First thing first, we are not going to link to the site that created the most drama this week. This site has a very, how do we say it, deranged (mis)understanding of what online bullying and stalking are, and we don't want to direct any more traffic there, especially seeing that for some strange reason the creators of the site think that all the people who check it out are their supporters rather than those who just want to see the infamous crazy stalker behavior with their own eyes. There have been many responses to this site already - Foz Meadows' that explains for the unknowing what bullying exactly means, Rachel Vincent's who, sadly, is forced to make it clear she has nothing to do with it (accusations are running rampant!) and Stacia Kane's very passionate one from an author's perspective. We especially sympathize with Kane's position that witnessing constant conflicts between reviewers and writers is exhausting and disheartening, to the point of not wanting to be a part of this reading community anymore. We can't wait for that time when this raging culture of publicizing and sensationalizing every tiny disagreement comes to an end. We want to see genuine debates and discussions and disagreements and negative reviews, but not when they deteriorate to petty screen-capped examinations of everyone's online indiscretions, airing of personal dirty laundry and baseless accusations of any crime under the sun (stalking, sock-puppetting, you name it) that spread out via Twitter like wildfire and then result in hate mail, abuses on all sides, anonymous emails to the "offenders'"' work places and general atmosphere of hostility. It seems no disagreement is allowed to die down, get resolved or is ignored any more, instead there is a trend to expose, humiliate and destroy. And it applies to both sides - the reviewers (some) and authors (some). We don't know about you, but, boy, are we tired of drama and misguided screen-capped vendettas.

There are a couple of interesting posts that came out of the couple of weeks old "ARCgate" (again, a "scandal" that descended to a storm of name-calling, character assassinations and calls for war absolutely disproportionate to the nature of the questions raised in the original post). The first one is by Katiebabs, who says The Blogger with the Most ARCs Does Not Rule Bloglandia, with which we wholeheartedly agree. Although the showcasing of IMMs and Book Hauls creates an idea, especially in the minds of young bloggers, that getting the most ARCs, at all cost, is the ultimate goal of blogging, actually having your hands full of so many books is more of a burden than a blessing. Just imagine reading and reviewing the books you are mostly uninterested in and see how much fun that is. And then comes a question of the disposal of those ARCs, another tricky one, it appears. Elizabeth Fama pleads to kill her ARCs, instead of swapping or donating them. What is comes down to is that there are not many options for bloggers to dispose of paper ARCs legitimately, besides throwing them into trash (hopefully recyclable). So, there is a whole new layer to this ARC-grabbing discussion which now includes wastefulness of paper ARCs as a promotional material. Distribution of egalleys to the reviewers who are actually interested in certain books seems like a better way to go. Definitely will save on postage and let some trees live.

In other news, if you wondered why new books are not as well edited as the old ones, The Changing Face of Publishing Relationships might have some answers (via YA Highway). It is evident that editors are viewed more and more as business people who should be able to identify and sell big money-makers rather than, you know, edit. The article also says that if before editors had a luxury of editing a book for months, now they have days if not hours to spend on each book.

Bookshelves of Doom alerted us that there is an emerging site which is like Rotten Tomatoes, for books - www.idreambooks.com - which is supposed to present a mix of professional and amateur (blogger) reviews. If your blog satisfies certain requirements, you reviews can be featured on that site as well. It will be  interesting to see if this site catches on.

There's a been a very curious blurb circulating this past week - of Yelena Black's Dance of Shadows. The blurb goes like this:

"Curtains up on a deliciously dark new YA trilogy from the creators of Lauren Kate’s Fallen."

Some readers legitimately asked - Isn't the creator of Lauren Kate's Fallen... Lauren Kate? Well, as we wrote before, there is an interesting artistic process in publishing that is called "packaging," when books are created by an agency and then an author is hired to write out the prepared plot. There is nothing new about this, but this is the first time when the fact that a book is packaged is used as a promotional point. Normally, this information stays concealed and the hired author gets all the credit.

And, to wrap things up for this week, a couple of links to podcasts (we haven't mentioned those in awhile). Kelly of Stacked and Liz of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy talk (at length) about library work, blogging, and everything book-related (and even mention our blog, thank you!). Sara Zarr's latest podcast features Sara's several local writer friends and is dedicated to discussing the value of being a part of a writing community.