> To: Scott Kellogg
> From: Frank Chadwick
> Sub: Plagiarism Accusation
>
> I read your recent post on this network. Since it was a public posting,
> I am responding as an open letter. Everything you say about GDW is
> wrong, and if you ever again say that you, or anyone else, was "screwed
> by GDW," you better be ready to prove it in court, Mister. I am through
> tolerating this sort of irresponsible, dishonest bashing of our
> company's reputation in public.
> . . . . . . . . . .I have decided not to take action this time on what
> clearly constitutes a libel. Chuck may not be inclined to be so generous.
... and you wonder why GDW spells MUD to some people, as the litigious society
nearly strikes again. "Hey, we have a problem. Perfect solution -- SUE 'EM!"
What did we have here? One posting, by an admittedly irate and emotional
person (as I think Scott would have to concede) when he had, in his own mind,
reason to be pissed. Does this make him right in accusing before verifying?
No, but neither does this justify your response. Would you REALLY have sued
Scott for libel if you hadn't been feeling so generous? (sarcasm alert) Really?
Do you think GDW has suffered in sales or will suffer? Have people suddenly
thought less of you? I would think that something on the order of "Fighting
(deleted) of the Shattered Imperium" would do more damage to a corporate or
personal reputation. So, but for a fit of generosity on your part, you would
gleefully waste hours and hours of time and gobs and gobs of money (in an
endeavor of probably astounding economic inefficiency, unless, of course,
you are a lawyer) all for the sole purpose of getting the emotional
satisfaction of having "gotten" Scott, since I doubt that the company or
you would benefit in any real sense. (If Scott is anything like the average
grad student that I know, he'd be a proverbial turnip as far as recovering
damages.)
Save the lawyer talk for a truly important situation and not as the typical
nuclear response to a small sniper attack. That would probably be better
for all concerned.
(Additionally, "irresponsible"? Perhaps. "dishonest"? Now, I think that is
going a bit too far, but in light of your subsequent comments, merely the
tip of the iceberg.)
> Finally, Traveller, the Imperium, and its history, are the creation of
> GDW, and are our intellectual property. Do you really think that you
> can unilaterally take over part of this intellectual creation by
> writing an unsolicited story, sending it to someone, even one of us at
> GDW, and then cry THIEF! if anything remotely similar appear in the
> future? You cannot, and the attempt to do so makes YOU the attempted thief.
> Traveller, and its future history, are ours. Stop trying to steal them.
While you are undoubtedly correct, in a literal sense, it does come off as
arrogant and pompous. A more reasoned, rational response would be much more
appreciated. You may have genuine outrage and such, but you should know
better. The clear imputation of this paragraph is to call Scott Kellogg a
thief. Whoa, Nellie! Now who may be libeling who? Playing with fire means
that you had best be careful, lest it come back to burn yourself. (I, for
one, would consider bringing along some weenies to any GDW roast.)
Next time, write two letters. In the first one, write into it all the angry,
vitriolic invective, slander, and other language that you care to include.
Really go at it and release the tension. It will make you feel better. Then
write a calmly rational and reasoned response, pointing out the errors and
mistakes and, if you like, cautioning against such outbursts. Or even
ignore the outburst. Mail the second letter.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Sylvain