Ugly new advertisement banner!!!

[Gothic.net]

Originally Posted by horrorgirl

I think his purpose was to call you out on your lies.

What lie? They were invited to support their claim.

[horrorgirl]

I'm going to go eat some Otter Pops right now. I'm tired.

[Gothic.net]

People always seem to get so tired all of a sudden, when they are wrong.

In the realm of capitalism, when one purchases a business one ALSO assumes any previous debt, and instead of resurrecting those previously paid and e-published stories, why not erase the debt owed to all the writers that went without pay a contract renewal with first time publication payment? Nepotism, or sadism?

Err, or just bad buisness sense?

[horrorgirl]

Originally Posted by Gothic.net

People always seem to get so tired all of a sudden, when they are wrong.

No, they get tired when they want an Otter Pop and they have to go to the freezer to get one.

[Gothic.net]

Originally Posted by TStone

In the realm of capitalism, when one purchases a business one ALSO assumes any previous debt, and instead of resurrecting those previously paid and e-published stories, why not erase the debt owed to all the writers that went without pay a contract renewal with first time publication payment? Nepotism, or sadism?

Err, or just bad buisness sense?

You might want to re-state that in clear English.

Although the sale was supposed to include the rights to work previously published on Gothic.net, the new ownership did new contracts and paid every writer contracted a second time.

Okieedokie, queer Engerwsh it is,

A: You paid a select few, which had already received payment for 1st time publication rights, again—from my sources at deepthroat.com well above the market average—and published those stores a second time.

B: You defaulted on payments from 2003 thru 2005 for contracted works when you took ownership, and did not honor previous agreed upon rates, and instead republished select authors well above (sources my majick 8 ball) any market listings for professional pay, and if what I’ve been led to believe is correct, gothic.net could have feasibly published a monthly story for more than two years on what your site paid to REPUBlISH previously published works. How serious, exactly, are you about being a literary webzine when you piss all your capital away? FYI, pro-market rates for first time publication rights are 5 cent a word, and 1 cent a word for reprints. Just in case, you know, you were confused.

C: You REFUSED to remove my work after I asked numerous times, and YOU threatened various moderators (when someone else removed my work for me) and berated them for the removal of posts without your prior consent. In general, you were douchebags.

D: Your site was not included in the 2005 or 2006 Writer’s Market listing, your site has been removed from the listings at Ralan.com.

E: There is a clear cause and effect for why established writers, which once frequented the site, no longer make any appearances.

[Gothic.net]

The current owners of Gothic.net have paid every writer they contracted.

Obviously, the previous management was not able to pay their bills for writers or hosting or anything else. This is why they accepted charity hosting and eventually sold off most of their assets. Nobody disputes that the previous management was either unable or unwilling to pay as agreed.

As previously stated, Gothic.net is currently closed to general submissions. It would be wrong for there to be market listings which would encourage writers to create work which could not be submitted at this time.

From what you posted here, your fundamental complaint is not solely that you posted on a message board and your posts are still here. You also wish to complain that writers were paid too much.

Hmmm, read the faqs, eh? Well, how about this. My work was on the site prior to the change of ownership, and with the change of ownership the boards faq section went up, which is when I STARTED petitioning for my work to be removed, since your new FAQ’s enabled you to STEAL intellectual property, so if you are arguing that my work was your property since it preexisted when you took over ownership then you negate your previous argument that you do not owe other writers for published contracted work prior to your ownership.

How fucking thick can you be?

I am stating a select few writers were paid too much, and others not at all.

You're just now catching on?

I'm also stating, emphatically, that the new site owners are idiots, and have no idea what they are doing.

[horrorgirl]

Originally Posted by TStone

I'm also stating, emphatically, that the new site owners are idiots, and have no idea what they are doing.

Agreed. Word.

[Gothic.net]

Originally Posted by TStone

Hmmm, read the faqs, eh? Well, how about this. My work was on the site prior to the change of ownership, and with the change of ownership the boards faq section went up, which is when I STARTED petitioning for my work to be removed, since your new FAQ’s enabled you to STEAL intellectual property, so if you are arguing that my work was your property since it preexisted when you took over ownership then you negate your previous argument that you do not owe other writers for published contracted work prior to your ownership.

How fucking thick can you be?

Posts to a message board are not "work" a writer such as yourself would typically be paid for. Would you have preferred that the database for these boards not be imported into the improved and faster script? Would it have been better if everyone's words and logins and profiles just disappeared? What would have been the point of preserving the site then?

People need to learn to think before they post to the web, as almost everything ever posted online is archived in perpetuity in numerous ways. If you place something in a free forum, it is not theft for that thing to remain there. If you spraypaint the side of a building, the building owner is not stealing from you if they choose not to paint over what you wrote.

Everything contracted by the current ownership for Gothic.net has been paid for. If one listens to you, the writers were paid too much.

If a store goes out of business, the person who buys the fixtures from it does not owe payment for the defunct management's past due phone bill.

[Gothic.net]

Originally Posted by TStone

I'm also stating, emphatically, that the new site owners are idiots, and have no idea what they are doing.

If you are reduced to name-calling, it means you know you are wrong.

Really, I’m wrong? That’s gothtastic, my ever-so-goth-whine that is fundamentally discarded by double-speak and nana’s from you.

GOTHIC NET DID NOT PAY ALL WRITES THEY CONTRACTED WORK FROM!

I don’t know how I can state that in simpler terms, or something your simple mind can wrap around, seeing as how you keep repeating the same thing over and over it’s led me to the observation you are an idiot, and that makes you right…

I guess, it does, and you’re a right idiot.

See, in business when you purchase or absorb a company you absorb all previous debts and obligations. THE OWNERS DID NOT PURCHASE FIXTURES, but the entire fucking thing, if we are going to use your analogy, and if the previous owners did have an unpaid electric bill, it is now their responsibility to pay it. If you purchase a house and there is an unpaid balance for work rendered, that is called a lien, which you are obligated to pay as the NEW OWNER.

Isn’t that fucktastic how that works?

Now, let’s backup a moment and tackle, again, this issue of intellectual work posted on a web board.

I highly suggest you read this http://www.copyright.gov/title17/circ92.pdf and then realize you are wrong in your assumptions that you can fabricate a rules section that gives you the rights to my property. IT IS NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN, I also suggest you read up on, exactly, what constitutes public domain and save yourself the legalities of having to tell a judge you are a stupid fucknugget. In NONE of my posts have I granted ANYONE the permission to copy, in part or whole, any portion of my intellectual works. I granted the previous owners temporary rights to make my work viewable, which they did in a message board format, and of which DID NOT convey to the new ownership.

This is banal, this whole discussion. Your site does not OWN any work posted on these message boards, and if requested by ANY user to remove any work your are REQUIRED BY LAW to comply. How fucking hard is that?

[Gothic.net]

This is not about simplicity. It is about being accurate, being correct, being right.

What leads you to believe that the current owners of Gothic.net purchased the business in its entirety? That is so patently not the case, but presumably you base your wholly inaccurate assumption there on something. There are numerous assets from the now defunct business which were not transferred from the former owners.

You are invited to point out anything Gothic.net's current owners contracted which you think they didn't pay the writers for.

You have once again failed to answer any of the questions posed.

What would make you think you deserve to be paid for something you chose to post to a message board? Posts to a message board are not "work" a writer such as yourself would typically be paid for. Would you have preferred that the database for these boards not be imported into the improved and faster script? Would it have been better if everyone's words and logins and profiles just disappeared? What would have been the point of preserving the site then?

Originally Posted by Gothic.net

What would make you think you deserve to be paid for something you chose to post to a message board? Posts to a message board are not "work" a writer such as yourself would typically be paid for. Would you have preferred that the database for these boards not be imported into the improved and faster script? Would it have been better if everyone's words and logins and profiles just disappeared? What would have been the point of preserving the site then?

What would make you think you have the right to archive, not only my work, but any author’s work, indefinitely? If I, or any other writer, CHOSE to allow the previous owner temporary electronic rights, we did so for the love of the craft and to help promote the website. For my part, those works did not convey with what you purchased. Let me draw you this analogy, if you purchased a business that was receiving free electrical service due to some previous arrangement with the previous owner and Service Company, do you assume you, too, will automatically receive free electric?

When the bill comes, or they cut off your service, do you sit there in the dark suckling your thumb?

Posts to a literary message board, containing poems and original intellectual works, are tangible things writers can be expected to recieve pay for. If you were getting free eclectic for a while, then enjoy it while it’s there and when it’s gone?

Call your Service Company and see about getting reconnected.

Originally Posted by Gothic.net

What leads you to believe that the current owners of Gothic.net purchased the business in its entirety? That is so patently not the case, but presumably you base your wholly inaccurate assumption there on something. There are numerous assets from the now defunct business which were not transferred from the former owners.

There is what is factual, and what is perceived. You’d do well by being perceived to be factual, and ethical, in your dealings with the literary minded. Myself not included, if; when you took over ownership of the site you were aware of a previous non-payment to an author for work under contract, then you SHOULD have paid those authors before contracting new work. Plain, simple, direct. It was the right thing to do. Also, let me make abundantly clear I offered poetry for a limited period, but the contracted story, _Dead Air_ was purchased to make viewable online for a period not exceeding a year. I’m not sure what you purchased from the previous owner, but I do know that I’m a mild guy (really) and if I’m feeling the current owners are culpable of some improprieties, them I’m sure other’s view you as the antifuckingchrist.

If you were the warm and fuzzy literary friendly zine you claim to be, then you would have looked into any past grievances and settled them, you would treat your authors and author hopefuls with respect and offer competitive pro-rates with one time electronic use rights for a period of no more than a year with the option to have work removed, in its entirety, from archival sources at the author’s request.

Yay, you paid your current contract obligations (TWICE) but Equifax is still showing non-payment for numerous debts for a period of years.

Loan. Denied.

[Gothic.net]

What is factual is that Gothic.net's current ownership has conducted its business in a thoroughly decent, reasonable, ethical, and proper way and you are libelously attempting to make perception be something other than what is factual.

Have you ever contacted Gothic.net privately via email or snail mail with a professionally-worded query about this story you have just mentioned for the first time? It does not appear on the site at this time, does it? Was that story ever published?

Stories which are currently published on the site have been paid for, by the current owners, per the terms of the contracts those authors signed with the current ownership.

How precisely would you propose that Gothic.net's current owners go about finding out who the former owners might potentially have had a deal with and whether or not they paid as agreed?

Posts to a message board, if you want to get all literate about it, are intangible. Name a few horror or gothic message boards which pay everyone who chooses to make a post.

The right thing to do is to take care of people one works with, which you admit the current owners of Gothic.net have done, albeit at a higher rate than you think is appropriate.

You still have not answered would you have preferred that the database for these boards not be imported into the improved and faster script? Would it have been better if everyone's words and logins and profiles just disappeared? What would have been the point of preserving the site then?

Libelously? What did I say that is false? That the current owners did not review business records to ensure all intellectual property previously purchased was paid for? Or that fact I requested, numerous times, to have my poetry removed and was met with this same patronizing shtick and runaround as you are currently engaging me in? Or the stories that were published at launch were reprints, four from one author, two from another, two more from a third, three from a fourth, and one from a fifth, and one more from a sixth author? What webzine or rag publishes 4 stories from one author in a single issue? That just does not make sense. Furthermore, is it libelous to want variety? To expect the administration to deal respectfully with readers and writers, and to address complaints and concerns without being pretentious and condescending to your viewers? Am I being libel by calling you on your mission statement; Bone Chilling Literary Culture, and ask where the fuck is the Bone, the Chilling, the Literary, and the Culture? My opinion is not liable, the lack of new publication is fact, my discourse with your site on removing my poetry is public record as is your dissenting remarks to me, and the non-payment of a previously accepted and published work of mine is factual, as well.

Furthermore, to your point on payment for board posts, I have never even entertained the idea of asking for payment for anything that I posted on these boards, only for it to be removed when I asked, which was removed (finally) but not by the administrators approval. Common courtesy, and diligence with respect when hosting someone else’s work, especially in regards to receiving further work.

Your question WAS answered by the copyright law, and you should have asked for permission, first.

Now on to the argument of higher rates that you’ve taken as a personal diatribe, and the crux is this: You proclaim to be a literary site devoted to the bone chilling literary culture, but you haven’t published anything since your (new) inception. You (specifically you) attacked a forum member who disliked a banner, and when your explanation was answered, you countered with the benign motivations of the new owners trying to raise capital so they can publish new work, and I met that argument with…well, all the previous. A literary site would be best served by hosting literary works, and use those works and related advertisements to generate revenue. How do the owners expect to pull in more fiction when they aren’t offering any new fiction? Would you go to a car lot that has been bought out by a taco shack and is now selling crack cocaine to buy a sponge? Eh? That doesn’t make any goddamn sense?

Exactly.

So, this is how it works, essentially. Instead of setting aside enough capital to carry you through (at least four quarters) you pay out x amount of dollars and publish ALL the literary work at once (multiple stories from the same authors) and do not publish anything else. You don’t see the faint trappings of nepotism there? You expect to keep an audience riveted with those same stories for…years? Haven’t you ever been to the titty bar? You strip down slowly and don’t show the crack-taco until you’ve sucked your mark dry of all the dollars; the principal is a little skewed in this application, but the fundamentals are; keep your audience interested, keep your talent happy, and they will keep you in business.

In summation; you’ve done right by six authors, but have failed over 7,420 subscribed members plus an uncountable mass of guest users. Way to go!

[horrorgirl]

*passes you a blue raspberry Otter Pop*

[Gothic.net]

You already admitted that you were talking more about perception than fact. You may want to retain competent legal counsel if you don't understand libel law. Not that anyone here is likely to waste legal time on you. If you think linking to a 290 page PDF is proving a point, you might want to try narrowing it down to a specific cite of what you believe to be pertinent or perhaps relevant caselaw.

So, the summary of what you have to say is:

Okay, you lied about purchasing a Wolverine statue via a banner on this site.

Okay, you admit that you believe that all the currently contracted Gothic.net authors have been paid, although you think they were paid too much.

You think that the defunct management kept something akin to business records and they should have passed those over to the people who purchased some of their assets.

But you think funds to pay people like writers appear through alchemical magic, so this site should only run banners which do not interest the forum members.

Guess what. The former owners of Gothic.net apparently shared your view that money appeared via alchemical magic and they ended up breaking what is apparently a large number of promises to a lot of people, the current owners of Gothic.net included.

And you still have not answered would you have preferred that the database for these boards not be imported into the improved and faster script? Would it have been better if everyone's words and logins and profiles just disappeared? What would have been the point of preserving the site then? Have you ever contacted Gothic.net privately via email or snail mail with a professionally-worded query about this story you have just mentioned for the first time? It does not appear on the site at this time, does it? Was that story ever published?

This site is not a tease of a strip club nor is it a used car lot which dabbles in crack sales. Maybe you preferred the way this site used to be run, but the current management believes in keeping promises and not making promises until it is definite that they can be kept. Word should be bond.

[horrorgirl]

Dear Gothic.net,

You seem like a very unhappy person. You need the magic of Ronnie James Dio in your life.

DIO - Rainbow In The Dark


When there's lightning - it always brings me down
Cause it's free and I see that it's me
Who's lost and never found
I cry for magic - I feel it dancing in the light
But it was cold - I lost my hold
To the shadows of the night

There's no sign of the morning coming
You've been left on your own
Like a Rainbow in the Dark

Do your demons - do they ever let you go
When you've tried - do they hide -deep inside
Is it someone that you know
You're a picture - just an image caught in time
We're a lie - you and I
We're words without a rhyme

There's no sign of the morning coming
You've been left on your own
Like a Rainbow in the Dark

When there's lightning - it always brings me down
Cause it's free and I see that it's me
Who's lost and never found
Feel the magic -feel it dancing in the air
But it's fear - and you'll hear
It calling you beware

There's no sign of the morning coming
There's no sight of the day
You've been left on your own
Like a Rainbow in the Dark

[WolfMoon]

Originally Posted by horrogirl

Remember....I'm gothtastic!

And lickable.


I've got some ideas for banner ads, I don't know any company names, though.

How about something that appeals to the great many gothic people that frequent these boards? I know that some people don't like them, but how about a banner for Gothic Beauty?

How about banners for groups that interest us? Cinema Strange, Legendary Pink Dots, Rammstein, Genitorturers, Skinny Puppy, Type O Negative?

To advertise a band in the emo genre on a Gothic forum, it's like a slap in the face to some of us. What's next? Simple Plan? Hawthorne Heights? Blink 182?

In case you haven't been paying attention to the boards, the great majority of us are not Emo. We laugh at them, we flame them, we leave them crying.

Tom, I love you.

[Ben Lahnger]

Current ownership has turned a blind eye to MANY conversations herein where people inquired about submitting their writings for free.

If writers were interested in submitting their work for review, expecting no more payment than the good exposure that being published here would bring, then money is no longer the problem. True, hosting and maintaining this site incurs some costs, and I have no problem with you getting your advertising dollars where you can. But calling this a literary site when there isn't even a mechanism in place for people to submit their written offerings - not even one listing of an email address - is a farce.

By the way, you have lots of pretty banners rotating through here. I would think they generate enough revenue to pay for one new piece a month, at least. Unless you're getting paid on a click-through basis. Then I could see you having a problem. I myself haven't clicked on a banner since February ... when I realized you weren't supporting the literary side of this site.

But, hey, cheer up! These are some lovely gothic chat rooms you're hosting!

[Gothic.net]

Originally Posted by Xnguela

T did not lie about the Wolverine statue... He said he wasn't going to buy one, and he hasn't. It was funny, because all of us regulars know that TStone is an X-men fan. It was a joke.

Here is where TStone claimed to have a Wolverine statue:

Originally Posted by TStone

Bah. *Goes back to enjoying his statue*

But, the conversation was about the fact that the banners that get the most complaints are exactly the ones that actually show results, and the banners that don't get complaints also don't perform. It was about the fact that a negative response to the new AFI banner was so predictable that we actually had an office pool on how many minutes it would take before someone such as HorrorGirl would make a snide comment about it. TStone did not get a Wolverine statue, not that this is any sort of big deal, but it underlines the point being made.

Originally Posted by Xnguela

It's interesting that you've become "riled up" about this issue.

I'm not sure why, I just find it interesting.

Fundamentally, a guy who asks people to call him Weaselboy tried to weasel on the deal he made with Gothic.net's current owners and he didn't get his way on every little thing. A lot of people seem to think the recent rash of troll activity was his doing. It took up a lot of the moderators' time and was purely malicious. If the former ownership had put half the energy into making this site viable that they have put into causing problems for its current incarnation, it probably would not have been necessary for them to sell off any of its assets.

Eventually the moderators and owners had to get tired of him and his cronies doing everything they can to drag the site down. TStone is warning writers away from the site, yet the current owners have paid every writer they have contracted to appear on the site. What is there really to warn them about? All these folks are doing is undermining a totally ethical site because the previous less reputable owner is disgruntled about some nonsense. If people like TStone are going to continue to post complaints about fictitious problems and make wholly inaccurate assertions about the character and ethics of this site, yes, eventually we might respond. We might ask them to actually support their claims. This is the part where they start having problems because people such as TStone are so unable to logically support their false claims that they are reduced to swearing and name-calling. Don't expect a lot of threads like this, as it is not particularly gratifying to debate with people who keep dodging direct questions and clearly have no intention of attempting to work out any problem they might have. If the only thing about a person which is gothic is their love of complaining, it doesn't make sense to spend a lot of energy taking their complaints seriously.