[ SECRET POST #6097 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6097 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[Persona 5]



__________________________________________________



04. [repeat]



__________________________________________________





































05. [SPOILERS for Good Omens season 2]




__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for discussion of seuxal assault]





































Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #871.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

This man stalked and hunted down a complete stranger that left him bad reviews on the internet?

[(Anonymous)]

He had a stalker who followed him around and gave bad reviews to all his books as well as insulted him personally, so it's not like he tracked down a random person who gave one a single negative review. He quite rightly thought, wait a second, criminology and psychology is my job, why can't I figure this out on my own?

So he did some Googling because it was clear the guy in question was likely British, in academia, who published/read books on similar subjects overlapping with his own expertise. So he found the likeliest suspect, called him up and politely asked to speak to him. Then he asked the guy if he was so-and-so who kept leaving one star reviews on Amazon and the guy was 100% embarrassed and apologized and promised not to do it again.

Oh, and the stalker also gave himself 5 star reviews on his own books, LOL.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

But I've been surprised how many people in academia think this kind of deceptive online bullshit (sockpuppet praise own brilliance + sockpuppet attack competing professionals) is in any way acceptable. And often, you legit do not need a criminology degree to track it down.

[(Anonymous)]

Yep. And no, a relevant degree wasn't really needed. It's just that he felt a bit silly just putting up with that level of stalkery trolling and wondering who hated him that much when that was kind of his job to figure that stuff out. Once he started Googling around for academics who wrote about xyz specific topics, in a specific region of the UK (because the stalker had put down his general region) there weren't that many potential suspects. All of the info he looked at was public, voluntarily left by the stalker himself. And he probably knew that a person like this who was an unprofessional coward would stop immediately if he just asked him to knock it off, and he was right.

[(Anonymous)]

Doesn't matter. People are allowed to leave bad reviews on books they don't like. The criminologist is in the wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

If you read that as just "leaving honest but negative reviews because he didn't like the book" and not "deliberately trying to trash the books of a professional rival while hiding behind a not-so-anonymous username while simultaneously giving yourself 5 star reviews", I don't know how to help you, and I feel like I'm being generous in assuming you're sincere and not just deliberately opting for the willfully bad faith interpretation in order to be trollish yourself.

[(Anonymous)]

I do not need to be helped because I hold a differing opinion from you.

[(Anonymous)]

You opinion is noted, it's just that it's factually wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

... did you miss the "giving his own books 5 star reviews" part because that's directly against Amazon's TOS