Partly Response-ish
Sep. 30th, 2006 09:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
heidiI admit that I haven't read all of the posts from Micheka aka Laura aka Purple Popple aka Partly Bouncy, but I've read enough to know that people are going to have questions.
But more than that, it seems from Michela's account that various users of the Sugarquill and Gryffindor Tower forums/sites have been hearing lies about me for years. There's things in Michela's account which are completely fiction. I mean, what can one possibly say about
...except that it's entirely fictional. Someone created a story, perhaps to cause other people to fear me, and to fear Cassie. That's all it is - a story - the same kind of story that parents tell their kids to keep them from going into the candy store across the street. Urban legend, whatever you want to call it, it's a lie.*
So if you've been told of something evil, nefarious, underhanded, malicious or bad that I've done - ask me if it's true, and I'll let you know. But since tomorrow night marks the start of Yom Kippur, and thus I'm going to be mostly-offline through Monday night, I can't answer everything - but I'll answer any questions people have about any contents of her posts or any comments made on B_P before things were deleted there, or on her own JF account. Anon commenting will be on through Sunday and again on Tuesday, and IP logging will be off at the same times. If I can't do all the answering, I'll finish on Tuesday and afterwards.
But I do want to deal with a few things sooner than later, because they're attacks on my professionalism and on me as a lawyer.
I did use my blackberry on occasion to post to various private (ie ungoogleable archives that are not accessable by members of the public unless they join them) Yahoogroups. This was actually allowed under our internet usage policy - we could use our blackberries for occasional personal usage - the same way that people in many offices can use their office phones for occasional personal usage, like to make a lunch date with a friend or check in to make sure the kids have made it home from school.
I'll defer to Rebcca Tushnet's law journal article regarding where I based some of my feelings in 2000 and 2001 regarding disclaimers, and note that I don't think that there was a fandom-standard for disclaimers at that time, in any way, especially because "senior" fanfiction people like Cairnsy at ffn did not have any disclaimers on
their stories, not even of the HP characters and content. But YMMV and reasonable minds may differ.
I don't know where she's getting hte idea that Sinead stalked Cassie but on the matter of sinead, I'll defer to![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
kelleyscorpio's post to Michela on B_P back in June - Kelley, I know you sent me the link this week and that was the first time I'd seen it, but I can't find the url now - let me know so I can edit it into this if that's ok?
I've seen that people are wondering why I discussed fannish things at work.
It's a long story... but a nice one.
My first month at Carlton Fields was in October of 2000. I was in a "satellite" office with attorneys from a law firm that had been a small and independent firm for over a dozen years, and had just merged into CF. At said small firm, there was a firmwide tradition of dressing up for Halloween, and in 2000, my boss, and at least one other attorney, and IIRC a paralegal, showed up in full Star Trek regalia. Boss told me that day that he was a Trekker, and it was then that I first saw his Klingon dictionary on his bookcase. I admitted to my Harry Potter and Crowded House fannishness (I used to mod the frenz.com forums withaswas) and he promised me a day off to go see the film the day it opened the following year, noting that he always took the morning off when a Trek film opened.
I felt comfortable being a fan because I knew I was around other people who had attended cons, who brought their fannishness into the workplace to some degree, and who didn't blink at the pre-release
Sorcerer's Stone poster I had framed on the wall.
I know I'm lucky to have had these experiences, but I am not the only one. I know of lawyers who have served as counsel to fandom groups, with the knowledge and support of their firms - and they sometimes even get pro bono credit for it. I know accountants who've done the same. And I personally think it's terrific.
I was not fired from Carlton Fields in November of 2001 because of posts I made online in June of 2001. No law firm would ever wait nearly six months to fire someone for violating firm ethics rules or guidelines. Too much liability risk. I left Carlton Fields, along with the other attorneys in my department, when the firm disolved the San Jose office and the entire Internet Law department when we just didn't have enough business after the death of the department's co-head, Keith Stephens, the previous spring, only six months after the department had started. I left on good terms with everyone and have lunched, dined and hung
out with former colleagues since.
I hope this clarifies a few things, and I'm off to re-allow anon comments and turn off the IP logging.
ETA: Anons are unscreened again.
But more than that, it seems from Michela's account that various users of the Sugarquill and Gryffindor Tower forums/sites have been hearing lies about me for years. There's things in Michela's account which are completely fiction. I mean, what can one possibly say about
> It is also about this time, in the spring of 2002,
> unsubstantiated rumors circulated saying that Heidi Tandy was going after
> an adult woman who had left Cassandra Claire negative feedback. Along
> with Stacey and with Cassandra Claire's involvement in helping with IP
> information, they tracked down the woman and her employer. Supposedly,
> one of them contacted the employer and informed the employer of the
> woman's fannish activities. This led to the woman being fired. This story
> cannot be verified and the truthfulness of it is almost not important.
> What is important is that people heard this story and believed it to be
> true. The story helped stem a great deal of criticism regarding Heidi and
> Cassandra Claire's actions out of fear that the duo would do similar
> things to the unfortunate person who crossed them.
...except that it's entirely fictional. Someone created a story, perhaps to cause other people to fear me, and to fear Cassie. That's all it is - a story - the same kind of story that parents tell their kids to keep them from going into the candy store across the street. Urban legend, whatever you want to call it, it's a lie.*
So if you've been told of something evil, nefarious, underhanded, malicious or bad that I've done - ask me if it's true, and I'll let you know. But since tomorrow night marks the start of Yom Kippur, and thus I'm going to be mostly-offline through Monday night, I can't answer everything - but I'll answer any questions people have about any contents of her posts or any comments made on B_P before things were deleted there, or on her own JF account. Anon commenting will be on through Sunday and again on Tuesday, and IP logging will be off at the same times. If I can't do all the answering, I'll finish on Tuesday and afterwards.
But I do want to deal with a few things sooner than later, because they're attacks on my professionalism and on me as a lawyer.
By this time, Heidi was posting to fan fiction mailing lists from an
e-mail address that included information regarding the law firm she
was working for. The signature from that e-mail address added to every
post as a text file specified that the advice offered in it should not
be considered as legal advice.
I did use my blackberry on occasion to post to various private (ie ungoogleable archives that are not accessable by members of the public unless they join them) Yahoogroups. This was actually allowed under our internet usage policy - we could use our blackberries for occasional personal usage - the same way that people in many offices can use their office phones for occasional personal usage, like to make a lunch date with a friend or check in to make sure the kids have made it home from school.
I'll defer to Rebcca Tushnet's law journal article regarding where I based some of my feelings in 2000 and 2001 regarding disclaimers, and note that I don't think that there was a fandom-standard for disclaimers at that time, in any way, especially because "senior" fanfiction people like Cairnsy at ffn did not have any disclaimers on
their stories, not even of the HP characters and content. But YMMV and reasonable minds may differ.
I don't know where she's getting hte idea that Sinead stalked Cassie but on the matter of sinead, I'll defer to
kelleyscorpio's post to Michela on B_P back in June - Kelley, I know you sent me the link this week and that was the first time I'd seen it, but I can't find the url now - let me know so I can edit it into this if that's ok?I've seen that people are wondering why I discussed fannish things at work.
It's a long story... but a nice one.
My first month at Carlton Fields was in October of 2000. I was in a "satellite" office with attorneys from a law firm that had been a small and independent firm for over a dozen years, and had just merged into CF. At said small firm, there was a firmwide tradition of dressing up for Halloween, and in 2000, my boss, and at least one other attorney, and IIRC a paralegal, showed up in full Star Trek regalia. Boss told me that day that he was a Trekker, and it was then that I first saw his Klingon dictionary on his bookcase. I admitted to my Harry Potter and Crowded House fannishness (I used to mod the frenz.com forums with
aswas) and he promised me a day off to go see the film the day it opened the following year, noting that he always took the morning off when a Trek film opened.I felt comfortable being a fan because I knew I was around other people who had attended cons, who brought their fannishness into the workplace to some degree, and who didn't blink at the pre-release
Sorcerer's Stone poster I had framed on the wall.
I know I'm lucky to have had these experiences, but I am not the only one. I know of lawyers who have served as counsel to fandom groups, with the knowledge and support of their firms - and they sometimes even get pro bono credit for it. I know accountants who've done the same. And I personally think it's terrific.
I was not fired from Carlton Fields in November of 2001 because of posts I made online in June of 2001. No law firm would ever wait nearly six months to fire someone for violating firm ethics rules or guidelines. Too much liability risk. I left Carlton Fields, along with the other attorneys in my department, when the firm disolved the San Jose office and the entire Internet Law department when we just didn't have enough business after the death of the department's co-head, Keith Stephens, the previous spring, only six months after the department had started. I left on good terms with everyone and have lunched, dined and hung
out with former colleagues since.
I hope this clarifies a few things, and I'm off to re-allow anon comments and turn off the IP logging.
ETA: Anons are unscreened again.
Re: Would you mind...
Date: 2006-10-01 11:59 am (UTC)But she's obviously frightened to let the truth come out about this point; here's my comment in full which she's just deleted:
"If your "edits for accuracy" are of the standard of this example I have to doubt whether you really do believe that "the truth is important".
Originally you said:
"...The next level of the Inner Circle consisted of those with ties to the
publishing world. Unlike the doers and peripheral members who were centered
around the three, this group was centered largely around Cassandra Claire.
Its members consisted of A. J. Hall, Holly Black, Peg Kerr, Ester Friesner,
Kate Nepveu, Barry Goldblatt and others. Cassandra Claire appears to have,
historically, actively courted this group, being aided in this courting by
the fact that a number of professional authors were in the Harry Potter
fandom in places like HPforGrownUps. Members of this group would enter
Cassandra Claire's orbit and then help Cassandra Claire find others.
Connections with A.J. Hall helped bring about Cassandra Claire's
relationship with Peg Kerr. Connections with Holly Black helped snare Barry
Goldblatt. The end result was that this tier helped Cassandra Claire become
a published author....
You also said in a link which remains live at present (http://www.fanhistory.com/index.php?title=Holly_Black) that
"Holly Black is a professional author and friend of Cassandra Claire. She was introduced to Cassandra Claire by another member of the Harry Potter fan fiction community, AJ Hall"
When both Holly and I contacted you, separately, to tell you that we didn't know each other, and that your account of these alleged meetings and introductions was quite untrue (I have got screencaps, though of course the exchange was deleted when you removed your posts from bad_penny) you have now apparently decided to change the original paragraph to read as follows:
The next level of the Inner Circle consisted of those with ties to the publishing world. Unlike the doers and peripheral members who were centered around the three, this group was centered largely around Cassandra Claire. Its members consisted of [my name omitted] Holly Black, Peg Kerr, Ester Friesner, Kate Nepveu, Barry Goldblatt and others. Cassandra Claire appears to have, historically, actively courted this group, being aided in this courting by the fact that a number of professional authors who were already in the Harry Potter fandom in places like HPforGrownUps. Members of this group would enter Cassandra Claire's orbit and then help Cassandra Claire find others. Connections with Harry Potter fans helped bring about Cassandra Claire's relationship with Peg Kerr. Connections with Holly Black helped snare Barry Goldblatt. The end result was that this tier helped Cassandra Claire become a published author.
I have shown in bold the sum total of your changes from the original. In short, when a specific allegation was drawn to your attention and shown to be false you simply substituted a generalised allegation which conveniently cannot be proved true or false. Some historian!
In the comments to bunny and notjo to entries further down you claim that the problems with the account you gave are minor. Certainly as far as this specific incident is concerned it is minor; nothing bad is going to happen to me because you claimed I was a mover and shaker in the publishing world - actually, as allegations go it's rather flattering. Pity it also happens to be total tosh.
But this happens to be the only aspect of your claims on which I, personally, have direct evidence one way and the other, and I know perfectly well both that what you originally wrote was complete nonsense and that when you were called on that nonsense you weaseled around it in the way shown. Oddly enough, this rather leads me to suspect that the rest of your taradiddles have the same regard for accuracy.
AJ Hall (no journalfen account)"
I'm sure she'll be spinning it that she was threatened with legal action, but that's what I said, and that's what she's evidently scared people might read.
AJH
Re: Would you mind...
Date: 2006-10-01 06:16 pm (UTC)Actually, I probably could prove that "connections with Harry Potter fans helped bring about Cassie's relationship with Peg" is false by posting the first email I ever got from Peg. It's clear that she read my fanfiction and dropped me a note, and that we were not introduced by anyone, fan or otherwise, though why this should matter to anyone either way is beyond me.
Peg is the only one of the list of people that Michaela provides: "A. J. Hall, Holly Black, Peg Kerr, Esther Friesner, Kate Nepveu, and Barry Goldblatt " who could reasonably be considered both someone in publishing and someone in fandom. Peg also, bless her, had absolutely nothing to do with my being published and I'm sure she'd be the first to say so, beyond providing some encouragement and moral support. As for the others:
Holly Black: Not in the Harry Potter fandom. Never has been. Never will be. Was not introduced to me by you. Had previous to this particular insane diatribe, never even heard of you. First contacted me when an editor at Del Rey sent her the Very Secret Diaries.
AJ Hall: In fandom. Not in publishing.
Kate Nepveu: To my knowledge, neither in the fandom, nor in publishing. Was not introduced to me by anyone in fandom. Is a lawyer. Has nothing to do with the publishing world at all to my knowledge. Has never introduced me to anyone either in publishing or in fandom.
Esther Friesner: Not in the Harry Potter fandom. Never was. Never will be. Contacted me after an editor sent her the VSDs. Asked me to submit a story for a humor anthology; I did, they published it. For all I know she's neither ever read the Harry Potter books nor knows I ever wrote Harry Potter fic. If she does, she has never mentioned it.
Barry Goldblatt: HAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! Ok, sorry. Barry loathes the Harry Potter books. Never was in the fandom. Never will be in the fandom. Not a bleeding chance. Wasn't even Holly's agent in the time period that Michaela thinks all this happened in.
I don't plan to read the rest of Michaela's lunatic screed; other people are doing that and I'm sure will notify me if there's anything that requires attention. It doesn't seem like it. I simply thought it worth pointing out that in a list of six people who were theoretically "in fandom and in publishing" she is correct only about *one* of them, and not even entirely correct there. Of the few other sections I've been shown, every single detail has been wrong, even totally innocuous details that it makes no sense to purposefully invent. She seems to have drawn all her information from anonymous hate memes and entirely believed all of it, even the parts that contradict each other. It would be pitiable if it weren't so vicious. Fortunately it seems to have met with the derision it deserves.
- cassie (can't be bothered to sign in)