean set and were then told they were involved in a set that included "super steamy."
> 
> But hey, "no refunds." (A term which does not apply in the case of breach or a contract becoming voidable, as I've tried to make clear many times.)


I've seen the contracts to know that it states if the contract is broken on Rebecca's end, a refund must be issued, which is the only reason I'm even bringing any of this up. These are what the lawyers will bring up when it goes to court. If this was just about exposing bad business practices, I wouldn't question it. But since there are now legal implications as well as a gofundme to help you with the costs, I want to make sure everything is clear and documented. At no point do I want you to feel like you have to show proof of anything. This isn't a court of law at all. You don't owe me anything. No one is being forced to fund anything, I simply ask so I can make that decision for myself.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

My first book suddenly has a one-star review voted to the top. Hmmmm. 
Of course, another book is in the top 10 of the store right now, so you're not exactly killin' me here, ladies. 
And no, I haven't gone and voted anybody else's one stars up. We're not in grade school. Not even in high school. The Popular Girls don't get to decide my fate. I see you. I know you. I reject you.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rosalind J said:


> My first book suddenly has a one-star review voted to the top. Hmmmm.
> Of course, another book is in the top 10 of the store right now, so you're not exactly killin' me here, ladies.
> And no, I haven't gone and voted anybody else's one stars up. We're not in grade school. Not even in high school. The Popular Girls don't get to decide my fate.


Yes, I have two 2* reviews for Gateway and both have been quickly up-voted as well as a 1* on Chasm. My books aren't anywhere near the top 10, but somehow I feel that I, too, will survive.

ETA that it does prove the tactics some are willing to go to in order to distract from the truth. This is why people are afraid to come forward and why this has gone on so long.


----------



## jaehaerys

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Yeah, most of us who knew the shenanigans going on (like I wrote off working with Rebecca Hamilton and Jasmine Walt years ago because to me when the first boxed set went down back two summers ago and they didn't seem to understand many of the things voices of experience were explaining it was like okay, they're not experienced enough for me to want to work with them.) In other words, for the people who wouldn't jump to work with you now because all of this coming out that was true before everything came out. I've always steered clear of the authors who were vocal supporters of the RH and JW methods and I never hid that.
> 
> Everyone makes mistakes in business and maybe those currently working with Rebecca and other similar indies don't feel they are making a mistake. But we are all judged on the company we keep, just like I am for sure positive there those in Rebecca's camp who would never work with me at this point either. ::Shrug::
> 
> It doesn't really matter, people only have so much power over you as you grant them. I learned that the hardest myself when I was a newbie.
> 
> There are ways to insulate yourself from being "blacklisted" with promotion services and cover artists etc and that is it's a big big world of publishing out there. Google ads and Facebook ads don't care who you are friends with on social media. Cover artists who do a bunch of different genres and are just gifted in the world of art don't make themselves beholden to one client's whims and moods to determine who they can work with. I mean just the very fact people are like I can't speak out or leave the boxed set because I lose my investment goes to the heart of what's wrong with all of this.
> 
> Refunds are a part of doing business. And if someone is really signing up for any service that says no refunds and plans to honor that then they shouldn't go into it unless they were 100% willing to lose every penny with nothing in return. Because that's what you are really signing up for when you agree to no refunds, that the other actor can do anything and you have zero recourse at all.
> 
> True story, I have posted publicly before when everyone had stars in their eyes about Bookbub that it wasn't a secret how they built their lists. They made a shill blog post to look like a 3 Rd party endorsement of their service (the book insider) and sent Google ads and yahoo ads to it in droves. It still exists. I had shared that not so flattering observation of their service many times. Didn't stop them from selling me a spot in July 2015. It's really not normal for any business to lash out at a critical review or observation. They let the quality of their product or service stand on its own.


Gosh, is that really true about Bookbub? 

Between this post, and this thread in general - among the other rumblings of the various ebook scams out there - how is one to believe that indie publishing is anything other than rotten to the core at this point? I suppose we at least have Carolyn's thread to cling to, but my goodness what a mess.


----------



## Undecided

I've been following this thread since the beginning, and am still catching up with the past couple of hours worth of posts. But I felt that it was time I said something. Like many others, I've gone the anonymous route because I don't want to risk the back lash, and I don't feel that either "side" is completely free of that. 

So, here's where I stand. 

- I've only ever booked one GC service (I believe it was a spotlight) and it performed badly. I didn't complain, nor did I ask for a refund. However, on reflection, the failure of this service was at least in part my own fault. My cover and blurb weren't right for the genre, and I suspect the genre wasn't right for GC either. I haven't booked any GC services since because I have limited funds, and have to be picky about where I spend it. And I'm going to spend it on services that have performed for me in the past. Which is exactly what I've told anyone that asked. 

- I'm in a RH box set at the moment. So far, I've seen nothing dodgy, sketchy or illegal. In fact, I've seen posts about making sure we abide by the KU rules, and about uploading via pronoun so that file size isn't an issue. The main reason I wanted to be in a box set of this magnitude is the exposure. No matter what, my work will be in the hands of THOUSANDS more readers than I could get it into myself. And sure, not all of those will ever read the book, and only some of them will buy the next book. But if even a handful of those readers become my fans, then it's a win for me. The potential best seller title would be the icing on the cake, and mostly so I can say "told you so" to the people in my "real" life that told me I couldn't do it. I'm not expecting it to change my career massively. It will still be a lot of hard work  even if I do get the title, and I'm okay with that. 

- Here's the thing about the internet; it's sometimes hard to tell the tone that people meant something to be said in. I'm not saying that RH has never been short with anyone, or said something she shouldn't - but then who hasn't I know I've said the wrong thing on occasion, but I didn't mean it maliciously. I'm not saying the accounts here are wrong. But neither am I saying that I think RH is completely wrong either. There's most likely some fault on both sides. 

As I've said, I haven't had a personal bad experience with Rebecca. Nor do I know anyone who has. I haven't seen her ask anyone to do anything illegal, immoral or sketchy within the box set group. And while she does call people out, I'm not sure she does so with malicious intent. But the round about accusing people without naming them thing? That's almost exactly how this thread (and the website it links to) started - so why is she a villain for doing that but no one else is? Basically, I suppose my question is, who hasn't done something wrong in their life? And yes, I'm probably going to get some kick back from saying that. 

But you want to know what I feel the most about this situation? I feel SCARED. And not of Rebecca. I feel scared of the potential backlash that could happen for my career. Because I've seen what can be construed as nastiness on both sides. I shouldn't feel like this. But some of the people on this thread, and particularly those earlier in the conversation, have made me feel that way.


----------



## Huldra

In regards to Christina's email to Rebecca, and the statements that Christina's saying she wants out of the set... that's a very twisted version of the truth.

She's saying (very, very politely) that due to the recent changes to the box sets Myths & Legends, Spellbound and Gypsies after Dark, she's not sure they're a good fit. Furthermore, because of the announcement of new contracts coming out she's not comfortable promoting a set she doesn't know if she can agree with the terms of, she is _asking_ for her money refunded.

I know this, because Rebecca posted this screenshot in the genreCRAVE Facebook group she asked people to join to see proof of the truth. She then captioned it with "Screenshot that she requested removal and was not kicked out."

She didn't request removal - she requested a *refund*. Now, the assumption is that a refund would be followed by a withdrawal fromt he group, but this email does in no way, shape or form give Rebecca the authority to remove Christina from the group _and_ withhold her money.

Imagine you buy a Kindle off amazon, but it arrives at your house completely broken. This wasn't the Kindle you purchased - you purchased a new and functioning Kindle.
You get in touch with Amazon, telling them you want your money refunded, because they didn't hold up their end of the bargain.
Next thing you know, Amazon's swung by your house, picked up your broken Kindle and are now refusing to pay you the money back.
That's what happened in this situation, too.

That's what happens with a lot of the proof Rebecca posts. She shows screen grabs of something that supposedly proves her point and captions the picture with a _slightly_ twisted version of the truth, and it's so easy to fall for if you don't scrutinise the image very, very carefully and ideally know the full backstory to WTH is going on.

Link to the email in Rebecca's group so you can read for yourself:
https://scontent.flhr4-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/18237806_1517361911642524_2074124972319758512_o.jpg?oh=c29c15a340808143a477a113e527e20f&oe=59BBF3FC


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Rosalind J said:


> My first book suddenly has a one-star review voted to the top. Hmmmm.
> Of course, another book is in the top 10 of the store right now, so you're not exactly killin' me here, ladies.
> And no, I haven't gone and voted anybody else's one stars up. We're not in grade school. Not even in high school. The Popular Girls don't get to decide my fate. I see you. I know you. I reject you.


With the number of good reviews you have I definitely think you will survive


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

dn8791 said:


> Gosh, is that really true about Bookbub?
> 
> Between this post, and this thread in general - among the other rumblings of the various ebook scams out there - how is one to believe that indie publishing is anything other than rotten to the core at this point? I suppose we at least have Carolyn's thread to cling to, but my goodness what a mess.


Mess or not, I still remain convinced that a lot of this is short-term nonsense. In the long run, those who survive will do so by the strength of their books.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

dn8791 said:


> Gosh, is that really true about Bookbub?
> 
> Between this post, and this thread in general - among the other rumblings of the various ebook scams out there - how is one to believe that indie publishing is anything other than rotten to the core at this point? I suppose we at least have Carolyn's thread to cling to, but my goodness what a mess.


No. It's not. Just as most people in every other legit business behave ethically. Most people who get to the top get there honestly, because in the end, it's on the books. All any promotion can give you is momentary visibility. After that? It's on the books.


----------



## thesmallprint

To those committed to contracts with RH I echo earlier advice. See them through and walk away.  Any sensible promoter in this position would behave with utter propriety from now and make certain every aspect of what they do is above suspicion. You should be fine. After the deal is done, you can decide what you want to do regarding future business associates.

As an onlooker who has never been involved with RH but who has read every post in this thread (and has also lived long enough to see all sorts of behaviour) I count myself an objective observer. But I'm sufficiently convinced by what's been reported that I happily donated to Christina's fund. Some of the most chilling content I've read among RH's posts are the supposedly 'nice' ones, the 'caring' ones, which are gold-plated, classic examples of manipulation.  No wonder so many are running scared.


----------



## Monique

Undecided said:


> - Here's the thing about the internet; it's sometimes hard to tell the tone that people meant something to be said in. I'm not saying that RH has never been short with anyone, or said something she shouldn't - but then who hasn't I know I've said the wrong thing on occasion, but I didn't mean it maliciously. I'm not saying the accounts here are wrong. But neither am I saying that I think RH is completely wrong either. There's most likely some fault on both sides.


No one is claiming to be perfect, but no one I know and associate with bullies people repeatedly or spreads lies about them. I don't know anyone who does that.



> As I've said, I haven't had a personal bad experience with Rebecca. Nor do I know anyone who has. I haven't seen her ask anyone to do anything illegal, immoral or sketchy within the box set group.


But surely you can understand that many of us have seen it, have felt it personally. It's happened.



> And while she does call people out, I'm not sure she does so with malicious intent. But the round about accusing people without naming them thing? That's almost exactly how this thread (and the website it links to) started - so why is she a villain for doing that but no one else is? Basically, I suppose my question is, who hasn't done something wrong in their life? And yes, I'm probably going to get some kick back from saying that.


I'm sorry but the "haven't we all done something wrong in our life" rationale is just that an attempt to excuse responsibility for bad behavior. It doesn't. In my case, she went the "I don't name names route, but here's a name and here's stuff I think they probably did." All completely fabricated. The intent is defame and mobilize against. It's malicious.



> But you want to know what I feel the most about this situation? I feel SCARED. And not of Rebecca. I feel scared of the potential backlash that could happen for my career. Because I've seen what can be construed as nastiness on both sides. I shouldn't feel like this. But some of the people on this thread, and particularly those earlier in the conversation, have made me feel that way.


I hope you call out that nastiness (wherever you see it and from whomever you see it.) If people who are in sets with RH are getting abuse, tell us. Show us. We will help.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Thank you, Huldra. The example that had recently come to mind for me was a dress, but the argument is the same. The punishment for requesting a refund is not the other person getting to snatch away the goods (or service) and keep the money.


----------



## sela

The letter from Christina to the organizer is totally professional and above board.

The response was totally over the top and unprofessional.


----------



## Huldra

Another example of Rebecca twisting the truth about that email:

She's saying Christina used the Amazon changes to boxed sets as an excuse to want out of the Charmed Legacy project. But that's not actually true. If you read the last part of that email, it very clearly states that Christina wants out of the Charmed Legacy project because *Rebecca has asked for participants to post blurbs, outlines and chapter summaries for her to approve* - and that wasn't part of the original contract.
That's an entirely different reason than what Rebecca is twisting it into. *And it's all right there in the screen shot SHE posted!*

https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1485156088225109/?comment_id=1485352928205425&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D (This _should_ link directly to Rebecca's post about the Charmed Legacy project)

Christina, LMK if you'd rather I stop referring to your email. It just kills me to see Rebecca's words being taken as the truth, when the evidence she's posting actually proves the opposite of what she's saying.


----------



## thesmallprint

Just a thought on those being one-starred in reviews or the one-stars being upvoted; it's worth keeping a record as from now on what happens with your reviews. Given that legal action looks likely (and very probably media coverage), there is no saying what will wash out of all this. Might a court place an order demanding that Amazon/Goodreads identify reviewers whom the balance of probability suggests might have been acting in a malicious manner?  

Who knows?

I think the repercussions here could result in radical changes to a number of processes in publishing.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Huldra said:


> Another example of Rebecca twisting the truth about that email:
> 
> She's saying Christina used the Amazon changes to boxed sets as an excuse to want out of the Charmed Legacy project. But that's not actually true. If you read the last part of that email, it very clearly states that Christina wants out of the Charmed Legacy project because *Rebecca has asked for participants to post blurbs, outlines and chapter summaries for her to approve* - and that wasn't part of the original contract.
> That's an entirely different reason than what Rebecca is twisting it into. *And it's all right there in the screen shot SHE posted!*
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1485156088225109/?comment_id=1485352928205425&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D (This _should_ link directly to Rebecca's post about the Charmed Legacy project)
> 
> Christina, LMK if you'd rather I stop referring to your email. It just kills me to see Rebecca's words being taken as the truth, when the evidence she's posting actually proves the opposite of what she's saying.


I believe this link is only viewable to members of the group.


----------



## CassieL

Undecided said:


> - I'm in a RH box set at the moment. So far, I've seen nothing dodgy, sketchy or illegal. In fact, I've seen posts about making sure we abide by the KU rules, and about uploading via pronoun so that file size isn't an issue.


At the risk of derailing this thread, this is twice now I think I've seen KU and using Pronoun mentioned in this thread. As far as I'm aware, and someone please correct me if this is no longer true, you can't get into KU if you list on Pronoun. Same with using AMS ads. Not available if using Pronoun. Those are only available by going direct with Amazon.

This is something I've seen repeatedly with RH. Like the having KU books in box sets that were up for preorder wide at the same time, the file size restriction on 99 cent boxsets so linking to Instafreebie for the rest of the content, or the swapping out content between the initial version of a box set and a later version. (All things she's publicly posted about either on here or her personal FB page.) She does something you aren't supposed to do which eventually creates a problem and then she comes up with a solution to that problem that is also a problem.


----------



## Undecided

Monique said:


> No one is claiming to be perfect, but no one I know and associate with bullies people repeatedly or spreads lies about them. I don't know anyone who does that.
> 
> But surely you can understand that many of us have seen it, have felt it personally. It's happened.
> 
> I'm sorry but the "haven't we all done something wrong in our life" rationale is just that an attempt to excuse responsibility for bad behavior. It doesn't. In my case, she went the "I don't name names route, but here's a name and here's stuff I think they probably did." All completely fabricated. The intent is defame and mobilize against. It's malicious.
> 
> I hope you call out that nastiness (wherever you see it and from whomever you see it.) If people who are in sets with RH are getting abuse, tell us. Show us. We will help.


I think you completely missed what I was trying to say. Or I didn't communicate it well (which perfectly illustrates my point about tone and the internet).

I'm not denying that people have had personal run ins with Rebecca. Nor am I denying that she could have handled it better in some cases (though I can't say for sure, because I haven't paid much attention to it. I'm in a different time zones, and I like to avoid drama, until now, I wasn't about to search facebook for drama I didn't know about. I've only followed this thread because I became involved in a box set).

What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.

I haven't been the subject of any nastiness. So there's nothing that I can call out. (However the set I'm in isn't out for preorder yet) I'm saying that this thread, and the way that some people are talking about RH's sets as scammy and undeserving (which did happen) has made me feel scared for the future of my career. Call that selfish, but it's a genuine concern. As I said, it's not anything one person said. It's the culmination of what's being posted here.

Please don't get me wrong. I won't be doing anything that I'm not comfortable with. And for me that includes anything that even potentially violates any TOS. But again, I haven't SEEN any of that happening. And I've also seen nothing to suggest that any of the other authors in the set would violate the TOS or do anything sketchy. Everything that's been going on has made me feel like I'm doing something shady. Because like it or not, several times in this thread it's been stated that people will be judged by the people they're working with.

Can you imagine how that's making people like me feel? We have people on both sides who are BIG names, and their careers probably won't be impacted too much by things like 1 stars. For those of us stuck in the middle - we can't afford that. A handful of 1 stars is probably all it would take to tank my career. And I'm sure that there are others in a similar situation. And it's scary.

Again, please don't misunderstand me. I don't want to belittle anyone's situation. I have been bullied in my non-author life, and it's not a situation I would wish on anyone, and I would never condone it. I know how it affects people and I'm sorry that you feel this way, and that events and other people have made you feel that way.

As someone stuck in the middle, who has only really been made aware of the situation with this thread and the drama that has ensued, it is extremely difficult to tell exactly who is at fault for what. Because while the screenshots say one thing, some of the statements on this thread have suggested that it's something more two-sided than the screenshots do.


----------



## Violet Haze

You are correct. You cannot be in KU nor use AMS ads if you upload books through Pronoun to Amazon.



Cassie Leigh said:


> At the risk of derailing this thread, this is twice now I think I've seen KU and using Pronoun mentioned in this thread. As far as I'm aware, and someone please correct me if this is no longer true, you can't get into KU if you list on Pronoun. Same with using AMS ads. Not available if using Pronoun. Those are only available by going direct with Amazon.
> 
> This is something I've seen repeatedly with RH. Like the having KU books in box sets that were up for preorder wide at the same time, the file size restriction on 99 cent boxsets so linking to Instafreebie for the rest of the content, or the swapping out content between the initial version of a box set and a later version. (All things she's publicly posted about either on here or her personal FB page.) She does something you aren't supposed to do which eventually creates a problem and then she comes up with a solution to that problem that is also a problem.


----------



## Huldra

Betsy:
I did grab screen shots, might as well upload them I guess.



http://imgur.com/CCDOHGt

 <--- Christina's email + Rebecca's caption



http://imgur.com/JhHt2

 <---- Rebecca claiming Christina wanted out of Charmed Legacy due to Amazon's changes.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

thesmallprint said:


> Just a thought on those being one-starred in reviews or the one-stars being upvoted; it's worth keeping a record as from now on what happens with your reviews. Given that legal action looks likely (and very probably media coverage), there is no saying what will wash out of all this. Might a court place an order demanding that Amazon/Goodreads identify reviewers whom the balance of probability suggests might have been acting in a malicious manner?
> 
> Who knows?
> 
> I think the repercussions here could result in radical changes to a number of processes in publishing.


At the very least, taking some screenshots and time stamps might be advisable. Might not do any good, but with Amazon not being particularly fond of review tampering these days, it could serve as impetus to get them to investigate.


----------



## Undecided

Cassie Leigh said:


> At the risk of derailing this thread, this is twice now I think I've seen KU and using Pronoun mentioned in this thread. As far as I'm aware, and someone please correct me if this is no longer true, you can't get into KU if you list on Pronoun. Same with using AMS ads. Not available if using Pronoun. Those are only available by going direct with Amazon.
> 
> This is something I've seen repeatedly with RH. Like the having KU books in box sets that were up for preorder wide at the same time, the file size restriction on 99 cent boxsets so linking to Instafreebie for the rest of the content, or the swapping out content between the initial version of a box set and a later version. (All things she's publicly posted about either on here or her personal FB page.) She does something you aren't supposed to do which eventually creates a problem and then she comes up with a solution to that problem that is also a problem.


By KU rules I meant that books couldn't be in both KU and on preorder. They must be out of KU for the entirety of the preorder. Also worth noting that RH now requires all content to be exclusive throughout the entirety of preorder and the published run.

I know that Pronoun is being used for the preorder, and doesn't have a price restriction on file size. More than that I can't comment. However, it does strike me as an example of how RH IS updating her business practices based on the TOS and not breaking them.


----------



## jaehaerys

Rosalind J said:


> No. It's not. Just as most people in every other legit business behave ethically. Most people who get to the top get there honestly, because in the end, it's on the books. All any promotion can give you is momentary visibility. After that? It's on the books.


I would really like to believe that, but between the box set stuff and all the profiles of people hurt/careers and lives ruined, along with other scam threads that have cropped up from time to time on kboards, the youtube channels devoted to creating new scams, websites devoted to same...it just seems to go on and on. I get that this kind of thing happens in every industry, but I'm in this one, and it's disheartening when all I'm doing is telling stories and publishing them and I'm seeing all of this apparatus being built up around me for the express purpose of manipulating a system that should be devoted to artists and storytellers connecting with readers. I also get that we're supposed to view this whole enterprise as a "business", but I feel like a lot of people are using that word as an excuse to engage in what might otherwise obviously be viewed as nefarious behavior or at the very least questionable decision making.

Maybe I'm naive, I probably am, I guess really I'm an indie pub utopian wishing for a place where authors just write their books, push them out into the world and they either sell or they don't and all the "business" stuff stays out of it. Obviously, reality is proving to be something different. Seems to me a lot of folks wanting to treat this like more of business than an art is what's leading the spiral down. I wish I saw more of the good that others seem to see.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Undecided said:


> I think you completely missed what I was trying to say. Or I didn't communicate it well (which perfectly illustrates my point about tone and the internet).
> 
> I'm not denying that people have had personal run ins with Rebecca. Nor am I denying that she could have handled it better in some cases (though I can't say for sure, because I haven't paid much attention to it. I'm in a different time zones, and I like to avoid drama, until now, I wasn't about to search facebook for drama I didn't know about. I've only followed this thread because I became involved in a box set).
> 
> What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.
> 
> I haven't been the subject of any nastiness. So there's nothing that I can call out. (However the set I'm in isn't out for preorder yet) I'm saying that this thread, and the way that some people are talking about RH's sets as scammy and undeserving (which did happen) has made me feel scared for the future of my career. Call that selfish, but it's a genuine concern. As I said, it's not anything one person said. It's the culmination of what's being posted here.
> 
> Please don't get me wrong. I won't be doing anything that I'm not comfortable with. And for me that includes anything that even potentially violates any TOS. But again, I haven't SEEN any of that happening. And I've also seen nothing to suggest that any of the other authors in the set would violate the TOS or do anything sketchy. Everything that's been going on has made me feel like I'm doing something shady. Because like it or not, several times in this thread it's been stated that people will be judged by the people they're working with.
> 
> Can you imagine how that's making people like me feel? We have people on both sides who are BIG names, and their careers probably won't be impacted too much by things like 1 stars. For those of us stuck in the middle - we can't afford that. A handful of 1 stars is probably all it would take to tank my career. And I'm sure that there are others in a similar situation. And it's scary.
> 
> Again, please don't misunderstand me. I don't want to belittle anyone's situation. I have been bullied in my non-author life, and it's not a situation I would wish on anyone, and I would never condone it. I know how it affects people and I'm sorry that you feel this way, and that events and other people have made you feel that way.
> 
> As someone stuck in the middle, who has only really been made aware of the situation with this thread and the drama that has ensued, it is extremely difficult to tell exactly who is at fault for what. Because while the screenshots say one thing, some of the statements on this thread have suggested that it's something more two-sided than the screenshots do.


Everybody has their own bright line. Everybody is an adult and can decide for herself. We all have the power of critical thinking and our own moral code. Lots of tough choices to make in publishing and in life. Sometimes you know which way to jump now because you jumped the wrong way in the past and paid for it. Sometimes you have kids and realize that you want to be better for them.

This isn't to belittle your dilemma. It's to acknowledge it. I suggest you read the thread again and then make the choice your judgment and heart dictate. There are consequences for every action and many inactions as well. Sometimes that's just living with your choice. What we say or what we feel isn't who we are. What we do is who we are.


----------



## Monique

Undecided said:


> What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.


Her attack on me had nothing to do with the impersonal nature of the internet. It was a strategic attack. It was meant to harm.

There is only one common denominator in all of this mishigas and that's RH. I did butt heads with her. We disagreed, right here about things. She took it to FB and insinuated that I had done things I absolutely did not do and would never do. That was all her. All of it. There are lots of stories where all someone had to do was disagree or challenge her and they became victims of her bullying. Now, that's surely not the way it was in every single instance, but it was the way of it in far, far, far too many. It's a glaring pattern.



> Please don't get me wrong. I won't be doing anything that I'm not comfortable with. And for me that includes anything that even potentially violates any TOS. But again, I haven't SEEN any of that happening. And I've also seen nothing to suggest that any of the other authors in the set would violate the TOS or do anything sketchy. Everything that's been going on has made me feel like I'm doing something shady. Because like it or not, several times in this thread it's been stated that people will be judged by the people they're working with.


As I said upthread, if the set you're currently in all above board, see it through. But yeah, moving forward, knowing what you know now, seeing the abuses of people and TOS, is this someone you want to work with? You want to be associated with? Being caught unaware is one thing, choosing to work with someone who behaves this way is another. That doesn't mean people should attack you or your work for it, however.



> Can you imagine how that's making people like me feel? We have people on both sides who are BIG names, and their careers probably won't be impacted too much by things like 1 stars. For those of us stuck in the middle - we can't afford that. A handful of 1 stars is probably all it would take to tank my career. And I'm sure that there are others in a similar situation. And it's scary.


No one should be one-starred or fear for their career because they got caught in the middle of something. It is scary. It's even scarier for those who've _already_ been one-starred and had poor reviews upvoted out of malice.



> As someone stuck in the middle, who has only really been made aware of the situation with this thread and the drama that has ensued, it is extremely difficult to tell exactly who is at fault for what. Because while the screenshots say one thing, some of the statements on this thread have suggested that it's something more two-sided than the screenshots do.


Can you explain specifically where you're having trouble seeing fault? What specific screenshots vs posts are contradictory? I think we all want as much transparency and truth as possible.


----------



## Guest

I've thought long and hard about posting my story because I didn't think it added anything to the narrative. I'll also be up front - I have NO proof. All I have is my experience, but I finally decided to tell my involvement because I wanted to illustrate why (possibly) those of us who have been bullied/harassed have stayed silent.

I became involved with Rebecca via her newsletter blast service in 2015. I thought the blast was awesome, I received nearly 2,000 new subscribers. A great start to my list! From there, I was drawn into her circle, we were friends, I was added to many of her groups. I felt like I was finally on the right track with my career.

During the honeymoon phase of a relationship, Rebecca is fantastic. I felt special. She told me I was a talented author and all I needed was her help/mentoring to take my career to the next level. As a small time author struggling in the publishing industry, Rebecca was a lifeline. I was so relieved someone finally understood me and knew how to help me.

Time ticked by and I started to notice little things. First I noticed the quality of the subscribers from the newsletter blast. I had a huge unsubscribe and spam abuse rate. And that's assuming any of them even opened an email. Fast forward 2 years and from those original 2,000 subscribers, I have 100 left. I have no idea if that's a normal attrition rate. I moved to InstaFreebie last year and have had much better success. I'm just putting that out there as my first "huh" moment.

Then I noticed other things. Personal things. The heated emotion. Let's keep in mind we're talking about *a business*. We're not talking about a playground friendship gone bad. This is a business owner. We're talking about normal business - customer engagement. Like others, I was in a boxed set. I saw things from the inside that I didn't agree with and walked. I wasn't refunded and to be honest, I didn't even bother to pursue it. By that time I wanted out. I had seen enough to know that how I wanted to do business, wan't consistent with how Rebecca's business operated. I have no idea what happened to my spot, I know it was filled but have no clue if it was donated or if the new person also paid the opt in fee. And frankly, it wasn't my issue so I never bothered to ask.

At no point did it even occur to me to screen shot anything. As others have said, I decided I didn't want to do business with her. End of story. I simply walked away and turned my attention in a different direction.

Time keeps ticking by, and around December I see another author posting about problems they are having withdrawing from a boxed set. I posted a vague, no names message of support. Something along the lines of "so sorry, pm me if you want someone to vent to." That was it. Little did I know that Rebecca has friends everywhere screen snapping everything and reporting back to her. Now I never mentioned her name, but apparently my comment was some sort of personal attack on her. I was "named and shamed" on her page, and then the barrage began.

I received a flood of abusive messages to my profile and page from her supporters. They were horrid. I was a piece of [email protected] My books were excrement. I was a jealous nobody who would always be a nobody. That I had blown my one chance to make it as an author. They went on and on. Then I noticed in a pre-made group I was in that 2 of the cover artists had blocked me and I couldn't see any covers they posted. Odd timing.

Then the 1-stars turned up on my books. Now we all expect 1-stars, especially if you do a big promo push. I thought it was odd since I wasn't doing any promo at the time. Even more odd, the 1-stars came from accounts that 5-starred Rebecca's books. Another odd co-incidence. Then there was the up-voting of negative reviews. Book #1 in my series went from having a range of reviews showing on the book page to only 1-star reviews. Some upvoted 200 times. Another odd co-incidence for a small author not running any promo to suddenly have that many eyes on a book.

I was unfriended by people I had been friends with for years. Suddenly people were dropping like flies around me. Again, odd timing.

Is any of this proof? No. It's entirely circumstantial and all I have is the timing.

Did I screen shot the abusive messages? No. You want to know why? Because when the flood hits you, it's a body slam from behind. I went into shock. I deactivated my FB account and slunk away from social media, writing, everything. I believed them. I was [email protected] I was the problem. I was the only one and I needed to crawl under a rock and die. Very few people know what happened to me because I felt ashamed and assumed it was my fault. It was only to talking to a small number of authors bigger than me that I realised this wasn't normal operating procedure for a business. I crawled back and I'm slowly picking up the pieces. And that is why I finally found the courage to tell my story. Bullying is not a normal business practice.

What I think is vital about this conversation is that authors are aware of the red flags to look out for around any business they intend to engage with. It's not specific to Rebecca, but there needs to be a general awareness of what to look for, like standard business practices, how the business deals with refunds or customer complaints, how does a service work, what are the results, what are experiences of past customers?


----------



## Becca Mills

Undecided said:


> I think you completely missed what I was trying to say. Or I didn't communicate it well (which perfectly illustrates my point about tone and the internet).
> 
> I'm not denying that people have had personal run ins with Rebecca. Nor am I denying that she could have handled it better in some cases (though I can't say for sure, because I haven't paid much attention to it. I'm in a different time zones, and I like to avoid drama, until now, I wasn't about to search facebook for drama I didn't know about. I've only followed this thread because I became involved in a box set).
> 
> What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.
> 
> I haven't been the subject of any nastiness. So there's nothing that I can call out. (However the set I'm in isn't out for preorder yet) I'm saying that this thread, and the way that some people are talking about RH's sets as scammy and undeserving (which did happen) has made me feel scared for the future of my career. Call that selfish, but it's a genuine concern. As I said, it's not anything one person said. It's the culmination of what's being posted here.
> 
> Please don't get me wrong. I won't be doing anything that I'm not comfortable with. And for me that includes anything that even potentially violates any TOS. But again, I haven't SEEN any of that happening. And I've also seen nothing to suggest that any of the other authors in the set would violate the TOS or do anything sketchy. Everything that's been going on has made me feel like I'm doing something shady. Because like it or not, several times in this thread it's been stated that people will be judged by the people they're working with.
> 
> Can you imagine how that's making people like me feel? We have people on both sides who are BIG names, and their careers probably won't be impacted too much by things like 1 stars. For those of us stuck in the middle - we can't afford that. A handful of 1 stars is probably all it would take to tank my career. And I'm sure that there are others in a similar situation. And it's scary.
> 
> Again, please don't misunderstand me. I don't want to belittle anyone's situation. I have been bullied in my non-author life, and it's not a situation I would wish on anyone, and I would never condone it. I know how it affects people and I'm sorry that you feel this way, and that events and other people have made you feel that way.
> 
> As someone stuck in the middle, who has only really been made aware of the situation with this thread and the drama that has ensued, it is extremely difficult to tell exactly who is at fault for what. Because while the screenshots say one thing, some of the statements on this thread have suggested that it's something more two-sided than the screenshots do.


Thank you for sharing your experience of one of RH's recent sets as drama-free and run in accordance with Amazon's TOS, Undecided. We do want to hear these testimonials.

I hope we all understand how deeply jarring it is to suddenly discover there's a large group of people out there whose personal experience of something is diametrically opposed to your own experience of that thing.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Huldra said:


> Another example of Rebecca twisting the truth about that email:
> 
> She's saying Christina used the Amazon changes to boxed sets as an excuse to want out of the Charmed Legacy project. But that's not actually true. If you read the last part of that email, it very clearly states that Christina wants out of the Charmed Legacy project because *Rebecca has asked for participants to post blurbs, outlines and chapter summaries for her to approve* - and that wasn't part of the original contract.
> That's an entirely different reason than what Rebecca is twisting it into. *And it's all right there in the screen shot SHE posted!*
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/976086735798716/permalink/1485156088225109/?comment_id=1485352928205425&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D (This _should_ link directly to Rebecca's post about the Charmed Legacy project)
> 
> Christina, LMK if you'd rather I stop referring to your email. It just kills me to see Rebecca's words being taken as the truth, when the evidence she's posting actually proves the opposite of what she's saying.


Actually, I totally appreciate you bringing that up. I saw that narrative twisting but there is so much of it to keep track of I forget to address it. For those who can't see her screen shot in the GenreCrave group, I'm pasting the email below:

Hi Rebecca,

I'm reaching out to you via email because you've said FB Messenger is more for emergencies.

Given recent changes, I no longer feel the box sets I'm involved with are a good fit. (Myths & Legends, Spellbound, Gypsies after Dark.) With today's news that there are revised contracts coming, I'm even more uncomfortable because I'm being asked to promote a set without knowing if the updated terms are ones I'm willing to agree to. I'd like to have my money refunded for each of these sets.

With regards to the Charmed Legacy collection:

I see in the Facebook group you're asking participants to post outlines, blurbs, and chapter summaries for you to approve. This wasn't part of our original agreement and not something I feel comfortable with.

While I appreciate the opportunity, I feel that this, too, is no longer a good fit - most likely for either of us. Given that I'm not in breach of this contract, would you consider releasing me from it and refunding my money? I'm sure many others would jump at the chance for one-on-one feedback and would love to take my place in what I'm sure will be a wonderful collection.

I wish you all the best and would very much like to resolve this amicably.

Sincerely,

Christina Garner

This was her email response:

http://imgur.com/TJXZuqh

And a sampling of the public posts she made directly after:

http://imgur.com/WbC87lU

As someone noticed, the first ones--where I'm not named--are the warnings. The "get back in line" or else.


----------



## Sad Author

Undecided said:


> What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.


I'm new to the thread (and posting anonymously because of the bully behavior of the person this thread concerns inflicted on me).

Logically the above statement makes SO much sense. But in my experience, the person in question often does not respond to criticism, being told no, or questioning about practices/services in a logical manner.

Logically if there is a misunderstanding most level headed parties involved are able to work out the problem in a way that can be civil.

This was not the case when she had an issue with me.

But very quickly (within minutes) after an encounter and unbeknownst to me (because I didn't even know there was an issue) she attacked me and called me names over several posts on Facebook. I was immediately blocked from all her accounts and I only was able to view what she was saying about me through another account.

I found out what was happening because in this short time frame (less than an hour... probably closer to 30 minutes) people started to seek me out and blame me.

This situation made me feel terrified and I had no idea what was happening because I didn't do anything to warrant this type of retaliation and name calling. I send an email to the person in question telling her I was very sorry and so confused. But I received nothing in return and the lashing continued on her page.

I couldn't sleep that night and was in tears.

After not being able to settle anything I realized that the person in question was not displaying rational behavior and I was going to get nowhere. So I picked my bruised self up and tried to move on.


----------



## Undecided

Monique said:


> Her attack on me had nothing to do with the impersonal nature of the internet. It was a strategic attack. It was meant to harm.
> 
> There is only one common denominator in all of this mishigas and that's RH. I did butt heads with her. We disagreed, right here about things. She took it to FB and insinuated that I had done things I absolutely did not do and would never do. That was all her. All of it. There are lots of stories where all someone had to do was disagree or challenge her and they became victims of her bullying. Now, that's surely not the way it was in every single instance, but it was the way of it in far, far, far too many. It's a glaring pattern.
> 
> As I said upthread, if the set you're currently in all above board, see it through. But yeah, moving forward, knowing what you know now, seeing the abuses of people and TOS, is this someone you want to work with? You want to be associated with? Being caught unaware is one thing, choosing to work with someone who behaves this way is another. That doesn't mean people should attack you or your work for it, however.
> 
> No one should be one-starred or fear for their career because they got caught in the middle of something. It is scary. It's even scarier for those who've _already_ been one-starred and had poor reviews upvoted out of malice.
> 
> Can you explain specifically where you're having trouble seeing fault? What specific screenshots vs posts are contradictory? I think we all want as much transparency and truth as possible.


There is a common denominator in all the situations in this thread, and it is RH, because this thread is discussing RH.

I'm sincerely sorry that you feel she attacked you maliciously - she might have done. And if she did then that was inexcusable on her part. But not having been there, or being either yourself, or Rebecca, it is hard to know what was truly behind it. That's not to say I don't believe you, or that I don't believe it happened, because I can read, and want to be able to trust people. All it's to say is that there may have been something underlying on one or both sides that caused the attack in the first place. I, and anyone other than you or Rebecca, can't know exactly what happened because both sides are biased.

You've said it yourself here though:

"seeing the abuses of people and TOS, is this someone you want to work with? You want to be associated with? Being caught unaware is one thing, choosing to work with someone who behaves this way is another."

How do other people know whether an author has been caught unawares or if they've knowingly signed up to something? There's no way of knowing, but that doubt is going to be there regardless. You'll see my name on a box set and your first thought won't be "oh she's innocent in all this" it'll be "I wonder if she's innocent in all this" and how long is that stigma going to follow me around?

Because I didn't knowingly sign up for anything that could potentially break any rules. I'm a keep my head down and work hard kind of person. But now, thanks to a few comments about how the box sets are scamming their way onto the best sellers lists, and don't get real readers, more than one person in the indie community will look at new authors in box sets and wonder exactly what they knew.

Yes, being one starred maliciously is horrible. And it's particularly low when it comes from other authors, because they know EXACTLY how much it hurts. My concern is that I don't, and I suspect others don't, feel safe from one starring by either side. While this thread is civil now, in the beginning it was almost nasty in places. And that's left some uneasy feelings in it's wake. I know at least one person who is now considering using a pen name in a box set because she's too worried about the repercussions from people against RH to use her usual one. Despite the fact that this will lose her cross-promoting opportunities.

Honestly, there are so many screenshots and posts that I'm starting to lose track. On both sides, and especially when both sides are posting the same screenshot but explaining it in different ways. Even having read posts in this thread and off the thread more than once, it's still confusing. Especially without knowing a lot of the people in question personally.


----------



## Undecided

Sad Author said:


> I'm new to the thread (and posting anonymously because of the bully behavior of the person this thread concerns inflicted on me).
> 
> Logically the above statement makes SO much sense. But in my experience, the person in question often does not respond to criticism, being told no, or questioning about practices/services in a logical manner.
> 
> Logically if there is a misunderstanding most level headed parties involved are able to work out the problem in a way that can be civil.
> 
> This was not the case when she had an issue with me.
> 
> But very quickly (within minutes) after an encounter and unbeknownst to me (because I didn't even know there was an issue) she attacked me and called me names over several posts on Facebook. I was immediately blocked from all her accounts and I only was able to view what she was saying about me through another account.
> 
> I found out what was happening because in this short time frame (less than an hour... probably closer to 30 minutes) people started to seek me out and blame me.
> 
> This situation made me feel terrified and I had no idea what was happening because I didn't do anything to warrant this type of retaliation and name calling. I send an email to the person in question telling her I was very sorry and so confused. But I received nothing in return and the lashing continued on her page.
> 
> I couldn't sleep that night and was in tears.
> 
> After not being able to settle anything I realized that the person in question was not displaying rational behavior and I was going to get nowhere. So I picked my bruised self up and tried to move on.


  I'm sorry Sad Author. No one should have to put up with that from anyone.


----------



## Monique

Yes, RH is the subject of the thread and there's a reason for that. This isn't all some big misunderstanding. It's because of systematic bullying and unethical business practices.

As to the stigma, I'm sure there will be some. How long will it linger? How stinky will it stink? Each person will react differently, judge differently. There's just no one answer. However, no one should have their books one-starred for the company they keep.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Tilly and Sad Author, I'm so sorry those things happened to you. Thank you for sharing your stories. 

I can chime in on the NL building services. They aren't the crux of my complaint but after the first one, they went downhill fast with off the chart spam rates, unsubs, etc. More than triple what I'd experienced from any other promos, with less than half the open rate.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

thisisscary said:


> Popping back in because I can't seem to stay away. Like Undecided, I haven't personally witnessed the shady stuff reported. I'll reiterate I think that may relate to who is in the set. Groups have a mind of their own and tones are set early on (speaking in general to groups anywhere in life). If the tone is set early that everyone is aboveboard, it holds in general. RH was very clear about abiding by KU rules in the sets I was in. To answer someone's comment about Pronoun - that's only used for the wide distribution, so it's not a violation of TOS for KU. I believe we must not inaccurately say that's a violation when it's not - that weakens the overall concerns and proves her points that people are wrongly saying she's breaking rules when it's not the case for that particular issue.
> 
> Monique identified the core issue I've observed (after managing to avoid the drama all this time). The common issue is when someone disagrees with RH or questions one of her services. Those who haven't had reason to do so, or chosen not to for whatever reason, seem to have managed to avoid the negative experiences. Plenty of services haven't lived up to my expectations, so that's part of business.
> 
> I don't think it's anyone's intent, but the comments about walking away once we know something negative/shady are what made me scared to post to begin with. I'm not a big name. I don't have a book in the top 10 and maybe never will. 1* reviews and upvoting poor reviews could seriously derail my fledgling career. For those of us who have shared how eye opening this is and how it will affect our future business decisions, please understand the untenable position we find ourselves in. I won't be booking any new services at all with her. Not too long ago, many Kboarders recommended her services and that's how I ended up using them to begin with. I remain heartbroken to hear the stories of bullying and wish I could make it all go away.


I get it. It's scary for me too, honestly. I posted that because I was pissed off about the whole thing. It's all so unnecessary.

I can't speak for everybody, but I certainly don't judge somebody for not walking away when they have a large sum of money invested. I do judge people who join in bullying or give support to bad behavior, on whatever side. I will probably also judge people who stick around and put more money on that table, but then they're judging me too, I'm sure, for being a moralistic witch.  Human nature.


----------



## CassieL

Undecided said:


> All it's to say is that there may have been something underlying on one or both sides that caused the attack in the first place. I, and anyone other than you or Rebecca, can't know exactly what happened because both sides are biased.


I think this statement highlights one of the issues we see in the indie community which is that often services are provided by someone who isn't an established business person, they're just someone who saw a need and they jumped in to fill it. But some of us on this thread come from spending years in more established business environments. And for us a professional businessperson simply does not do what we've seen RH do. Ever. No matter what the provocation.

You don't air your dirty laundry about one customer in front of other customers. Period. End of story.

Someone brought up another service provider earlier in this thread who has posted long-winded screeds against customers who complain about their service and it's a very big signal that that person is not treating their business professionally and the reason I will never use that service either. If you are used to dealing with people in a more formal professional environment seeing a provider make something personal and rant and rave about it is a very big red flag to stay away from that person and their services.


----------



## Undecided

Becca Mills said:


> Thank you for sharing your experience of one of RH's recent sets as drama-free and run in accordance with Amazon's TOS, Undecided. We do want to hear these testimonials.
> 
> I hope we all understand how deeply jarring it is to suddenly discover there's a large group of people out there whose personal experience of something is diametrically opposed to your own experience of that thing.


Thank you Becca.

It is particularly scary. For those of us that have never really been part of the drama or even aware of it, but are now involved in box sets, it is kind of feeling like there is no good option available to us. There seems to be at least some animosity on both sides, and the long term repercussions of pulling out of the sets or not doing, both seem risky.


----------



## allie f.

Cassie Leigh said:


> You don't air your dirty laundry about one customer in front of other customers. Period. End of story.


Yes! So much yes.


----------



## CassieL

thisisscary said:


> To answer someone's comment about Pronoun - that's only used for the wide distribution, so it's not a violation of TOS for KU. I believe we must not inaccurately say that's a violation when it's not - that weakens the overall concerns and proves her points that people are wrongly saying she's breaking rules when it's not the case for that particular issue.


Since I'm the one that brought this up, let me clarify the point I was making.

The post I was quoting seemed to imply that box sets were now being listed with Amazon through Pronoun and that this fixed the issue that you can't price a box set at 99 cents if it's too large. But the post also referenced KU. The point I was making is that you can't be in KU if you list through Pronoun. I wasn't saying there was a TOS violation. I was saying that to be in KU, you can't list through Pronoun. Now, maybe in this case the box will be listed with Pronoun for the initial run at the USA Today list and then delisted from Pronoun and put up direct with Amazon when it's time to go into KU. But I wanted to make it clear that you can't get into KU while listed on Pronoun and that if someone hadn't thought that through it was going to be an issue at some point.

(Just like many months ago I posted about how if you swap out content on a box set you need to have a new ASIN number and that swapping out content while using the same ASIN would be a TOS violation. It was an attempt to head off an issue I saw developing.)


----------



## 75814

Undecided said:


> What I am saying, is that the fault doesn't likely lie with one person. In fact, the fault might not lie with anyone but the impersonal nature of the internet. All it takes is one comment read in the wrong way, and an all out argument ensues. Neither side thinks they're in the wrong, because neither side purposefully did something to start the argument.


Yes, that's true. Things can be taken the wrong way and arguments can break out as a result. And if it was only Christina talking about this, then this could be a situation of people overreacting to imagined as opposed to real slights.

Except it's not just Christina. It's also Elizabeth and Patty and Monique and Tilly and how many other people who have posted their stories either in this thread or on TPV or in the comments of Christina's GoFundMe and probably a whole lot more places. And there's one common factor in all those stories.


----------



## Undecided

Cassie Leigh said:


> Since I'm the one that brought this up, let me clarify the point I was making.
> 
> The post I was quoting seemed to imply that box sets were now being listed with Amazon through Pronoun and that this fixed the issue that you can't price a box set at 99 cents if it's too large. But the post also referenced KU. The point I was making is that you can't be in KU if you list through Pronoun. I wasn't saying there was a TOS violation. I was saying that to be in KU, you can't list through Pronoun. Now, maybe in this case the box will be listed with Pronoun for the initial run at the USA Today list and then delisted from Pronoun and put up direct with Amazon when it's time to go into KU. But I wanted to make it clear that you can't get into KU while listed on Pronoun and that if someone hadn't thought that through it was going to be an issue at some point.
> 
> (Just like many months ago I posted about how if you swap out content on a box set you need to have a new ASIN number and that swapping out content while using the same ASIN would be a TOS violation. It was an attempt to head off an issue I saw developing.)


Yes it was my post you were responding to, and I did respond further up the thread - but it probably got lost in the posts.

The KU rules I was referring to was that you couldn't have a book listed in a preorder and in KU at the same time. The Pronoun comment was just about the file size/preorder and wide week.

The KU comment was about the fact that RH is asking the authors to ensure that NONE of the books in the pre-order file are enrolled in KU. Thus not breaking any KU rules.

I hope that clears it up. It was nothing to do with enrolling in KU and publishing on pronoun at the same time.


----------



## Undecided

Perry Constantine said:


> Yes, that's true. Things can be taken the wrong way and arguments can break out as a result. And if it was only Christina talking about this, then this could be a situation of people overreacting to imagined as opposed to real slights.
> 
> Except it's not just Christina. It's also Elizabeth and Patty and Monique and Tilly and how many other people who have posted their stories either in this thread or on TPV or in the comments of Christina's GoFundMe and probably a whole lot more places. And there's one common factor in all those stories.


On the flip side, people are also posting about positive experiences with RH. Though those are appearing to hold less weight in the grand scheme of things because many of those people are maintaining their anonymity.

This isn't to say that the events that happened to ANY of those people are lies or Christina, Elizabeth, Patty, Monique, Tilly or anyone else's fault. Because they're not. But they also *might* not be totally blameless (though they might be). We have no way of knowing exactly what happened. Which *could* mean there's more to the story.

To be clear; Rebecca might be totally in the wrong, one of those people could be completely in the wrong, or they could share the blame in whatever proportion. We have no way of knowing.

However, it may be important to remember that bullying isn't actually defined by the act itself, it's defined as how that act makes the other person feel. Which could possibly muddy the issue a bit. Both sides are saying they are/have been hurt by the other side. Both sides are using the word "bully" - so who is actually telling the truth? If it's all about how the person being bullied feels then the answer could actually be both are victims and both are bullies. Just some food for thought there.

And yes, the common theme in this thread is Rebecca. But if I started a thread titled "McDonald's scams" then I bet 90% of those posts would be people with negative experiences about McDonald's commenting. That doesn't mean it's the whole story.

As my username suggests, I'm undecided on this issue. I can see wrong on both sides, and that's what's tripping me up the most. The situation isn't as black and white as some people seem to be saying it is. The situation makes me sad and scared.


----------



## RedFoxUF

ChristinaGarner said:


> Tilly and Sad Author, I'm so sorry those things happened to you. Thank you for sharing your stories.
> 
> I can chime in on the NL building services. They aren't the crux of my complaint but after the first one, they went downhill fast with off the chart spam rates, unsubs, etc. More than triple what I'd experienced from any other promos, with less than half the open rate.


I did a NL promo with her a while back and never even used the emails b/c so many other authors were saying they had problems.


----------



## 75814

Undecided said:


> On the flip side, people are also posting about positive experiences with RH. Though those are appearing to hold less weight in the grand scheme of things because many of those people are maintaining their anonymity.


That's because a bully doesn't tear down every single person they meet. You'll find plenty of people who have bullied and harassed others, and if you ask some of their closest friends or family, I guarantee you that 99 times out of 100, their reaction will be, "But I don't understand. So and so was always nice and friendly with me."

When I was in Japan, I knew a guy once who was very friendly, funny, and social, seemed like the nicest person in the world. And then one day, a friend of mine revealed to me that this guy had sexually assaulted her.

I was shocked and I didn't know what to believe at first. She left shortly after that and I'd been told by other people that "there were two sides to that story." So I didn't think anything of it.

And then another story came out. And another. And another.

By the time all was said and done, the program that brought us to Japan launched an investigation into the matter. The guy ended up getting fired and deported as a result.

And even after all that, there were still people who were friends with him who denied all of it and said he was the nicest, friendliest guy you'd ever meet.


----------



## Stop the Bullies

This thread has been so eye-opening for me, I still can't quite believe what I am reading. I too have a personal testimonial to share. What I have read so far in this thread makes me (more than) slightly nauseous. I have respect for the information I read on this forum, and I have come here seeking that information on a number of subjects for many years. What I am learning now is truly mind-blowing.

To think that long-standing, respected members of this community (such as Rick Gualtieri, Elizabeth West, Sela, Myra Scott, Becca Mills, and others) whose opinion I have learned to trust, could have led me so astray makes me sick.

For a week now, I have been a witness to these respected individuals attacking a woman who was once a helpful member here on this board. This attack is doing a lot of damage to her business and her reputation, yet it is allowed to go on. It will continue to do damage to her business and reputation, if it allowed to remain publically accessible.

Why is this happening?

To get some semblance of justice for people in a disagreement with her, or who have been wronged by her, in an eye-for-an-eye sort of way?

I was always taught that this is wrong. Because to allow it, is to cause chaos that forms of a lawless society where anyone with an axe and a score to settle can do so. In real life we have the police to create order, in online forums we have moderators. From what I have seen so far, they are not doing their job as they should.

*The goings on in the Boxed Sets Scams thread is the most horrific example of online bullying I have ever witnessed in real life. It is also the most terrifying example of censorship I have ever seen with my own eyes. *

The moderators are not only allowing it to go on, but enabling it by keeping this thread running, deleting posts and banning people who do not agree with this bashing and bullying, and want it to stop. I will add that I have, over the years, seen threads locked down for a lot less controversy than what I'm reading here.

Being someone who has researched (I'm an investigative journalist by trade) both sides of this argument as much as I could, I have to say things are not as cut and dry as this post would have casual readers believe. It is possible (and quite easy) to see both sides as having a point. To state this in plain terms, yes, I am sure people feel they were wronged, but I also know that there are two sides to every story.

This thread makes me doubt every single thing I have ever read on this forum. How many times were voices silenced by the mods because they were not in agreement with these long-standing members? I will forever wonder that now. And I will never again respect, or fully trust this site for information again. That such a thing as this thread could happen and be allowed to go on for so long with no signs of slowing down is horrifying. I think it should not only stop, but also be deleted.

Witnessing this thread unfolding makes me want to pull back and never publically post my opinion on a public forum again. For a thread that is supposed to be all about allowing people to come out of hiding and safely post experience, to have such an effect on someone leads me to conclude that it is not serving its purpose. I am not the only one with this kind of reaction to this thread. You can search publically accessible posts for confirmation of my words, no screenshots needed.

Furthermore, I am posting this under an anonymous account, because I am afraid of retaliation. I am afraid of having my business and life dragged out like this on a public forum by anyone who has 5 minutes of time to form an opinion and make a comment. As I'm sure are most people. I will point out that posting anonymously does not make my points any less valid. Many of the testimonials on this thread were made by anonymous people.

At first, it absolutely baffled me why the mods are allowing this to thread to go on. *But then a pattern started to emerge...*

Right now, this whole thread reads like one endless sea of people coming in to share their bad experiences with Rebecca Hamilton, and ones who have now reconsidered ever working with her again. The picture is very different elsewhere. But people are afraid to post their positive experiences here, because of what happens to those who try. It seems that if you have a wholly positive experience to share, you get attacked. It happened to several people already, and those posts are all still intact.

Seeing as the Internet is a very unregulated place, it is up to forum moderators to make sure discussions stay within socially (and legally) acceptable boundaries. Time and again on this thread I have seen the mods come down hard on anyone disagreeing with those that have a grievance against RH, while allowing those that have a grievance against RH to basically willy-nilly accuse anyone speaking against them of being:

a) A liar 
b) Blinded and naive 
c) A sock puppet
d) Immoral and unethical
e) A supporter of bullying behavior in general
f) All of the above

I don't know how many posts have now been removed, but if you're interested in investigating this pattern for yourself, scroll back to a post that speaks up for Rebecca Hamilton, and then follow the responses (they are usually by Rick Gualtieri, Christina Garner, Myra Scott, Sela, Perry Constantine, She-La-ti-da, and a few other forum regulars). These responses are along the lines of the ones I listed above. Someone disagrees with those opposing RH and they get called a liar, a sock puppet, a supporter of online bullying, immoral, unethical.

After 7+ days of this thread being open, this is the pattern of behavior I have noticed over and over again. It almost seems as though it is orchestrated to play out that way.

I realize that this post might get heavily edited or even deleted, but I hope it does not. In the interest of freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I hope it will not.

*This is my personal experience with online bullying as concerns Rebecca Hamilton and the services she provides. Will this thread in any way prevent me from seeking her services? No. But because of it, I will avoid ever visiting Kboards.com again. *

Please remember that everyone is Innocent Until Proven Guilty. And that no one deserves to be the victim of online bullying. Then try to find it in your hearts to stop this frenzy.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Randall Wood

Perry Constantine said:


> Yes, that's true. Things can be taken the wrong way and arguments can break out as a result. And if it was only Christina talking about this, then this could be a situation of people overreacting to imagined as opposed to real slights.
> 
> Except it's not just Christina. It's also Elizabeth and Patty and Monique and Tilly and how many other people who have posted their stories either in this thread or on TPV or in the comments of Christina's GoFundMe and probably a whole lot more places. And there's one common factor in all those stories.


Patterns? This is the pattern I see as most dominant in this thread:

He said - She said. And she said, and she said, and she said, and she said, and she said, and she said, and she said, and she said,...


----------



## PhoenixS

FWIW, I have not seen one set *previously or currently published* by RH's Bestselling Box Sets or GenreCrave that does not break Amazon's price-matching rule. Every set has been in violation. Every set, therefore, is guilty of some level of shenanigans. It becomes a question of how many of Amazon's rules have been violated by each set.

However, most if not all the sets *currently on preorder* have been uploaded via Pronoun, which operates under a different set of rules. Sets of any file size may be priced 99 cents without having to be price-matched.

Does that make price-matching right for any sets that have come before? No. Just because a boulevard ups the speed limit from 35 to 45 this month doesn't make all the speeding tickets that have come before invalid.

When 22 books price-match to 99 cents while other organizers struggle to keep their boxes within guidelines and can only put in 10 or 12, it creates an unfair competitive advantage. Just like key-word stuffers are doing. Or the KU "authors" who stuff 20 erotica bonus books into their clean romance title.

And all of those are a violation of the T&Cs we each agreed to. Do a *lot* of folk do it. Yes. A lot of folk speed or shoplift small items. Does it make it any less right? No.

Many of the boxes skate through. Spellbound looks like it will, despite, as I've noted before, being in violation right now. Some boxes didn't see the cop behind the tree on the other side of the hill and were snagged. Those boxes were cut in half and half linked to instafreebie, trading one violation for another.

This conversation has turned the focus to cyberbullying from price-matching, the instafreebie ploy, the bait-and-switch of mass shifting of novels out of the boxes and replacing with short stories and novellas yet continuing to claim the same title for the work, KU titles in wide sets, incentivized buys and incentivized reviews. But EVERY ONE of the sets that has lettered has done it off the back of one or -- frequently -- more violations. The proof is no further than the Wayback Machine. Every author so far who has achieved their letters via RH's boxes achieved them at the expense of those who followed the T&Cs and *didn't* put up 22 novels for 99 cents and/or who didn't engage in any of the verifiable KU, IF and incentivized buys violations.

So yes, when I see those authors who've lettered ahead of other books and boxes that deliberately did not violate the T&Cs, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Is it as bad a taste as the allegations of cyberbullying and financial breaches? No. Of course not. But these violations shouldn't simply be brushed aside either. Violations that should have been clear to every author signing up, whether they were social media blind or not.

RH pivots as needed. But she doesn't pivot until her sets are tagged by Amazon for infractions. She's reactive, not proactive about abiding by the guidelines. Maybe going forward her sets will all be squeaky clean. But that doesn't invalidate 2+ years of dodging the radar gun _(which is not a weapon, and this statement in no way constitutes a death threat)._

Also, Amazon itself needs to shoulder blame here for not enforcing its policies and for letting repeat violations off with little more than wrist-slaps. When the reward is greater than the punishment for breaking a rule, what rules are going to be left unbroken?


----------



## Monique

Good post and good point, Phoenix. In the emotion of it all, it's easy to overlook the rest of it which are important issues and things we as indies need to be mindful of.


----------



## Sad Author

Undecided said:


> On the flip side, people are also posting about positive experiences with RH. Though those are appearing to hold less weight in the grand scheme of things because many of those people are maintaining their anonymity.


Yes, there are many good experiences. If most of the people were having bad experiences most of this thread would not exist. Everything would have been cut and dry and over years ago. But in my opinion (formed because of my personal dealings with her that you can see above), this is only because none of these people with good experiences have done anything to question her in any way. They paid their money and took their services. They either supported her in, kept their head down or just didn't know about drama that may have arisen and went on their way.

I keep wondering if any of the people who've had great experiences would be able to say the same thing if they somehow (even politely) challenged the person in question. I can't say for sure of the outcome but I would not be surprised if it were not pleasant and they found themselves blocked and beeing spoken harshly of.

People seem to have a hard time believing that things are as bad as they are because it's totally illogical for them to be so bad. It seems like no one would ACTUALLY treat other people so poorly without just cause. But here's the thing (again from personal experience), this is exactly what the person in question does. Nothing is off the table to be said about the author being attacked, no matter if it is true or not. And when that is the case it is very easy to place blame and deflect from the real issue. The accused will not be allowed to make their case in the forum where they are being attacked (because they are blocked or kicked out of the group) and if they are brave enough to speak out on another forum the words are twisted.

But most are not brave enough (me included) because we are not important enough to be believed and speaking out will only result in further attack.


----------



## sela

> ...Rick Gualtieri, Christina Garner, Myra Scott, Sela, Perry Constantine, She-La-ti-da, and a few other forum regulars


Glad to see my name associated with those!


----------



## C. Gockel

> I quoted wrong peep. My bad.


I thought you were just being friendly-sarcastic.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Boyd said:


> I quoted wrong peep. My bad.





C. Gockel said:


> I thought you were just being friendly-sarcastic.


I thought I was going to have to delete something.


----------



## lilywhite

C. Gockel said:


> I want to add, I don't think that being in a set is going to hurt you long term. But participating in the bullying and encouraging it? Yes, of course people are watching that and are going to be wary.


^^ This. I don't know who is/has been in every one of the box sets, nor do I care. For a long time now, GC and the other "services" have been billed as some kind of magic pixie dust that would do wonderful things for your career, and and critical threads here (sorry mods) were pruned and/or shut down very quickly. I see how easy it would be, if you don't belong to the private groups where evidence has been freely shared, and especially if you're the sort that hops on and off Facebook quickly because you've got writing to get to, to not know all or even most of what's going on.

But when someone shares a screencap with me where a bunch are replying with exhortations of how pretty and brilliant and wonderful and loving and giving and kind RH is? Yeah, everyone one of THOSE goes on my blacklist. There are lines, and there are lines.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Randall Wood

We are not discussing RH the author. 

We are discussing a book promoter, a publisher of box sets, and a shared world owner. Someone who takes money from other authors in a business capacity. If you take money from other people in exchange for things such as promotion or other services, you absolutely should be held to a higher standard than someone who doesn't. You are a business, with power over people and requiring their trust in you to act professionally and do as you say you will. You handle other people's money and other people's books, and that means you need to be even more careful with how you approach things like Terms of Service, how you conduct yourself in your professional groups, etc. You are no longer a private citizen just doing private citizen things. There are standards. 

We are discussing how RH as a business has potentially not met those standards and giving information as to why you might want to think twice about doing business with a business who does the things RH has been shown in screenshots of her own words to do and has been shown through the numerous stories here to do. This is not professional behavior and there are things reported here that are at their very best unethical and at their worst might lead to a court case. This impacts anyone who would do business because you are in charge of your own career, and you need to be able to make informed decisions about who you give your money to and who you are agreeing to go into business with.


----------



## lilywhite

ChristinaGarner said:


> With regards to Spellbound, let's clear that up right now.
> 
> The original call for entries in the GenreCrave group clearly state "clean" and "appropriate for all ages." Right after the group formed, people began listing the book they would be including and some raised concerns b/c of the adult content. Instead of addressing the concerns calmly, people were told to "chill out" and a long post ensued that stated "super steamy" content was allowed.
> 
> http://imgur.com/TSYmd0w
> http://imgur.com/KxUiZ9a
> http://imgur.com/OtcGbr9


Thanks for posting that. Interesting.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

With regards to the information asked for last night and earlier in the day about the Spellbound box set. Here is timeline.

Original terms before I sent payment: 
1.	Close to 60k words
2.	Not free on any platform when the set is live
3.	Able to be wide for week 1 of release
4.	Able to be in Kindle Unlimited for 3 months, commencing after first week
5.	Young adult/New adult set, appropriate for all ages groups

I was instructed to pay via PayPal Friends and Family or pay the fees - a violation of their TOS for her to require. Asking me to pay this way also guarantees a refund cannot be pursued via PayPal.

http://imgur.com/iZCHB3t

I never received a contract for this set.

In December, after 2 sets got pulled down, Rebecca posted about a "new rule that did not exist before" which all now know wasn't new, just newly enforced. 
I don't know if it's possible to put 2 images together, but there is overlap in the images so you can see they came from the same post:

http://imgur.com/prwnaDI
http://imgur.com/WBV4XD3

There continued to be discussion so there were further posts. (In an effort to be transparent, I will say that these were cross-posted among the box sets I was in. I never noticed any editing between them put it's possible this isn't the exact version what was displayed in Spellbound, or that one appeared in one set and not another. Regardless, it shows how Amazons "new PITA terms" were being handled.)

http://imgur.com/cFdC5lt
http://imgur.com/XitTrbT
http://imgur.com/WYxOHhL

At the time I was racing for a deadline on a new release. I very much wanted to withdraw from these sets and all of my dealing with her, but I was involved with her new release coaching and new any mention would bring me more stress when i was already at my limit. So I buckled down and got my launch handled.

Around 7:30am on January 29th I posted this, asking about the original contracts as in doing some research realized I'd never received one for this set.

http://imgur.com/FHdpBDK

Once I learned of the new contracts and that I was being asked to promote sets without seeing these contracts, I sent the email asking for a refund, on January 29th at 9:39a.m.:

Hi Rebecca,

I'm reaching out to you via email because you've said FB Messenger is more for emergencies.

Given recent changes, I no longer feel the box sets I'm involved with are a good fit. (Myths & Legends, Spellbound, Gypsies after Dark.) With today's news that there are revised contracts coming, I'm even more uncomfortable because I'm being asked to promote a set without knowing if the updated terms are ones I'm willing to agree to. I'd like to have my money refunded for each of these sets.

With regards to the Charmed Legacy collection:

I see in the Facebook group you're asking participants to post outlines, blurbs, and chapter summaries for you to approve. This wasn't part of our original agreement and not something I feel comfortable with.

While I appreciate the opportunity, I feel that this, too, is no longer a good fit - most likely for either of us. Given that I'm not in breach of this contract, would you consider releasing me from it and refunding my money? I'm sure many others would jump at the chance for one-on-one feedback and would love to take my place in what I'm sure will be a wonderful collection.

I wish you all the best and would very much like to resolve this amicably.

Sincerely,

Christina Garner

This was her email response, also January 29th:

http://imgur.com/TJXZuqh

And a sampling of the public posts she made directly after, seemingly to get me back in line and prove I was a "woman of my word." I only noticed them the next day, as I'd spent the entire day at a protest rally at the airport.

http://imgur.com/WbC87lU

In the group she posted this:

http://imgur.com/grZOSt9

And two minutes later, this:

http://imgur.com/4CJr3qB

On February 1, at 9:36 in the morning I took this screenshot. You can see it was posted 28 minutes beforehand and therefore the post went up around 9 a.m.

http://imgur.com/x8Lho2X

Because I could see form the comments that most had signed the contracts, I didn't feel any urgency. I wanted to show the new contract to an attorney and get advice on how to proceed.

Ninety minutes later I received PMs from people regarding a post they'd seen in the GenreCrave group:

http://imgur.com/llxOF4E

At 11:05 I tried to access the Spellbound group and was unable to:

http://imgur.com/3mVjm4Z

That's about as clearly as I can lay out that timeline. I asked for a refund and was then expelled from the set.

Edited to get rid of the symbols.


----------



## sela

Randall Wood said:


> We are not discussing RH the author.
> 
> We are discussing a book promoter, a publisher of box sets, and a shared world owner. Someone who takes money from other authors in a business capacity. If you take money from other people in exchange for things such as promotion or other services, you absolutely should be held to a higher standard than someone who doesn't. You are a business, with power over people and requiring their trust in you to act professionally and do as you say you will. You handle other people's money and other people's books, and that means you need to be even more careful with how you approach things like Terms of Service, how you conduct yourself in your professional groups, etc. You are no longer a private citizen just doing private citizen things. There are standards.
> 
> We are discussing how RH as a business has potentially not met those standards and giving information as to why you might want to think twice about doing business with a business who does the things RH has been shown in screenshots of her own words to do and has been shown through the numerous stories here to do. This is not professional behavior and there are things reported here that are at their very best unethical and at their worst might lead to a court case. This impacts anyone who would do business because you are in charge of your own career, and you need to be able to make informed decisions about who you give your money to and who you are agreeing to go into business with.


Nail on the head. *claps*


----------



## Diamond Eyes

PhoenixS said:



> So yes, when I see those authors who've lettered ahead of other books and boxes that deliberately did not violate the T&Cs, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


If these box sets really have been getting on the lists and getting all those authors their "letters" by bending and breaking ToS of Amazon or any of the other online bookstores, it's disturbing and sad to think about any authors who were playing by all the rules and doing things the right way and might have got pushed off the lists they deserved to be on.


----------



## lilywhite

Rosalind J said:


> My first book suddenly has a one-star review voted to the top. Hmmmm.
> Of course, another book is in the top 10 of the store right now, so you're not exactly killin' me here, ladies.
> And no, I haven't gone and voted anybody else's one stars up. We're not in grade school. Not even in high school. The Popular Girls don't get to decide my fate. I see you. I know you. I reject you.


I hope you've called your rep.


----------



## unkownwriter

sela said:


> Glad to see my name associated with those!


Back at ya, Sela!

Now, on to something else:



> It's been stated that there's a line drawn in the sand, that it's us vs them, and that breaks my freaking heart.


Perhaps I didn't explain myself well. _By the line in the sand, I meant for ethical behavior._ Everyone has to decide where they stand. Will you participate in unethical behaviors? Name and shame? Accuse people who want out of unethical contracts or other situations of being crazy, drunk, delusional, rabid? Tell people to unfriend certain other people, or else? Agree to unfriend people?

Or will you strive to remain ethical and run your business in a manner that doesn't cause other authors harm?

Yes, there's a line in the sand. You chose where you stand. Like it or not, there's not really a gray area, except perhaps in your own mind (and I'm using "you" and "your" in the general sense). People who have been innocently caught up in this, you aren't being judged. You've done nothing wrong, you made a mistake without knowing it was one. Everybody has done this (goodness knows, I have), and we understand. No one blames you. Run your contract out and find someone ethical to deal with in the future. It's all any of us can do.

And about the posts saying people here endorsed these box sets: I think at the time, many didn't know what was going on in these groups. Remember, for years people have been afraid of speaking out, because of what happened when they did. Now, I think things have gotten so bad that some feel they have to speak out, and darn the consequences. Or hope to avoid it by remaining anonymous.

Oh, I got named and shamed in a response here! Does that make me a big deal now? No? Dang it. And yeah, I've said that people knowingly participating in the shenanigans going on -- the skirting/outright breaking of TOS, the naming and shaming, the unfriending, the name-calling and whatever else I can't remember -- are behaving unethically. Truth hurts, eh?

By the way, yes I judge people doing these things. No, I won't willingly associate with them or respect them. I won't name and shame them, I won't one-star their books. That's unethical. Those who got caught up in something and did nothing wrong? They are victims, as are those who've been through the wringer. They don't need to be afraid of being targeted, except by the person in question and the minions.

Edited to fix those copy/past odd symbols. Words are the same.


----------



## Logan R.

Stop the Bullies said:


> To think that long-standing, respected members of this community (such as Rick Gualtieri, Elizabeth West, Sela, Myra Scott, Becca Mills, and others)...
> 
> ...
> 
> ...they are usually by Rick Gualtieri, Christina Garner, Myra Scott, Sela, Perry Constantine, She-La-ti-da...


I want to be you guys when I grow up


----------



## lilywhite

Tilly said:


> Did I screen shot the abusive messages? No. You want to know why? Because when the flood hits you, it's a body slam from behind. I went into shock. I deactivated my FB account and slunk away from social media, writing, everything. I believed them. I was [email protected] I was the problem. I was the only one and I needed to crawl under a rock and die. Very few people know what happened to me because I felt ashamed and assumed it was my fault. It was only to talking to a small number of authors bigger than me that I realised this wasn't normal operating procedure for a business. I crawled back and I'm slowly picking up the pieces. And that is why I finally found the courage to tell my story. Bullying is not a normal business practice.


I remember when this happened, and how small you felt. How shocked. Yours was actually the first story like this that I heard (SillyWriter's was the second), and it was enough for me to know that I would never have anything to do with this promoter, nor her lackeys. I'm glad you've finally told it in public. (((hugs))) to you.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

lilywhite said:


> I hope you've called your rep.


Nah. My career is long and I'm doin' fine. And hey--it was my first fiction. I did use too many adverbs. I didn't know it was a rule.


----------



## lilywhite

Cassie Leigh said:


> Now, maybe in this case the box will be listed with Pronoun for the initial run at the USA Today list and then delisted from Pronoun and put up direct with Amazon when it's time to go into KU.


But then it will have a new ASIN and people who purchased it during the preorder or that first week could inadvertently purchase it again. If that's the plan it's not a very good business practice.


----------



## lilywhite

ChristinaGarner said:


> In December, after 2 sets got pulled down, Rebecca posted about a "new rule that did not exist before" which all now know wasn't new, just newly enforced.
> I don't know if it's possible to put 2 images together, but there is overlap in the images so you can see they came from the same post:
> 
> http://imgur.com/prwnaDI
> http://imgur.com/WBV4XD3


Can we pause and address one thing right now, because I feel like it keeps getting lost: Unpublishing a book that's enrolled in KU _does not release you from the exclusivity terms you agreed to_. You still have to abide by those terms for the full length of the original KU term you agreed to.

Am I misunderstanding, or are these screenshots saying you should unpublish and then you can do whatever you want, regardless of KU rules? Because if so, that's most certainly not the case.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

We need to come up with a different word here, y'all. The mods have said certain words (though accurate) cannot be used. But, is it fair to those who were injured by RH to continue to call her a "promoter" and dance around what she's done like so many PC wusses? I, like everyone of you, promote my books. *We* are promoters. Do you see any correlation between your tactics and those that RH employs?


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Randall Wood said:


> We are not discussing RH the author.
> 
> We are discussing a book promoter, a publisher of box sets, and a shared world owner. Someone who takes money from other authors in a business capacity. If you take money from other people in exchange for things such as promotion or other services, you absolutely should be held to a higher standard than someone who doesn't. You are a business, with power over people and requiring their trust in you to act professionally and do as you say you will. You handle other people's money and other people's books, and that means you need to be even more careful with how you approach things like Terms of Service, how you conduct yourself in your professional groups, etc. You are no longer a private citizen just doing private citizen things. There are standards.
> 
> We are discussing how RH as a business has potentially not met those standards and giving information as to why you might want to think twice about doing business with a business who does the things RH has been shown in screenshots of her own words to do and has been shown through the numerous stories here to do. This is not professional behavior and there are things reported here that are at their very best unethical and at their worst might lead to a court case. This impacts anyone who would do business because you are in charge of your own career, and you need to be able to make informed decisions about who you give your money to and who you are agreeing to go into business with.


Definitely worth quoting in its entirety. An excellent point.


----------



## Stop the Bullies

Stop the Bullies said:


> This thread has been so eye-opening for me, I still can't quite believe what I am reading. I too have a personal testimonial to share. What I have read so far in this thread makes me (more than) slightly nauseous. I have respect for the information I read on this forum, and I have come here seeking that information on a number of subjects for many years. What I am learning now is truly mind-blowing.
> 
> To think that long-standing, respected members of this community (such as Rick Gualtieri, Elizabeth West, Sela, Myra Scott, Becca Mills, and others) whose opinion I have learned to trust, could have led me so astray makes me sick.
> 
> For a week now, I have been a witness to these respected individuals attacking a woman who was once a helpful member here on this board. This attack is doing a lot of damage to her business and her reputation, yet it is allowed to go on. It will continue to do damage to her business and reputation, if it allowed to remain publically accessible.
> 
> Why is this happening?
> 
> To get some semblance of justice for people in a disagreement with her, or who have been wronged by her, in an eye-for-an-eye sort of way?
> 
> I was always taught that this is wrong. Because to allow it, is to cause chaos that forms of a lawless society where anyone with an axe and a score to settle can do so. In real life we have the police to create order, in online forums we have moderators. From what I have seen so far, they are not doing their job as they should.
> 
> *The goings on in the Boxed Sets Scams thread is the most horrific example of online bullying I have ever witnessed in real life. It is also the most terrifying example of censorship I have ever seen with my own eyes. *
> 
> The moderators are not only allowing it to go on, but enabling it by keeping this thread running, deleting posts and banning people who do not agree with this bashing and bullying, and want it to stop. Some have referred to the thread as a witch hunt, and I couldn't agree more. I will add that I have, over the years, seen threads locked down for a lot less controversy than what I'm reading here.
> 
> Being someone who has researched (I'm an investigative journalist by trade) both sides of this argument as much as I could, I have to say things are not as cut and dry as this post would have casual readers believe. It is possible (and quite easy) to see both sides as having a point. To state this in plain terms, yes, I am sure people feel they were wronged, but I also know that there are two sides to every story.
> 
> This thread makes me doubt every single thing I have ever read on this forum. How many times were voices silenced by the mods because they were not in agreement with these long-standing members? I will forever wonder that now. And I will never again respect, or fully trust this site for information again. That such a thing as this thread could happen and be allowed to go on for so long with no signs of slowing down is horrifying. I think it should not only stop, but also be deleted.
> 
> Witnessing this thread unfolding makes me want to pull back and never publically post my opinion on a public forum again. For a thread that is supposed to be all about allowing people to come out of hiding and safely post experience, to have such an effect on someone leads me to conclude that it is not serving its purpose. I am not the only one with this kind of reaction to this thread. You can search publically accessible posts for confirmation of my words, no screenshots needed.
> 
> Furthermore, I am posting this under an anonymous account, because I am afraid of retaliation. I am afraid of having my business and life dragged out like this on a public forum by anyone who has 5 minutes of time to form an opinion and make a comment. As I'm sure are most people. I will point out that posting anonymously does not make my points any less valid. Many of the testimonials on this thread were made by anonymous people.
> 
> At first, it absolutely baffled me why the mods are allowing this to thread to go on. *But then a pattern started to emerge...*
> 
> Right now, this whole thread reads like one endless sea of people coming in to share their bad experiences with Rebecca Hamilton, and ones who have now reconsidered ever working with her again. The picture is very different elsewhere. But people are afraid to post their positive experiences here, because of what happens to those who try. It seems that if you have a wholly positive experience to share, you get attacked. It happened to several people already, and those posts are all still intact.
> 
> Seeing as the Internet is a very unregulated place, it is up to forum moderators to make sure discussions stay within socially (and legally) acceptable boundaries. Time and again on this thread I have seen the mods come down hard on anyone disagreeing with those that have a grievance against RH, while allowing those that have a grievance against RH to basically willy-nilly accuse anyone speaking against them of being:
> 
> a) A liar
> b) Blinded and naive
> c) A sock puppet
> d) Immoral and unethical
> e) A supporter of bullying behavior in general
> f) All of the above
> 
> I don't know how many posts have now been removed, but if you're interested in investigating this pattern for yourself, scroll back to a post that speaks up for Rebecca Hamilton, and then follow the responses (they are usually by Rick Gualtieri, Christina Garner, Myra Scott, Sela, Perry Constantine, She-La-ti-da, and a few other forum regulars). These responses are along the lines of the ones I listed above. Someone disagrees with those opposing RH and they get called a liar, a sock puppet, a supporter of online bullying, immoral, unethical.
> 
> After 7+ days of this thread being open, this is the pattern of behavior I have noticed over and over again. It almost seems as though it is orchestrated to play out that way.
> 
> I realize that this post might get heavily edited or even deleted, but I hope it does not. In the interest of freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I hope it will not.
> 
> *This is my personal experience with online bullying as concerns Rebecca Hamilton and the services she provides. Will this thread in any way prevent me from seeking her services? No. But because of it, I will avoid ever visiting Kboards.com again. *
> 
> Please remember that everyone is Innocent Until Proven Guilty. And that no one deserves to be the victim of online bullying. Then try to find it in your hearts to stop this frenzy.
> 
> _Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


Thank you to the moderators for editing out a key piece of my observations and experience with this issue. I saved the original post and the one that was left up after the edits. I will be forwarding both to Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware as an illustration of what is happening on this thread.


----------



## Jana DeLeon

I think perhaps some of you should probably give up the good fight and get back to writing books. What I see here from some is classic "If it's not happening to me, it must not be happening."

They have a vested interest in avoiding everything presented. You're not going to change their minds.

Either people dwell in reality and understand common denominator theory, or they choose not to.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Stop the Bullies said:


> Thank you to the moderators for editing out a key piece of my observations and experience with this issue. I saved the original post and the one that was left up after the edits. I will be forwarding both to Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware as an illustration of what is happening on this thread.


STB, one portion of your post that was speculation about a member's motives in posting was removed. You are certainly welcome to forward your posts as well as this response to Victoria.

Thank you for your comments and feedback.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## ChristinaGarner

lilywhite said:


> Can we pause and address one thing right now, because I feel like it keeps getting lost: Unpublishing a book that's enrolled in KU _does not release you from the exclusivity terms you agreed to_. You still have to abide by those terms for the full length of the original KU term you agreed to.
> 
> Am I misunderstanding, or are these screenshots saying you should unpublish and then you can do whatever you want, regardless of KU rules? Because if so, that's most certainly not the case.


We always needed to be wide for the first week, so that should have meant KU terms were up by the time the set went on sale.

But notice how the original terms say available to be wide for the first week, and midway through she stretched it to 10 days prior. Then it was 2 weeks prior. For the Spellbound set that was fine--I was out well in advance, but for Myths & Legends, for which I'd planned my release date of Pledge specifically around when I needed to be out of KU--it was an issue.

When I brought it up in the M&L set I was told this:

http://imgur.com/pm66L4n
http://imgur.com/I4ALkWv

I found the whole thing passive aggressive and no weight was given the the fact that our contracts made no stipulations for 10 days or 2 weeks. A business provider can't assume what a customer knows or doesn't know. If it was a term that was meant to be complied with, it needed to be in the contract.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Jana DeLeon said:


> I think perhaps some of you should probably give up the good fight and get back to writing books. What I see here from some is classic "If it's not happening to me, it must not be happening."
> 
> They have a vested interest in avoiding everything presented. You're not going to change their minds.
> 
> Either people dwell in reality and understand common denominator theory, or they choose not to.


You're absolutely right, and to be honest, I'm exhausted.

This has been one of the longest and strangest weeks of my life. I've done and said what I can to shed some light on the situation. I'll pop back in here and there, but I have a preorder to get up and a list of things to provide my attorney.

But first, a nap.


----------



## TinyDancer

The discussion going on here and through PMs has left me thinking of little else this week (even further back when I consider my issues with Rebecca started last summer).

But last night, I tired to take everything personal out of it. Whether I like/respect Rebecca as a person is completely irrelevant to the issues of this thread. This is about how she conducts her business.

Remember United Airlines a few weeks ago?
I've flown United. They were great. Friendly, helpful, and I never saw them beat up a customer. Then video of a man being beaten and dragged off one of their planes went viral. Who did I believe was at fault? The company who never treated me wrong or the evidence on my screen? There were those who said United was 100% at fault and wrong. There were those who defended the airline blaming the customer. United even released a statement to explain the situation. But you know what? The public didn't want to hear their excuses because at no time is it acceptable for a business to treat a customer as a punching bag (physically or verbally). The public found United responsible because United created a situation where a customer was hurt while in the process of the business withdrawing services through no fault of the customer's. 

Rebecca's business is like United. She had a customer and for whatever reason (whether the TOS changed, or something else depending on the customer involved), the customer demanded something of her that was within their rights (ie. a reimbursement due to a nullified contract or failure to deliver service on time). The verbal beating of the customer happens in the form of online bullying whether in groups, personal pages, private messages, or emails. 

For me, the Rebecca issue is much easier to decide because I have witnessed and experienced the verbal beatings. Not having first hand experience of United's beatings left me momentarily questioning the victim "what did he do?" "Why didn't he just get off the plane quietly?". This is the position some of Rebecca's satisfied customers are in, they see the evidence, but can't totally believe it because they've never experienced it before. But the more I thought about the United situation, I realized I didn't need to see everything that happened leading up the beating as long as the guy followed his end of the contract. For me, United was wrong because beating a person (verbally or physically) when you fail to provide the contracted service is unethical and unprofessional.

But the United and Rebecca situations aren't exactly the same. With United, the public spoke out. They had no fear that United would retaliate against them and convince other service providers to refuse them service. United realized the customers needed to be their priority. They apologized, settled, and are now making changes to their protocols to avoid further issues. Through this thread, a large portion of the indie author community is standing up and saying that Rebecca's business practices are not professional or ethical and that she needs to change her business practice. A professional business owner would have taken this thread as an opportunity to reflect on their practice, and make changes to ensure their customers are their number one priority. Yet Rebecca continues to retaliate. She has gathered her supporters and set them loose on everyone who dares share their experience or opinions that reflect poorly on her business practices. 

I do have a question for anyone might know. Rebecca says no refunds and then gives the author dropping out the option to "donate" their spot to another author. This means that the new author doesn't need to pay the buy, but the leaving author gets their buy-in money back once royalties start coming in. But in the screen shot Christina posted, Rebecca says if the spot isn't donated then that's $500 less they have for marketing. Why would there be less money? If she's not giving it back to the author then where is it going if not marketing?


----------



## Fel Beasley

Sad Author said:


> Yes, there are many good experiences. If most of the people were having bad experiences most of this thread would not exist. Everything would have been cut and dry and over years ago. But in my opinion (formed because of my personal dealings with her that you can see above), this is only because none of these people with good experiences have done anything to question her in any way. They paid their money and took their services. They either supported her in, kept their head down or just didn't know about drama that may have arisen and went on their way.
> 
> I keep wondering if any of the people who've had great experiences would be able to say the same thing if they somehow (even politely) challenged the person in question. I can't say for sure of the outcome but I would not be surprised if it were not pleasant and they found themselves blocked and beeing spoken harshly of.
> 
> People seem to have a hard time believing that things are as bad as they are because it's totally illogical for them to be so bad. It seems like no one would ACTUALLY treat other people so poorly without just cause. But here's the thing (again from personal experience), this is exactly what the person in question does. Nothing is off the table to be said about the author being attacked, no matter if it is true or not. And when that is the case it is very easy to place blame and deflect from the real issue. The accused will not be allowed to make their case in the forum where they are being attacked (because they are blocked or kicked out of the group) and if they are brave enough to speak out on another forum the words are twisted.
> 
> But most are not brave enough (me included) because we are not important enough to be believed and speaking out will only result in further attack.


I will say that as someone who has questioned Rebecca both publically and privately, I've never been attacked by Rebecca or those I know associate with her. I've never had a thinly veiled post about me. All of the responses to me from Rebecca have been polite, even when we don't agree. I haven't been one starred. I haven't been unfriended by other friends. I'm not saying it does not happen, but as someone who hasn't experienced the negative personally, I want to speak up that it isn't because I'm afraid to speak up or haven't before or just drink the kool-aid.

I will also say I have gotten hateful PMs. I've been accused of things that are baffling to me. I've seen other people I care about being dragged through the mud. So when people are being shut down when saying there are always two sides to a story, I get upset. Because there are two sides.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Concerned said:


> I will say that as someone who has questioned Rebecca both publically and privately, I've never been attacked by Rebecca or those I know associate with her. I've never had a thinly veiled post about me. All of the responses to me from Rebecca have been polite, even when we don't agree. I haven't been one starred. I haven't been unfriended by other friends. I'm not saying it does not happen, but as someone who hasn't experienced the negative personally, I want to speak up that it isn't because I'm afraid to speak up or haven't before or just drink the kool-aid.
> 
> I will also say I have gotten hateful PMs. I've been accused of things that are baffling to me. I've seen other people I care about being dragged through the mud. So when people are being shut down when saying there are always two sides to a story, I get upset. Because there are two sides.


The same thing happened to me. I wasn't even BLOCKED by Rebecca Hamilton but yet she had to draw the line in the sand about you can't be Facebook friends with me and her. I have witnessed her response to change depending on perhaps what your perceived strength level is. For me, she couldn't say I was a disgruntled client, I had and have zero dollars on the line. I've also noticed men can critique her services and again, they aren't given a big "This man is attacking me and it's libel and it's defamation!!!"

So I would say it's like the boxed sets, the behavior isn't the same across the board, which also is a problem if you think about it for a business. The response should be neutral no matter who it is critiquing the service. Professional, direct, and without emotion.


----------



## Sad Author

Concerned said:


> I will say that as someone who has questioned Rebecca both publically and privately, I've never been attacked by Rebecca or those I know associate with her. I've never had a thinly veiled post about me. All of the responses to me from Rebecca have been polite, even when we don't agree. I haven't been one starred. I haven't been unfriended by other friends. I'm not saying it does not happen, but as someone who hasn't experienced the negative personally, I want to speak up that it isn't because I'm afraid to speak up or haven't before or just drink the kool-aid.
> 
> I will also say I have gotten hateful PMs. I've been accused of things that are baffling to me. I've seen other people I care about being dragged through the mud. So when people are being shut down when saying there are always two sides to a story, I get upset. Because there are two sides.


You are right. There are always two sides and I can't force people to believe me that I spent an entire night a basket case over the verbal beating I received over what was in my mind an innocent exchange. Even though I had no idea how what I had said was so wrong I apologized profusely, thinking that it was somehow my fault. My apology was ignored and the online abuse was allowed to continue.

It's awful that someone has treated you this way as well. I truly hope that people were able to come to your aid and support you.

(edited for my terrible grammar  )


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I did want to address something that was included in STB's post--the claim that dissenting opinions have been shut down by the moderating staff.

At the time I write this, there are over 1200 posts in the active thread (I know it's going up as I post this). There are 113 posts (by 48 members) which have been deleted.

Some of those 113 have been removed by the posters themselves (including three more since I started posting this).  86 of the 113 posts were by members who have posted about negative experiences or in support of members who had negative experiences.  27 of the 113 were by members who posted positively about their experiences. Those members who posted positively have a total of 144 posts between them remaining in the active thread.  Their voices are still heard in the active thread.  And there are other members who have posted in the active thread who have not had any posts removed, so they are not included in the above numbers.  Their voices are also still heard.

Posts that were removed by moderators were either posts making personal attacks (and this happened on both sides), posts making the same point or question over and over again, which tends to stymie conversation, posts which included information not pertinent to the topic (and this happened on both sides) or were goofy or otherwise inappropriate for a thread with such serious implications.

I want to reiterate what has been said repeatedly throughout this very long thread: members are welcome to post their first hand experiences, good or bad, in this thread.  We will continue to do our best to ensure that opposing viewpoints can be presented here without attack.

If you think something said is inappropriate, please use the report feature found in every post.  We are actively reviewing this thread and any reports as they happen.

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.  I don't want to derail this thread--but I wanted this info to be on the record.

Thanks to all who have posted civilly and with respect on both sides.

Betsy
KB Admin


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

TinyDancer said:


> The discussion going on here and through PMs has left me thinking of little else this week (even further back when I consider my issues with Rebecca started last summer).
> 
> But last night, I tired to take everything personal out of it. Whether I like/respect Rebecca as a person is completely irrelevant to the issues of this thread. This is about how she conducts her business.
> 
> Remember United Airlines a few weeks ago?
> I've flown United. They were great. Friendly, helpful, and I never saw them beat up a customer. Then video of a man being beaten and dragged off one of their planes went viral. Who did I believe was at fault? The company who never treated me wrong or the evidence on my screen? There were those who said United was 100% at fault and wrong. There were those who defended the airline blaming the customer. United even released a statement to explain the situation. But you know what? The public didn't want to hear their excuses because at no time is it acceptable for a business to treat a customer as a punching bag (physically or verbally). The public found United responsible because United created a situation where a customer was hurt while in the process of the business withdrawing services through no fault of the customer's.
> 
> Rebecca's business is like United. She had a customer and for whatever reason (whether the TOS changed, or something else depending on the customer involved), the customer demanded something of her that was within their rights (ie. a reimbursement due to a nullified contract or failure to deliver service on time). The verbal beating of the customer happens in the form of online bullying whether in groups, personal pages, private messages, or emails.
> 
> *For me, the Rebecca issue is much easier to decide because I have witnessed and experienced the verbal beatings.* Not having first hand experience of United's beatings left me momentarily questioning the victim "what did he do?" "Why didn't he just get off the plane quietly?". This is the position some of Rebecca's satisfied customers are in, they see the evidence, but can't totally believe it because they've never experienced it before. But the more I thought about the United situation, I realized I didn't need to see everything that happened leading up the beating as long as the guy followed his end of the contract. For me, United was wrong because beating a person (verbally or physically) when you fail to provide the contracted service is unethical and unprofessional.


THIS.

Like I said way up thread, I still have friends who have professional relationships with her. I haven't seen them engage in any of the unethical practices or bullying, so I'm still in contact with them. I just stay away from Hamilton and any of her services. I can definitely see how there are many people who are baffled by the negative experiences shared. _I_ don't question those experiences because, as you said (bold emphasis in the quote my own), I've had my own similar negative experiences. None of these things surprise me, because this behavior is nothing new to me.

I think it's like someone said a bit further back (and I'm sorry, but I can't remember or find it again): When you initially connect with her, she _is_ very nice. It's only when you ask questions or stand up for someone she's bullying that you end up on her bad side. I honestly don't know what was said about me because I blocked her before she had the chance to get started.



> I do have a question for anyone might know. Rebecca says no refunds and then gives the author dropping out the option to "donate" their spot to another author. This means that the new author doesn't need to pay the buy, but the leaving author gets their buy-in money back once royalties start coming in. But in the screen shot Christina posted, Rebecca says if the spot isn't donated then that's $500 less they have for marketing. Why would there be less money? If she's not giving it back to the author then where is it going if not marketing?


That's a very good question.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Concerned said:


> I will also say I have gotten hateful PMs.


Concerned--

If you've received abusive PMs through our forum system here on KBoards, please report them using the "Report to Admin" link in every PM. Using the PM system to attack a member is a bannable offense here.

And the same for anyone else here. Abusive PMs will get the sender banned. Please report them.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## 75814

sela said:


> Glad to see my name associated with those!


I'd be hard-pressed to find a group I'd rather be associated with. Some great names in there.


----------



## PhoenixS

ChristinaGarner said:


> We always needed to be wide for the first week, so that should have meant KU terms were up by the time the set went on sale.
> 
> But notice how the original terms say available to be wide for the first week, and midway through she stretched it to 10 days prior. Then it was 2 weeks prior. For the Spellbound set that was fine--I was out well in advance, but for Myths & Legends, for which I'd planned my release date of Pledge specifically around when I needed to be out of KU--it was an issue.
> 
> When I brought it up in the M&L set I was told this:
> 
> http://imgur.com/pm66L4n
> http://imgur.com/I4ALkWv
> 
> I found the whole thing passive aggressive and no weight was given the the fact that our contracts made no stipulations for 10 days or 2 weeks. A business provider can't assume what a customer knows or doesn't know. If it was a term that was meant to be complied with, it needed to be in the contract.


This, of course, is a bit of a wiggly dance.

The box sets are on 3-month preorders. The whole reason RH does not name the titles that will be in the box is so that no one or no bot can match up those titles to books in Select. If Amazon doesn't know, then it's OK to break the rules, right?

Books released in the box sets on the wide venues should not be in Select for the duration of the preorder. That's 3 months, not 10 days or 14 or 3. But the ploy here of not naming titles isn't to give ~♥♥ readers ♥♥~ a little surprise like a box of mixed chocolates but to deceive Amazon and thwart the rules.

Technicality or intent? It's a slippery slope...


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

PhoenixS said:


> But the ploy here of not naming titles isn't to give ~♥♥ readers ♥♥~ a little surprise like a box of mixed chocolates but to deceive Amazon and thwart the rules.


I have to admit the concept of not telling people what they're buying has always perplexed me in how it's able to be on the Kindle store and not be buried in customer complaints.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

PhoenixS said:


> This, of course, is a bit of a wiggly dance.
> 
> The box sets are on 3-month preorders. The whole reason RH does not name the titles that will be in the box is so that no one or no bot can match up those titles to books in Select. If Amazon doesn't know, then it's OK to break the rules, right?
> 
> Books released in the box sets on the wide venues should not be in Select for the duration of the preorder. That's 3 months, not 10 days or 14 or 3. But the ploy here of not naming titles isn't to give ~♥♥ readers ♥♥~ a little surprise like a box of mixed chocolates but to deceive Amazon and thwart the rules.
> 
> Technicality or intent? It's a slippery slope...


You're right, of course. I admit to being far less informed on Amazon's terms and conditions than I should have been. I fully admit that I had a book that was to be included in that set that was in KU throughout much of the preorder. It's not something I'm proud of, but I think it's important I admit my own mistakes in this situation.

I will reiterate, however, that *at no time did I ever intend to, nor take action to have this set on sale wide while the individual novel was also in KU*. I took steps to make sure that didn't happen, even thought Rebecca told me I didn't have to. She alleges that I planned to break this rule, and that her not allowing me to is what had me walk away from doing business with her. That is simply untrue.


----------



## Becca Mills

Going to elaborate on the rules a bit, folks: hearsay-based questions count as hearsay. Let's stick to the evidence people bring us.


----------



## sela

A couple of questions about procedures used with the boxed sets:

1. Has anyone corresponded with Amazon about putting a boxed set up for preorder for 3 months and then putting books that have been in KU for all that time into wide distribution? 

It's a creative way to get around the KU exclusivity requirement. I wonder if Amazon is aware of this work around and if they approve. 

2. Do the TOS say anything about not describing the actual contents of a boxed set on the product page when it is on preorder?

It's a creative way to get around the KU exclusivity requirement. I wonder if Amazon is aware of this work around and if they approve.


----------



## #############

Stop the Bullies said:


> Thank you to the moderators for editing out a key piece of my observations and experience with this issue. I saved the original post and the one that was left up after the edits. I will be forwarding both to Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware as an illustration of what is happening on this thread.


Something tells me that isn't going to turn out like you think it will. Unless you don't link her to this thread.

Will you be linking her this thread?


----------



## BiancaSommerland

berke said:


> Something tells me that isn't going to turn out like you think it will. Unless you don't link her to this thread.
> 
> Will you be linking her this thread?


Writer's Beware mentioned already looking at this thread.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

sela said:


> A couple of questions about procedures used with the boxed sets:
> 
> 1. Has anyone corresponded with Amazon about putting a boxed set up for preorder for 3 months and then putting books that have been in KU for all that time into wide distribution?
> 
> It's a creative way to get around the KU exclusivity requirement. I wonder if Amazon is aware of this work around and if they approve.
> 
> 2. Do the TOS say anything about not describing the actual contents of a boxed set on the product page when it is on preorder?
> 
> It's a creative way to get around the KU exclusivity requirement. I wonder if Amazon is aware of this work around and if they approve.


I can only speak to Q1

I received the following response from Michelle (last name withheld) of the Executive Customer Relations department on this very topic. She gave me a flat no, it is not allowed and followed with:

"The KDP Select Exclusivity states, "If the digital version of your book appears to be available for pre-order, for sale, or for free elsewhere (such as on your website or blog, or a third party's website), then it is not eligible for KDP Select.""

I assume the "appears to be" allows them some wiggle room. Contents that are hidden don't appear to be anything.


----------



## Fel Beasley

I can't speak for past sets but all sets I'm doing both with Rebecca  and with other organizers are 100% clear. The file for preorder can not include any material published in KU. Not during pre-order or live. As for price matched on Amazon because of file size, that is why sets are now going through pronoun. Everything I've seen has been 100% in compliance with tos. 

This doesn't negate past violations but they are not happening to sets that were put together after the enforcement of exclusivity for multi author box sets began. Which for me was Jan of this year. 

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk


----------



## Becca Mills

Locking as I head off to bed. This thread will be reopened when our North American East Coast mods rise in the morning. To those currently enjoying the daylight: if there's something you'd really like to add, but the thread won't be reopened until you're asleep, feel free to PM it to me in the form you'd like it to appear. Assuming what you've written meets with forum decorum and this thread's guidelines, I'll gladly post it as a quote from you when I'm back online in the morning.

_unlocked._


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Happy to see this back open this AM.  A reminder, Victoria Strauss from Writer Beware is also looking into this issue. If you have a story to tell on this topic and you're not comfortable sharing it here, please reach out to her.


----------



## 41419

*Warning:*

I received a very suspicious email from someone claiming they wanted to report "KU Scamming" - and it didn't feel genuine. I checked with some friends, and they also received an email from the same person but looking to report "Review Purchasing."

Following the breadcrumbs, I think this person is connected to the person we are discussing here. So, be careful of any potential catfishing. I think someone is going through the thread for that purpose.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

dgaughran said:


> *Warning:*
> 
> I received a very suspicious email from someone claiming they wanted to report "KU Scamming" - and it didn't feel genuine. I checked with some friends, and they also received an email from the same person but looking to report "Review Purchasing."
> 
> Following the breadcrumbs, I think this person is connected to the person we are discussing here. So, be careful of any potential catfishing. I think someone is going through the thread for that purpose.


Let's cut this off right now: there is ZERO proof of your assertion. Certainly be cautious about responding to such emails but there will be ZERO discussion of it in this thread.


----------



## crow.bar.beer

It seems there's enough evidence for people to report suspected tax fraud. The PayPal thing in particular could suggest unreported income.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/how-do-you-report-suspected-tax-fraud-activity



> Print the form and mail to:
> 
> Internal Revenue Service
> Fresno, CA 93888
> 
> or, order the form by mail or by calling the Tax Fraud Hotline recording at 1-800-829-0433. Note: we don't accept alleged tax law violation referrals over the phone.
> 
> You may also send a letter to the address above instead of using Form 3949-A. Please include as much information as possible, such as these important points:
> 
> Name and Address of person or business you are reporting
> The individual's social security number or the business' employer identification number
> A brief description of the alleged violation(s), including how you became aware or obtained information about the violation(s)
> The years involved
> The estimated dollar amount of any unreported income
> Your name, address and telephone number*
> 
> *Although you are not required to identify yourself, it is helpful to do so. Your identity will be kept confidential.


Sometimes an audit is the best available tool to put an end to shady business practices...


----------



## ChristinaGarner

thisisscary said:


> Since it's come up, I feel I need to add the sets I was in the guidelines were very clear that no content from KU could be in KU while the sets were on pre-order and that no content could be in KU during the wide week. After the issue came up around boxed sets having books only exclusive to them (again - I know it wasn't only RH sets where this came up - there was a post on Kboards about it from someone reputable who was surprised as well), it was made very clear that anything to remain in the set after the wide week couldn't be published anywhere else by the author as an individual title. There was a flood of questions from individual authors when that came up. I admit I didn't pay close attention because the books in question for me had been wide for months, so I didn't have to think about timing. I planned it that way because I didn't want to worry about it. I only had to decide if I wanted to pull the books down as individual titles. I chose not to do that and again didn't pay close attention to discussions among others about what they chose to do. Having seen some of the posted PM's, it appears private discussions may have included different feedback. I'll acknowledge now to being naive about the pre-order guidelines. Since my books were already wide, I just didn't think about it much. I didn't know that some authors might have had KU books they intended to remove right before the deadline. So while can say the public guidelines were clear, it seems as if some were making different choices unbeknownst to the rest of us.


This topic came up in at least one of the sets I was in. It's currently live which indicates how recent it is. I say this not to discredit the above account, just to say that what happens in one set might not be what is happening in another.

The person identifiable as "J" was the co-manager of the set and makes it clear she is speaking for Rebecca.

http://imgur.com/GaM3rDu


----------



## MyraScott

My understanding (and I am not a lawyer) is:

Screenshots are not evidence.

Facebook complies with court-ordered discovery and supoenas

Facebook can provide deleted content and all edits


So, while all of this is entertaining in the court of public opinion, when it actually gets to a judge, there will be no question of what was written or the timeline. So, we can speculate and point fingers all day, in the end, the court case has been funded and all of the posts (ALL OF THEM, not just Rebecca Hamilton and Christina Garner posts) will be made available to a judge to decide.

Oh and thanks to whoever listed me as a respected Kboarder! That was really sweet and warmed my heart. I've been away from KBoards a while, but this has brought me back and I forgot how much I enjoyed it here.








_
*fixing my list format~_


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Tulonsae said:


> Question for you. Is the intent, for the sets you're in now, the ones going through pronoun, to put them in the KU after the wide period?
> 
> If so, wouldn't that mean (as someone said upthread) that they would have to get a different ASIN if you put the boxed set in KU?


I'm sorry; I can't speak with certainty as I'm not currently in any sets. After Rebecca kicked me out of Spellbound, I rescinded my contracts for the other two a short time after that.

(Which begs the question: if, as she claims, my email proves I was quitting, why did she only kick me out of one set?)

However it's a great question. You can see that recently released box sets are in KU and in the prior screen shot you can see that it's billed as where the money is made, so my assumption is yes, but I can't say for sure.

https://www.amazon.com/Myths-Legends-Margo-Bond-Collins-ebook/dp/B01N35PE0C/

While it's listed as the 2nd edition, (likely meaning some stories have been pulled and may have been swapped with novellas or shorts) the original publication date remains the same.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

thisisscary said:


> Christina, As has been stated earlier by others, it's definitely clear not all sets are handled the same. Ours didn't have someone else running it. To reiterate my take on all of this - I'm uncomfortable about what I've learned and don't intend to continue doing business with RH. That said, by your own PM's posted you had separate convo's with RH about KU that no one in your set would've known about. You've publicly acknowledged that wasn't wise, but it goes to show that plenty of ppl in these sets may be oblivious to what's happening with other author's books in them. Hence, my name here now - thisisscary. Also, I have learned the hard way now that being busy and not paying attention to everyone else's posts may mean I missed things like what you just showed. Since my books were out of KU before the pre-order ever went up, I didn't really think about it. I felt the need to post what I did earlier because I think it's crucial that ppl don't assume all involved are purposefully & knowingly being nefarious. That weakens the concerns shared because then RH can argue that's not always the case. Let's not be global when an issue can't be shown as global. At this point, due to everything I've learned, I don't know that I'll ever do a boxed set again since it's so impossible to know what other author's might be choosing to do and having PM's I don't know about.


I'm a little confused because my post was in no way meant as a rebuttal of yours; I just wanted to add another bit of information. (People keep taking about "the whole story" and my post is part of it.)

With regards to my private conversation with Rebecca--yes, I asked what the rules were for compliance so that I _would_ be in compliance with my new release. Her telling me it was ok to break KU's rules is neither proof nor indication that I ever intended to break them. I put my book up for preorder in October which defined my release date. That date was chosen in part so that I would not be breaking the KU rules as I understood them at the time.

In case it wasn't clear, I am not speaking globally for Rebecca's box sets or the participants, and don't know what others intended or even what they did with regards to KU rules. I am speaking specifically to my experience and no one else's. As I've said before, I know many are caught up in something right now--as I was--having no idea what rules might have been being skirted.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

MyraScott said:


> My understanding (and I am not a lawyer) is:
> 
> Screenshots are not evidence.
> 
> Facebook complies with court-ordered discovery and supoenas
> 
> Facebook can provide deleted content and all edits
> 
> 
> So, while all of this is entertaining in the court of public opinion, when it actually gets to a judge, there will be no question of what was written or the timeline. So, we can speculate and point fingers all day, in the end, the court case has been funded and all of the posts (ALL OF THEM, not just Rebecca Hamilton and Christina Garner posts) will be made available to a judge to decide.
> 
> Oh and thanks to whoever listed me as a respected Kboarder! That was really sweet and warmed my heart. I've been away from KBoards a while, but this has brought me back and I forgot how much I enjoyed it here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _
> *fixing my list format~_


This is why someone calling me a "dishonest fundraiser" or making other libelous claims they have no evidence to support would be wise to recant as publicly as they made the claims.

This also goes for the twitter account calling me a racist POS and claiming they *know* I am running the @IamScamilton account. That's actually impossible because not only am I not running it, I have no idea who is. But it will be possible to find out the identity of the person running the account that's making those untrue statements about me. And the repeated tweets that name me as someone people should not buy books from are going to be hard to explain as anything but an effort to ruin my career.


----------



## Thetis

PhoenixS said:


> FWIW, I have not seen one set *previously or currently published* by RH's Bestselling Box Sets or GenreCrave that does not break Amazon's price-matching rule. Every set has been in violation. Every set, therefore, is guilty of some level of shenanigans. It becomes a question of how many of Amazon's rules have been violated by each set.
> 
> However, most if not all the sets *currently on preorder* have been uploaded via Pronoun, which operates under a different set of rules. Sets of any file size may be priced 99 cents without having to be price-matched.
> 
> Does that make price-matching right for any sets that have come before? No. Just because a boulevard ups the speed limit from 35 to 45 this month doesn't make all the speeding tickets that have come before invalid.
> 
> When 22 books price-match to 99 cents while other organizers struggle to keep their boxes within guidelines and can only put in 10 or 12, it creates an unfair competitive advantage. Just like key-word stuffers are doing. Or the KU "authors" who stuff 20 erotica bonus books into their clean romance title.
> 
> And all of those are a violation of the T&Cs we each agreed to. Do a *lot* of folk do it. Yes. A lot of folk speed or shoplift small items. Does it make it any less right? No.
> 
> Many of the boxes skate through. Spellbound looks like it will, despite, as I've noted before, being in violation right now. Some boxes didn't see the cop behind the tree on the other side of the hill and were snagged. Those boxes were cut in half and half linked to instafreebie, trading one violation for another.
> 
> This conversation has turned the focus to cyberbullying from price-matching, the instafreebie ploy, the bait-and-switch of mass shifting of novels out of the boxes and replacing with short stories and novellas yet continuing to claim the same title for the work, KU titles in wide sets, incentivized buys and incentivized reviews. But EVERY ONE of the sets that has lettered has done it off the back of one or -- frequently -- more violations. The proof is no further than the Wayback Machine. Every author so far who has achieved their letters via RH's boxes achieved them at the expense of those who followed the T&Cs and *didn't* put up 22 novels for 99 cents and/or who didn't engage in any of the verifiable KU, IF and incentivized buys violations.
> 
> So yes, when I see those authors who've lettered ahead of other books and boxes that deliberately did not violate the T&Cs, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Is it as bad a taste as the allegations of cyberbullying and financial breaches? No. Of course not. But these violations shouldn't simply be brushed aside either. Violations that should have been clear to every author signing up, whether they were social media blind or not.
> 
> RH pivots as needed. But she doesn't pivot until her sets are tagged by Amazon for infractions. She's reactive, not proactive about abiding by the guidelines. Maybe going forward her sets will all be squeaky clean. But that doesn't invalidate 2+ years of dodging the radar gun _(which is not a weapon, and this statement in no way constitutes a death threat)._
> 
> Also, Amazon itself needs to shoulder blame here for not enforcing its policies and for letting repeat violations off with little more than wrist-slaps. When the reward is greater than the punishment for breaking a rule, what rules are going to be left unbroken?


Wait...the price matching thing is unclear.

During the majority of the pre-order period with any set I've been in, there ISN'T an issue due to file size as there's only a placeholder file that often just has a list of names (and this goes for sets NOT organized by GenreCrave/Rebecca Hamilton...we often didn't have the stories written and ready until a certain deadline).

It's definitely under the size limit, then, for the majority of the preorder period...so the problem with price matching doesn't even come up until the final file is loaded about a week before the set releases.

But why is "forced price matching" such an issue with a $0.99 boxset but not with "forcing" Amazon to set a book to free by having it priced as $0.00 on other retail sites? Or is the issue the split files that happened last year, (which I'd agree wasn't an appropriate way to handle the file size)? Genuine question because I'm honestly not understanding why a $0.99 boxset that is priced as such because it's listed as $0.99 on other sites is any different than getting Amazon to set the price of a book to $0.00 because of price matching.

I don't have any stake in this as I'm not organizing any boxsets or setting any books as permafree but in case others have the same question, I wanted to get clarification on it.


----------



## Justawriter

Thetis said:


> But why is "forced price matching" such an issue with a $0.99 boxset but not with "forcing" Amazon to set a book to free by having it priced as $0.00 on other retail sites? Or is the issue the split files that happened last year, (which I'd agree wasn't an appropriate way to handle the file size)? Genuine question because I'm honestly not understanding why a $0.99 boxset that is priced as such because it's listed as $0.99 on other sites is any different than getting Amazon to set the price of a book to $0.00 because of price matching.
> 
> I don't have any stake in this as I'm not organizing any boxsets or setting any books as permafree but in case others have the same question, I wanted to get clarification on it.


It's different because Amazon allows for price-matching to free. They even have an embedded form now, to make easier and so you can let them know which stores you wnt it set free in.

Forced price-matching to .99 is something they get upset about. I did it accidentally once when I didn't update a price on a vendor and got a 'nasty gram' from Amazon saying I had 5 days to fix the situation or they'd take the book down, or something along those lines.

So they view it quite differently.


----------



## Thetis

PamelaKelley said:


> It's different because Amazon allows for price-matching to free. They even have an embedded form now, to make easier and so you can let them know which stores you wnt it set free in.
> 
> Forced price-matching to .99 is something they get upset about. I did it accidentally once when I didn't update a price on a vendor and got a 'nasty gram' from Amazon saying I had 5 days to fix the situation or they'd take the book down, or something along those lines.
> 
> So they view it quite differently.


That's so odd they'd be okay with free but not $0.99 when they actually make money on a $0.99 sale! Thanks for answering.


----------



## C. Gockel

> This also goes for the twitter account calling me a racist POS and claiming they *know* I am running the @IamScamilton account. That's actually impossible because not only am I not running it, I have no idea who is. But it will be possible to find out the identity of the person running the account that's making those untrue statements about me. And the repeated tweets that name me as someone people should not buy books from are going to be hard to explain as anything but an effort to ruin my career.


Yes. This is ground for libel.


----------



## C. Gockel

> That's so odd they'd be okay with free but not $0.99 when they actually make money on a $0.99 sale!


Yes, this! I totally don't get it.


----------



## Pnjw

Part of the price matching thing is that back in 2011-2012 people were pricing their books at $2.99 on Amazon and choosing the 70% royalty and 99 cents elsewhere, forcing a price match. That meant the price matched 99 cent titles on Amazon were making 70% royalties and not 35% as is required if you price at 99 cents. Now that doesn't explain why they get upset at the $1.99 down to 99 cent price match, but I assume they just make blanket policies and let the bots run with them. 

In six years, I have never seen an instance when Amazon has sent a nastygram about a book price matched to free. I have seen, and have gotten my own, nastygrams for books listed higher on Amazon than other vendors. *The nastygrams I received were on books that were priced lower on other vendors by mistake--not because I was trying to get away with anything.


----------



## PhoenixS

Tulonsae said:


> Isn't the force price matching an issue because of file size and delivery/bandwidth costs?
> 
> Is there a limit on the file size for something that's free?
> 
> (Not meaning to derail the thread or anything. Just trying to get clarification.)


Free pricing is a specific exclusion in the T&C (see D in the table). And no, no limit on file size:
https://kdp.amazon.com/help/topic/A29FL26OKE7R7B

Forced price matching:

For the record, anyone with box set organizer experience will know 22 full-length novels will break the 3MB threshold. But let's say, for sake of argument, an organizer is surprised to find the file is over 3MB and can't be compressed enough to fit under the limit.

Since Amazon's T&C states 1) that a file over 3MB can't be priced under $1.99 (and you literally cannot select the 99 cent option in the dashboard) AND 2) that you cannot have a lower price on another vendor, then the recourse is to _raise the price at the other vendors_ or to cut your file size down till it's below the limit. Putting half the content on a 3rd-party site is not the way to solve that as it's yet another violation.

Organizers are responsible for ensuring the file size will be within acceptable limits before the contracts even go out by 1) not overbooking the file and/or 2) capping word counts from each author if they're determined to have X number of authors represented.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Thetis said:


> That's so odd they'd be okay with free but not $0.99 when they actually make money on a $0.99 sale! Thanks for answering.


When Amazon price matches (say from 2.99 to .99) they pay 70% rather than 35%. (Unless this has been changed). This makes them less than happy.


----------



## C. Gockel

I am going to chime in here though ... Amazon has been really unreliable and inconsistent about it's enforcing of this AND in their verbal over the phone responses to inquiries. I was in a set that I price matched a few years back. I was really concerned about breaking Amazon's TOS so I called them and bugged them so much to know if it would be okay I eventually got a member of the executive team to call me. He said it was really fine and they just don't like to encourage it. So I price matched the set. But toward the end of the run (6 months I think?) I did get a nasty gram. 

Since then I've not done that, and have no intention to do it again. To me it's just not worth the hassle. Also, I'd like to be in other 99-cent box sets, but I don't want to be in a multi-author set that's intention to list ever again. I just feel that pressure to make the USAT makes people do crazy things.


----------



## PhoenixS

C. Gockel said:


> I am going to chime in here though ... Amazon has been really unreliable and inconsistent about it's enforcing of this AND in their verbal over the phone responses to inquiries. I was in a set that I price matched a few years back. I was really concerned about breaking Amazon's TOS so I called them and bugged them so much to know if it would be okay I eventually got a member of the executive team to call me. He said it was really fine and they just don't like to encourage it. So I price matched the set. But toward the end of the run (6 months I think?) I did get a nasty gram.
> 
> Since then I've not done that, and have no intention to do it again. To me it's just not worth the hassle. Also, I'd like to be in other 99-cent box sets, but I don't want to be in a multi-author set that's intention to list ever again. I just feel that pressure to make the USAT makes people do crazy things.


That, of course, goes back to the responsibility being on the organizer for not overbooking the file or inviting a bazillion authors into the set in the first place if you're concerned about breaking the rules.

Sure, mistakes will happen. To all of us. That's another point where intent becomes a prime driver and you need to look at emerging patterns. A first box (like yours) that's in violation versus an organizer's 20th box that is.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> This topic came up in at least one of the sets I was in. It's currently live which indicates how recent it is. I say this not to discredit the above account, just to say that what happens in one set might not be what is happening in another.
> 
> The person identifiable as "J" was the co-manager of the set and makes it clear she is speaking for Rebecca.
> 
> http://imgur.com/GaM3rDu


I do want to mention one thing, the pre-order file and the file that goes live are not the same. Right now in a set that is about to go up for pre-order, I have a different book in it than I will have when it goes live. I haven't even started writing the book that will be included in the set. It is a full story, just not the one that'll stay in it (and it isn't in KU, either). You can argue that that isn't okay, but how many people upload a pre-order file that isn't their final file? Amazon allows this. I'm pretty sure the other retailers do as well.

Edited: I think it is important to mention the differences between sets. It shows that this isn't universal and shouldn't be treated as thus. I will also say Rebecca's sets are not the only ones who do the things here that are against TOS. In at least one case, one of the people speaking out was doing the same thing as she spoke out (probably hoping no one would look at her set). I don't know if she was the organizer, but she was in the set.

I do believe in a lot of cases (maybe most) none of these TOS violations are intentional. Many times I think the thought is that it might skirt close to the line, but that since other people get away with it, it's okay. For me, it matters that things are being changed and violations are being fixed.

As for box sets that are currently live, we have to remember that these sets were created months ago, months before Amazon started enforcing exclusivity. Now, having a book in KU and wide at the same time has never been okay, but I'll admit I didn't know it was a TOS violation to have a book up for pre-order in a box set and still in KU. I wasn't in any box sets when I didn't know this, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that thought it.

Do we know for sure that it is against TOS for box sets not to list titles while on pre-order? I see it said, and I see it broken a lot by many organizers, so clarification on this would be great. I don't even know my title for the book in an upcoming box set. I have a working title, but if I changed it and the set goes live with a different title, is that wrong?

Not only do I not want to break TOS myself, I want to make sure any set or project I'm involved in also doesn't break TOS. I think it is very important that these things are discussed, even without pointing fingers. There's a big difference between scams/shady business practices and crossing the TOS in regards to box sets. Scam has such a negative connotation and I believe 100% that most people involved in these sets aren't trying to scam Amazon, other authors, or the bestseller lists.

Ignorance isn't innocence of course which is why posts are so important. I fear that since this thread is so long and about so many things, many of the important pieces that everyone needs to know if they are going to join a box set led by anyone is being buried. I really appreciate the PayPal thread for this reason.


----------



## mdrake

crow.bar.beer said:


> It seems there's enough evidence for people to report suspected tax fraud. The PayPal thing in particular could suggest unreported income.


Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Call off the hounds. There's another reason why someone would want to be paid via F&F, and it has nothing to do with committing a felony. I think it got mentioned a few posts back but drowned out.

F&F means that...

*you dodge PayPal's fees. *

Here's how 1099 reporting works for the uninitiated: the payer doesn't have to file a 1099 with the IRS unless the $600 threshold has been crossed.

For example: if I pay an artist $750 for artwork, I probably have to file a 1099 for them. If I pay an artist $400 I do not. The artist, however,* still has to report that $400 as income* to the IRS. Let's say the artist never got a 1099 because I didn't file it, or it got lost in the mail, or whatever reason. The artist STILL has to report that income, 1099 or not.

If I pay the artist $400 for the work via PayPal, PayPal takes % (about 3%) of the artist's cut. If I pay the artist $400 via F&F, PayPal takes nothing. This is a violation of PayPal's TOS.

See the difference?

You might go 3%? Who cares? No, that 3% (it's roughly 3%--depends on the transaction) does add up quick.

If you're dealing a box set that that has a $500 buy in from 20 authors, that's $10,000. 3% of that is $300. That's not pocket change.

If you've ever dealt with PayPal as a vendor, or hung out with people who sell routinely through PayPal, you know that vendors trying to figure out ways to dodge, reduce, or otherwise avoid processing fees is not new or exotic. 

But it also doesn't mean that income is ultimately going unreported to authorities, either. There's a big (big!) difference between violating PayPal's TOS to avoid a 3% fee and committing a serious crime.


----------



## Fel Beasley

crow.bar.beer said:


> It seems there's enough evidence for people to report suspected tax fraud. The PayPal thing in particular could suggest unreported income.
> 
> https://www.irs.gov/individuals/how-do-you-report-suspected-tax-fraud-activity
> 
> Sometimes an audit is the best available tool to put an end to shady business practices...


It already has been reported. Months ago even. (Or at least I was told it had been reported by the person who was reporting it). I'm not privy to private matters dealing with the IRS and reports like this. But Amazon TOS violations, PayPal violations, and tax fraud have been reported for a few months. To the best of my knowledge, nothing has happened, at least not yet (it could still be investigated). I'm not telling anyone not to make reports based on how they feel about this situation, just that it has been reported.

I just don't want people to throw out tax fraud about someone without knowing for sure. Tax fraud is a huge, serious crime. Speculating isn't helpful.


----------



## Becca Mills

Concerned said:


> I just don't want people to throw out tax fraud about someone without knowing for sure. Tax fraud is a huge, serious crime. Speculating isn't helpful.


Agreed. Barring the appearance of concrete evidence, let's not go further down that road.


----------



## fredrickirl

As a new member of this community (maybe... after seeing all this I might want to look elsewhere... because ick.)

Can I offer a suggestion?

What do you want? From what I can gather it seems people are upset and they want to punish the person they feel wronged them. That sounds a lot like high school, and from various author groups I belong to on Facebook everyone is just rolling their eyes and hoping people will resolve this like adults.

So, for those people who are "anti-RH" what is your end goal? What would make you happy?

Refunds on past services?
A change in RH policies (no more "bullying", no more gifting copies?, no more box sets?)
An Apology?

Or is there nothing that will satisfy you?

I would be far more willing to support the cause if there was a stated goal somewhere. I'm sure I'll be flamed for this proposition, I'd be delighted to be proven wrong. For the record, I believe RH has done some shady things, but err on the side of ignorance to sound business practices and a attitude that escalates things <--- the exact attitude exhibited by the main people in this thread that have shown nothing else. I think people can come together and reach an agreement for changes that will keep people like me, who just want to be authors to enjoy this community. Expecting the other party to take the high ground is not strategy that adults pursue. Can we come up with something reasonable?

If there is something I missed, and there is already a plan drawn up, I apologize for missing it.

_Edited. Please review this thread's guidelines and drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## wheart

Concerned said:


> I will also say Rebecca's sets are not the only ones who do the things here that are against TOS. In at least one case, one of the people speaking out was doing the same thing as she spoke out (probably hoping no one would look at her set). I don't know if she was the organizer, but she was in the set.
> 
> I do believe in a lot of cases (maybe most) none of these TOS violations are intentional.


I agree. As far as _'probably hoping no one would look at her set' _, it could also be that that person might've not known they were violating and only until all these issues are being brought up here, did they then realize, _'Oops, I did/am doing this too. Yikes!'_ So yes, we all might think twice before condemning others so fast and heartily, lol.

How many of us read the TOS daily to make sure that something hasn't changed? As long as those who know now and are making those adjustments, the past shouldn't be held against them (for Rebecca and those who have been speaking out against her yet have unintentionally done the same thing).

Again, I'd like to thank everyone who is sharing what you know to be true for your own experiences being involved. All this matters. New info continues to be presented and all aspects need to be considered. I'm sure if this thread hadn't been created, those who are in boxed sets by other organizers (and those organizers themselves) might not have realized they too were needing to make changes to conform to the TOS.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

fredrickirl said:


> As a new member of this community (maybe... after seeing all this I might want to look elsewhere... because ick.)
> 
> Can I offer a suggestion?
> 
> What do you want? From what I can gather it seems people are upset and they want to punish the person they feel wronged them. That sounds a lot like high school, and from various author groups I belong to on Facebook everyone is just rolling their eyes and hoping people will resolve this like adults.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


People can roll their eyes however they want. This is business we're talking about, not a popularity contest. And if a marketing business has allegedly broken TOS, put their clients' accounts into danger, refused rightful refunds, or engaged in harassment that harmed their clients' business, then those are serious accusations.

That's what we're discussing. And, if you'll notice another thread here regarding crowd sourcing for legal action, I would argue that is potentially the most adult way to handle this possible.

As for what does anyone here want - how about we start with the truth. That's what all of the various first hand accounts here are for, for us to hear everyone's side of the story and allow people to determine for themselves how they best wish to conduct their business.


----------



## AshK

Stop the Bullies said:


> This thread has been so eye-opening for me, I still can't quite believe what I am reading. I too have a personal testimonial to share. What I have read so far in this thread makes me (more than) slightly nauseous. I have respect for the information I read on this forum, and I have come here seeking that information on a number of subjects for many years. What I am learning now is truly mind-blowing.
> 
> To think that long-standing, respected members of this community (such as Rick Gualtieri, Elizabeth West, Sela, Myra Scott, Becca Mills, and others) whose opinion I have learned to trust, could have led me so astray makes me sick.
> 
> For a week now, I have been a witness to these respected individuals attacking a woman who was once a helpful member here on this board. This attack is doing a lot of damage to her business and her reputation, yet it is allowed to go on. It will continue to do damage to her business and reputation, if it allowed to remain publically accessible.
> 
> Why is this happening?
> 
> To get some semblance of justice for people in a disagreement with her, or who have been wronged by her, in an eye-for-an-eye sort of way?
> 
> I was always taught that this is wrong. Because to allow it, is to cause chaos that forms of a lawless society where anyone with an axe and a score to settle can do so. In real life we have the police to create order, in online forums we have moderators. From what I have seen so far, they are not doing their job as they should.
> 
> *The goings on in the Boxed Sets Scams thread is the most horrific example of online bullying I have ever witnessed in real life. It is also the most terrifying example of censorship I have ever seen with my own eyes. *
> 
> The moderators are not only allowing it to go on, but enabling it by keeping this thread running, deleting posts and banning people who do not agree with this bashing and bullying, and want it to stop. I will add that I have, over the years, seen threads locked down for a lot less controversy than what I'm reading here.
> 
> Being someone who has researched (I'm an investigative journalist by trade) both sides of this argument as much as I could, I have to say things are not as cut and dry as this post would have casual readers believe. It is possible (and quite easy) to see both sides as having a point. To state this in plain terms, yes, I am sure people feel they were wronged, but I also know that there are two sides to every story.
> 
> This thread makes me doubt every single thing I have ever read on this forum. How many times were voices silenced by the mods because they were not in agreement with these long-standing members? I will forever wonder that now. And I will never again respect, or fully trust this site for information again. That such a thing as this thread could happen and be allowed to go on for so long with no signs of slowing down is horrifying. I think it should not only stop, but also be deleted.
> 
> Witnessing this thread unfolding makes me want to pull back and never publically post my opinion on a public forum again. For a thread that is supposed to be all about allowing people to come out of hiding and safely post experience, to have such an effect on someone leads me to conclude that it is not serving its purpose. I am not the only one with this kind of reaction to this thread. You can search publically accessible posts for confirmation of my words, no screenshots needed.
> 
> Furthermore, I am posting this under an anonymous account, because I am afraid of retaliation. I am afraid of having my business and life dragged out like this on a public forum by anyone who has 5 minutes of time to form an opinion and make a comment. As I'm sure are most people. I will point out that posting anonymously does not make my points any less valid. Many of the testimonials on this thread were made by anonymous people.
> 
> At first, it absolutely baffled me why the mods are allowing this to thread to go on. *But then a pattern started to emerge...*
> 
> Right now, this whole thread reads like one endless sea of people coming in to share their bad experiences with Rebecca Hamilton, and ones who have now reconsidered ever working with her again. The picture is very different elsewhere. But people are afraid to post their positive experiences here, because of what happens to those who try. It seems that if you have a wholly positive experience to share, you get attacked. It happened to several people already, and those posts are all still intact.
> 
> Seeing as the Internet is a very unregulated place, it is up to forum moderators to make sure discussions stay within socially (and legally) acceptable boundaries. Time and again on this thread I have seen the mods come down hard on anyone disagreeing with those that have a grievance against RH, while allowing those that have a grievance against RH to basically willy-nilly accuse anyone speaking against them of being:
> 
> a) A liar
> b) Blinded and naive
> c) A sock puppet
> d) Immoral and unethical
> e) A supporter of bullying behavior in general
> f) All of the above
> 
> I don't know how many posts have now been removed, but if you're interested in investigating this pattern for yourself, scroll back to a post that speaks up for Rebecca Hamilton, and then follow the responses (they are usually by Rick Gualtieri, Christina Garner, Myra Scott, Sela, Perry Constantine, She-La-ti-da, and a few other forum regulars). These responses are along the lines of the ones I listed above. Someone disagrees with those opposing RH and they get called a liar, a sock puppet, a supporter of online bullying, immoral, unethical.
> 
> After 7+ days of this thread being open, this is the pattern of behavior I have noticed over and over again. It almost seems as though it is orchestrated to play out that way.
> 
> I realize that this post might get heavily edited or even deleted, but I hope it does not. In the interest of freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I hope it will not.
> 
> *This is my personal experience with online bullying as concerns Rebecca Hamilton and the services she provides. Will this thread in any way prevent me from seeking her services? No. But because of it, I will avoid ever visiting Kboards.com again. *
> 
> Please remember that everyone is Innocent Until Proven Guilty. And that no one deserves to be the victim of online bullying. Then try to find it in your hearts to stop this frenzy.
> 
> _Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


Well-said.


----------



## MyraScott

I'll tell you what I want! Thanks for asking!









I want people not to feel alone or stupid or scared to speak out against bullying tactics, especially in a business setting. I want people to be able to share the stories that make them pull back or get out of publishing altogether.

I want people who are willing to do a minimum of research to know what they are signing up for, before they enter the Twilight Zone and are emotionally manipulated into "not letting all the others down" when they find out things aren't what they expected.

Up until now, if you searched these boards, you would only find praise for Rebecca Hamilton or GenreCrave because a) people were afraid to have their livelihood targeted and b) the threads that attempted to talk about the behavior were shut down.







That's not fair or balanced. Plenty of businesses on KBoards have both sides of the coin represented.

At this point, I'm thrilled with the people who, even if they can't identify themselves, have had the chance to be heard. It's frustrating when a business deal doesn't work out, but there is absolutely no expectation in most people's minds that if the deal goes bad, they are going to be attacked, shamed and isolated.









To say people should have known better... who expects that? Who looks for evidence that shame and harassment will be your punishment if you cross the organizer? It's not normal!! I think most people don't even know how to react because it's so... bizarre. And scary.









It's such an awful outcome, that people who've come here to insist it doesn't happen are afraid of it happening to them... think about that. It really is that awful that even the people who participate in it, maybe especially the people who participate in it, are desperate to not be put in the crosshairs. Who can blame them?

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Fel Beasley

wheart said:


> I agree. As far as _'probably hoping no one would look at her set' _, it could also be that that person might've not known they were violating and only until all these issues are being brought up here, did they then realize, _'Oops, I did/am doing this too. Yikes!'_ So yes, we all might think twice before condemning others so fast and heartily, lol.


I want to clarify (I'm not naming names because that isn't helpful for this situation), the person I'm talking about was posting everywhere, rallying others (including readers as well as other authors) to report specific sets of RH for the violation. Mass reporting. When I checked the set she was in, (which was easy to do), the set was also doing the same exact thing that she was telling people to report. That is disingenuous to me. It shows she knew that it was against TOS (or at the very least shows she believes it was against TOS) at the same time she was doing it. But I'm not if this is relevant to this post.

I'll be frank that I don't think the supposed violation actually violates TOS, but there are people who believe it does and are using it as another example of scamming.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

For some reason, this old song has been running through my head for days. I guess this is my own motivation. Other people will see it differently. We are all judged, for good or bad, by the choices we make and the company we keep. I need to know that I spoke out when I saw something wrong. My goal would be to have the wrongdoing and the bullying stop.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_s-Qk07KxA


----------



## TinyDancer

fredrickirl said:


> So, for those people who are "anti-RH" what is your end goal? What would make you happy?


I don't consider myself anti-Rebecca. I see myself as anti-bullying, anti-shady business tactics.

In regards to Rebecca, my advice to her would be to:

1. Apologize privately and publicly to the authors she has named and shamed.

2. In the apology take responsibility for the effect (personal and professional) that her bullying had on those individuals and the authors and readers who had to witness the behavior.

3. Publicly state that anyone engaging in bullying behavior whether it is directly naming an author or reader or not is unacceptable and how she will ensure that those types of posts will not be allowed on her business pages.

4. Provide refunds to all authors who did not receive their money back when the contracts were nullified or broken by her, or if they left due to being bullied (if the client willingly broke the contract then that is different).

5. Be transparent. Provide an accurate accounting for all boxset monies to the authors who were part of those groups whether they remain in the group or were kicked out (exception being those who were given their buy-in back). This also includes transparency for Book Blasts. If an author has booked a Book Blast with you, they should have the opportunity to see how you are promoting their book. Add them to your Book Blast groups, so they can see their blast in action. It takes less than a minute to add a user to a FB group and then delete them later and for the amount they are paying they deserve to see this. This would also cut down on the number of people complaining about the results of the service. If they can see that you have followed through on delivery, that your readers are claiming those books, and that it is not just a click farm there shouldn't be complaints.

6. Keep your personal life out of it. We all know Rebecca Hamilton is your pen name. This is where you interact with clients and readers. Keep it professional and have a personal page for your personal life where you share anything you want except professional dealings. If you want to rant and rave about a client do it in private messages. Everyone knows that what is said on FB, even personal pages, is not always private. Think of the people who have been fired because they complained about their boss or company on their private page.

7. As for gifting and giveaways. Keep them authentic. They are great for generating buzz, but if the goal is to get a certain # of sales to hit a list, then spending the money on those is useless. I earned my letters with you years ago and we didn't do mass gifting. We gave away a handful of copies each, but otherwise we worked our a**es off. You know how to successfully promote books without sidestepping the system, so do it right.

Would this make me happy? No, because nothing will ever erase the overwhelming anxiety, fear and horror her attacks have left me with as I've watched her behaviors escalate. But it will give everyone an opportunity to put all of this behind them. It will give her an opportunity to rebuild the indie author communities trust in her. It will give her victims peace to know that they no longer have to fear attacks from her or her friends.


----------



## Becca Mills

MyraScott said:


> It's such an awful outcome, that people who've come here to insist it doesn't happen are afraid of it happening to them... think about that. It really is that awful that even the people who participate in it, maybe especially the people who participate in it, are desperate to not be put in the crosshairs. Who can blame them?


I could be misremembering, but I think all the firmly pro-Rebecca people who've shared fears of retribution have been worried about being bullied or ostracized by anti-Rebecca people. I think at least one person currently involved in a set has said they feel caught in the middle, vulnerable to attack from either side, depending on what they choose to do, but I don't remember any pro-Rebecca folks saying they're afraid of her or her supporters.

So far as I'm remembering, we haven't yet seen concrete evidence of attacks on pro-Rebecca people by anti-Rebecca people.


----------



## suliabryon

MyraScott said:


> I'll tell you what I want! Thanks for asking!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want people not to feel alone or stupid or scared to speak out against bullying tactics, especially in a business setting. I want people to be able to share the stories that make them pull back or get out of publishing altogether.
> 
> I want people who are willing to do a minimum of research to know what they are signing up for, before they enter the Twilight Zone and are emotionally manipulated into "not letting all the others down" when they find out things aren't what they expected.
> 
> Up until now, if you searched these boards, you would only find praise for Rebecca Hamilton or GenreCrave because a) people were afraid to have their livelihood targeted and b) the threads that attempted to talk about the behavior were shut down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not fair or balanced. Plenty of businesses on KBoards have both sides of the coin represented.
> 
> At this point, I'm thrilled with the people who, even if they can't identify themselves, have had the chance to be heard. It's frustrating when a business deal doesn't work out, but there is absolutely no expectation in most people's minds that if the deal goes bad, they are going to be attacked, shamed and isolated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To say people should have known better... who expects that? Who looks for evidence that shame and harassment will be your punishment if you cross the organizer? It's not normal!! I think most people don't even know how to react because it's so... bizarre. And scary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's such an awful outcome, that people who've come here to insist it doesn't happen are afraid of it happening to them... think about that. It really is that awful that even the people who participate in it, maybe especially the people who participate in it, are desperate to not be put in the crosshairs. Who can blame them?
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


I find this entire response ironic, since I agree completely with Stop the Bullies' post above that, indeed, anyone with any positive experience to share or any kind of conflicting statement with the clear agenda of those on this thread are immediately and aggressively piled on by the names mentioned. Additionally, I am sickened and appalled that kboards.com has allowed the thread promoting Christina's gofundme. Rebecca is still a member of these same boards, and the mods allowed a thread that painted the crowdfunding as an effort "to stop bullying" when it is in fact an effort to pay for legal fees in a private contract dispute between two members of these very boards. It is wrong. Those of you named in Stop The Bullies' post (and no, it wasn't me under a different account, but I applaud everything that person said) should look in the mirror every time you accuse someone else of bullying.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

suliabryon said:


> I find this entire response ironic, since I agree completely with Stop the Bullies' post above that, indeed, anyone with any positive experience to share or any kind of conflicting statement with the clear agenda of those on this thread are immediately and aggressively piled on by the names mentioned.


Except that they haven't been. Go back and read. I think you'll see that those who have come here posting aggressively, essentially trying to stir the pot or call people liars, perhaps have been met with the same attitude they've brought into this. Regretful, but passions run high in discussions such as this.

However, there have also been plenty of posters who have come forward and simply stated that they've had a positive experience. Some have done so anonymously, fearing perhaps a backlash, but they've been treated respectfully here. Questions, discussion, yes. Outright attacked? That's painting a different picture than the reality of the situation.


----------



## MyraScott

suliabryon said:


> Those of you named in Stop The Bullies' post (and no, it wasn't me under a different account, but I applaud everything that person said) should look in the mirror every time you accuse someone else of bullying.


I think it's important for everyone to look in the mirror on this topic, and ask yourself, is this charity? Am I being a good member of the community?


----------



## Monique

REMINDER: Victoria Strauss of Writer Beware is looking into this and wants to hear your experience as a victim. Contact her with your story at beware [at] sfwa.org. Be sure to include names and documentation.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

suliabryon said:


> I find this entire response ironic, since I agree completely with Stop the Bullies' post above that, indeed, anyone with any positive experience to share or any kind of conflicting statement with the clear agenda of those on this thread are immediately and aggressively piled on by the names mentioned. Additionally, I am sickened and appalled that kboards.com has allowed the thread promoting Christina's gofundme. Rebecca is still a member of these same boards, and the mods allowed a thread that painted the crowdfunding as an effort "to stop bullying" when it is in fact an effort to pay for legal fees in a private contract dispute between two members of these very boards. It is wrong. Those of you named in Stop The Bullies' post (and no, it wasn't me under a different account, but I applaud everything that person said) should look in the mirror every time you accuse someone else of bullying.


Disagreement isn't bullying. Bullying is hateful PMs and messages and emails, naming and shaming on social media, upvoting/downvotinf reviews, one-stars. If that is going on anywhere, it's wrong. Flat wrong.


----------



## Becca Mills

suliabryon said:


> I find this entire response ironic, since I agree completely with Stop the Bullies' post above that, indeed, anyone with any positive experience to share or any kind of conflicting statement with the clear agenda of those on this thread are immediately and aggressively piled on by the names mentioned. Additionally, I am sickened and appalled that kboards.com has allowed the thread promoting Christina's gofundme. Rebecca is still a member of these same boards, and the mods allowed a thread that painted the crowdfunding as an effort "to stop bullying" when it is in fact an effort to pay for legal fees in a private contract dispute between two members of these very boards. It is wrong. Those of you named in Stop The Bullies' post (and no, it wasn't me under a different account, but I applaud everything that person said) should look in the mirror every time you accuse someone else of bullying.


Sulia, please provide links to specific places in the thread where you see people "piling on," as opposed to analyzing, discussing, or disputing concrete evidence or other members' assertions. Alleged instances of "piling on" will be examined by the moderators for possible removal/editing.

I hope those quoting Stop the Bullies took the time to read Betsy's information about how many posts have been deleted from the thread (a large majority of the posts deleted from this thread were critical of Rebecca, not supportive): http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,250491.msg3491979.html#msg3491979


----------



## Fel Beasley

Tulonsae said:


> I'm trying to make sure that I understand the TOS, so could you clarify what action you're referring to when you say you don't think it violates TOS? (I did look back at your original post, but I couldn't figure out which thing you meant.) Are you talking about the practice of uploading a dummy/different file during the pre-order stage?


I'm sorry. I should have been more clear. The violation I'm speaking about is not listing titles included in the box set during pre-order. It was said to readers, who probably don't even know where to check, that any box set not naming the titles included are doing so because they are violating TOS and are trying to fool Amazon.


----------



## suliabryon

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Except that they haven't been. Go back and read. I think you'll see that those who have come here posting aggressively, essentially trying to stir the pot or call people liars, perhaps have been met with the same attitude they've brought into this. Regretful, but passions run high in discussions such as this.
> 
> However, there have also been plenty of posters who have come forward and simply stated that they've had a positive experience. Some have done so anonymously, fearing perhaps a backlash, but they've been treated respectfully here. Questions, discussion, yes. Outright attacked? That's painting a different picture than the reality of the situation.


While I will say that you were the most neutral in your response to me, Rick, when I posted, no less than four others - perhaps more, I'd have to go back and count - responded that by stating my experiences I was therefore calling others liars, and some implied that I must therefore be supportive of bullying. You were the only one that I recall who asked a measured question, took my answer and said "fair enough" or words to that effect. I stopped commenting once it became clear that anything else I said would devolve into an "either I must be lying or they are" conflict. Here is the truth that no one seems to want to face: in a court of law, it's going to come down to who broke contract. All of this other she said/she said drama won't mean a thing. (Libel is a word people like to throw around without understanding what it actually takes to prove.) It all saddens me, because I have a lot of respect for some of the names on this thread as authors, as people who have built careers off the written word. And now, my perception of many of them will be forever altered.

Argument has been made that Rebecca deserves to have this happen because she knowingly violates Amazon's TOS. Really? I'm pretty sure AMAZON has things in place to deal with that, if such is even the case, and with the sheer number of times her detractors have reported her sets to Amazon only for Amazon to clear them, I would think people would get tired of trotting that out. But I'm sure everyone here thinks they know more than a multi-billion dollar company and its employees. When scammers are reported and removed, they have to come back under a different account. Rebecca has never had to do that, because Amazon has always found her to be compliant. Maybe think about that when you accuse her of scamming, breaking TOS, etc.

_Edited. No name-calling. Please read the thread guidelines before posting again. - Becca_


----------



## lilywhite

MyraScott said:


> It's frustrating when a business deal doesn't work out, but there is absolutely no expectation in most people's minds that if the deal goes bad, they are going to be attacked, shamed and isolated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To say people should have known better... who expects that? Who looks for evidence that shame and harassment will be your punishment if you cross the organizer? It's not normal!! I think most people don't even know how to react because it's so... bizarre. And scary.


*This really cannot be overstated.*

If I go down to True Value Hardware and buy a hammer, and I get home and find I got the wrong hammer, or the hammer breaks the first time I use it, or my husband bought a hammer the same day, I take it back and they give me my money. They don't chase me out into the street crying SHAME! SHAME! BURN THE WITCH because our business transaction didn't work out.

This. Is. Not. Normal.


----------



## BiancaSommerland

Quick question, because this has confused me through reading a lot of posts.

I see this as a discussion about a business. Sure, some complaints are more direct, referring to members of the business, but still regarding the business practices as a whole. Which in itself is not bullying.

If I take a flight and have a horrible experience, I'll likely complain with the name of the attendant to the airline first. Then, if nothing is done, I might go public with 'This man was rude to me when I was on this flight, refused XYZ that I was entitled to, and forced me to be late to a conference in Westeros. I was upset by the experience.'

Now, following this public complaint, some may personally attack the man. Which is wrong, I absolutely agree.

But if others come forward, sharing their own experiences, that's still complaining about his involvement regarding the business.

So is that the objection? If complaints are going beyond business, and becoming personal, that should absolutely stop. I think people are upset and need to take a moment to make sure they're sticking to valid complaints. And I'm not saying any I've seen aren't valid, but understandably, many on both sides are concerned.

I also think it needs to be clear the point of this whole thread is objections to the actions of a business. The owners and employees may be mentioned because of involvement in the situation. That's impossible to avoid.

But, IMO, the lines are being blurred which makes things confusing.


----------



## Lydniz

BiancaSommerland said:


> So is that the objection? If complaints are going beyond business, and becoming personal, that should absolutely stop. I think people are upset and need to take a moment to make sure they're sticking to valid complaints. And I'm not saying any I've seen aren't valid, but understandably, many on both sides are concerned.
> 
> I also think it needs to be clear the point of this whole thread is objections to the actions of a business. The owners and employees may be mentioned because of involvement in the situation. That's impossible to avoid.
> 
> But, IMO, the lines are being blurred which makes things confusing.


For any other organization this would be very true, but when an operator has built up such a cult of personality as Rebecca Hamilton has, it becomes very difficult to keep the business and the personal separate.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

suliabryon said:


> Rebecca is still a member of these same boards, and the mods allowed a thread that painted the crowdfunding as an effort "to stop bullying" when it is in fact an effort to pay for legal fees in a private contract dispute between two members of these very boards.


It was a private contract dispute right up until Rebecca posted publicly on Facebook about it. She did that months ago, with more than one post, and even then I did not speak publicly about her or the situation. I assume you're not suggesting that it's ok for her to make a private dispute public, but that I cannot defend myself in public? I assure you, I would have preferred to keep this out of the public eye altogether and took steps to ensure that happening. Have you voiced your same concerns with her that you've shared here? That business matters should be kept between only the involved parties?



C. Gockel said:


> Yes. This is ground for libel.


My attorney wholeheartedly agrees.



Rosalind J said:


> For some reason, this old song has been running through my head for days. I guess this is my own motivation. Other people will see it differently. We are all judged, for good or bad, by the choices we make and the company we keep. I need to know that I spoke out when I saw something wrong. My goal would be to have the wrongdoing and the bullying stop.
> 
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_s-Qk07KxA


Thanks, Rosalind. I needed that.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

suliabryon said:


> Here is the truth that no one seems to want to face: in a court of law, it's going to come down to who broke contract. All of this other she said/she said drama won't mean a thing. (Libel is a word people like to throw around without understanding what it actually takes to prove.)
> 
> _Edited. No name-calling. Please read the thread guidelines before posting again. - Becca_


That I 100% agree with (albeit maybe not the part about people not wanting to face it . Once this hits the court, all of this is elementary. They'll be looking for facts, not hearsay. Was a contract broken and is reimbursement due.

I'm not privy to Christina's thoughts or legal counsel, but it's possible it might involve more than just that, but at the core of it whatever is brought will ultimately be up to a judge to decide.


----------



## Fel Beasley

I personally believe rallying people to make reports for violations is a form of bullying that doesn't just affect the organizer but every single author in a set. If you believe something is a violation, report it. Trying to garner support for a mass reporting not only wastes the time of Amazon, it also makes them distrustful of further reports. 

But others may not see it as such. 

As for no proof that those defending Rebecca aren't being targeted, other than personal testimony, I haven't seen anything but personal testimony calling out the bullying by Rebecca. As for naming and shaming, it's happening all over the place, including in this thread. I believe that the mods have done their best to modify the posts doing so, but that doesn't mean it never happened, nor does it mean that those who are worried of retaliation are in the wrong for feeling that fear. 

Personally? If someone is going to attack me, I'm probably going to ignore them. But being told my account is being reported because I'm violating TOS, that is not okay, especially since I'm not even in any box sets. No one can be blamed for the actions of someone else but this very thread puts a target on the back of either anyone speaking out in favor or even anyone in a box set run by Rebecca. 

Since I know I'm not violating TOS, it probably won't destroy my career, but I've personally dealt with trying to fix mistakes with Amazon and I don't want to have to go through that nightmare for no other reason that I said something. I have not and will not bully, one star, or purposely cause hurt against any other author, that doesn't mean I can't be afraid of speaking out. 

I 100% support stopping bullies, standing up for those who have been attacked, hurt, and mistreated. I hope so much that when this situation with Rebecca is resolved one way or another that those vehemently supporting the stop the bullies campaign continues to go after anyone else that is doing these things. More likely than not, business will return to normal, these things will still happen. This doesn't feel like a campaign to stop bullying, it feels like a campaign that targets only one person. How is that not just another form of bullying? Is it okay just because Rebecca is guilty in your eyes? She hurts people so it's okay to hurt her back? She deserves what she gets? I can't stomach that. I just can't. Calling out shady business practices doesn't require naming names unless there is substantial proof from an unbiased source (like Victoria). Even the passive voice article states that the claims on the website haven't been substantiated by the Passive Voice, and that doesn't name names.


----------



## suliabryon

TinyDancer said:


> I don't consider myself anti-Rebecca. I see myself as anti-bullying, anti-shady business tactics.
> 
> In regards to Rebecca, my advice to her would be to:
> 
> 1. Apologize privately and publicly to the authors she has named and shamed.
> 
> 2. In the apology take responsibility for the effect (personal and professional) that her bullying had on those individuals and the authors and readers who had to witness the behavior.
> 
> 3. Publicly state that anyone engaging in bullying behavior whether it is directly naming an author or reader or not is unacceptable and how she will ensure that those types of posts will not be allowed on her business pages.
> 
> 4. Provide refunds to all authors who did not receive their money back when the contracts were nullified or broken by her, or if they left due to being bullied (if the client willingly broke the contract then that is different).
> 
> 5. Be transparent. Provide an accurate accounting for all boxset monies to the authors who were part of those groups whether they remain in the group or were kicked out (exception being those who were given their buy-in back). This also includes transparency for Book Blasts. If an author has booked a Book Blast with you, they should have the opportunity to see how you are promoting their book. Add them to your Book Blast groups, so they can see their blast in action. It takes less than a minute to add a user to a FB group and then delete them later and for the amount they are paying they deserve to see this. This would also cut down on the number of people complaining about the results of the service. If they can see that you have followed through on delivery, that your readers are claiming those books, and that it is not just a click farm there shouldn't be complaints.
> 
> 6. Keep your personal life out of it. We all know Rebecca Hamilton is your pen name. This is where you interact with clients and readers. Keep it professional and have a personal page for your personal life where you share anything you want except professional dealings. If you want to rant and rave about a client do it in private messages. Everyone knows that what is said on FB, even personal pages, is not always private. Think of the people who have been fired because they complained about their boss or company on their private page.
> 
> 7. As for gifting and giveaways. Keep them authentic. They are great for generating buzz, but if the goal is to get a certain # of sales to hit a list, then spending the money on those is useless. I earned my letters with you years ago and we didn't do mass gifting. We gave away a handful of copies each, but otherwise we worked our a**es off. You know how to successfully promote books without sidestepping the system, so do it right.
> 
> Would this make me happy? No, because nothing will ever erase the overwhelming anxiety, fear and horror her attacks have left me with as I've watched her behaviors escalate. But it will give everyone an opportunity to put all of this behind them. It will give her an opportunity to rebuild the indie author communities trust in her. It will give her victims peace to know that they no longer have to fear attacks from her or her friends.


1. Shouldn't those who have falsely accused her of wrongdoing and hurt her business apologize to her?

2. What about the bullying she has endured? Or those close to her? On Twitter, her cover artist was attacked yesterday. A photo of her was posted, followed by a tweet about the orcas at Seaworld and how people should be careful of splash zones. Just one example.

3. She has stated this several times, and in fact I have seen two comments from her regarding this in her group today alone.

4. She has provided full refunds in the rare instance in which she was the one asking the author to leave. She only does not provide refunds (and this is seriously stated everywhere with her TOS - in the group, on the website, in the message people get being invited to the boxed sets) if the author is the one breaking contract, HOWEVER, they still earn back their buy in when the set goes live from royalties, just like everyone else. Effectively, a refund through royalty share, even though they broke contract and backed out.

5. She has already done. She is the most transparent promoter I know. Also, Book Blasts don't get FB groups. It's a service just like signing up for Robin Reads or even Bookbub - none of which provide what you are asking for.

6. That is your opinion, and has nothing to do with anything. Plenty of authors are super private and share nothing of their personal lives on their pen name, and plenty DO share a lot. Approval or disapproval of this is personal opinion and has nothing to with morals, ethics, etc.

7. She DOES use gifting in exactly the way you state. I have said it before, I will say it again. The boxed set sales are sales. A very small percentage are attributed to gifting, and Amazon clearly has no problem with it so why does anyone else? Example: my set had over 15k sales. Most of them were preorders. A few hundred during release week were gifted by the 20+ authors in the set. And yes, we worked out a**es off to get that many sales. We earned out letters and I'm really tired of all the intimation that we didn't.


----------



## Pizzazz

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Did this literally just turn into one big advertisement for potential clients to join her Facebook group?
> 
> Brava.


LOL! Rebecca is one of the smartest women I've ever known, and that's all I'll say about it.


----------



## Lydniz

Pizzazz said:


> LOL! Rebecca is one of the smartest women I've ever known, and that's all I'll say about it.


I don't think anyone would give you an argument there.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Lydniz said:


> For any other organization this would be very true, but when an operator has built up such a cult of personality as Rebecca Hamilton has, it becomes very difficult to keep the business and the personal separate.


I keep seeing anyone supporting Rebecca as being called minions, members of a cult, flying monkies. This isn't just reporting the misdoings of a business, there are attacks on Rebecca's character as a person outside of the business, accusations, and implications about the character of people associating with said business.

I keep seeing over and over from those relating personal experiences of bullying that Rebecca sent people after them, didn't actually do it herself. But no one is naming names (and I'm not saying they should), but it paints anyone associated with Rebecca, those who work for her or work with her or even her readers as suspects. I believe most people wouldn't jump to the conclusion without proof of a person's transgressions, but plenty will.

If this was about Rebecca's business, it would be about GenreCrave (you know the business she owns), it wouldn't be about her as a person, it wouldn't bring up stuff that she did before GenreCrave was created, unless specific to another owned business by Rebecca (such as Hungry Author). This is not just a thread about bad business practices. This is a thread (and outside of this thread) is an attack on character which for me is far more damaging than someone choosing not to do business with me in the future.

Emotions are high. People personally involved in this are upset, angry, hurt. We have 50+ pages about a person. I don't care if you have sympathy for her or not, I question anyone who wants to say this is only about a business and not about a person, as well.


----------



## GeneDoucette

"You're bullying her by calling her a bully" has to be the most topsy-turvy argument I've seen in a while.


----------



## MyraScott

Concerned said:


> Emotions are high. People personally involved in this are upset, angry, hurt. We have 50+ pages about a person. I don't care if you have sympathy for her or not, I question anyone who wants to say this is only about a business and not about a person, as well.


I think that says a lot, in and of itself.

This thread isn't about one person. It's about a lot of people who've been harassed in a very personal, damaging way. To make it about one person again, minimizes what others have been through. The legal fund has 165 backers... *165 people who agree this is a problem*. That's a lot of people who are tired of these practices.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Dpock

suliabryon said:


> When scammers are reported and removed, they have to come back under a different account. Rebecca has never had to do that, because Amazon has always found her to be compliant. Maybe think about that when you accuse her of scamming, breaking TOS, etc.


That's irrelevant. The dispute isn't with Amazon.


----------



## BiancaSommerland

Concerned said:


> I question anyone who wants to say this is only about a business and not about a person, as well.


Well then...

I would think the person running the business would prefer the direction leaning toward it being about the business. Which is why I asked. Either way, there's plenty of business related info here for people to make up their own minds.

If the business and the personal can't be separated, that's an issue in itself.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Concerned said:


> If this was about Rebecca's business, it would be about GenreCrave (you know the business she owns), it wouldn't be about her as a person, it wouldn't bring up stuff that she did before GenreCrave was created, unless specific to another owned business by Rebecca (such as Hungry Author). This is not just a thread about bad business practices. This is a thread (and outside of this thread) is an attack on character which for me is far more damaging than someone choosing not to do business with me in the future.
> 
> Emotions are high. People personally involved in this are upset, angry, hurt. We have 50+ pages about a person. I don't care if you have sympathy for her or not, I question anyone who wants to say this is only about a business and not about a person, as well.


I agree that we should avoid name calling. It doesn't help either side.

However, it's very difficult to separate Rebecca the person from Rebecca the business person. Look at any of her posts discussing this issue here or on FB. There's mention of her kids, her family, etc etc. She herself can't separate the business from the person, which makes it extraordinarily difficult for anyone here to, especially when we're up against counter arguments that we're taking food out the mouths of kids.

I would be more than happy to make this a case of discussing nothing more than XYZ company, but in this case that company IS that person and vice versa.


----------



## Fel Beasley

MyraScott said:


> I think that says a lot, in and of itself.
> 
> This thread isn't about one person. It's about a lot of people who've been harassed in a very personal, damaging way. To make it about one person again, minimizes what others have been through. The legal fund has 165 backers... *165 people who agree this is a problem*. That's a lot of people who are tired of these practices.
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


And if Rebecca made a gofundme to pay for her legal costs (which has been suggested to her by plenty of people) and was funded by X number of people, does that mean she's in the right? Or does it mean that x number of people believe her instead of Christina? And again, the case itself isn't about bullying, it may be a result of unacceptable bullying, but Christina isn't suing for that. It's perfectly fine to stand up and say it is not okay that Christina or anyone didn't receive a refund and should and support bringing that to court, but would the fund have been funded so quickly if the word bully wasn't used? I have no doubt it still would have been funded because I know a lot of people agree on this issue, but the line is blurred. I've seen people saying that if you don't support the gofundme you are supporting bullying.

I'm seeing everything directed toward one person. Of course, as someone standing in the splash zone, I can't argue against my bias.

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## PhoenixS

suliabryon said:


> 5. She has already done. She is the most transparent promoter I know. Also, Book Blasts don't get FB groups. It's a service just like signing up for Robin Reads or even Bookbub - none of which provide what you are asking for.


Can you talk a bit more about the Book Blasts and what they are, if not FB groups? Robin Reads and BookBub, of course, are newsletters with websites and FB pages that are open for anyone to check out and join. I can see Proof of Delivery even without signing up (and the Post Office is the only company I can think of that tacks on Proof of Delivery fees). When I just now visited the Book Blast sign-up at GenreCrave, it says:



> _This is not a newsletter feature. _This is a direct marketing campaign. We have various segments of readers on social media who have signed up for us to send them a message if we find a book we think they might like.
> ...
> Please note: There is no way to view a Book Blast because that is done via a direct marketing campaign. Here is an example of the kind of proof we can provide that you blast ran. There is an extra fee for "Proof of Delivery" same as most companies have if you want to add tracking to a order you've placed. That said, your results will be clearly measurable by your ranking increase and sales.


http://www.genrecrave.com/schedule-today/

When I click the example link, I find I'm unfortunately not a member of the FB page that contains that example. It doesn't even let me know which group it may be.



> Sorry, this content isn't available right now
> The link you followed may have expired, or the page may only be visible to an audience you're not in.


https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.1197136197027101&type=3

Can you provide that example for us, please?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Concerned said:


> And again, the case itself isn't about bullying, it may be a result of unacceptable bullying, but Christina isn't suing for that.


It would be unwise of anyone to presume they know my legal strategy.


----------



## Sad Author

suliabryon said:


> 3. She has stated this several times, and in fact I have seen two comments from her regarding this in her group today alone.


suliabryon- this does not negate the vicious attack she set on me (I will only speak for myself). The person in question blocks most, if not all (but I can't know this for sure), people she decides to speak against from her groups and personal page. So none of us can see if she asked people to be kind or expressed remorse for any hurt she has caused in the past (although I do not think there was an apology).

I'm a big believer in forgiveness and if the person in question was truly taking steps to heal the hurt she has caused then I would be willing to give that a chance.

But these are yet to happen.

(edited for a missing word)


----------



## Fel Beasley

Markus Croft said:


> Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if she sends her... let's call them fans... to attack people because of goings wrong in business agreements, isn't that fair game in a discussion of business practices?
> 
> It reminds me of Beyonce's fans... She said "Rachel with the good hair" in one song and they started posting lemonade and bee emojis and threats all over Rachel Rey's social media accounts. They had the wrong Rachel, but the swarm didn't care. That's a silly example, but people on a lower scale can be hurt financially. They aren't Rachel Ray. They aren't Beyonce. They have a right to speak up and defend themselves.
> 
> There's also one other distinction I'd make... Beyonce didn't ask or instruct her fans to do anything shady. Can RH say the same? Screenshots show otherwise.
> 
> https://twitter.com/IamScamilton/status/861039697396674562/photo/1
> 
> Edit: Added link so someone doesn't ask.


Here's the problem with the minions and cult comments. They are being directed at anyone knowingly supporting her. It is such a general statement that it can be applied to anyone. Heck, I've been called those very things and it makes me shake my head. Doing so much as writing a supporting comment on one of her Facebook posts is enough to be grouped as supporting bullying.

As for the example of Beyonce and Rachel Ray, do you blame Beyonce in that situation? Or was it people, her fans, that by their own actions took it upon themselves? If we're going to hold up Rebecca as responsible for people's actions based on her words, well everyone in this thread is responsible for the actions of those who are using their words to bully, threaten, and mistreat others.

As for asking to downvote one stars, I'm not saying it's okay. I wouldn't do it. But come on? There are plenty of authors that ask for their fans to downvote or upvote reviews that don't get called out. I have yet to see Rebecca telling anyone to one-star, PM harassment, or attack someone else. Is she responsible for the actions of those who follow her that do those things based on something she says? Maybe. I'm not sure one way or another because I see it done by others who later say they can't control what their people do. But I don't need to see proof. Nobody owes me anything. And my opinion doesn't really matter in the scheme of things. I am simply not seeing other people being called out for doing the same things, specifically naming and shaming. If people don't want to call out their friends, I'm not saying they have to. But don't twist this situation into an anti-bullying campaign and only name one person. Rebecca isn't a cancer that once removed makes the indie community healthy again.

_I would hope any references to "minions," "cult members," and "flying monkies" have been edited out of the thread. If you see any, please report them. NB, I do see Lydniz's reference to a "cult of personality." That phrase is under moderator discussion. - Becca_


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Concerned said:


> I am simply not seeing other people being called out for doing the same things, specifically naming and shaming.


Can you please provide examples of this? I've seen none, and myself and others have been asking for them.

I actually know the identity of one person being very vocal in her support of Rebecca in this thread, and I have not called her out here, on Facebook, or anywhere else. She has a right to her opinion and her anonymity.


----------



## MyraScott

Concerned said:


> And if Rebecca made a gofundme to pay for her legal costs (which has been suggested to her by plenty of people) and was funded by X number of people, does that mean she's in the right?


No, it means x number of people agree with her case.

Like I just said, so far 165 people agree _there is a problem, _enough to support Christina's case with their own money.

Are you seriously trying to say... after 50 pages of discussion and lots of personal testimony... that there isn't a problem? That people are simply lying? That Rebecca Hamilton is the innocent victim of all of these people who,_ through no act of her own_, decided to perjure themselves to *make her sad*?

_Edited. - Becca_


----------



## Fel Beasley

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I agree that we should avoid name calling. It doesn't help either side.
> 
> However, it's very difficult to separate Rebecca the person from Rebecca the business person. Look at any of her posts discussing this issue here or on FB. There's mention of her kids, her family, etc etc. She herself can't separate the business from the person, which makes it extraordinarily difficult for anyone here to, especially when we're up against counter arguments that we're taking food out the mouths of kids.
> 
> I would be more than happy to make this a case of discussing nothing more than XYZ company, but in this case that company IS that person and vice versa.


I don't necessarily disagree, but people need to remember that the company is not Rebecca. The company GenreCrave employs other people. Have those people bullied others? Are they minions? Is everyone that works for GenreCrave responsible for all the actions of the company or responsible for all the actions of the person in charge of it? If the CEO is guilty of embellishment, is everyone else working with them also guilty?

This is why there needs to be a line. There are two issues. The business practices of GenreCrave and the actions of Rebecca Hamilton. Did GenreCrave bully Christina or the other authors who were attacked, one starred, too scared to speak out in fear of retaliation? No. We can argue whether Rebecca was professional or unprofessional in her business dealings, but we really have to separate the issues because otherwise everyone who works for GenreCrave are being accussed of everything Rebecca is.

Maybe it's semantics. Maybe it doesn't matter. But other people are being affected. Those authors in the box sets are affected. Employees of GenreCrave are affected.

You, Rick, have kept all your comments directed at the business practices, as have others, but I can't agree that it's okay to lump Rebecca's personal dealings with her professional. They should be separated, even if it's just to protect those that aren't responsible for the dealings outside their jobs.


----------



## Sad Author

Concerned said:


> If we're going to hold up Rebecca as responsible for people's actions based on her words, well everyone in this thread is responsible for the actions of those who are using their words to bully, threaten, and mistreat others.


Yes. If anyone is doing anything to bully and mistreat people they should be held responsible. And I have seen some of the behavior/words of the "nonsupporters" of the person in question to move beyond appropriate because it could not be backed up with facts.

I think the reason I'm struggling to understand why some don't want the person in question to be held responsible is the abusive behavior has been going on long enough (years) that the 'person in question' is no longer innocently inciting her supporters. I can forgive a mistake/one-time event. But that is not what this is. Although I am blocked from seeing what she says I am fully aware that the types of posts which cause the issues continue on a very regular basis.

But let me be clear. Standing up for things that are wrong and making your voice heard is not bullying. And if this were an incident of one person's word against another it could be difficult to come to a conclusion who is telling the truth. But that is not the general case in this situation. This is many, many people's words (some which are backed up with evidence, others which are not for various reasons, including a very real fear of retaliation) against one person's word.

Don't let the few who might have crossed a line negate the words of the others which are simply standing up to fight a wrong.


----------



## David VanDyke

Accusing someone of "bullying" is rapidly becoming the [way] to shut down opposition.

In other words, people get involved in a discussion, often a passionate discussion, and when they meet passionate opposition, they play the "bully" card, labeling their opponents as a way of smearing them.

Even worse is when it's a general accusation in the passive voice, "I've been bullied here by so many people." Well, it's hard to prove a negative.

But here's the thing: mere passionate opposition is not bullying. Even inappropriate namecalling or unjust accusations are not necessarily bullying. Bullying by its very nature is using power in a clear and unjust manner in order to hurt someone or gain compliance in opposition to their free will. I'd suggest that it's very difficult to bully someone in a public, well-moderated forum.

Real bullying (as opposed to merely arguing vociferously) includes things designed to unfairly and significantly damage a person's public image or career, things which unduly use power outside the scope of the reasoned discussion or argument, such as going elsewhere to post attacks that can't be responded to (usually because the forum where the attacks take place won't allow opposing views), or by unlawfully breaking contracts and keeping/taking money, or by posting or manipulating reviews or anything else that damages a person's legitimately earned livelihood (whistleblowing wrongdoing would not qualify as bullying).

It's a standard tactic of the genuine bully, blackmailer or extortionist (not accusing anyone in particular, speaking in general here) to use unfair tactics, unlawful threats (even if only civilly rather than criminally unlawful), and unfair and unlawful enticements (favoritism of the "in crowd" or co-wrongdoers). *None of that can really go on here in this forum, as long as the moderators stay on top of things.
*
So I suggest that any accusations of bullying here in this forum are, _prima facie,_ as near to impossible as to be declared so.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Undecided

I debated practically all day about whether to bother posting again, because the main feeling that I got from posting yesterday was that it was pointless. 

My original post neither condemned nor condoned Rebecca, but said that there was likely more to ALL of it, that we aren't privy to. While there were some admissions that this may be the case, a lot of responses were along the lines of "read the thread again" (and FYI, I've read it multiple times or "this person's experience says differently." 

If I feel like I can't express my NEUTRAL opinion  safely here, then is it any wonder that the vast majority of PRO-Rebecca people are posting anonymously and only a few times? That suggests that they feel there is something to be worried about, and if they're supporting Rebecca then I very much doubt it's her they're scared of. 

I'd ask the Mods not to cut any of that. I know it isn't fact, but it's how I've been led to feel, as someone involved in a RH box set but not having seen anything sketchy, by THIS thread. Not by anything that Rebecca has done. 

I'd also like to add that a couple of us have mentioned the pronoun thing and avoiding the forced price matching, which was mentioned as an issue. The response of this thread was immediately to look at how she COULD be breaking the TOS in sets that aren't even live yet. However, as a side note, I was led to believe that you can ask for ASINs to be linked by amazon. I might be wrong, but it would make sense how indies could republish and keep their reviews if they'd been published by someone else. 

So yes, I'm done. Just the existence of this thread and everything going on led to an anxiety attack earlier, and I don't want to go back to that stage of my life. 

Even though I don't believe that Rebecca is entirely innocent, this thread has opened my eyes to who I'm more sympathetic towards. Bullying is wrong in all it's forms. And the way that some members have conducted themselves on this thread cuts close to the line. And I won't be back to name names. Nor would I anyway. Because I don't see the point. Nothing I say is going to change your minds about how you're conducting this side of things. Just like nothing I say would convince Rebecca to change the way she's dealing with things.


----------



## wheart

Regarding 'standing up for something' ... I'm standing up for 'fairness' . That's why it's good to get both sides of the story, and having firsthand testimonials and also evidence is important. Actually, some of the links to screenshots of dialogs posted (even by anti-Rebecca people) have shown, for me, Rebecca taking the high road in many instances when she was attacked on social media first. She's admitted and apologized in several places for mistakes she's made and even for behaving badly when her emotions got the better of her and hadn't responded amicably.

As I've said in a previous post way back, what many times seems like bullying is just sides defending a position.

Some who have claimed being bullied may have actual claims while others might not. Only until we can see the entire interaction of both parties can those (who can keep an objective mindset to whether there's bullying or just disagreements/defensive stances going on), decide for ourselves which is which.

Somebody a ways back made a comment that a member ('Honesty', I think it was) was 'attacking' but I didn't read their posts that way. I didn't see their questions as being that of 'attacking.' This is what I mean by sometimes what feels like bullying/attacking/what-have-you might not be viewed that way by someone else reading the entire dialog from all sides.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> Once this hits the court, all of this is elementary. They'll be looking for facts, not hearsay.


And this is why I am for having this done legally. Once and for all, the courts can decide the verdict based on evidence. In fact, as already suggested, Rebecca should indeed do a gofundme drive as well, to help her with her legal fees.


----------



## Fel Beasley

Markus Croft said:


> This has been around for a while. If we're not tolerant of their intolerance then we must also be intolerant. If we fight back against a bully, then we ourselves become bullies. Some live in a world divorced from right and wrong.


You can call out bullying without descending to the same place. Not everyone here is doing that. I would say most, at least in this thread, are not bullying people. But we have no clear definition of what constitutes the line between bullying and not bullying. Can anyone read this thread and say that there hasn't been attacks on people's characters (not in their books)? There's been speculation of laws being broken, implications of things that may or may not have happened. Christina has stated that she feels her character is being attacked by false accusations. She is put in a position to either defend herself or not. I've seen no one say that this is bullying. I don't think it's bullying. And yet if Rebecca does the same thing, that is bullying by naming and shaming someone and directing her minions against whoever is being named. I don't agree that it's good business to share conflict disputs publiclily, but it happens. And sometimes, in some of those screenshots being shown, the other side isn't being shown, aka the naming of Rebecca by someone else and her response to that. And if Rebecca is guilty of not actually naming but everyone knows who she is talking about, then those that do the same thing need to be held accountable for it.

For the record, I'm not referring to Christina or her dispute. I know words can be misunderstood or meaning being unclear.

Call out a bully. Call out their behavior, but there's a line. People can say anything they want about someone else and people can take what they want from it. But when unsubstantiated claims are being repeated, or things that have been proven to be false but are never cleared off, over and over by anyone and then used to hurt that person's business? That's bullying. It also diminishes the credibility of those telling the truth.

I know the mods don't agree with me on this, but keeping the business practices of GenreCrave that can be proven with facts along with personal testimony that can't be proven (and I don't count screenshots), and I include both those who support and don't support Rebecca, in the same thread titled box set scams, blurs too many lines and makes me uncomfortable.

Saying "_If we're not tolerant of their intolerance then we must also be intolerant._ simplifies a situation that is far from simple. I think this thread goes too far in places. I don't think it's objective but I also don't think it shouldn't exist at all. What the line is between acceptable and not acceptable isn't up to me, it's up to the mods. But please don't dismiss those that aren't comfortable with things as trying to shut down the conversation or telling anyone that bullying is okay.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Concerned said:


> I can't agree that it's okay to lump Rebecca's personal dealings with her professional. They should be separated, even if it's just to protect those that aren't responsible for the dealings outside their jobs.


I never said it was okay. It's just very difficult to separate them. It's hard to win a debate arguing TOS, when the other party is continually throwing in references to family. Factual as the first might be, the other side is fighting an entirely different battle.

Think of us in a reversed position. You're telling the audience that I didn't provide a service you paid for, but every time I - acting as CEO - respond, I also throw in a comment about how sad I am that I had to put my beloved dog down (just an example, he's actually outside right now barking at squirrels . You might be in the right or you might not be, but those heartstrings I'm pulling are almost guaranteed to make people paint you as a jerk for daring to question me in my time of need.

In that instance I'm crossing lines between my business and me, yet I'm asking you not to.

Again, not saying it's right, but it makes it very difficult to even have the conversation.


----------



## Sad Author

wheart said:


> She's admitted and apologized in several places for mistakes she's made and even for behaving badly when her emotions got the better of her and hadn't responded amicably.


I struggle with this because, and correct me if I'm wrong, she has apologized to the group... not the wronged person.

If this is the case it feels extremely hollow to me and much for show that anything else.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> It would be unwise of anyone to presume they know my legal strategy.


Please don't threaten me. It isn't the first time you've done so. I stand by anything I've said, so don't fling the whole threat of suing me for libel.

I mean really? My first reaction to that was fear. Is that okay? Don't become what you are accusing Rebecca of being. Believe me or not, this whole situation has left me a mess. I've cried. Right now I'm shaking. I've had my Amazon account reported, I've been sent threatening PMs by newly created FB accounts. But that's okay. I mean, who knows. Maybe I'm one of those flying monkies going around hurting people. That makes it okay, right?

_I honestly do not see Christina's comment as threatening, Concerned. I see her as saying "don't presume the bullying aspect of this situation is not part of my lawsuit -- maybe it is, maybe it isn't." It goes without saying that threats are not tolerated here, so please PM me if you have further thoughts to share on the matter, and the moderators will consider the issue further. - Becca_


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Concerned said:


> Please don't threaten me. It isn't the first time you've done so. I stand by anything I've said, so don't fling the whole threat of suing me for libel.
> 
> I mean really? My first reaction to that was fear. Is that okay? Don't become what you are accusing Rebecca of being. Believe me or not, this whole situation has left me a mess. I've cried. Right now I'm shaking. I've had my Amazon account reported, I've been sent threatening PMs by newly created FB accounts. But that's okay. I mean, who knows. Maybe I'm one of those flying monkies going around hurting people. That makes it okay, right?


Saying you don't know her legal strategy is threatening her? Huh? In whose world?


----------



## MyraScott

Concerned said:


> ChristinaGarner said:
> 
> 
> 
> It would be unwise of anyone to presume they know my legal strategy.
> 
> 
> 
> Please don't threaten me. It isn't the first time you've done so. I stand by anything I've said, so don't fling the whole threat of suing me for libel.
> 
> I mean really? My first reaction to that was fear. Is that okay? Don't become what you are accusing Rebecca of being. Believe me or not, this whole situation has left me a mess. I've cried. Right now I'm shaking. I've had my Amazon account reported, I've been sent threatening PMs by newly created FB accounts. But that's okay. I mean, who knows. Maybe I'm one of those flying monkies going around hurting people. That makes it okay, right?
Click to expand...

If you think this is a threat, you probably haven't been threatened before. This isn't directed at you, even!

Are you afraid of being named in her lawsuit? Because then I guess I can see it as a threat... other than that, I don't know what you see here that we don't.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Can you please provide examples of this? I've seen none, and myself and others have been asking for them.
> 
> I actually know the identity of one person being very vocal in her support of Rebecca in this thread, and I have not called her out here, on Facebook, or anywhere else. She has a right to her opinion and her anonymity.


I've been given examples of what is happening to me and what I've heard from friends. What do you want? Screenshots? I don't have any. I don't even know how to screenshot on my computer. So you can either believe me or not. I can't make you. If you want to see it happen, just look at that twitter handle that people are accusing is you (which tells me you've at least seen it). I don't think it's you. I think you've been for the most part professional and level-headed. But no one is calling out that and that is simply the most public. What happens in private groups or on people's private pages isn't accessible to me.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Think of us in a reversed position. You're telling the audience that I didn't provide a service you paid for, but every time I - acting as CEO - respond, I also throw in a comment about how sad I am that I had to put my beloved dog down (just an example, he's actually outside right now barking at squirrels . You might be in the right or you might not be, but those heartstrings I'm pulling are almost guaranteed to make people paint you as a jerk for daring to question me in my time of need.
> 
> In that instance I'm crossing lines between my business and me, yet I'm asking you not to.


Excellent example.


----------



## Fel Beasley

MyraScott said:


> No, it means x number of people agree with her case.
> 
> Like I just said, so far 165 people agree _there is a problem, _enough to support Christina's case with their own money.
> 
> Are you seriously trying to say... after 50 pages of discussion and lots of personal testimony... that there isn't a problem? That people are simply lying? That Rebecca Hamilton is the innocent victim of all of these people who,_ through no act of her own_, decided to perjure themselves to *make her sad*?
> 
> I count as a grasshopper anyone who sees the abuse and condones it. And if you believe all of these people deserved how they've been treated, including people I watched go through it, then yes, I consider you a grasshopper.


Please point to me where I have ever said that I condone these actions. That I think people deserved to be treated that way. Where have I said EVER that there wasn't a problem? I've said the opposite. I have called no one a liar. I have asked questions for clarification and I have said I'm uncomfortable with some of what's being said. That I'm uncomfortable about people ignoring bullying that doesn't incriminate Rebecca.

And you made my point in my quote. That's all X amount of supporters mean. It doesn't determine truth or lie. It's public opinion. Call me a grasshopper all you want. In my eyes, anyone who is condoning the bullying toward anyone else is also a "grasshopper". Maybe we're all grasshoppers then.


----------



## Becca Mills

Okay, folks, I've closed the thread for a little cooling off period.


----------



## Becca Mills

I think what we're seeing in Concerned posts ... and Concerned, I apologize for grabbing you and using you as an example -- feel free to tell me to go take a hike if this is off base, but ... I think what we're seeing is _alarm_ that's likely shared by many others.

Those of you who've been around for a while may remember that a few years ago I was the victim of a copyright scam. I know very well the feeling of your entire writing career being reduced to a single sheet of notepaper lying on the sidewalk, ready to be blown away by the next gust of wind. Because who can predict the wind down to the gust, right? I bet that's how a lot of people who are working with or have worked with Rebecca are feeling right now. They have no idea how this thing will shake out. I mean, really, Christina's legal case is only one facet of it. The repercussions for the community -- who trusts, works with, and hangs out with whom -- are also profound. Many are probably looking into the future and imagining themselves maligned and ostracized by their peers. Perhaps subtly, but subtle can still be devastating.

While I thoroughly agree with David VanDyke's distinction between bullying and passionate disagreement, we shouldn't assume that the *potential* for bullying doesn't exist among those calling Rebecca's business tactics into question. Social power is real power, and that power can be wielded by both sides. So I don't think Concerned's alarm is out of line.

I'm going to reopen the thread in just a bit. Remember, it will close at the end of the day today, so there's little time left for people to share their stories and evidence -- from both sides. Let's try to keep it open until the deadline comes.

FYI, I'll be going through and deleting the ants-and-grasshopper stuff. Maybe I'm dense, but I don't even follow the analogy. The only version I'm familiar with is Aesop's, and it's hard to see how a tough-love anti-laziness fable applies to this situation. At any rate, it's name-calling, so no more of it please.


----------



## 75814

Concerned said:


> I've been given examples of what is happening to me and what I've heard from friends. What do you want? Screenshots? I don't have any. I don't even know how to screenshot on my computer.


https://www.take-a-screenshot.org/


----------



## ........

suliabryon said:


> 7. She DOES use gifting in exactly the way you state. I have said it before, I will say it again. The boxed set sales are sales. A very small percentage are attributed to gifting, and Amazon clearly has no problem with it so why does anyone else? Example: my set had over 15k sales. Most of them were preorders. A few hundred during release week were gifted by the 20+ authors in the set. And yes, we worked out a**es off to get that many sales. We earned out letters and I'm really tired of all the intimation that we didn't.


But how do you know how much gifting happens for iBooks and Nook?

On Rebecca's own GenreCrave facebook page she has a post regarding the Fall into Magic boxset. She explicitly says they are trying to come up with the numbers for iBooks.

This is in reference to the minimum number of sales required on iBooks to make the USA Today Bestseller list.

She offers to gift the iBook copies to anyone who wants them... so they can make the numbers. This means Rebecca is directly buying the copies herself to *make the numbers*.

The hard proof is right there on her own facebook page.

If I were in that boxset I'd be asking how many copies were sold on iBooks and how many of those were gifted.

If the gifted copies got it over the minimum figures required then this is explicit hard proof that the Fall into Magic boxset was bought on to the USA Today Bestseller list. Gifted copies also lead to sales rank changes, which affect visibility.

You can also look up Shadow Marked on her own page. She openly tells authors that if they will gift copies of this book (iBook and Nook) to their readers she will foot the bill. She will send them money via PayPal to pay for these gifted copies. In the comments authors eagerly respond. There is even a post from Rebecca's assistant saying they have a lot of copies to give away.

These two examples are out in the open.

It's hard to hit the minimum numbers on iBooks and Nook, which is why me and many other authors have seen her or the authors she is involved with begging for sales in private groups for these platforms and offering inducements to buy (which violates TOS of Amazon and others).

One of the claims made on the original indie-insider site is that Rebecca engages in mass gifting using her account, her assistant's account and by paying authors to gift through their accounts.

This has been 100% verified. You can see it *in her own posts*. She directs people to email her assistant to do the gifting. This is not gifting for promo copies. It is *to make the numbers*.

You may put aside all of the multiple testimonials of bullying and everything else and just focus on this one and solitary point: Rebecca Hamilton buys gifted copies or pays others to buy copies to make the minimum numbers for iBooks and Nook.

How can you ignore this? How can this be interpreted in any other way than buying their way on to the bestseller list?

There are really only a few options here:

1) The gifted copies on iBooks and Nook were the difference between Bestseller list or not (in which case it is wholly illegitimate and the titles aren't really best sellers but best-gifted)

2) Gifted copies manipulated sales rank which affected visibility which then lead to higher sales to hit the minimum number (in which case sales rank manipulation was engaged in)

3) The gifted copies are a tiny portion, the set easily made its numbers (so why engage in the mass gifting in the first place if the set will make it over the line organically?)


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Concerned said:


> Please don't threaten me. It isn't the first time you've done so. I stand by anything I've said, so don't fling the whole threat of suing me for libel.
> 
> I mean really? My first reaction to that was fear. Is that okay? Don't become what you are accusing Rebecca of being. Believe me or not, this whole situation has left me a mess. I've cried. Right now I'm shaking. I've had my Amazon account reported, I've been sent threatening PMs by newly created FB accounts. But that's okay. I mean, who knows. Maybe I'm one of those flying monkies going around hurting people. That makes it okay, right?
> 
> _I honestly do not see Christina's comment as threatening, Concerned. I see her as saying "don't presume the bullying aspect of this situation is not part of my lawsuit -- maybe it is, maybe it isn't." It goes without saying that threats are not tolerated here, so please PM me if you have further thoughts to share on the matter, and the moderators will consider the issue further. - Becca_


Becca said it perfectly in her mod comment above so I'll let that explanation stand. I can't think of an instance when I've said anything threatening to you or anyone in this thread (or off-thread, for that matter) on this topic. I'm sorry that you feel I have. I have no personal argument with you and don't know who you are, nor am I trying to find out. What I have said, is that in courts, Facebook records don't have the names blocked out--as I have done with my shots to protect people. If that's what you're referring to, it was meant as a warning for those who might be caught up right now--making comments that if seen by the world at large, they might wish they hadn't made.

I hope that puts your mind at ease.

With regards to being sent threatening PMs, that would be wrong on matter who is doing it. (Meaning, which "side.") But it seems our definition of a threat may be different, so without an example of what was said, I can't comment.


----------



## Monique

While I appreciate a lot of the insideindie site has done to shed light on all of this, the iamscamilton twitter account (no idea if it's the same person or not) isn't being clever, they're being a douche. Can I say that? Probably not. They're not helping the cause they claim to want to help. And getting into a mean girls slapfight with trueindieinside (also a piece of work) just makes them both look like jerks.


----------



## sela

I can't speak for everyone who is being critical of RH's business behaviour, but for me, it is her behaviour as a business person that is open to criticism. 

We have to start from this basic position: She is a business person providing a business service. 

In the past, when her clients / customers have complained, she did not act in a professional manner. That is the issue.

We have received the testimony of a number of people who have experienced what they feel and others agree is bullying, broken TOS, and unethical practices. 

They are alleging and have provided evidence that when they have complained or questioned the business practices and contracts, etc, she has retaliated, kicking people out of the groups they belonged to, posting about private business matters in the groups, and then made it personal, indicating the authors in question were "harming" the other members by depriving the sets of advertising money, and potentially harming her family and even her own pregnancy. 

There are numerous examples on this thread and posted elsewhere in screenshots of her talking publicly about private business matters. There are numbers examples on this thread and elsewhere in screenshots that show she has skirted TOS and broken them, and was only concerned if she got caught: "...if you tell someone and they rat on you."

Imagine if Jeff Bezos went on his personal Facebook page and started to talk down individual authors because of their business problems? We would all be up in arms about it, saying how unprofessional it was of him. Imagine if he talked negatively about a specific author's books and gave a bad review and urged his friends to up vote the bad reviews, etc. Imagine if he mentioned his family as a reason why he couldn't give indie authors a 70% share of the sale price of their books any longer. Imagine if he talked to his employees behind the scenes about allowing page-flip feature to rob indies of their page reads, because no one will know unless someone rats on them. 

Imagine if he changed the terms of our contracts without notice.... Oh, wait. 

We would go collectively nuts if he did those things.

I don't know RH as a person. RH isn't even her real name. It's a business name. But she has continually brought her family and personal life into her business dealings, blurring the lines between business and personal in an unprofessional manner. She has, in the past, and some are alleging currently, broken or skirted TOS and named and shamed authors who question her practices or want out of their (broken) contracts. 

The mere fact that this has been going on in other places over the past number of years suggests that this is not an isolated one-off issue but a systemic problem. Perhaps individual authors who have dealt with her have not personally seen this kind of behaviour, but you have to believe that there is some massive concerted effort on the part of a lot of people to harm her if you think all the evidence presented is bogus or unreliable. It stretches credibility to believe that there is nothing going on.

Hence, it is a service to the indie community to make this public so the rest of us can be informed and make better business decisions.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

I want to thank everyone, on both sides, who came forward and shared their sides of the story.  I particularly want to express my appreciation to anyone who's broken their silence. It's a terrible thing to be afraid and I would hope that nobody here wishes that upon you. Conversely, to those posting positively about their experiences with Rebecca's companies, the same sentiment.  Fear is a terrible thing and please know I and many others here do not wish that for you. 

For those still holding their tongue, know you're not alone.  And if you decide to speak out at some point in the future in another thread, I trust in this community to support you. 

For those on the fence, it's entirely up to you to decide which way you wish to manage your business. Hopefully this thread was helpful. Good luck. 

And for the mods, thanks for letting this thread continue. It's greatly appreciated and I hope the items discussed here serves as a service to the indie community as a whole.


----------



## MyraScott

Concerned said:


> Please point to me where I have ever said that I condone these actions. That I think people deserved to be treated that way. Where have I said EVER that there wasn't a problem? I've said the opposite. I have called no one a liar. I have asked questions for clarification and I have said I'm uncomfortable with some of what's being said. That I'm uncomfortable about people ignoring bullying that doesn't incriminate Rebecca.
> 
> And you made my point in my quote. That's all X amount of supporters mean. It doesn't determine truth or lie. It's public opinion. Call me a grasshopper all you want. In my eyes, anyone who is condoning the bullying toward anyone else is also a "grasshopper". Maybe we're all grasshoppers then.


Hey... I am sincerely apologizing because I think you are taking a lot of this as if I somehow know you personally and am attacking you. I am answering your arguments and questions- that's all. I don't have any bad feelings against you, nor do I know who you are. If you were close by, I'd probably give you a hug because I am detecting some panic in your responses. I don't know what your situation is; I can only answer what you've posted and I'm sorry that is upsetting to you. I really, really am.

I don't know_ if_ you condone threatening and emotional manipulation. I said _IF _you do, then yes, you are part of the problem. <-Again, I'm not saying you are, unless those conditions apply and you are the only one who knows if they do. I never said I think _you_, personally do. And I have no idea. But you asked _who_ I considered a grasshopper and I answered.

If you don't agree with the bullying, the harassment, the emotional manipulation and you don't condone it, e_ven if you love Rebecca Hamilton personally_, then you're OK in my book.

A woman I really think is kind and sweet and I follow her posts in my FB feed because she's having a hard time and I can empathize with her.... is also a staunch supporter of Rebecca Hamilton. I don't think she condones isolating and harassment and unless she said herself that she does, I wouldn't believe it of her. And I haven't unfriended her or tried to change her mind or even talked about it to her. It's none of my business who her friends are.

And that's part of what I'm defending. You shouldn't have to cut people out of your life* to fulfill a business deal*- that is unacceptable. Rebecca forced her personal disagreements on other people's personal lives_ as part of her business dealings_. That's why this thread is personal... because people have been forced to choose their business interests or their personal convictions. She has made it personal.

But here, in this thread, I am defending people who have been hurt. I can honestly and sincerely tell you, I am sorry for your upset and I mean you no harm. But I'm not sitting aside anymore and watching people get hurt without standing up for them. That's not being a bully, that's having integrity.


----------



## sela

MyraScott said:


> You shouldn't have to cut people out of your life* to fulfill a business deal*- that is unacceptable. Rebecca forced her prejudices on other people's personal lives_ as part of her business dealings_. That's why this thread is personal... because people have been forced to choose their business interests or their personal convictions. She has made it personal.
> 
> But here, in this thread, I am defending people who have been hurt. I can honestly and sincerely tell you, I am sorry for your upset and I mean you no harm. But I'm not sitting aside anymore and watching people get hurt without standing up for them. That's not being a bully, that's having integrity.


I am sure a number of us had people come to us in private to tell their own stories of experiencing bullying by RH and their concerns over shady marketing techniques and how they personally suffered when they raised issues or concerns with RH.

I have.

I listened last year to several people who were personally very hurt through their dealings with RH and GenreCrave or the boxed sets, so much that they considered leaving writing because of the public shaming and bullying.

That's terrible.

That kind of bad business behaviour and unprofessional behaviour can't be condoned and if we don't speak up against it, we condone it by our silence.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

sela said:


> I am sure a number of us had people come to us in private to tell their own stories of experiencing bullying by RH and their concerns over shady marketing techniques and how they personally suffered when they raised issues or concerns with RH.
> 
> I have.
> 
> I listened last year to several people who were personally very hurt through their dealings with RH and GenreCrave or the boxed sets, so much that they considered leaving writing because of the public shaming and bullying.
> 
> That's terrible.
> 
> That kind of bad business behaviour and unprofessional behaviour can't be condoned and if we don't speak up against it, we condone it by our silence.


100% agreed. I think a lot of us got PMs like that from this thread and each one serves as a gigantic warning sign that this is not how things should be.


----------



## Becca Mills

Markus Croft said:


> There's a reason it's happening on Twitter instead of Kboards. @IAmScamilton would be wasting their breath here with the moderators.


You'd better believe it.

I appreciate Worried's having cited those tweets as concrete evidence of the effect he/she is talking about, but folks, I don't want to see discussion of them as even remotely justifiable. They're not.


----------



## Fel Beasley

ChristinaGarner said:


> Becca said it perfectly in her mod comment above so I'll let that explanation stand. I can't think of an instance when I've said anything threatening to you or anyone in this thread (or off-thread, for that matter) on this topic. I'm sorry that you feel I have. I have no personal argument with you and don't know who you are, nor am I trying to find out. What I have said, is that in courts, Facebook records don't have the names blocked out--as I have done with my shots to protect people. If that's what you're referring to, it was meant as a warning for those who might be caught up right now--making comments that if seen by the world at large, they might wish they hadn't made.
> 
> I hope that puts your mind at ease.
> 
> With regards to being sent threatening PMs, that would be wrong on matter who is doing it. (Meaning, which "side.") But it seems our definition of a threat may be different, so without an example of what was said, I can't comment.


I wasn't going to make another comment and I have sent my thoughts to Becca, but since you commented directly I feel you deserve a response. I read your words as a threat not for legal action but in general. You might not have meant it that way but as someone who is seeing this go down, it still is worrying. To clarify it was the use of the word unwise. For someone who knows you and knows your intentions, they probably wouldn't see anything in those words, especially not malice. But I don't know you. And for better or worse, that is how I took your words. If that makes me stupid, or apparently I've never really been threatened before, fine.

I just ask for people to take a look from the other side. What would have been your response if Rebecca told someone it was unwise to do something? If I'm wrong about your case, I apologize for the assumption. My words are based on what I've read rather than what you've said outside of all this. I also am not sure how what I said that you responded that way was somehow legally wrong? So forgive me if I didn't think your statement meant legal action, but rather something else.

All I want to say is that because of all this I feel like it's best for me to go elsewhere. I don't feel comfortable here anymore and that sucks. That really sucks. Words matter. How you say things matters. There are people behind these screens and right or wrong, misunderstanding or not, it doesn't change the fact about how it made me feel, afraid and sick, and how the posts afterward calling me out for even saying it, made me feel even worse.

Nowhere have I said anyone here was lying. Nowhere have I asked for screenshots to prove bullying or anything else. I believe I've been fair, but I could be wrong. I apologize if anything I said was offensive or hurtful or disrespectful. It was never my intention. By your own words and the words of everyone in this thread, no one should feel like they can't speak. No one should be afraid of speaking out the truth or their thoughts.


----------



## wheart

Undecided said:


> I debated practically all day about whether to bother posting again, because the main feeling that I got from posting yesterday was that it was pointless. ...
> 
> ... So yes, I'm done. Just the existence of this thread and everything going on led to an anxiety attack earlier, and I don't want to go back to that stage of my life.


I can understand how you must be feeling, but I for one am glad that those of you who have posted on both sides have done so, to give your sides of the story and defend your positions. It gives those of us who don't have firsthand experiences get a better picture.

I probably should get back to my writing also because even just reading this thread and keeping up with it has been exhausting and time consuming, lol. But so far I've stayed in this because I feel it's important to hear both sides and read the screenshots, and to ask my questions when I need clarification, etc. However, at this point, it might be best to leave the rest up to the courts.

For those who need to make a rebuttal to something posted, I hope those who can sustain their energy continue to do so, especially if you feel it's unjust or inaccurate. Please don't feel like what you're saying is not worth it. It is worth it.



Sad Author said:


> I struggle with this because, and correct me if I'm wrong, she has apologized to the group... not the wronged person.


I can't answer whether she's ever apologized to the wronged person, but then we have to evaluate whether the person was actually wronged or not, or if Rebecca had a reason for what she did or how she responded. In your case, because you can only speak for yourself, can you link me to the convo and other evidence where she wronged you so I can read and judge for myself what actually transpired? Without knowing the whole story/picture, it's hard for me to make a fair assessment.



Boyd said:


> Well... here is RH posting in a screenshot with her PA's... http://i.imgur.com/UHWdPVJ.png .... in which RH agrees with her PA that the person they are discussing might be off their meds or mentally ill...
> 
> Here's another one - http://i.imgur.com/ncxTeVD.png - A raccoon bite? Drunk? Oh my! I hope the person bit didn't contract rabies... cuz that's what was implied. #amiright ? plz tell me I'm wrong, because this is kinda horrible. Isn't it?
> 
> In neither situation did she shut down the discussion with her PA's. In fact, she engaged in it, and in view of other members. I'm pretty sure I met you at SAS recently, with a bunch of others. You seem like a stand up type of Woman. You didn't see any of this?
> 
> This is why people are coming forward. Sometimes it's hiding in plain sight.


Boyd, those screenshots you posted seem to be from the one made by 'Not a Regular' in this post they made?

Actually, when I read all 18 screenshots of that dialog, I have to say, at the end of it, I came away feeling that Rebecca was trying to take the high road on that issue for the most part. From what I gather (after reading the images of the convo), it sounded like the other party started something on social media about Rebecca first, and she along with her PAs discussed what to do about it. Yes, there are some things they said that I surely don't agree with, but for most of the subsequent dialog (which I had encouraged everyone to read in full in a past post), to me it conveyed empathy from Rebecca, not malice. She sounded genuinely concerned for that person's health. Now, I don't know who the person being discussed is, but I'm gathering that some of you here do?

This is where you and I read that entire convo but came away with different views.


----------



## Dpock

sela said:


> That kind of bad business behavior and unprofessional behavior can't be condoned and if we don't speak up against it, we condone it by our silence.


It goes a little deeper than just bad business. Greed is at the root this whole thing, the collaborative will to manipulate product into schemes to earn coveted "letters". That was the essence of the first post on this thread.


----------



## eleutheria

I completely understand how people can view the same screenshots and gain two entirely different views on what occurred. But I'd like to add that emotional abuse can be very hard to see, even when it's being done right in front of you. Imagine a husband telling his wife, who just wrote a book, "Well, you tried to make it good, darling." (Random example.) It could be consoling, genuine concern, or it could be a pattern of dismissing his wife's work and anything else she does. But seeing that one instance - well, who knows? When you are just an observer, seeing bits and pieces of an interaction, you can miss the nuance. And good abusers know all about nuance. 

I don't know RH at all, and therefore not enough to say whether there was malice behind her words. But there could have been, if it was a pattern (and it appears to be, just in my opinion as an outside observer). But I can totally see why so many believe, really truly believe, that there was only genuine concern, and I don't think there's any blame in that.


----------



## Becca Mills

Markus Croft said:


> You didn't say so, but just to be clear: I wasn't trying to justify the tweets, just pointing out why I think they were made. What I took for context might not be. Many have brought up the blurred line between personal and business in this situation. It's tricky.


The conflation of the personal and the business may be tricky, but it ain't tricky not to tweet stuff like that. You just have to not be __ _______. (Makes me earn for my pre-moderator days, when I felt freer to lean on the forum's profanity filters.)


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

Boyd said:


> I would agree, context is important. IMO tho, it is a form of bullying, especially by not naming a person but then immediately agreeing to name somebody in private message. I am not going to make assumptions on what the PA's or group members were going to do once they had the identity of the person they were discussing, that's beyond the scope of my point.
> 
> My point, is that a reasonable person seeing themselves being discussed as being off their meds, mentally unstable, drunk, or having a communicable disease, they might not feel like RH was taking the high road and it probably made them feel bad. Maybe even bullied.


There's also the context of that conversation, between employees of the company, happening in a place where clients of that company can see it happen. I don't care if it's meant to be helpful or malicious, it's highly unprofessional.


----------



## suliabryon

Since this thread is closing down tonight, I am going to add why I feel, in particular, that it was bad form for kboards to allow it at all, much less to have run as long as it has. GenreCrave is a business with multiple employees, and Rebecca Hamilton is a person. There has been a lot of discussion on this thread about her ethics, morals, business practices, etc, and despite the many people sharing their stories, there has been little in the way of actual hard evidence that Rebecca has stolen money, taken money for services not rendered (non-refunding as per GC's TOS is not the same thing) or otherwise scammed people. the only legal proceeding currently is Christina's over a broken contract, with each side claiming the other broke it. 

And yet, this thread has gone on for 50+ pages largely devoted to negativity against Rebecca and her business. Rebecca is a member of these boards. But after this, why would she ever come here again? How could she possibly feel safe to do so? I work with her, and *I* don't feel welcome, safe or comfortable here anymore. Rebecca has been around these boards for a long, long time, and any number of searches pulls of threads with people very happy with her services, but now none of that will matter. The damage this thread has done to her reputation and business, at least to writers who come here, is IMO very likely irreversible, regardless of the outcome of Christina's court case.


----------



## MyraScott

Kboards isn't a charity, they are also a business. People trust them to show both sides of a story.  This one has been a long time coming.


----------



## Becca Mills

suliabryon said:


> Since this thread is closing down tonight, I am going to add why I feel, in particular, that it was bad form for kboards to allow it at all, much less to have run as long as it has. GenreCrave is a business with multiple employees, and Rebecca Hamilton is a person. There has been a lot of discussion on this thread about her ethics, morals, business practices, etc, and despite the many people sharing their stories, there has been little in the way of actual hard evidence that Rebecca has stolen money, taken money for services not rendered (non-refunding as per GC's TOS is not the same thing) or otherwise scammed people. the only legal proceeding currently is Christina's over a broken contract, with each side claiming the other broke it.
> 
> And yet, this thread has gone on for 50+ pages largely devoted to negativity against Rebecca and her business. Rebecca is a member of these boards. But after this, why would she ever come here again? How could she possibly feel safe to do so? I work with her, and *I* don't feel welcome, safe or comfortable here anymore. Rebecca has been around these boards for a long, long time, and any number of searches pulls of threads with people very happy with her services, but now none of that will matter. The damage this thread has done to her reputation and business, at least to writers who come here, is IMO very likely irreversible, regardless of the outcome of Christina's court case.


Sulia, I didn't realize you work with Rebecca. Since you're so close to the situation, are you able to shed more light on the stories of devastating abuse and harassment offered by Silly Writer, Tilly, and others? Is it GenreCrave's position that these narratives are not factual?


----------



## Sad Author

wheart said:


> I can't answer whether she's ever apologized to the wronged person, but then we have to evaluate whether the person was actually wronged or not, or if Rebecca had a reason for what she did or how she responded. In your case, because you can only speak for yourself, can you link me to the convo and other evidence where she wronged you so I can read and judge for myself what actually transpired? Without knowing the whole story/picture, it's hard for me to make a fair assessment.


That would be nice, but this situation is so scary and dangerous this is not possible. You do not seem to truly appreciate how terrifying the attack was on me. By outing myself I risk not only being attacked again but having my book attacked and my reputation ruined. What I went through the 1st time was enough for me. I do not wish to relive it.

The above is nowhere near worth it to me to convince anyone that I am not the one lying.

You are free to believe whoever you might like. And if you truly can not be swayed by the pile of stories in this thread against the word of one person that is your business and I have to accept that.

I 100% can see why you have a hard time with it.. the accusations seem SO unbelievable, and as I've stated before it's hard to believe that someone who at times can seem so helpful and generous could attack another author so viciously. It's why I was totally blindsided when the attack a happened. I sat there in shock as I was belittled in public by the person in question and those who supported her (most of which who never saw our public exchange).

I had only been a part of her groups for a couple of months and had not witnessed any drama yet before my situation.

But when it happened to me I started looking at the history of her personal feed (it was public at the time) and there was a definite trend of complaints and name calling to people she had dealt with and was having a dispute with. Each post like this would get everyone riled up about the complained about person. I found these types of posts at least once a week and sometimes more.

I challenge you to take a look at the person in question's posts (personal and the ones in groups) and start counting the ones where she is having disputes. You may find it is a lot, like I did. I have been in this business to see a lot of very public very helpful authors (who have very successful platforms) and service providers and none of them have the kind of drama and public disputes as the person in question have. Having this many problems because of jealousy or whatever is not normal and it could indicate something not so nice is going on.


----------



## wheart

Boyd said:


> I would agree, context is important. IMO tho, it is a form of bullying, especially by not naming a person but then immediately agreeing to name somebody in private message. I am not going to make assumptions on what the PA's or group members were going to do once they had the identity of the person they were discussing, that's beyond the scope of my point.


Although I don't see the content in the convo as a form of bullying, I do agree with you on the _'not naming a person but then immediately agreeing to name somebody in private message' _was not right.

From everything I'm reading here on the forums, sounds like groups on both sides might've been conversing in private somewhere, discussing the other side in similar form? Can I make that assumption? Can I assume that many here might even make jokingly or whatnot comments about what people are posting here even in a similar way?



Boyd said:


> My point, is that a reasonable person seeing themselves being discussed as being off their meds, mentally unstable, drunk, or having a communicable disease, they might not feel like RH was taking the high road and it probably made them feel bad. Maybe even bullied.


I hope that person read the whole convo and realized that Rebecca was concerned about their health. But this is the very point I and others have expressed about when people say they were bullied, that could be the case or it could not. This is why for me, with this whole issue, I needed to see the evidence myself so I could determine from my own standpoint, not from just people saying they were bullied or wronged, but I want to read for myself the evidence to prove this was so.

In Christina's case, I still have a few questions to ask her to clarify about some things that were posted over the weekend regarding the email and convo between her and Rebecca about the refund on the three boxed sets, etc. And it's things that she'll need to answer in court because it will probably be asked of her. But I'm going to do it later because I'm needed to look back through this thread for the posts to get the info, and I want to get this posted before this thread gets closed, lol.


----------



## Monique

wheart said:


> I hope that person read the whole convo and realized that Rebecca was concerned about their health.


It does not come across as genuine concern to me but rather something called concern trolling. I know we're not supposed to use that word, but that's what it's called. It's a common technique employed by RH and others on the internet. It was used in my case as well as many others.


----------



## Not a Regular

Boyd said:


> I would agree, context is important. IMO tho, it is a form of bullying, especially by not naming a person but then immediately agreeing to name somebody in private message. I am not going to make assumptions on what the PA's or group members were going to do once they had the identity of the person they were discussing, that's beyond the scope of my point.
> 
> My point, is that a reasonable person seeing themselves being discussed as being off their meds, mentally unstable, drunk, or having a communicable disease, they might not feel like RH was taking the high road and it probably made them feel bad. Maybe even bullied.


Just to be clear, all of the screencaps from that particular incident were public posts on Rebecca's public Facebook profile. They did not occur within the "safety" of a private group.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

suliabryon said:


> The damage this thread has done to her reputation and business, at least to writers who come here, is IMO very likely irreversible, regardless of the outcome of Christina's court case.


The same could be said for Rebecca's multiple accusations of plagiarism. I can't think of a charge more damaging to a writer. And you cannot unring that bell, even if the accusation is later recanted.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

wheart said:


> From everything I'm reading here on the forums, sounds like groups on both sides might've been conversing in private somewhere, discussing the other side in similar form? Can I make that assumption? Can I assume that many here might even make jokingly or whatnot comments about what people are posting here even in a similar way?


A point there, but a counter point being that most of us are authors, not providers of marketing services. If that was a true PM conversation only between them that's one thing. However, that conversation is more akin to two supermarket cashiers talking about the crazy customer that just left while still working on a line of people at checkout.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

The public "maybe she has rabies or is mentally ill or drunk; I'll just track down her DAUGHTER and express my concern" conversation is like the bulk gifting issue. If those things are A-OK with you in a business partner, you're doing business with the right person. If they aren't--well, now you know. 

Personally, if a professional associate (or a personal one) had had a public conversation like that about me online, I'd be so humiliated. So I know where that conversation leads me. But as I said way, way upthread, everyone has their own bright line for professional and personal behavior.


----------



## Guest

suliabryon said:


> Rebecca is a member of these boards. But after this, why would she ever come here again? How could she possibly feel safe to do so? I work with her, and *I* don't feel welcome, safe or comfortable here anymore.


And after the multiple bullying, harassing and horrid pms I received on Facebook from Rebecca's followers (and it was pretty obvious they came from her followers when they mentioned I had blown my chance to ever make it as a writer and that I was a pile of turd compared to her), I didn't feel safe on FB and had to deactivate my account. After months of silence I came here to share my story, only to be told without screen shots and apparently some form of public acknowledge or apology from Rebecca, I'm a liar taking everything out of context. Or even better, I discover people saying I must have "done something" to trigger the barrage. I would love if someone could point out what I did, obviously I don't want to make the same mistake twice  Keep in mind this is a business owner, I walked from the boxed set I was in and never sought a refund. So I'm not sure what *business action* I took that "deserved" the hit my books and career took for supporting another author? Not to mention the effect it had on me mentally, as when I was attacked, I was dealing with the fallout of my dad dying unexpectedly. The loss of my dad, depression and the onslaught of abuse from her followers after I was "named and shamed" certainly put me in a very fragile state.

I would also point that retaliation is already happening against those who spoke up in this thread with 1-stars on their books and negative reviews seeing a jump in being up-voted. This just goes to show why so many of us stayed silent, when you're a prawn you simply can't risk taking a hit to your books. Not to mention that many of us are dealing with real life issues and when you stand by and condone bullying, or engage in it, you never know how it will impact the person on the other side of the screen.


----------



## Sad Author

Tilly said:


> And after the multiple bullying, harassing and horrid pms I received on Facebook from Rebecca's followers (and it was pretty obvious they came from her followers when they mentioned I had blown my chance to ever make it as a writer and that I was a pile of turd compared to her), I didn't feel safe on FB and had to deactivate my account. After months of silence I came here to share my story, only to be told without screen shots and apparently some form of public acknowledge or apology from Rebecca, I'm a liar taking everything out of context. Or even better, I discover people saying I must have "done something" to trigger the barrage. I would love if someone could point out what I did, obviously I don't want to make the same mistake twice  Keep in mind this is a business owner, I walked from the boxed set I was in and never sought a refund. So I'm not sure what *business action* I took that "deserved" the hit my books and career took for supporting another author? Not to mention the effect it had on me mentally, as when I was attacked, I was dealing with the fallout of my dad dying unexpectedly. The loss of my dad, depression and the onslaught of abuse from her followers after I was "named and shamed" certainly put me in a very fragile state.


If there were heart emojis to give you... I would. {{{hugs}}


----------



## elizabethsade

eleutheria said:


> I completely understand how people can view the same screenshots and gain two entirely different views on what occurred. But I'd like to add that emotional abuse can be very hard to see, even when it's being done right in front of you. Imagine a husband telling his wife, who just wrote a book, "Well, you tried to make it good, darling." (Random example.) It could be consoling, genuine concern, or it could be a pattern of dismissing his wife's work and anything else she does. But seeing that one instance - well, who knows? When you are just an observer, seeing bits and pieces of an interaction, you can miss the nuance. And good abusers know all about nuance.
> 
> I don't know RH at all, and therefore not enough to say whether there was malice behind her words. But there could have been, if it was a pattern (and it appears to be, just in my opinion as an outside observer). But I can totally see why so many believe, really truly believe, that there was only genuine concern, and I don't think there's any blame in that.


I'm not speaking as someone who has worked with RH, just seen her stuff on FB/etc, but I've dealt with people who fall into different categories you described, and you hit the nail on the head. Something that comes across as genuine to someone can be utterly soul-crushing to someone else, especially once taken in context. If you haven't dealt with that particular sort of situation, it's a lot harder to see the subtle nuances in the way things are worded, etc (both from RH's personal page that is public, and the GenreCrave group).

It's even harder as the person on the other side (the one dealing with the person speaking that way), because it's so hard to get people to understand where you're coming from without having to give all sorts of context or explanations that people dealing with other things would not have to use.


----------



## fredrickirl

TinyDancer said:


> I don't consider myself anti-Rebecca. I see myself as anti-bullying, anti-shady business tactics.
> 
> In regards to Rebecca, my advice to her would be to:
> 
> 1. Apologize privately and publicly to the authors she has named and shamed.
> 
> 2. In the apology take responsibility for the effect (personal and professional) that her bullying had on those individuals and the authors and readers who had to witness the behavior.
> 
> 3. Publicly state that anyone engaging in bullying behavior whether it is directly naming an author or reader or not is unacceptable and how she will ensure that those types of posts will not be allowed on her business pages.
> 
> 4. Provide refunds to all authors who did not receive their money back when the contracts were nullified or broken by her, or if they left due to being bullied (if the client willingly broke the contract then that is different).
> 
> 5. Be transparent. Provide an accurate accounting for all boxset monies to the authors who were part of those groups whether they remain in the group or were kicked out (exception being those who were given their buy-in back). This also includes transparency for Book Blasts. If an author has booked a Book Blast with you, they should have the opportunity to see how you are promoting their book. Add them to your Book Blast groups, so they can see their blast in action. It takes less than a minute to add a user to a FB group and then delete them later and for the amount they are paying they deserve to see this. This would also cut down on the number of people complaining about the results of the service. If they can see that you have followed through on delivery, that your readers are claiming those books, and that it is not just a click farm there shouldn't be complaints.
> 
> 6. Keep your personal life out of it. We all know Rebecca Hamilton is your pen name. This is where you interact with clients and readers. Keep it professional and have a personal page for your personal life where you share anything you want except professional dealings. If you want to rant and rave about a client do it in private messages. Everyone knows that what is said on FB, even personal pages, is not always private. Think of the people who have been fired because they complained about their boss or company on their private page.
> 
> 7. As for gifting and giveaways. Keep them authentic. They are great for generating buzz, but if the goal is to get a certain # of sales to hit a list, then spending the money on those is useless. I earned my letters with you years ago and we didn't do mass gifting. We gave away a handful of copies each, but otherwise we worked our a**es off. You know how to successfully promote books without sidestepping the system, so do it right.
> 
> Would this make me happy? No, because nothing will ever erase the overwhelming anxiety, fear and horror her attacks have left me with as I've watched her behaviors escalate. But it will give everyone an opportunity to put all of this behind them. It will give her an opportunity to rebuild the indie author communities trust in her. It will give her victims peace to know that they no longer have to fear attacks from her or her friends.





MyraScott said:


> Thank you for providing a list. It seems to be the most constructive thing posted on this thread by a long shot. How I would interrupt your requests:
> 
> 1) An apology. Of course that's a natural thing to want. If this includes admission of guilt it will never happen and is foolhardy. Somehow, I doubt this would truly make a difference to the movement.
> 
> 2) I think her expressing regret for how people might have been affected (intentionally or unintentionally) would be a lovely thing to see. I would love to see it from the people on this board as well. I think apologies and de-escalation all around would be great.
> 
> 3) Fantastic suggestion. I really hope RH does that.
> 
> 4) From what I've seen this is a tricky subject and maybe the point of contention. Unfortunately, I am not aware of how I would get a refund from a services provider because my feelings were hurt. Service providers are a very tricky thing to get a refund for. Not the same as a physical product. Perhaps this would be where a neutral third party could provide some good recommendations.
> 
> 5) This doesn't seem like it would resolve any issues and instead you wanting to tell a service provider how to better do their business. If it's a good suggestion, then it would only be of benefit for her to do so. A good suggestion, but un-actionable, and might I suggest, a waste of your time to pursue it.
> 
> 6) Another great suggestion. I don't believe she has much of a business background (from what I've been told, never used any of her services) and this suggestion would serve her greatly. In fact, many problems seem to center around this issue. I think everyone, would be better off in this situation. Very constructive feedback. I hope someone who knows RH can contact her and offer these suggestions to her as they seem logical and not associated with any sort of revenge effort. No one would be worse off for this, and this would hopefully put the worry of future people being attacked put to bed. I admire the people who seem truly interested in just preventing other people from being hurt, and I think this would go along way toward that.
> 
> 7) I think that's a valid request as well. I think it would be disputed from many about what is and not allowed. But if I were running her business I would want everyone to know that I was upstanding and doing things the right way. Perhaps this ties into your "transparency" request.
> 
> And for your final line about those changed not appeasing you, I agree, I don't think it would make you happy and that's what is reflecting so poorly from this community to us neutral authors on the outside just wanting to worry about books. There seems to be insatiable anger. War is a hell of a thing, and it seems both sides are waging war and continue to escalate things regardless of how it affects them personally, or others. I would seek help with your anxiety from someone trained to help, and I would suggest you stop adding to it by waging war. Everyone would love to see both sides quit their rhetoric and start to deescalate things while acknowledging disagreements and points of improvement. Unfortunately, RH seems happy to take the "sue me" approach and this community is all too obliged. It is apparent this thread has garnered plenty of her attention, and would represent a great opportunity for her to learn and grow from this.
> 
> I'd love to see more of a "fix these things and we'll be watching" approach, rather than the "We feel as if we've been hurt, (plenty valid, not disputing that), so we're going to burn RH at the stake!"
> 
> I'll tell you what I want! Thanks for asking!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I want people not to feel alone or stupid or scared to speak out against bullying tactics, especially in a business setting. I want people to be able to share the stories that make them pull back or get out of publishing altogether.
> 
> I want people who are willing to do a minimum of research to know what they are signing up for, before they enter the Twilight Zone and are emotionally manipulated into "not letting all the others down" when they find out things aren't what they expected.
> 
> Up until now, if you searched these boards, you would only find praise for Rebecca Hamilton or GenreCrave because a) people were afraid to have their livelihood targeted and b) the threads that attempted to talk about the behavior were shut down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's not fair or balanced. Plenty of businesses on KBoards have both sides of the coin represented.
> 
> At this point, I'm thrilled with the people who, even if they can't identify themselves, have had the chance to be heard. It's frustrating when a business deal doesn't work out, but there is absolutely no expectation in most people's minds that if the deal goes bad, they are going to be attacked, shamed and isolated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To say people should have known better... who expects that? Who looks for evidence that shame and harassment will be your punishment if you cross the organizer? It's not normal!! I think most people don't even know how to react because it's so... bizarre. And scary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's such an awful outcome, that people who've come here to insist it doesn't happen are afraid of it happening to them... think about that. It really is that awful that even the people who participate in it, maybe especially the people who participate in it, are desperate to not be put in the crosshairs. Who can blame them?
> 
> _Edited. - Becca_


It would seem like you wish to leave a negative review on RH's services. That seems to be accomplished. And you don't want people to be bullied so you've gone about trying to solve that by entering a bullying war. From a neutral perspective, as many have expressed, it seems both sides are intimidating and scary. I don't think you, and your associates, are coming off as you'd hope. Even though, I think those are good things to want. I don't know anyone that is a fan of bullying and perhaps somehow this will lead to a net reduction eventually (although it's done nothing but increase it for now.). I don't believe your current strategy is aligning with your stated goals. Perhaps it might be best to end the current battles and keep some sort of alternative method of reporting in the future that is more focused on providing negative feedback and reviews rather than it coming off like people are trying to destroy someone, (which, it super is right now. Not a good look).

I'm happy that if people felt they couldn't express their thoughts before this have given them a platform for it. I do think there have been some positive outcomes from this, but it's way past the point of being anything constructive for the community. The collateral damage has grown far past negative reviews (referenced below, KB boards is becoming known as not a nice place to be) and personally, I am grateful I haven't been involved.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> People can roll their eyes however they want. This is business we're talking about, not a popularity contest. And if a marketing business has allegedly broken TOS, put their clients' accounts into danger, refused rightful refunds, or engaged in harassment that harmed their clients' business, then those are serious accusations.
> 
> That's what we're discussing. And, if you'll notice another thread here regarding crowd sourcing for legal action, I would argue that is potentially the most adult way to handle this possible.
> 
> As for what does anyone here want - how about we start with the truth. That's what all of the various first hand accounts here are for, for us to hear everyone's side of the story and allow people to determine for themselves how they best wish to conduct their business.


You and I differ greatly on what we might believe to be an adult way to handle things. I see what you have said here lines up perfectly with your statements and those of your friends here. I suppose we'll leave that, at that. Best of luck to you, and I sincerely hope we never have any disagreements ha. =)



Rick Gualtieri said:


> And for the mods, thanks for letting this thread continue. It's greatly appreciated and I hope the items discussed here serves as a service to the indie community as a whole.


Worth mentioning along those lines that, like myself, there are many authors out there whose only impression of this community has been this thread and the way that people have handled themselves (including the mods). To put it nicely, if this is an example of "beautiful community" there are many of us who will be looking to find a different community elsewhere and leave this type of thing, to a community which appears to love it (I really hope that's not the case, while I have not personally been a member here I know many good people that used to enjoy it and I wish them to be able to continue to enjoy this community). My only plea would be that somehow the KB board / RH drama can be contained to at the minimum to this board and RH's group. The rest of us, really don't want this spilling over to otherwise lovely communities.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Tilly said:


> And after the multiple bullying, harassing and horrid pms I received on Facebook from Rebecca's followers (and it was pretty obvious they came from her followers when they mentioned I had blown my chance to ever make it as a writer and that I was a pile of turd compared to her), I didn't feel safe on FB and had to deactivate my account. After months of silence I came here to share my story, only to be told without screen shots and apparently some form of public acknowledge or apology from Rebecca, I'm a liar taking everything out of context. Or even better, I discover people saying I must have "done something" to trigger the barrage. I would love if someone could point out what I did, obviously I don't want to make the same mistake twice  Keep in mind this is a business owner, I walked from the boxed set I was in and never sought a refund. So I'm not sure what *business action* I took that "deserved" the hit my books and career took for supporting another author? Not to mention the effect it had on me mentally, as when I was attacked, I was dealing with the fallout of my dad dying unexpectedly. The loss of my dad, depression and the onslaught of abuse from her followers after I was "named and shamed" certainly put me in a very fragile state.
> 
> I would also point that retaliation is already happening against those who spoke up in this thread with 1-stars on their books and negative reviews seeing a jump in being up-voted. This just goes to show why so many of us stayed silent, when you're a prawn you simply can't risk taking a hit to your books. Not to mention that many of us are dealing with real life issues and when you stand by and condone bullying, or engage in it, you never know how it will impact the person on the other side of the screen.


Tilly, I just want you to know that I believe you. I'm sorry that happened to you and I'm sorry for any backlash you, or anyone else, has received. Believe me, I empathize.

Which does not mean I doubt the word of those who say they've had positive experiences. I've called out those who say Rebecca "never does" something because that's a problematic assertion, but I don't doubt that some people have only had positive experiences.



Rosalind J said:


> The public "maybe she has rabies or is mentally ill or drunk; I'll just track down her DAUGHTER and express my concern" conversation is like the bulk gifting issue. If those things are A-OK with you in a business partner, you're doing business with the right person. If they aren't--well, now you know.


As always, Rosalind, hitting the nail on the head.

And I'd like to add to the chorus of those thanking the mods. I know this hasn't been easy, and I appreciate your efforts.


----------



## wheart

Sad Author said:


> You do not seem to truly appreciate how terrifying the attack was on me.
> ...


Sad Author, if that is what you are reading into my posts then I'm sorry it is coming across to you that way. I do indeed feel very much, but I feel it for everyone, on BOTH sides of this issue. Because nobody is going to come out the winner here. Both side have been hurt, both sides have been attacked, both sides are both guilty and innocent of certain accusations.

I know none of you, nor am I in anybody's groups on either side, but my heart does feel heavy in this entire ordeal.

For me, I just need to know that everything being said is fair and just. I can't make a judgement unless proof is shown that I can assess for myself. And I totally understand those who can't give it, and I'll respect that, but I then can't make any decisions on your cases.

This whole issue is heartbreaking


----------



## Sad Author

wheart said:


> Sad Author, if that is what you are reading into my posts then I'm sorry it is coming across to you that way. I do indeed feel very much, but I feel it for everyone, on BOTH sides of this issue. Because nobody is going to come out the winner here. Both side have been hurt, both sides have been attacked, both sides are both guilty and innocent of certain accusations.
> 
> I know none of you, nor am I in anybody's groups on either side, but my heart does feel heavy in this entire ordeal.
> 
> For me, I just need to know that everything being said is fair and just. I can't make a judgment unless proof is shown that I can assess for myself. And I totally understand those who can't give it, and I'll respect that, but I then can't make any decisions on your cases.
> 
> This whole issue is heartbreaking


Yes, it is heartbreaking. And if people do not take a stand the abuse in this situation WILL continue. I have no doubt of this. Someone has to stand up at some point to try and stop it.

And like I said, I challenge you to look deeper than what is said here into the person in question.


----------



## Guest

wheart said:


> Both side have been hurt, both sides have been attacked, both sides are both guilty and innocent of certain accusations.


Only one side is a business that takes money from authors for services.

As I said, I walked away from my money, but please educate me as to what I did that makes me a guilty party to the abuse I received?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

People need to run a business with honesty and integrity, or they are not someone I want to do business with. And as a community, we need to step up the business 101 education we do to help everyone understand you're not just a writer, you are a publisher if you are self-publishing your work.

And if you step up to publish OTHER PEOPLE, and you charge them for the privilege of doing that, I don't care if it's for vague marketing costs and formatting and a cover. You are a vanity press. End of story. I think not calling the boxed sets what they were from the very beginning got us into this mess.

Not saying publishers can't band together and co-fund a marketing plan. They can.

But when one person/business collects all of the monies and one person/business calls all of the shots and one person/business has draconian refund policieis, then it's not a bunch of publishers banding together to co fund a marketing plan. It's a vanity press. 

And if you wouldn't give $500 or $2,000 to Publish America or Author Solutions offering you a chance to make the USAToday Bestseller list, don't give it to another business or person just because they're an indie like you.

Thank you mods for finally allowing this information to get out there.


----------



## wheart

Rick Gualtieri said:


> A point there, but a counter point being that most of us are authors, not providers of marketing services. If that was a true PM conversation only between them that's one thing. However, that conversation is more akin to two supermarket cashiers talking about the crazy customer that just left while still working on a line of people at checkout.


Are those of you who are talking behind somebody's back not doing the same thing though? Can those of you who are engaging in this kind of behavior (on both sides) honestly say that you aren't discussing the authors on the 'other side' or anybody backing them up in the same manner? This was about Boyd calling it a form of 'bullying,' so in the same respect, if some of you are engaging in such behavior, then what's the difference? I'm referring to behavior that many here are calling bad behavior when it's being done by the other side.

And I agree with anyone calling it bad behavior because talking behind someone's back when they can't defend themselves is kinda sucky, in my opinion.



Sad Author said:


> And like I said, I challenge you to look deeper than what is said here into the person in question.


I can only investigate what is publicly posted (in links people have pointed to and having read through her profile posts here on Kboards) and I've stated my views on that on a post way back and won't keep repeating it here, so you'll have to go look through my profile to see what I said on the subject.



Tilly said:


> Only one side is a business that takes money from authors for services.
> 
> As I said, I walked away from my money, but please educate me as to what I did that makes me a guilty party to the abuse I received?


Can you please post what exactly happened in your case? Did you ask for a refund for similar reasons as Christina? And if you did, did you know about the 'no refund' policy and about being paid back with royalties? I'll go through your profile and read what you've posted again in case you gave details about your case. Again, these details are important because although I am so sorry that you felt bullied (unless I see the actual bullying being done, I can't make that judgement whether you were or weren't), I would like to know what exactly brought it on (I'm not excusing bullying, bullying is terrible, but again, for me to call it that, I'd have to see the evidence for myself and determine if I can call it bullying or just a side defending their position). Thank you.


----------



## wheart

Tulonsae said:


> You read the "whole convo" and decided that Rebecca's words were truth, that she was truly concerned about the person's health.
> 
> And you read the words of people stating how RH had treated them, and you asked for proof.
> 
> I don't see how that's neutral.


I'm asking for evidence to back up claims. I think that's reasonable if I'm to make a decision for myself on whether it's justified, right? Wouldn't you want someone to do that for you should you be the one being accused of things?


----------



## elizabethsade

wheart said:


> Can you please post what exactly happened in your case? Did you ask for a refund for similar reasons as Christina? And if you did, did you know about the 'no refund' policy and about being paid back with royalties? I'll go through your profile and read what you've posted again in case you gave details about your case. Again, these details are important because although I am so sorry that you felt bullied (unless I see the actual bullying being done, I can't make that judgement whether you were or weren't), I would like to know what exactly brought it on. Thank you.


This makes me cringe so badly. When things are phrased like this, it sounds like you believe that it was Tilly's fault and that whatever she got, she deserved it. That she incited it, that she caused it.

Please think more about your phrasing. Even if you don't believe something happened, or haven't made your judgment, these are real people whose experiences you're discrediting.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

wheart said:


> Are those of you who are talking behind somebody's back not doing the same thing though? Can those of you who are engaging in this kind of behavior (on both sides) honestly say that you aren't discussing the authors on the 'other side' or anybody backing them up in the same manner? This was about Boyd calling it a form of 'bullying,' so in the same respect, if some of you are engaging in such behavior, then what's the difference? I'm referring to behavior that many here are calling bad behavior when it's being done by the other side.
> 
> And I agree with anyone calling it bad behavior because talking behind someone's back when they can't defend themselves is kinda sucky, in my opinion.


Okay, lets agree there on bad behavior. I'm not one to throw rocks in a glass house. So assuming that, I might posit that if you caught a friend talking about you behind your back, you might be angry, disappointed etc. Fair?

So let me ask this. Forget about that friend for a moment. If you walked into, say, your local supermarket and caught the employees and manager talking about you, discussing your potential ill mental health (or susceptibility to rabies), in front of the other customers, would you continue to shop there?


----------



## wheart

Tulonsae said:


> Nope.
> 
> Certainly, I would appreciate people listening to me and hearing me out. But having someone I don't have any sort of personal or business relationship with cross examine and ask my accusers for proof, no.


Sorry that you feel I'm cross-examining. For me, I look at it as getting to the bottom of things. I've been consistent in my behavior, not only here but in other threads where someone's been accused. Please don't make me repeat my thing about needing the 'whole story', lol. I believe that's been my stance all along. You can read back on my profile to see where I stated why that's important.


----------



## Sad Author

wheart said:


> I'm asking for evidence to back up claims. I think that's reasonable if I'm to make a decision for myself on whether it's justified, right? Wouldn't you want someone to do that for you should you be the one being accused of things?


If this were a normal situation it would be quite reasonable. But at least in my experience, this is not a normal situation.

There is a large groups of people coming forward saying they were bullied, harassed, terrified...etc.. by one person and you say it's impossible to know if any of them are telling you the truth because they happen to need to stay anonymous (for safety reasons). It's placing the burden on victims.

This is an interesting article on blaming victims. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-love-and-war/201311/why-do-we-blame-victims


----------



## Usedtoposthere

Rick Gualtieri said:


> Okay, lets agree there on bad behavior. I'm not one to throw rocks in a glass house. So assuming that, I might posit that if you caught a friend talking about you behind your back, you might be angry, disappointed etc. Fair?
> 
> So let me ask this. Forget about that friend for a moment. If you walked into, say, your local supermarket and caught the employees talking about you, discussing your potential ill mental health (or susceptibility to rabies), in front of the other customers, would you continue to shop there?


Especially if those other customers were your work colleagues.


----------



## Mari Oliver

fredrickirl said:


> As a new member of this community (maybe... after seeing all this I might want to look elsewhere... because ick.)
> 
> Can I offer a suggestion?
> 
> What do you want? From what I can gather it seems people are upset and they want to punish the person they feel wronged them. That sounds a lot like high school, and from various author groups I belong to on Facebook everyone is just rolling their eyes and hoping people will resolve this like adults.
> 
> So, for those people who are "anti-RH" what is your end goal? What would make you happy?
> 
> Refunds on past services?
> A change in RH policies (no more "bullying", no more gifting copies?, no more box sets?)
> An Apology?
> 
> Or is there nothing that will satisfy you?
> 
> I would be far more willing to support the cause if there was a stated goal somewhere. I'm sure I'll be flamed for this proposition, I'd be delighted to be proven wrong. For the record, I believe RH has done some shady things, but err on the side of ignorance to sound business practices and a attitude that escalates things <--- the exact attitude exhibited by the main people in this thread that have shown nothing else. I think people can come together and reach an agreement for changes that will keep people like me, who just want to be authors to enjoy this community. Expecting the other party to take the high ground is not strategy that adults pursue. Can we come up with something reasonable?


Hi. I have no cause or involvement in this but only wanted to mention that, if you're asking others to respond to the situation in maturity and love, can you do the same? Because insinuating that others here are not acting like adults is flaming and insulting in an underhanded manner. And that's entirely the problem with this entire mess, is lack of respect.


----------



## wheart

Rick Gualtieri said:


> if you caught a friend talking about you behind your back, you might be angry, disappointed etc. Fair?


Yes, of course.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> If you walked into, say, your local supermarket and caught the employees and manager talking about you, discussing your potential ill mental health (or susceptibility to rabies), in front of the other customers, would you continue to shop there?


But let's back it up a bit to make the point you're making more applicable to how it relates to this issue it's been made for ... I certainly would be upset, but then I'd have to look at it objectively and say, what might have caused them to talk about me? Were they doing it because of something I had posted about them publicly elsewhere first?

I'm not excusing the behavior, and I've said so many times. But this whole issue for me is also about 'understanding' why/where the behavior (of both sides) stems from and if each side is fair and just in stating their cases with the full details of how it came about.

Yes, it's unnerving, and I feel for everyone involved. Both sides are doing it ... it's the Hatfield and McCoy feud. Don't you think?


----------



## Fel Beasley

I really need to ask this: when is the line crossed? When does it stop being okay to call someone out for bullying and become bullying itself? Someone, someone who has posted in this thread and has been supported by many of those in this thread, has shared a private message between herself and Rebecca that talks about something deeply personal and private and has blasted it on social media in an attempt to hurt Rebecca. I've seen people say that this isn't okay, but no one is saying that about the person who did this. 

There is a line. And that line is crossed. And frankly, anyone who could support someone after finding out they will go as low as to bring up someone's personal loss as a weapon is wrong. Rebecca hurt people, but that doesn't make it right to hurt her back. Do the right thing and tell this person to stop her personal attacks. It doesn't help anyone. 

I can't link to anything because that isn't allowed but if you're on twitter, you can probably find it. Or ask around. Or investigate. Or do nothing and let it continue.


----------



## Michelle Hughes

Regardless of what happened between these people and her, it's going to court (if I'm understanding correctly) and a judge will decide what is legal or not. Until that judge makes a decision everything here is just what everyone says, nothing is proven. One side has screen shots, the other side says the screenshots are cut off and not sharing the entire story. No one here knows either. I left a group that I was honored to be put in when winning my Kindle Scout nomination that I left over this. I had NO idea the world was taking sides when I mentioned how Rebecca's spotlight increased my book ranks and you would have thought I became the anti-christ. We've always mentioned what helped us sell more books in that group and I thought nothing of it until I was told how horrible she was and I shouldn't be doing business with her. I don't allow myself to bullied, so I did what any adult with intelligence does, removed myself from the toxic situation. This is all drama that needs to be left in the hands of a court is basically what I'm saying. I'm disappointed that it's been allowed to continue. Adults do not need to conduct themselves this way. There are legal avenues to take, and it should be left there. My two cents.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## BiancaSommerland

wheart said:


> But let's back it up a bit to make the point you're making more applicable to how it relates to this issue it's been made for ... I certainly would be upset, but then I'd have to look at it objectively and say, what might have caused them to talk about me? Were they doing it because of something I had posted about them publicly elsewhere first?
> 
> I'm not excusing the behavior, and I've said so many times. But this whole issue for me is also about 'understanding' why/where the behavior (of both sides) stems from and if each side is fair and just in stating their cases with the full details of how it came about.
> 
> Yes, it's unnerving, and I feel for everyone involved. Both sides are doing it ... it's the Hatfield and McCoy feud. Don't you think?


As someone else trying to understand the situation, if I'm understanding you right, you consider this more of a partnership than a business service? Are all participants on equal levels. Because that does change things.


----------



## wheart

Tulonsae said:


> No, you don't need to restate that. As far as I can remember your postings, you are consistent.
> 
> I just don't think it's neutral that you believe screenshots of Rebecca's words and yet don't believe other people's words.


But you see, the difference with seeing the actual screenshots of the convos taking place lets me judge for myself how it went down.

When people just say 'they were bullied' or 'they were scammed,' I need the same type of evidence so I can see how the account actually went down. I can then determine for myself what took place. That's important to me because before I condemn anybody for something someone claims was done to them, without evidence to back up their statements, that would be unfair and unjust for me to do.


----------



## Sad Author

wheart said:


> Yes, of course.
> 
> I certainly would be upset, but then I'd have to look at it objectively and say, what might have caused them to talk about me? Were they doing it because of something I had posted about them publicly elsewhere first?


You said this in relation to yourself, but if you are applying the same principle to those of us that who were attacked you would be victim blaming. (as according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming " Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them. ")


----------



## Patty Jansen

Boyd said:


> I agree with you about that twitter post.


Adding my voice to say that the newsfeed of that Twitter account helps no one.


----------



## MyraScott

wheart said:


> When people just say 'they were bullied' or 'they were scammed,' I need the same type of evidence so I can see how the account actually went down.


No, you don't. You've been provided with the same evidence as everyone else. If you can't be bothered to read it, stop insisting it's not there or it's not good enough for you. You are not a judge in this case and you do not get to demand people rehash their difficult situations until you are satisfied.









Tilly, in particular, stated that she has no additional evidence and that's why she's been silent. If you actually read her story, you would know that. Stop insisting that she does have evidence and you need it. You don't need it. Don't believe anyone you don't want to believe. It's not "unjust"- you are welcome to your opinion based on the information that is contained in 55 pages of this thread.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Patty Jansen said:


> Adding my voice to say that the newsfeed of that Twitter account helps no one.


Because my prior statement regarding this Twitter account may have gotten lost within the thread, I'd like to say it again: I am not running that account, nor do I have any idea who it is.

Any claims to the contrary are false.


----------



## sela

Boyd said:


> 55 pages of information, screenshots, websites, discussion and first person accounts. If you haven't made a decision yet, I'm not sure you're going to get much more than that before the mods close the thread for the night.


This.

There comes a time in any discussion when continual requests for more evidence become stalling tactics and downright cynicism. It appears that for some, no amount of evidence or testimony will convince and it is not because the evidence or testimony is inadequate.

There is more than enough evidence that people have been bullied and shamed in public, that TOS have been skirted and broken, and that business people have behaved in very unprofessional ways.

That some people have not experienced it does not negate those who have.

If people are still on the fence at this point, I question their ability to judge evidence.


----------



## Guest

wheart said:


> But you see, the difference with seeing the actual screenshots of the convos taking place lets me judge for myself how it went down.
> 
> When people just say 'they were bullied' or 'they were scammed,' I need the same type of evidence so I can see how the account actually went down. I can then determine for myself what took place.


I'm so sorry that while I was battling depression, the loss of my dad and the onslaught of abuse from Rebecca's followers I didn't think _I must screen shot all this so that in a year's time I can try and convince some anonymous person on the internet that bullying happens_. I'm so sorry I can't serve up a blow by blow account of my victimisation for you to dissect in Rebecca's secret groups, so you can all highlight exactly what I did wrong to deserve it all. You see at the time, I shut down emotionally, deactivated my account and it took all my energy to keep going and not think how easy it would to make it all go away by killing myself, because you are quite right - it must have all been my fault.

You also conveniently skip over the one major point here in all your finger pointing at the victims - *only ONE person is taking people's money*.

But sure, let's blame me. I must have deserved it. Thanks so much for reminding me why I chose to keep quiet in the first place. I'm done.


----------



## Patty Jansen

wheart said:


> But you see, the difference with seeing the actual screenshots of the convos taking place lets me judge for myself how it went down.
> 
> When people just say 'they were bullied' or 'they were scammed,' I need the same type of evidence so I can see how the account actually went down. I can then determine for myself what took place. That's important to me because before I condemn anybody for something someone claims was done to them, without evidence to back up their statements, that would be unfair and unjust for me to do.


I posted an actual FB post on page 42. Or maybe it's now on p 41. No one has commented on it. Maybe you'd care to go and read it.


----------



## sela

wheart said:


> I'm not excusing the behavior, and I've said so many times. But this whole issue for me is also about 'understanding' why/where the behavior (of both sides) stems from and if each side is fair and just in stating their cases with the full details of how it came about.
> 
> Yes, it's unnerving, and I feel for everyone involved. Both sides are doing it ... it's the Hatfield and McCoy feud. Don't you think?


There is no excuse for bullying, for unethical behaviour or for unprofessional business behaviour. Understanding is pretty simple, from what I can see:

RH failed to provide a service or changed the contracts or terms or broke TOS and people wanted out of the boxed sets, wanted refunds or questioned the results of promotions.

Those people have provided evidence and testimony that they were bulled, blackballed, and experienced retaliation for speaking up or questioning.

That's all you need to know.

It doesn't matter WHY the bullying happened or the blackballing happened or the retaliation happened. It was unprofessional and possibly illegal.

What you are doing is creating a false equivalency. There is no equivalency between those who have come forward to provide evidence and testimony about their experiences after dealing with RH / GenreCrave and the response from RH / GenreCrave and employees / followers of same.


----------



## Michelle Hughes

Markus Croft said:


> Would you say this if people were on here discussing a different vendor or vanity press?
> 
> When it's a legal matter like this, I absolutely would say yes. There's nothing to be gained from this back and forth anymore. It's already been stated it's going to court.
> 
> Is every person on Yelp not handling themselves like adults when they write about their experiences with different businesses? Should a lawsuit be our solution to every professional encounter that goes awry? Should we spend more on legal fees than we spent on the service in question?
> 
> At this point, it's already been stated a lawsuit is pending, so not sure why that matters now  When it starts messing with other people's careers because they are doing business with a vendor that other people don't like, I think yes it should be handled in a better manner than a public forum.
> 
> There's no reason in the indie community we shouldn't be able to share our experiences and support each other. That gets tricky because no one person is the same thing to all people, and no one opinion is shared by everyone, but what people have had the guts to come forward about in this thread isn't anything they should be ashamed of. Claiming they aren't adult because they decided to speak out doesn't ring true.
> 
> Giving and sharing experiences yes... but crucifying people that don't share your opinion? Absolutely not. Kindle Boards used to be a great place to talk about the industry and new works, now it's little more than a boxing ring with people going at each other's throats.
> I'll repeat Rick on this one:


----------



## LurkingUnderARock

Tilly said:


> I'm so sorry that while I was battling depression, the loss of my dad and the onslaught of abuse from Rebecca's followers I didn't think _I must screen shot all this so that in a year's time I can try and convince some anonymous person on the internet that bullying happens_. I'm so sorry I can't serve up a blow by blow account of my victimisation for you to dissect in Rebecca's secret groups, so you can all highlight exactly what I did wrong to deserve it all. You see at the time, I shut down emotionally, deactivated my account and it took all my energy to keep going and not think how easy it would to make it all go away by killing myself, because you are quite right - it must have all been my fault.
> 
> You also conveniently skip over the one major point here in all your finger pointing at the victims - *only ONE person is taking people's money*.
> 
> But sure, let's blame me. I must have deserved it. Thanks so much for reminding me why I chose to keep quiet in the first place. I'm done.


Tilly, I see you. I hear you. I believe you.

It happened to me too. My run-ins with RH's volatile personality led into a suicide attempt. I'm okay, but I've been terrified to discuss it with anyone because of her power in the community. I have no intention of saying more than that, but her behavior was still a major enough part of it that I would strongly council ANYONE who is mentally ill STEER CLEAR of her, for their own safety. She frequently talks as though she is supportive of mentally ill people, but her behavior toward me, and the screenshots others have shared of her questioning clients' mental ability should tell you the truth.


----------



## PhoenixS

wheart said:


> But you see, the difference with seeing the actual screenshots of the convos taking place lets me judge for myself how it went down.
> 
> When people just say 'they were bullied' or 'they were scammed,' I need the same type of evidence so I can see how the account actually went down. I can then determine for myself what took place. That's important to me because before I condemn anybody for something someone claims was done to them, without evidence to back up their statements, that would be unfair and unjust for me to do.


But you're not being asked to judge a civil suit or a criminal case. You're being asked to come to your own personal decision about whether to work with Rebecca in a professional capacity. If it takes as much proof as you're requesting from every single party, how do manage to hire any contractors for any work? Were you even contemplating working with her before this thread? Is the question of judgment in your case even relevant?


----------



## elizabethsade

Boyd said:


> I don't know you and don't know if you know me but...
> 
> I've got big shoulders, and can give hugs if needed. You ever need either or both, you got it.


I can attest to both. He's quite good at it.


----------



## wheart

Sad Author said:


> There is a large groups of people coming forward saying they were bullied, harassed, terrified...etc.. by one person and you say it's impossible to know if any of them are telling you the truth because they happen to need to stay anonymous (for safety reasons). It's placing the burden on victims.
> 
> This is an interesting article on blaming victims. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-love-and-war/201311/why-do-we-blame-victims


I'm in no way blaming victims, but in certain circumstances like with this boxed set thing, there are things that occurred that I don't see as being 100% Rebecca's fault. In this case, she too might consider herself a victim, should she claim that those authors who didn't follow through with their commitments were partially at fault.

I'm going about my decisions as fairly as possible. I have that right, I hope 



Sad Author said:


> You said this in relation to yourself, but if you are applying the same principle to those of us that who were attacked you would be victim blaming. (as according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming " Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially responsible for the harm that befell them. ")


Sorry you see it that way because I in no way hold victims of crimes responsible at all.

For me, it's a matter of looking at both sides of the story fairly. I even try to do so when I'm in the middle of it, lol. When my hubby and I get into arguments, I try to always look from his point of view too, to see where he's coming from and if I might've caused him to feel that way. In my youth, I wasn't always that way, but through my life's experiences, I've come to value that. My hubby's the same way and it's helped in our marriage to do so.



MyraScott said:


> No, you don't. You've been provided with the same evidence as everyone else. If you can't be bothered to read it, stop insisting it's not there or it's not good enough for you. You are not a judge in this case and you do not get to demand people rehash their difficult situations until you are satisfied.


Have I 'demanded' anything? There again, is that whole matter of how interpreting words is subjective and of one's own perception, because to me, I simply 'asked', I never demanded, because for me that's what I need to make a decision. And if it can't be provided, then I should have the right to refrain from making a decision on a particular case.

I've already stated that I respect the wishes of those who choose not to do so. But in the same respect, I should be allowed to refrain from making a decision on the case.

I don't know how else I can convey my feelings in the matter with more than what I've already stated. Like I said, it's heartbreaking for all those involved.


----------



## KarmaIsA...

I barely found the cojones to make one post, but here I am, making two. 

I am not going to address the overall issues. I stated my piece before.

But I wanted to talk about Tilly's post. I believe her. I'll tell you why. Because I have been a long time member of Kboards. Don't post a lot, do read a lot. I've read a lot from Tilly. I like the way she presents herself online. She presents as genuine, and real, and like many on these boards, gives it straight with a tad of diplomacy. 

I like Monique for the same reason. I don't always agree with either, but I have never found them to be hateful, or unwilling to stand up for themselves, or what they believe in. And I've seen them be fair, even in the midst of a heated disagreement. 

It comes down to patterns. I have seen the pattern of how these two members have presented themselves over the years. They still ring consistently honest.

If you haven't been a member, well, I can see where you would not see that. But to require "proof" of some sort? Like what, screenshots? I've seen a megaton of screenshots since this all began, more than I want to see ever again in my life. I see patterns there, too. I saw them before, while my set was going, and at that point, I decided I would fulfill my obligation, and then do no more business, because the pattern I was seeing was not what I wanted to be part of.

When you break up in business, there is a calm and kind way to do it, even with disputes. I've ended two businesses. I'm friendly with both my former partners. 

When I see patterns that are otherwise, they are hard to refute. That may not be true for everyone. Not everyone does business the same way. But I know what I've seen, and how it made me feel. 

And I "know" of the people who are now speaking out, and what my thoughts have been on them given the patterns they have presented. 

It's all subjective. But Tilly, Monique, Silly, SadA, Lurking - I believe you. And I am so, so sorry.


----------



## MyraScott

wheart said:


> I've already stated that I respect the wishes of those who choose not to do so. But in the same respect, I should be allowed to refrain from making a decision on the case.


I'm not sure who you are asking for permission, but I hereby allow you to refrain from making a decision.

Cheers


----------



## Rick Gualtieri

LurkingUnderARock said:


> Tilly, I see you. I hear you. I believe you.
> 
> It happened to me too. My run-ins with RH's volatile personality led into a suicide attempt. I'm okay, but I've been terrified to discuss it with anyone because of her power in the community. I have no intention of saying more than that, but her behavior was still a major enough part of it that I would strongly council ANYONE who is mentally ill STEER CLEAR of her, for their own safety. She frequently talks as though she is supportive of mentally ill people, but her behavior toward me, and the screenshots others have shared of her questioning clients' mental ability should tell you the truth.


I'm really sorry to hear that happened to you, but glad to hear you're okay now. Thank you for speaking up and adding your voice.


----------



## wheart

Tilly said:


> I'm so sorry that while I was battling depression, the loss of my dad and the onslaught of abuse from Rebecca's followers I didn't think _I must screen shot all this so that in a year's time I can try and convince some anonymous person on the internet that bullying happens_. I'm so sorry I can't serve up a blow by blow account of my victimisation for you to dissect in Rebecca's secret groups, so you can all highlight exactly what I did wrong to deserve it all. You see at the time, I shut down emotionally, deactivated my account and it took all my energy to keep going and not think how easy it would to make it all go away by killing myself, because you are quite right - it must have all been my fault.
> 
> You also conveniently skip over the one major point here in all your finger pointing at the victims - *only ONE person is taking people's money*.
> 
> But sure, let's blame me. I must have deserved it. Thanks so much for reminding me why I chose to keep quiet in the first place. I'm done.


I'm not blaming you, Tilly. I am so sorry for how the matter had affected you. Truly


----------



## spellscribe

I assume everyone who thinks it's wrong to share first hand experiences and collected evidence here is also wrong to, for example, discuss Tait publishing? That no one should have stood up and said 'don't use them' because that sort of thing belongs in a court of law, and advising your colleagues that it may not be above board is 'not an adult way of handling things'? And that if a colleague discussed their plan to use Tait, that despite you knowing or having heard there were well documented issues with their service, that you would not hold yourself at all  culpable by staying silent and watching your colleague lose thousands because that's what adults do?


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

fredrickirl said:


> So, for those people who are "anti-RH" what is your end goal? What would make you happy?


I'm not anti-Rebecca. I'm against her business practices. I don't know her personally.

Last year, I joined one of her box sets with several other colleagues. She friend-requested us and added us to the box set group on Facebook. There were no contracts yet; the box set was just being put together. During the first few days, she posted within the group tossing around suggestions and questions. In one of her posts, she asked for cover designer recommendations. This box set was in a genre she hadn't launched a box set in before; previously she'd only launched UF sets. Several participants posted suggestions. One of my colleagues made a recommendation, too, and shared a sample cover design and the designer's rates. Rather than just saying something like "Thank you, but that isn't what I'm looking for," Rebecca made some negative statements about the design. Things like that are subjective, sure, but it only escalated. She said that _she_ would never pay that much money for something so plain and awful -- not a direct quote, but that was the gist.

It didn't end there. My colleague replied with something like, "No worries," but Rebecca continued to leave multiple comments telling her how terrible the cover was. It was odd because Rebecca had been the one asking for recommendations. A simple "No thank you" would have sufficed. I watched all of this unfold in real time. My colleague messaged Rebecca and told her that she'd made her feel uncomfortable and that she would like to withdraw her book from the set.

Meanwhile, Rebecca began posting on her own personal, public Facebook account, naming my colleague there and within the group, saying that my colleague wanted to ditch her spot and miss out on _thousands_ of dollars all because Rebecca didn't like her designer. It made me uncomfortable because that wasn't true, and shouldn't have been discussed outside the group. I commented saying that I found the public posts to be unprofessional.

Rebecca continued to PM and harass my colleague until my colleague blocked her. I commented on the original post in the group saying that I, too, was withdrawing my book from the set. Then I blocked Rebecca and left the group before I started seeing my name all over her wall.

I would like to see her change the way she interacts with the authors she claims she is trying to help. There was some question of ethics on Goodreads several years back that resulted in her being banned from that site. While I have personal experience with her there, too, I don't think it's relevant to the discussion now. However, there is certainly a pattern of behavior here and too many complaints against her business to ignore. I'm glad my colleague and I withdrew from the box set when we did, because it seems that it could have been worse.

As I've said before, I have no negative opinions of those who continue to work with her; I have several colleagues who have had wonderful experiences with her and I continue to have relationships with them. I would only remove myself from those who engage in the same unprofessional behavior. I know that I will not work with her again, and I made that decision last year. I don't think the discussion here is harmful to her business; her own practices and those of her PAs have been harmful to her business.

I think much of the discussion here has been helpful to the community when it comes to discerning unethical practices, what to look for in services, etc. I haven't seen anyone attack Rebecca personally, questioning _her_ mental health, for example, but I'm aware that these things could certainly be happening off this forum. I come to Kboards to better myself as a self-publisher. I speak here tonight because my experiences with Rebecca left me feeling as if it'd be better to keep my mouth shut beyond my "This is unprofessional, and I'm withdrawing my book" comment; seeing these practices discussed was a relief to me because for quite some time my colleague and I thought we were the only ones.

To me, my career is not worth standing by while a colleague is belittled. I'm glad that I spoke up, I'm glad that I walked away from a box set that may or may not have made me "thousands."


----------



## Susanne123

KarmaIsA... said:


> I barely found the cojones to make one post, but here I am, making two.
> 
> I am not going to address the overall issues. I stated my piece before.
> 
> But I wanted to talk about Tilly's post. I believe her. I'll tell you why. Because I have been a long time member of Kboards. Don't post a lot, do read a lot. I've read a lot from Tilly. I like the way she presents herself online. She presents as genuine, and real, and like many on these boards, gives it straight with a tad of diplomacy.
> 
> I like Monique for the same reason. I don't always agree with either, but I have never found them to be hateful, or unwilling to stand up for themselves, or what they believe in. And I've seen them be fair, even in the midst of a heated disagreement.
> 
> It comes down to patterns. I have seen the pattern of how these two members have presented themselves over the years. They still ring consistently honest.
> 
> If you haven't been a member, well, I can see where you would not see that. But to require "proof" of some sort? Like what, screenshots? I've seen a megaton of screenshots since this all began, more than I want to see ever again in my life. I see patterns there, too. I saw them before, while my set was going, and at that point, I decided I would fulfill my obligation, and then do no more business, because the pattern I was seeing was not what I wanted to be part of.
> 
> When you break up in business, there is a calm and kind way to do it, even with disputes. I've ended two businesses. I'm friendly with both my former partners.
> 
> When I see patterns that are otherwise, they are hard to refute. That may not be true for everyone. Not everyone does business the same way. But I know what I've seen, and how it made me feel.
> 
> And I "know" of the people who are now speaking out, and what my thoughts have been on them given the patterns they have presented.
> 
> It's all subjective. But Tilly, Monique, Silly, SadA, Lurking - I believe you. And I am so, so sorry.


Thank you for posting. At some point, it becomes a balance of probabilities. Did something happen? Look at the history. Like you, I've rarely posted, but I do know the consistency of the truth when I see/read it. I also believe these women.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

Just checking in and seeing a bunch of new pages on this thread. This is really getting old. You're not a judge. Nobody needs to prove anything to you. You just keep on believing what you want. Trust me, when RH falls (notice I didn't say if) anyone currently involved with her will have their personal records opened and examined. If you have nothing to hide, by all means, keep on doing what you're doing. But, if I were involved with RH, I'd go straight to an attorney, lay out everything, and ask their advice. Lawyers barely charge three digits for a consultation. Is that too high a price to pay for your career? And don't take the statement from RH that she's talked to a lawyer and everything's okay. Go talk to your own lawyer.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Hugs to Tilly and LurkingUnderARock. No one should feel that way -- especially due to a business transaction. I absolutely believe you, and I'm sorry that this happened.

_ED to clarify._


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Just checking in and seeing a bunch of new pages on this thread. This is really getting old. You're not a judge. Nobody needs to prove anything to you. You just keep on believing what you want. Trust me, when RH falls (notice I didn't say if) anyone currently involved with her will have their personal records opened and examined. If you have nothing to hide, by all means, keep on doing what you're doing. But, if I were involved with RH, I'd go straight to an attorney, lay out everything, and ask their advice. Lawyers barely charge three digits for a consultation. Is that too high a price to pay for your career? And don't take the statement from RH that she's talked to a lawyer and everything's okay. Go talk to your own lawyer.


It's always prudent to seek your own legal counsel. Please do so if you think you have anything to worry about.

_Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## CassieL

elizabethbarone said:


> Hugs to Tilly and LurkingUnderARock.


Ditto. I am so sorry for the pain you've been made to feel over all of this.


----------



## wheart

BiancaSommerland said:


> As someone else trying to understand the situation, if I'm understanding you right, you consider this more of a partnership than a business service? Are all participants on equal levels. Because that does change things.


It's a business service, but commitments still need to be upheld on both sides. In court, that is basically what they will look at in the end.



Tulonsae said:


> When and where did anyone say you had to make a decision on this "case"?


LOL, actually, it's all over the place. People want sides picked, but I can't do that. This isn't something as simple as that to me. Both sides are being hurt. But both sides have valid points.



MyraScott said:


> I'm not sure who you are asking for permission, but I hereby allow you to refrain from making a decision.
> 
> Cheers


 , fair enough. Thank you for letting me off the hook!



PhoenixS said:


> Were you even contemplating working with her before this thread? Is the question of judgment in your case even relevant?


No, actually, since I don't write in her genres. I wasn't the one who brought up if my judgment matters, in fact, it doesn't but others were asking for us to pick sides, so I've made my stance on why I can't. Things seem to get convoluted in all this, lol.

I have to go attend to my family. So if I've missed any posts directed at me, I'll check-in tomorrow when I can. Have a goodnight.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Wheart,

People on both sides of this have posted their experiences; some on each side have posted screenshots, others have not.  You can read what is here and make a decision (or not), but to repeatedly ask people for more than they have shared is not appropriate.  Yes, it reads as a demand when it is repeated.  You may not have intended that, I realize.

Let's move past this.  

Everyone, let's not repeat things from the despicable Twitter account, thank you.  We'll remove content related to the Twitter feed.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Wayne Stinnett said:


> Just checking in and seeing a bunch of new pages on this thread. This is really getting old. You're not a judge. Nobody needs to prove anything to you. You just keep on believing what you want. Trust me, when RH falls (notice I didn't say if) anyone currently involved with her will have their personal records opened and examined. If you have nothing to hide, by all means, keep on doing what you're doing. But, if I were involved with RH, I'd go straight to an attorney, lay out everything, and ask their advice. Lawyers barely charge three digits for a consultation. Is that too high a price to pay for your career? And don't take the statement from RH that she's talked to a lawyer and everything's okay. Go talk to your own lawyer.


This is very sound advice. Very sound. As in, I really, really hope people take it.

The only legal counsel to take is counsel you, yourself, obtain.


----------



## sela

Worried said:


> Since I posted earlier about @Iamscamilton's twitter campaign against RH, more information has been posted on FB about the tweet which had an image from a FB direct message conversation about RH miscarrying and above the photo stated "That miscarriage is lasting a while. (*see definition for modus operandi)" From what RH is saying, the image was taken from a conversation in January of 2016 (when they presumably had a very different relationship than they currently have) with someone who has commented multiple times on this thread. RH has posted a screenshot of that conversation as proof of where it came from. After seeing her post, I was curious enough to pull the tweet up again and noticed that it was retweeted by the same author with a comment of "How long did the giraffe take?".
> 
> Bullying isn't right. From either side.


People shouldn't do bad things, okay? That's a no brainer. We can all agree to it.

We're discussing the _particular_ bad behaviour reported by many customers of RH / GenreCrave / boxed sets on this thread and discussing the evidence presented of bullying, breach of contract and general unprofessional behaviour.

The focus of this thread, when it isn't being derailed, is RH's business practices and unprofessional behaviour bullying and blackballing customers who have questioned business practices, requested refunds, or wanted out.

That's the focus of this thread. What other people are doing outside of this thread is immaterial to the matter at hand.

This is diversion, pure and simple.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett

elizabethbarone said:


> It's always prudent to seek your own legal counsel. Please do so if you think you have anything to worry about.
> 
> _Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


And of course, I won't be.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

wheart said:


> It's a business service, but commitments still need to be upheld on both sides. In court, that is basically what they will look at in the end.
> 
> LOL, actually, it's all over the place. People want sides picked, but I can't do that. This isn't something as simple as that to me. Both sides are being hurt. But both sides have valid points.
> 
> , fair enough. Thank you for letting me off the hook!
> 
> No, actually, since I don't write in her genres. I wasn't the one who brought up if my judgment matters, in fact, it doesn't but others were asking for us to pick sides, so I've made my stance on why I can't. Things seem to get convoluted in all this, lol.
> 
> I have to go attend to my family. So if I've missed any posts directed at me, I'll check-in tomorrow when I can. Have a goodnight.


I will go on record and say that I don't give a darn what you believe. I'm not sure why you would imagine anybody cares.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Wayne Stinnett said:


> And of course, I won't be.


Oh, I meant "you" in general, not _you_ you, Wayne. Just seconding the very good advice to always get your own legal counsel.


----------



## sela

wheart said:


> It's a business service, but commitments still need to be upheld on both sides. In court, that is basically what they will look at in the end.
> 
> LOL, actually, it's all over the place. People want sides picked, but I can't do that. This isn't something as simple as that to me. Both sides are being hurt. But both sides have valid points.
> 
> , fair enough. Thank you for letting me off the hook!
> 
> No, actually, since I don't write in her genres. I wasn't the one who brought up if my judgment matters, in fact, it doesn't but others were asking for us to pick sides, so I've made my stance on why I can't. Things seem to get convoluted in all this, lol.
> 
> I have to go attend to my family. So if I've missed any posts directed at me, I'll check-in tomorrow when I can. Have a goodnight.


IANAL but when the organizer breaks the terms of a contract, there are no longer any commitments to keep up and a new contract has to be agreed to. If a customer has paid money to the organizer and the contract is broken, they have every right not to sign a new contract and are owed money back for breach of contract. Possibly damages depending on the circumstances. That's for a judge to decide.

People do not want _you_ to pick sides or anyone to pick sides. But if people are still demanding more evidence after 55 pages of evidence and testimony and are still unable to make a decision at this point, I question whether they are being serious or are merely diverting and offering excuses. There is a term for it but we can't use it in this forum, but it's a big ugly ogre-type being that lives under bridges.


----------



## BiancaSommerland

wheart said:


> It's a business service, but commitments still need to be upheld on both sides. In court, that is basically what they will look at in the end.


Perhaps. I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know what's being presented in the case, so I won't pass judgment on that.

But I will say, from an author's standpoint, early in my career some of my readers would come to me about bad reviews they didn't think were fair. One commented on a review and I got a head's up and messaged her, asking her to delete the comment. Whether I'd sent her or not, people would assume I had which looks bad. And that's just how I do things as an author.

I'm looking at this as how a business handles situations that taken a turn for the worst. There's a reason many try to settle things with unhappy clients as quietly as possible. When customers complain in public, the best PR firms will release a statement saying they're looking into the problem and apologize for any unpleasantness, even before they've fully investigated.

As authors, we often end up in situations where we're looking at contracts we don't understand and don't have the protection of the mass market. So we learn from each other. We find the information we can about businesses. And make the most informed decision possible. I've learned a lot over the years doing things that way. And I give the same advice to others.

In this situation I guess it comes down to what kind of business you want to work with. Both sides have given good insight into what can be expected.

That said, those who've been hurt, I'm so sorry. And I'm here for hugs and support if you need it. I haven't been around the group much until lately, but I do plan to be here more now.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

I see a lot of mention of death threats, but I have not seen any actual evidence of such, nor any mention of the involvement of law enforcement, which is a logical step when there are actual death threats. Did I miss these things, or is the "death threats" claim just being trotted out as an appeal to emotion?


----------



## sela

Jeffery H said:


> And I suppose the mocking death threats and jokes about her miscarriage on twitter are completely unrelated to this thread. I mean, what kind of person mocks a woman for having a miscarriage? It boggles my mind. FYI, I have seen the email from the OP to Rebecca asking to be let out of the contract. Rebecca tells her she can't give her a refund but she will get the first $500 the set makes. And as of this moment, still over on Facebook, says she will still pay her as soon as the set makes money, per the contract. You see, the no refund policy is made VERY clear up front. A refund would hurt all the authors. So what she does is donate the spot to another author and then as the set makes money she gives the original author their money back, they just have to wait. This is something that is made very clear to each and every author who signs up for a box set. There will be no court case, and if I had to guess the money being collected for legal battle will never be used for that. All the evidence is on Rebecca's page for anyone to see, unedited, and undoctored. Even after all this, she is still saying things like, "I wish all these authors the best and I'm sorry they're so unhappy." Even after the death threats by anon twitter accounts, the mocking of her miscarriage and the accusations against her mental health. She still hasn't said ONE BAD THING about anyone. Not one. Perhaps if people were to join her marketing group, go over and see how she conducts herself on a daily basis, see the library of screen caps she posts about every transaction and exactly where the money went, see where she apologizes when she makes mistakes and see how she bends over backward to make each box set a success, then maybe, just maybe this witch hunt would have a little less steam. At the very least, maybe the death threats and the mocking of her miscarriage could stop.


1. RH changed the contract. When that happens, it is nullified. Everyone who signed and paid is entitled to their money back. The no refund policy only covers contracts that are signed and fulfilled. If they are broken or changed, everyone gets to back out with money back.

I call BS on the no refund policy anyway. It's a bad business practice. If an author pulls out, there is one less spot but it can be filled easily, based on what I have heard about how popular these promos are. Anyway, when someone wants out, for whatever reason, let them out and be professional about it. If the promo is so popular, I am sure someone will step right up and fill the empty spot. The biggest indies out there who provide services and products offer money back guarantees.

2. We are talking about the business practices of RH and the experiences of people who bought services from her. They have told us that when they tried to get their money back after the contract was broken or they saw unethical or questionable business practices or pull out of the sets, they were bullied, blackballed and harmed, not the behaviour of other people.

What uninvolved people say in private about anything is not the issue. The issue is what RH did: we have first-hand reports and evidence of RH refusing to return money after breaking contracts, public shaming and bullying, and unethical business practices.

Bringing up the behaviour of other people is a diversion from the main issue and it is a tactic by the failing side of an argument.

3. Look up the definition of passive-aggressive behaviour.

4. People are reporting bad behaviour they have personally experienced. Other people may have had very good experiences. Those good experiences do not negate those who have had bad experiences.

5. The term witch hunt is loaded and suggests that all those who have given testimony and presented evidence are liars.

6. People shouldn't do bad things. We all agree. The bad things we're focused on in this thread are the reports of bad things from former customers of RH and her GenreCrave service and boxed set business. If you want to discuss other bad things by other people, I am sure you could start a thread on it. The other bad things do not detract from the specific ones we are discussing here.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone

Thevoiceofreason said:


> And I suppose the mocking death threats and jokes about her miscarriage on twitter are completely unrelated to this thread. ...


I can only speak for myself, but I just looked at that Twitter account and found the miscarriage jokes despicable, to say the least. There have been no death threats or miscarriage jokes on this forum, though, so I don't think it's constructive to continue bringing up what's taking place off site. I suggest that people report the Twitter account for abuse (though, in my experience, Twitter doesn't seem to really do much about harassment *sigh*).


----------



## BiancaSommerland

elizabethbarone said:


> I can only speak for myself, but I just looked at that Twitter account and found the miscarriage jokes despicable, to say the least. There have been no death threats or miscarriage jokes on this forum, though, so I don't think it's constructive to continue bringing up what's taking place off site. I suggest that people report the Twitter account for abuse (though, in my experience, Twitter doesn't seem to really do much about harassment *sigh*).


It takes a lot of reports before twitter takes anything down, but I've reported posts that have been removed.

Death threats are serious. I've had to deal with them toward my daughter from friends who were 'joking'. The police got involved, as well as the school since all the kids went to the same one. It was an ugly situation, but all the parents took it seriously and it was handled quickly.

For threats like that, please report and keep documents of all instances. I know in Canada the police react quickly--they have agencies dedicated to this. I'm not sure how it is in the US, but I don't imagine they take it lightly.


----------



## Becca Mills

This thread has now grown to a rather unwieldy 57 pp. Much information has been shared. KBoards's owner and moderators hope members' contributions to this thread will allow people to read, consider, and come to their own decisions as they grapple with this issue. It's our feeling that the pace of new revelations has slowed, and that discussion of the posted evidence is beginning to become circular. Therefore, we've made the decision to lock this particular thread. Please respect our wish to end this discussion at this point by not starting new threads about exactly the same topic.

With love and thanks,
The KBoards Staff


----------

