I woke up yesterday to read about a fellow blog, Lord Matt, who is speaking out about someone’s attempt to get him to take down one of his blog posts. The post consists of an analysis of the efforts of another individual (Dr M G Notley) who makes some very rudimentary errors in trying to promote his website. Lord Matt’s post looks at the website and comes up with a number of constructive points which Dr Notley could have used to improve his website and his service.
Instead of using the advice and thanking the esteemed Lord Matt, the dastardly Dr Notley initially responded by rudely accusing Lord Matt of falsehoods and has now commissioned his legal team to take action against our intrepid hero.
Well, okay, I’ve romanticised it a bit, but you get the gist of the story. The sad thing about it is that Dr Notley could have done with the advice. If you have a look at the website, I’m sure you’ll agree that it’s pretty poor quality. Instead of improving the site, he’s expending energy retaliating, much like a schoolyard bully trying to get his own back on someone who got a better grade than he did.
Question is, if someone critiqued your site .. how would you react?
Great blog post Owen, If anybody wants to let rip on my site, please go ahead, the more critique the better 🙂 I hope that answers the question.
Kind regards,
Leo
“Question is, if someone critiqued your site .. how would you react?”
Long answer: Go ahead and critique my site in the signature space and see 🙂 You have my email and can contact me directly with it or make a blog post, your choice.
short answer: I consider all constructive feedback worthwhile — good, bad or indifferent.
If someone talked about my site, I’d love it. If they put up my piccy and sad nice things I’d love it even more. But then I lo-ove the attention which is evidenced by the fact I blog in the first place.
@Lord Matt: Thanks for dropping by. Hope this piece of nastiness blows over. If there’s anything we can do, just drop a line.
I?m afraid that, in this case, you are mistaken. The case is not about Mathew Brown (alias ?Lord Matt?) stating negative views about the SEO techniques used by Writers Promote, however rude and hectoring his language may have been. After all, the details of search engine optimisation techniques are hardly a matter for the courts.
The case to be answered is that Mathew Brown libelled Dr Notley, in that Mr Brown alleged that Dr Notley lied to members of Writers Promote about receiving money for advertising. These allegations are false, and extremely damaging to Dr Notley, an honest businessman, and Mr Brown will fail in his defence because the truth of these matters is capable of independent audit.
However, while sharing your views about the importance of retaining an independent voice, you do not need to be concerned in this instance. The removal of the offending article(s) will have no effect on any bloggers? right to express their views about businesses or governments, so long as they refrain from defamatory falsehoods, which has always been the case, and I hope will always remain so. I assume you would not support anyone?s right to publicly defame you, me or anyone else with false allegations.
You may publish these remarks if you publish them in full and without editing or interjections.
@Garth Notley: Thanks for your comment.
I must say this is the first time someone’s left a comment on my blog and expressly granted me permission to publish it “without editing or interjections”.
I also find it interesting that you have decided to carry out your defence on “an honest businessman” on my blog, rather than posting to Lord Matt’s blog, where, in my view, a response would have been more relevant.
Fair points.
Firstly – I orginally sent a rebuttal to Mathew Brown (aka Lord Matt) on his blog but it was twice rejected – I don’t speculate why. I therefore emailed him directly through his contact email address, but instead of replying to me or publishing my rebuttal as a normal comment, he chose to lampoon my response in his blog. Sadly it seems that further correspondance with him can only take place via our lawyers.
Meanwhile I am posting rebuttals on other sites or blogs that repeat his remarks.
Secondly – Mr Browns response to my original rebuttal is the reason for the all-or-nothing permission at the bottom of my email. I apologise if that seemed surprising.
I have a very effective spam filter. It also blocks swear words.
@Owen: Thank you for the offer. If I think of anything that I could reasonably ask for I will let you know. This post’s thread on bumpzee is quite lively.
@Matt. Cheers.
Thanks for highlighting the Bumpzee thread. I don’t tend to visit Bumpzee much .. there’s only so many websites one can get through in a day …