I will publicly agree that the blogger was overdoing it. But the matter was handled well by people on the board. I recall a couple situations in 2007 or 2008 when one or two new posters signed up with explicit agendas. They were, emm, handled in the same way as the recent blogging thing and/or by Mark. I think the system works.
That blogger gives her side of the story in a thread at the Well Trained Mind forum
http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=295804 .
I read the thread and also the nasty remarks about this board she posted on her blog. She misrepresented herself:
Lots and lots and lots of my posts were just comments. But yes, some of the comments did have links to my blog.
FWIW, I'm on holidays right now and counted her posts. I counted 20/27 messages (up to the point where she was called out) with links to her blog. Some messages had multiple links. That's more than "some." And to me, seven
without links is a lot less than "lots and lots." She was obviously distorting the truth on that other site. Not a good sign.
She was also pretty venomous in her comments about this forum and people who post here. I don't think that type of approach helps anything (though it does create an us-vs-them atmosphere). Maybe Iucounu was a bit strong here and there in his second post on the subject, but others weren't (a couple people seemed to bend over backwards to be gentle to her).
The overly defensive way that she's reacted suggests (to me at least) that Iucounu may have had a point about her motives. People who really are just doing something innocently typically react with regret, not venom.
