Today’s Dramas
The Inara Pey Drama
Inara Pey has a blog. I don’t know the woman but I’m sure she’s a nice lady. She likes to blog about SL issues. Recently she blogged about the SpotOn3d Copyright and Patent issues (which I have presented as a continuing Drama here.) This is admirable, however after I mentioned in a comment that I found it distracting that over half of the words (5 or 6) meant to read as “patent” read “patient,”and that “license” was misspelled as “licence,” she took umbrage. I read a lot of blogs and most of them make an attempt to edit their work. As for comments about things of this nature, it has been my experience that reasonable bloggers simply acknowledge their mistake, thank you for your attention and move on. Ms. Pey attempted to correct the numerous misspellings of “patient,” but left two. It appears she wants to leave the impression that there were only two inadvertent misspellings. She then deleted my comment, leaving my second comment about the spelling of the word “license.” It’s apparent from the context that there is a deleted comment. http://modemworld.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/the-viewer-licence-to-patent/
Today Ms. Pey blogged a summary of Rod Humble’s keynote address at SLCC. This too is laudable. However, she made a mistake quoting Rodvik as saying that Secondlife’s annual income is over $75 million. I’ve been following Secondlife’s financial claims closely and I knew this not to be factually correct, and I was certain Rodvik hadn’t actually said that.
I posted a follow-up comment that confirmed that Rodvik had said, “We publicly say that our top-line is at least $75 million.” Top-line means Revenue, not Income.
Then I happened to notice that the blog had been changed so that “income” had been replaced by the hyphenated word “top-line.” When I posted the second comment my first one disappeared. It had been deleted.
Then my second comment disappeared. Evidently, Ms. Pey had seen fit to correct her mistake but didn’t want anyone to see my comment, in the same manner as the earlier blog. To me, this looks like pretending that no mistake had ever been made. Perhaps she was hoping I wouldn’t notice. I left another comment that read, “I think it would be a good idea for you to leave my post. i have screenshots that you are removing them.” This comment then disappeared.
This was too much. I posted a tweet about what was happening and the last comment suddenly reappeared, along with a reply that said, “The one-word error has been corrected. Grow up and stop making silly threats.” At this time, this comment and reply remain on the blog along with my final comment. The blog post has been locked from further comment. But you will see that Ms. Pey can’t spell the word “international” as well. I have also been blocked from following her on Twitter.
See for yourself: http://modemworld.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/rodvik-at-slcc-2011-the-gist/
Wizzy's Workshop 
August 14, 2011 at 10:51 pm
Crikey….
August 15, 2011 at 11:20 am
There is a thing called net etiquette… and she broke it 🙂
Im swedish so i do a LOT OF mistakes in my blog! Please help me clean up if you have time =)). I´d really appreaciate that and be thankful for every comment <3<3<3
August 15, 2011 at 2:57 pm
that’s such a nice thing to say Mera. thankies! 😀
August 16, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Actually, my issue was your attitude. The mistake was a simple matter of mis-wording on my part. You, in your exchanges were determined to present it as my failure to know the difference between “income” and “revenue”, which was never the case.
If anyone is creating the drama here, you are.
I see you also bend facts.
The order of events were: you posted an immature threat to the blog. I responded. As a result of that you *then* opted to follow me specifically to tweet on the matter & then unfollowed. Childish again.
So, I’ll re-iterate here what I said to you via e-mail. That I used “income” when Rodvik said “top line” was a simple error in wording on my part, nothing more.
It had nothing to do with an inability to differentiate between “income” and “revenue”, despite your repeated (and tedious) claims otherwise.
You similarly leap to conclusions on the patent article. I actually only found two mis-spellings of “patent” which I corrected. Any that were left were purely through oversight of proof-reading. Again you presume to make drama on the matter where there is none.
My track-record for admitting errors on my blog speaks for itself. Others have pointed them out and I’ve responded with corrections, addendum’s and open admissions of my fault.
When looking at this matter, perhaps you would do well to look at your own attitude and motives when posting comments elsewhere before seeking to take the moral high-ground.
August 16, 2011 at 7:55 pm
sorry, i call bullshit. i caught you making the correction and deleting my comment. you only left the comments because i caught you and told you i had screen shots. i counted the number of “patient” spellings on your blog when i made that comment. that was why i felt a need to comment, due to the excessive and DISTRACTING number of them. you deleted that comment from your blog and left the “licence” comment simply because you felt you could easily defend that. the “licence” comment was an afterthought on my part and wasn’t really the issue. your over-defensive reaction to my “patient” comment colored your judgment and affected your reaction to my calling you on the “income” mistake. no one who understands the significance of the difference between revenue and income would make that mistake. sorry. that issue was an important one because one shouldn’t mislead the rest of your readers who might not know the difference. a statement that Linden Lab is making a HUGE profit of over $75 million would be very deceptive about the financial status of LL, which has been going to great pains to convince a dubious business community that they are profitable.