Judy Garland “Fandom” – Part 2

That was the end of things, or so I thought. As I said before, no one seemed to mind that this was mistakenly put out there as the real thing. Especially once it was cleared up. However, it didn’t take long for Max to trace the offending image back to The Judy Room News Page.

So, just a few days later on April 19th, I received this email from Max:

“This is actually a wonderful idea for the artwork for the upcoming boxed set.”

No, it isn’t, because it doesn’t represent what’s IN the boxed set, that cover photo represents the ANDY HARDY films. And it includes a film that ISN’T going to be part of the set. So how can it be “a wonderful idea”?

“I think you’ll agree that even though this is a “faux cover”, it certainly looks like something Warner Home Video could use. I hope they’re watching!”

They are, and they’re PISSED.

Max

What a nice “hello” email. I just love how these people hide behind their email accounts and send out snippy emails as their first contact with someone. The more extreme fans, like Max, do this all the time. They come out of the gate combative. If Max had been nice about it, I probably would have shrugged it off and apologized for any misunderstanding. However, since I’ve been on the receiving end of many of these “flaming” emails in the past, I simply don’t put up with it.

What Max was failing to realize was that this offending image was never meant to represent any official release by Warner Home Video. It was a fan’s idea of their ideal set. But in his stupor of angst, Max felt that the world might be misled and so this all must be stopped! And stopped now! Oh the madness! “Max Madness”!

So, my response was:

My site clearly states that it’s NOT official cover art and was done IN FUN at another forum in by a fan.
<http://www.thejudyroom.com/news.html> – scroll down to see what I wrote.

Here’s the link to the thread over at The Judy Garland Message Board, in which some of the members (not me – I’m not that great with PhotoShop), had a fun little contest for folks to come up with THEIR OWN IDEAS for cover art for the upcoming boxed set.

<http://judyboard.webprime.de/viewtopic.php?t=2638&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0>
You may need to sign up – it’s free. You can always delete your membership after you see the page.

I would think that WHV would be very happy that all the fans out there are so excited about this set coming out. Everyone is anxiously awaiting it’s release, regardless of what the cover art is.

I sure hope that you sent a similar snippy email to the person who TOOK THE IMAGE (MINUS THE TEXT) FROM MY SITE, AND POSTED IT OUT OF CONTEXT OVER AT THE HOME THEATER FORUM. That wasn’t done by me. That’s the person who put it out there implicating that it’s the real deal – and that’s the person you should go after, and tell them to CHECK THEIR SOURCES before they take things from someone else’s website to post elsewhere.

You might make note that as soon as that Dan person posted to his groups with the image, I IMMEDIATELY posted that it was taken out of context and was NOT the cover art, lest people get confused and think there was some announcement.

Thanks for writing.

Sincerely,

Scott B.
The Judy Room
http://www.thejudyroom.com

Of course, this went over with Max like a turd in a punch bowl. And having all the time in the world to sit at his computer, no doubt with a bag of chips on one side and a big gulp on the other, he fired off a quick response:

You didn’t address my comments about why that faux cover is “Not so `wonderful’.” I wasn’t debathing that it IS “faux,” nor that it was created “IN FUN,” nor that you said it was “Not really.” I’m debating YOUR comments *about it*, which lend an air of approval.

Why *would* WHV “be very happy” that this piece of art is MISrepresenting their coming release? The fans were already “so excited” about the set before they ever saw the faux art.

Speaking of “CHECK THEIR SOURCES,” I have asked that you not use material I post to the J-List or CASTRECL without credit, and you did it again, Scott.

Max

Um, ok. Just where is the threat to our national security here? Now suddenly I’m lending my “approval” to it? I’m flattered that anyone would think that my “approval” of any faux DVD cover art for a Judy Garland set would make any sort of difference in the universe. This made me chuckle. To think that anyone other than Max himself would be that upset over something like this is hysterical. I took the bait, and replied with:

If I “did it again, Scott”, then tell me what it is that I quoted from you without giving you credit and I’ll be more than happy to credit you. There’s no reason to be snippy about it.

And please know that it was a simple error on my part and was in no way meant as a “slight” to you, so don’t take it personally. Just email me and tell me.

If it’s something posted to one of the groups I’m on, without credit given to you, then obviously I wouldn’t know it came from you.

I’m not a member of the “J-List”. And I didn’t know that you owned the copyrights on track listings. Or press releases from the studios, if that’s what you’re talking about? I don’t copy and paste any of your text from the CASTRECL after the last time you had a hissy fit.

But again, let me know what I failed to give you credit for something, and I’ll gladly put your name on it. So many people contribute so many wonderful things to The Judy Room all the time, including studios and other media outlets, that I always give credit where credit is due.

Yes, I do think it’s a “wonderful” cover art idea. I do approve it – AS ARTWORK. It’s beautifully done, and if people are too stupid to realize that it was done in fun and is not from WHV, then that’s their problem for not reading the accompanying text.

I can’t control if people take images from my site and post them elsewhere. So go pick on the goon who put it on the Home Theater Forum in the first place. None of this would be an issue if that person hadn’t just posted the image alone over at The Home Theater Forum and Dan [last name removed] hadn’t taken it from there and spammed all of the Judy Groups he’s on. Talk to him too.

I still can’t see why WHV is pissed – unless they’re pissed at the person who posted it over at the Home Theater Forum. If that’s the case, then again, talk to that person.

On my news page, I always give links to Amazon for people to purchase their product. I would think they’d be happy about that. I’m promoting their product for free. And like it or not, a lot of people out there use my site as their first resource for news about upcoming products.

Thanks again for writing.

Sincerely,

Scott B.
The Judy Room
http://www.thejudyroom.com

Now here is where it gets weird, and we cross over into that world of psycho-ownership. Max changes his tune. Now the issue isn’t this offending photo or that horrible misrepresentation of some upcoming DVD set. Nope. It’s now my apparent theft, in his eyes, of information he posts to other groups:

The information about CLASSIC MUSICALS 2 came from my postings to the J-List and/or CASTRECL. I know because I *changed the WHV press release*. So where did you get it, if not from either list?

The material I post is often in advance of the press release being widely available, and is FOR those lists. I never post press releases (or track lists, for that matter) eactly as received, because I can then tell they came from me if they turn up elsewhere. But I never “had a hissy fit” [yes, he did!] nor even told you the CASTRECL information couldn’t be used, I just asked that you PROPERLY credit where it came from, whether you asked permission to repost it or not.

If you don’t “get” that the art MISREPSENTS what the coming boxED (not box) set is, there’s no point continuing that discussion. However, it’s pretty denigrating to call people “stupid” if they are misled into thinking the set will contain something it won’t when it isn’t pointed it out in YOUR comments in “the accompanying text.”

Max

Uh oh! So now the truth comes out! Poor Max has nothing better to do with his time than to take this “privileged” information that he receives early, and alter/edit it so he can keep track of it – and evidently send out his “cease and desist” emails to people who copy and paste “his” information on other discussion groups. Someone has some serious ownership issues!

At this point, I’m laughing and having fun. I didn’t take “his” information. Really! Someone else took it and forwarded it around, without credit to Max. And Lord knows, he should get credit!

Obviously this guy just can’t handle the fact that, thanks to the Internet, we don’t really need people like him to descend upon us from on high with the glorious news of what’s on a Judy Garland CD or DVD.

Well, I had tried to be fairly nice in my previous email. Even though I was irritated at yet another psycho fan spamming me over what I would call a “nothing issue”. So my response to poor Max was:

Someone else gave me that information – plus I received an email newsletter from Warner Home Video announcing the set at the same time. I’ll be sure to put your name all over it though. I had no clue you were so upset about it. Maybe if you had corrected me at the time? I guess it’s easier to stew about it and then be bitchy rather than professional when you finally decide to speak up?

I’m very sorry that your entire identity is so obviously wrapped up in being the “Rona Barrett of the web” – by being first-out-of-the-gate with CD/DVD product news. I would think that you would want the fans to get the news as quickly as possible in any and all available outlets rather than being the “owner” of it on a few email distribution lists. Weird.

It’s very telling that you would alter press releases (or track lists, for that matter), for the sole purpose of monitoring where it turns up. Perhaps when you post on the CASTRECL (and other) list(s) you could note this top secret information as such, to avoid other people (not just horrible me) from copying and pasting your posts. I’ve seen your posts pop up in all kinds of places, and not by me.

I may be too casual about things like this, because for me it’s immaterial who puts product info details out there. I wouldn’t think something like product information would be owned by any one person, regardless of how altered. For the casual fan out there, they don’t really care either, it’s the news itself that’s important.

The Judy Room news page IS clear about the “faux cover”. I’m sorry to offend you if you thought it was presented as such. I’ll dumb it down a bit and put a special note on there. I’ll do that when I update that product information about the Classic Musicals set and give you that much needed credit. I’m sure that’s of great importance to the fans out there.

This is my last email on this subject.

But try to remember in the future that when you’re making initial contact with someone via email – about any subject – that you will “get more flies with honey than with vinegar”.

Thanks for writing.

Sincerely,

Scott B.
The Judy Room
http://www.thejudyroom.com

I’m sure you can guess by now just how well THIS email went over. I couldn’t help fan the flames a bit. Partly because he’s so obviously delusional. And partly because, as I stated earlier, I’m just so tired of these freaks firing off bitchy emails thinking that I’m just going to roll over and take it.

Tune in tomorrow to find out just how Max decided to respond!

PART 1

PART 3 (final)