#notchilled Asshat of the MONTH

Asshat (1)

It’s been awhile since I’ve been able to shoot a video. But those familiar with my videos know about my Asshat of the Week.

Well…today, still unable to shoot a video for various reasons, I bring you the Asshat of the Week Month.

Anyone who follows the #notchilled hashtag to stay abreast of the Ellora v. Dear Author case knows about the nut, the psychotic egg, the toxic egg (the nicknames go on and on.) Around the time of the filing of the lawsuit and the #notchilled hashtag, a new Twitter user popped up @Pubnt who claims to be “Scouts for Publisher Protection. Not associated with Ellora’s Cave.”

Ehem. I’m really hoping DA’s lawyer subpoenas Twitter then the IP holder for the nut. I digress.

For those of you who aren’t following and have no clue what #notchilled is about, let me expand a bit. Sometimes, lawsuits are not filed because someone was injured and seeking relief. Sometimes, lawsuits are filed to chill speech. Hence, the #notchilled hashtag. Not until all facts are laid out in this case, will we have proof whether or not there was defamation (though most exhibits filed by DA have already showed she had reason to believe otherwise.)

So this “Scouts for Publisher Protection. Not associated with Ellora’s Cave,” joins the #notchilled hashtag and does nothing but inflame over and over again – the very definition of a troll. The irony? The very first act by this so called scout was to tweet all major publishing houses.  But don’t take my word for it. PUBNT

The very first tweets by this troll were to scare authors from even discussing the suit. The tweets were written to frighten authors and bloggers from discussing the possibility of the allegations made. This is an example of an effort to CHILL FREE SPEECH.

I despise bullies and IMHO that’s all this Twit does. The sole purpose of this account seems to be to inflame, enrage and bully.


15 thoughts on “#notchilled Asshat of the MONTH

  1. The pubnt tactics have changed over time. Did you see the tweets from yesterday where EC asked them to cool down and sign an affidavit saying they weren’t affiliated with EC?


    1. Actions of the last 24 hours don’t undo actions since the nut’s inception. Let’s look at this logically, someone claims not to be EC, not to know who TE is, yet their entire repertoire, before the last 24, was to tell everyone how DA is the bad guy, anyone who believes anything else is a moron and oh, by the way, dear publishers, anyone on this hashtag is anti-publisher. Some of the posts are down right worship of TE. It’s only a hunch, but I have a hunch that if subpoenas were issued, someone would get a sanction.

      I’m sorry, but if it waddles like a duck, flies like a duck but looks like a rat, something is still wrong.


      1. Oh, I’m not disagreeing with you, though I genuinely don’t think this person is affiliated with EC per se. I don’t take pubnt’s tweets at face value, though.

        (My theory has always been an EC reader and/or an EC writer, but not an EC employee or contractor per se.)

        In fact, did you see Randazza’s footnote in the Opposition to remand?

        “On 7 October, an email was sent to at least one of Ms. Lampe’s supervisors. On 14 October that same email was forwarded to the entire department within which Ms. Lampe works. This is consistent with prior actions by directors of Ellora’s Cave. Ellora’s Cave has also engaged in acts to try and intimidate witnesses in this case. Therefore, sending this subpoena on short notice was of great importance. Since the Defense addressed this with Plaintiff’s counsel, these actions have waned.”

        So, Randazza talked to EC’s atty, and Patty Marks talked with pubnt? And that’s why they no longer need the Google subpoena?

        https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11698292/ecda/index.html item 14, bottom of p. 2.


      2. Agreed – no one defends a person/business for a month then uses the phrase, “Someone named Patty Marks.” Come ON! My kids were better at fudging the truth at 4 years old.

        It’s only wild conjecture, but I believe the nut is related somehow, through, blood, marriage or business. There’s no way anyone is this adamant about someone whose name they don’t even know.

        Anyone who believes that… I gotta bridge to sell ya’!


  2. Well, that and the nut misspelled Patty’s first name! Come. On.

    (I could understand misspelling Patti as Patty in a careless moment, but not to use the less common spelling instead of the more common one as happened here.)

    I think we’re agreed this person’s extended EC family in some sense. Maybe their favorite writer’s unhappy, maybe their aunt has made a lot of $ from EC and has seen how much that money’s helped the family — but maybe they didn’t know what publisher because of pseudonyms — until this case came out.

    I actually bothered engaging pubnt this morning, which I never do (in fact, I have the account blocked).

    I genuinely wouldn’t mind a real, competent, devil’s advocate here. One that respected other people’s viewpoints, and tried to stick to as much as we know of the facts and the pleadings.

    But that’s not what Pubnt is.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I agree. All of what I said is basically wild speculation, of course, but I feel very strongly that I’ve hit the nail on the head.

      A competent devil’s advocate would be great. But I don’t think anyone competent wants to wade on that side of the pool.


      1. Yeah, mine’s speculation too. There’s some connection in the emotional sense. Otherwise, why lash out like pubnt did in the beginning?

        Speaking of wild speculation, the only thing that makes sense to me about this case being filed at all is that EC was hoping for a TRO, hoping to drag out everything else, and then hoping they could drop the case, effectively abandoning the TRO after the furor had died down.

        And completely misread the Internet, which doesn’t like being censored.


      2. Indeed.

        But now there is a counter-suit. And I suspect DA is supremely pissed. Okay, I don’t suspect it, rather if I were DA, I’d be supremely pissed and out for blood.

        And after seeing the evidence in the exhibits (and this literally JUST started) I’m fairly certain that no judge could rule in favor of the plaintiff. Which means EC just effed themselves up the butt with a cactus.



  3. Hello, Ms Cox, and than you for the gracious invitation.

    I answered my peeve over at my own place 😀

    Now, on the toxic egg itself, I beg to differ with both you and Ms Deirdre.

    This is, again, opinion and speculation (so if TE is watching: what follows is not defamation, ergo, not actionable).

    I do believe that the egg is TE. Its rabid and never ending attacks on any author seeking reversion of rights, the whole “ungrateful” bit, how authors would be blacklisted from all other publishers, it’s repeated doxxing of Jane and the, also repeated to death, admonition that repeating defamation made the person doing so liable as well.

    Then there come the almost too ignorant to be believed tweets, such as the one where the egg claims that the reason EC sued Jane is because she’s a lawyer and has money, and that it’s good that the legal defense fund reached its goal so quickly, because it would be “more money for EC” (rough paraphrasing).

    Then it’s back to how TE and EC are the victims of the bullies, after ‘all the good” she/they have done, and so on and so forth.

    It feels, to me, that the true feelings of the person behind the egg get the better of it, and then there comes a version of damage control. In this case, making it appear even less intellectually gifted than we already think it.

    (I hope I make sense here)

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Welcome and thank you for coming. To be clear, the reason I said the egg was acting like a bully was that he/she was using the threat of attracting publishers’ attention to the authors who were chatting on the thread with the facade of NEVER TOUCHING THEM. That’s bullying, IMHO. (Sorry about the caps – that was what he/she posted.)

      All we can do is speculate at this point, but I don’t disagree with you on the rest. I will pop some popcorn or mix an adult beverage if there is a subpoena issued with regard to the nut. That…would be awesome.

      We are all watching.


      1. I believe that the subpoena for the gmail account (the bit that Ms Deirdre quoted above) will be quite revealing too.

        If it weren’t for the stress this is causing Jane, and the fate of all those author contracts just hanging in limbo, the EC v DA train wreck would be truly great entertainment.


  4. Technically, there is no subpoena right now. The request was canceled in state court and not asked for in federal, not yet.

    I suspect we may not learn the answer to that question. 😦


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s