It's Been a While

It's been a bit since I've posted anything. Real life, things that matter, things that aren't whinny brats, have become more important. But I wanted to stop by and say hi and I haven't forgotten about this blog. I thought I'd treat everyone with a nice video. Every time anyone sees a mention of Carol Bryant I want everyone to think of this song. It'll make your day a bit brighter.

Is He A Dumbass Or Just Stupid? Carroll Bryant Has Reached A New Low.

I think Carroll Bryant has reached an all time low. In his latest post he not only plays games but decides to run another name through the mud. 

He claims to have received this "email" from Jude.

In the same email, Carroll Bryant says he painted over the email addresses to not expose personal information. Admirable enough, except for the fact he posted fake text stating that Jude had an abortion! Carroll Bryant plays his little games by saying:

I even had some bullies tell me it couldn't be fake when I suggested that possibility once. They said you can't fake emails.  

Really? Okay then, let's put that theory to the test, shall we? 

In the screenshot below, you will see an email - an actual email that Jude sent me one day. I did one thing to this email, and that is - I whited out her and mine email addresses. You will notice the white gap above her message. That was the area where our email addresses were. (I didn't think it would be nice of me to give her email out to the world)  

However, the message she sent me is real. (Or is it?) This is the question you have to answer. Keeping in mind that if an email can't be "doctored" or "altered" then it would make this email real and true. Then again, if it is fake, then that would open the door to the possibility that the email Jude Henderson showed all of her bully friends (which led to my being attacked) could have been "doctored" or "altered". 

Is the email doctored? Horribly...  I don't think a computer scientist needs to analyze this poorly crafted "evidence." See where the emails have been painted out? You see how the paint brush from the paint application left a discolored edge around the brush where the email address would typically be displayed? Can you spot that same artifacting anywhere else in this message? Perhaps, maybe around the body text of the email?

There are so many things wrong with his latest post, I can't help but put in my personal opinion.

Bryant, are you just downright fucking stupid?

Not only did he clear out the to and from email addresses, he cleared out any time stamps and the subject line. Brian Carroll copied some random email from his Yahoo inbox. There is a reason why ALL information is deleted and not just the email addresses.

The type font isn't correct, you dumb shit. Look it up. Even if you are (Carroll Bryant) going to post fake shit in the name of a game, do your homework and at least make the challenge difficult. You are a lazy dumb ass. No wonder your books are filled with grammar issues. You're too lazy to even research and put in the proper time. At least I have an excuse! I'm not a self-proclaimed author.

And worst of all, the message you display in the email for the sake of shock value.... You ever think maybe there is a reason why people write bad things about you? Maybe because they are true? Maybe because you deserve it.

You're a 48 year old lonely individual who can't stop pining over some girl you met on the internet. You pine so badly that Kristine broke up with you, or whatever her name was, because you couldn't stop. How did that marriage proposal go by the way? That internet girl hurt you so badly you decided to run a smear campaign that spanned into the next year. Good God, get over it already.

Furthermore, who stated that emails can't be faked? Show us the evidence. Give us a screenshot. But you can't. You read my articles about the difference about IP addresses and IPs. You got pissed when I left a comment flat out telling you that you lied, which wasn't published. You refuse to post real evidence backing any of your claims. I even told you how to get this evidence. And let's not pretend that you don't read this blog, aight Zemy?

Anyone that reads this article, I encourage you to report Carroll Bryant's blog for abuse to Google. Posting an obviously edited screenshot declaring that a person has had an abortion is not freedom of speech. It is down right abuse and libel.

You can read how to report a blog for abuse here: http://support.google.com/blogger/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=76315

I Thought Carroll Bryant Was Not Against Bad Reviews?

Carroll Bryant has stated that he is not against bad reviews.

But what happens when a reader does purchase one of his books and does honestly give it a bad review?

Carroll Bryant goes into overdrive and deflects as much as possible.

He attempts his deflection so much that the reviewer has to respond.

So what happens when Carroll Bryant receives a legitimately bad review?

Personal Opinion: I've read a lot of people say they won't read Carroll Bryant's books I've seen a lot of comments about GoodReads members shelving his book in a "do not read" list. Yet Carrol Bryant screams and hollers that these are bullying behaviors.

I have to wonder if Bryant has ever not purchased a product because he heard the bad press about that product. That's what people typically do. They hear something bad about a product from a friend and refuse to buy it. Or they hear about shady business practices on the news and refuse to purchase a product.

That's what happened here. We all heard some shady things going on and we refused to buy his product. Now he screams that we are all bullies for not buying his product. Why would I buy a product from a person that acts like he does and treats people like he does?

Now Jessica Sorenson, that is an upright independent author I have heard nothing but good things about.

References:

http://insatiablebooksluts.com/2012/07/17/reading-rage-tuesday-goodreads-bullies-and-why-authors-need-to-stop-the-crusade/
http://caedyslibrary.blogspot.com/2012/12/review-year-of-cat-by-carroll-bryant.html

Carroll Bryant Doesn't Approve Of Aliases, Or Does He?

Carroll Bryant has stated multiple time and in multiple places that he only uses his "real" name while posting comments or stories.

But it appears Carroll Bryant has decided to leave a comment on my article, A Proposed Debate, under a false name of Zemy96.

Why do I say this? Doing a quick google search for Zemy96 brings up this profile.

Why is this any kind of evidence? See that profile picture? Does it look familiar? Carroll Bryant seems fond of it himself.

So that leaves me with two questions.

1. Why is Carroll Bryant hiding behind an alias?

2. Why would he say that he won't debate me, offer his side of the story, and respond with...

... and then post a comment on this blog under an alias?

Carroll Bryant, you cry that no one asks for your side of the story. I did.  I offered a reasonable debate. You responded with this. 

References:

http://thelookingglassofcarrollbryant.blogspot.com/

http://carrollbryant.blogspot.com/

http://tiredofbryant.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-proposed-debate.html#comment-form

http://www.wattpad.com/user/Zemy96

http://carrollbryant.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-list-2-proof-of-bullies-on-goodreads.html

http://tiredofbryant.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-proposed-debate.html

Am I Tired Of Carroll Bryant?

Let me make myself clear; I am tired of Carroll Bryant. Carroll Bryant is a worthless individual to me. He has no effect on my life. Frankly I wish he would just go away. But Bryant has proven over the past year that he won’t with his continual stalking of other blogs.

The community has tried to ignore him in hopes that he will disappear. It hasn’t worked. When readers ignore Carroll Bryant he cries louder, throwing a temper tantrum like a child while screaming about false evidence and dragging peoples’ names through the mud.

I refuse to sit back and just let him do it. Ignoring him has not worked. Am I tired of Carroll Bryant? Yes. But while he continues his conquest of trying to shame others I will continue my work in displaying proven evidence, with as little personal opinion as possible, that Carroll Bryant is nothing more than a whinny bully child. Carroll Bryant does not tell the truth and spends his days tormenting others.

So you wish to bring hell to others Bryant? You wish to try and run peoples’ names through the mud? Fine. As long as you wish to continue your “crusade of truth” I’ll continue to post your actual truths.

As for you Carroll Bryant, yes I’m tired of you, and no…

Just Because You Say Something An Awful Lot Doesn't Mean It's True

Carroll Bryant insists Amanda is GenX because of some supposable comment GenX made on her blog according to Carroll Bryant.

There is only one problem with his statement; it never existed. Just because you might say something a thousand times doesn't mean it's true. I took a look through GenXpose and could not find a single comment that GenXfiles made that was deleted.

When a Blogger blog moderator later deletes a comment from a blog, including their own, that comment still leaves a footprint. It's the original commenters handle (their screen name) followed by a message that states the comment has been deleted.

But what about an article that's been deleted? Everything lives on the internet forever now, especially thanks to Google caching everything. I took a look through Google's cached pages of the GenXpose blog and could not find a single article that has been deleted. Obviously it's not feasible for me to copy and paste a screenshot of that blog here. So I encourage you to look for yourself.

You can read more about how to look through Google's cached pages here although doing a quick Google search will net tons of guides.

References:
http://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/15633/how-to-modify-a-url-to-get-a-google-cached-version-of-page
http://www.genxpose.blogspot.com/
http://thelookingglassofcarrollbryant.blogspot.com/2013/03/amanda-welling.html

A Proposed Debate

I originally wrote this as a comment response to Carroll Bryant's blog post regarding Amanda. My response ended up being to long. I decided to post it here along with a link and explanation of that link on Carroll Bryant's blog pointing him here.

Here is the comment I left on his blog:

Carroll, you say that you are open to debate. I tried to leave a comment here but apparently it can not be over 4000 characters in length. Instead I posted it on the blog. If you wish to read it and debate what I say I am extending you that offer as you have done in your comments previously. If you would like to read it and respond here, that is fine. We can also debate it there as well. Just as a word of warning, comment moderation is off. We can also debate via email correspondence if you wish. Per my policy, written content of emails are not posted and display without prior consent. The choice is yours.

Here is my intended debate response that would not fit in the comment area.

I’ll give you the benefit of debate here. 

I’m wondering how long it will take you to defer this debate to "I am Jon or Amanda" to. 

I’m not really seeing the proof here. I’d like you to explain it out better. And here’s why. 

You edited your post before it went live saying that evidence proves beyond a shadow of a doubt Amanda is GenX. You say this because of a PayPal receipt (I won’t revisit this to much, I’ve read your take already) and a blog post comment on GenX's blog.  

I understand you wouldn’t have that original email of that PayPal receipt but you do have an email from Jon. You say that Jon and Amanda are married. If they are married they would be using the same ISP. You also have emails from GenX. Why not post the email headers from both Jon and GenX in their entirety? That would contain hard evidence that both emails originated from the same household. 

You also make the case that Amanda is GenX because of a comment on GenX’s blog about her blog being backed up. I read through that blog post and the context of that comment meant that GenX backs up the GenXPose blog, not the “Hippies, Beauty, and Books. Oh My!” blog.  You made a reference about others reading one of your comments out of context. Could this be the same case here? 

In this blog article you mention an article Amanda had posted on her Hippies blog referencing you. I didn’t see a time stamp in the screenshot that you had posted. When I checked out the actual blog the timestamp on that article is from July 25th, 2012. Now she did mention you in that article, I’ll give you that. But the context of the article was not about you. It was written about events that regarded you. Around the same time though, there were tons of article written that mentioned you. You posted to one written at the Rex files, didn’t you? How do you know GenX isn’t one of these others, or even is any of them? 

Next I want to bring up those screen caps you posted that of comments Amanda had made on your blog. They are time stamped for the same day that the article mentioned above was written. An Anon commenter posted the links to her blog posts on your blog. She was responding to that Anon that posted those links. Amanda did change her review policy. But if you remember, and you’ve complained about it before, a lot of bloggers did during the summer of last year. There were a number of incidents with indie authors during the summer of last year. I think when the debacle with you started it was the straw that broke the camels back. Her leaving comments last summer doesn’t equate to her being GenX. I found tons of blog articles about you written by others where you had much worse interactions with other commenters..  

You also post a screen shot of a comment GenX post on your blog. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and read the post from Amanda, the comments Amanda left, and the comment by GenX closely. The writing style of all three actually seem very different to me. The comments Amanda made don’t leave enough writing to examine closely, but the comment that GenX and the blog post by Amanda do. The writing styles and tone are extremely different.  

I also want to bring up the comment by Mepis. I did not read anything that said he will “stop at nothing.” To me, that reads as a precautionary legal measure. In fact, this kind of thing isn’t uncommon. It generally looks good in court, if ever needed, to say that you warned someone before hand. And it looks like Mepis did exactly what he said he as going to do and copy and pasted that message to your email accounts. 

At any rate, I’ve been chewing over this and all I see is flimsy circumstantial evidence at best. I can barely call it that. Many other bloggers acted and reacted in the same fashion during the summer of last year. Picking a single one out doesn't seem like proof.

Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t expect much, if anything from these arguments. I know very well your supporters will back you no matter what you say. But you said you were open for debate. I was curious enough to see if you meant that and accept your extended offer. 

I think if you wanted to post real evidence that is beyond arguable than you need to display unedited headers from those emails. Everything that happened last year becomes flooded in the reactions by other bloggers. An email of a PayPal receipt means nothing by itself. I think by Jon's own admission in the comments on GenX's blog he used that donation to get information about that PayPal account that many were wondering about.

I think all of your proof lies on those email headers. Post screen shots of the complete headers so we can see that they are real and the image wasn't tampered with.

Update:

This is Carroll Bryant's official response to my comment posted on his blog offering this debate.

He goes on to respond to others that comment in regard to my comment.

Carroll Bryant thus far has refused to reasonably debate any person regarding his claims. I have found no evidence showing otherwise. Carroll Bryant claims that he started "Through the Looking Glass" in defense of himself yet he only posts libel and character defamation.