Welcome to the terrible majesty of the bray and the cray!
Ya gotta have friends!http://www.1938media.com/the-julia-allison-show/
The Mary puppet made me spit out my tea. That was fucking hilarious.
On the subject of videos, our bunnies just posted their Mr. Roboto lipdub from CES on Vimeo. Verdict: 4 minutes of the most powerful pink lights. AND perhaps the most retarded thing I've ever witnessed in my life. Discuss.
Crap. The link: The Stupid Mr. Roboto thingy
"Permissions error" spared me from what might have been the most deadly minutes of my life.
Oh yes, I assure you it was THAT bad. My question: Why the hell would Cisco sponsor a lipdub that has nothing to do with technology in the first place? It's just them prancing around and over-lip syncing under pink lights and getting all "crazy" on us and "living differently."I'm honestly very, very disappointed in Cisco. This goes beyond NonSociety and into the fact that in a recession when PEOPLE ARE LOSING THEY'RE JOBS Cisco chooses to support shit like this. And still, Cisco denies they sponsored them. How on Earth do the NonSociety bunnies pay to have a team of people professionally produce videos of them prancing around under pink lights? Oh, that's right. Sponsors.
That would be THEIR jobs. I know my grammar, but it's been a long day. I'm baffled by this. Truly baffled. And then Cisco goes and tells commenters "we care what you have to say but stop sending us e-mails!" Talk about out of touch. And undeniably clueless.
Yes Cisco proved about as receptive to feedback as NS, in my opinion
yeah i cant watch it too, after hearing so much about how much they put into that instead of ces coverage i am expecting it to be good (yeah right).
Lionella - It's just overproduced bullshit. Lots of shots of them all over CES acting and walking like robots in matching outfits. There's some choreography between the girls in several sections and as I mentioned, pink lights and pink special effects.You can tell they put time into it, but what on God's green earth is the point of it? They should be ashamed of themselves that they flew across country to attend CES and all they could come up was a fake music video. I'm repulsed.
Thank God Baugher is back. My response to the QOD: Should the drinking age be lowered to 18 in the USA or not? (I'll see how long until it gets deleted because I'm bored.)I completely disagree. I had two sips of Boone's and got completely wasted with a professor of mine freshman year at Georgetown.I couldn't call it rape because, well, I tend to shove my tits in the face of everyone I meet, but it wasn't far off.I was completely destroyed and totally insecure and because bulimic.But it's OK now because my ex has cancer and that makes me feel so much better about myself.
I wrote Julia a direct email earlier, and she has replied. And I have replied.xoxoScary
your e-mail was great scary, i never heard of a spam bot that asks "what your credit score" . also WTF!! "i wouldnt worry too much about it" WTF!!! of course you wouldnt- your 100% unethiical!!
Dear RBNS,Please. I. am. so. tired. I can't possibly respond to any of your really nasty (but mostly constructive) comments because I am just so sleepy and sad and crying over ineffable things happening in my life that I am not going to tell you about even though my entire business is based around the fact that I am going to share my life on the Internet so that you can emulate me. Honestly, your negativity is throwing me off my game. Even though your site hits are helping us scam more companies into giving us free stuff (and hopefully, eventually, free money), I really think that you should focus on something else! Please stop worrying about what I am doing and go do something more meaningful with your life.While you go feed babies and read to the blind, I am going to go post more pictures of myself and hilarious conversations I've had with my sistahs and readers about how hot I am, what a jerk my exboyfriend is and how attractive and kind my next victim is. And cry into my ice cream. Because I am just so sad and tired. xoxo, Julia
Aww, poor little Julia! I wonder who's called her out privately for her bullshit and made her all sad and cry-face-y? Dan? Or Charles Forman?
Julia Allison is sad because you've "fucked with her mind," Scary! :( :( :( Now doesn't that just want to make you pack it all in and take up archery. I know it makes me want to. She's probably sad because her next stalking victim, Alexander Marquardt (don't you know it's REQUIRED to use his first AND last name at every mention??) isn't biting her desperate bait.
I don't get it. When did this guy she was seeing dump her?
Never mind. I did that read the whole thread thing the kids are talking about.
Preston, you're probably right. He has absolutely NO INTEREST in her, and was in fact probably scared off by her cyber-stalking of him on her blog.
there are too many fools out there who will buy her shit.she wrote this for her DLD Conference blurb:The co-founder of NonSociety.com, which garners over 800,000 visitors every month, she also co-hosts and exec produces the popular internet chat show, TMI Weekly, with Next New Networks. She's been hired to speak to companies like A&E, Unilever, Microsoft, and MIT's Sloan School on new media and innovative marketing strategies, and is a frequent panelist at conferences, where she relishes the copious use of nametags.Also, it's interesting to know that her friend Randi Zuckerberg will be speaking at this DLD "conference". Innnnnnnnnnteresting.
Of course she left out the fact that the bulk of those visitors were driven to her site from checking Google for credit help, lead to NS by hidden keywords placed in her code, unbeknownst to her or her programmers, by spammers. And the fact that she's "tired and really sad".Yes. Tired and sad are just the words, I think.
http://www.dld-conference.com/speakers09.phpchad hurley too...! What a party it will be for her. Either she wows them with her breasts, or...ummmm...i guess that's it.I wonder who SHE HAS REPLACED!?!?!? Last minute fill-in, my dear...and dont expect rhe bigwigs in your "session". Thats not how it works, trust me.See you there, Julia.
MUST POST THIS QOD LOVELINESS!Charlsie - Intern said:Please disregard all messages that have my name, but do not contain the following symbol: £.The impersonator stuff is funny, but it's enough. If messages are not on topic, then they will be deleted. It is annoying for our loyal readers to have to scroll through negative, unproductive comments. As for the question, my opinion is that the drinking age is appropriate as is. I'm from a small mid-western town where drinking at an early age was/is a big social problem. It's not a good thing to have teenagers drunk, trust me.Thanks. £Charlsie Charlise - Intern said: Charlsie, sis,Your symbol idea is retarded.As for the question, I think the US needs to adopt some more European ways of life such as a younger drinking age. I think the "mystique" of drinking would be diminished, especially amongst teenagers. If they be sippin' some wine with the parentals at age 13, then boozin' behind the backyard shed at age 18 most likely wouldn't happen.Now you know how I grew up.Back to work!Charlise
Um, so now everyone impersonating Charlsie will just add a pound symbol? Stupidity.
That Charlsie...one smart cookie!
Charlsie's idea is so dumb that I almost didn't get it. Why wouldn't her impersonators just add a pound symbol as well? Surely they're involved enough with this site and the QOD to read her post? Stupidest thing I've heard all month-- I bet Mary Rambin had something to do with it.
I am pretty sure all the Charlsies are fake, even the £ one. Surely no one is that stupid... right? (don't answer that). Real Charlsie would have deleted some comments before posting. It looks like a lot of people are having fun being Charslie today, although that fun is giving Nonsociety their precious page views, so don't visit too much!
Scary, Hollie, others,I do enjoy the snark; but, you should be careful. Now that your identities are coming out, you may be prime targets for a defamation lawsuit. I sense that you don't have much to lose financially and may think that it would hlp self promote; but, I can assure you, it is those that can;t afford the high $$ lawyers that suffer the most in these types of cases.You have gone beyond just stating opinion when you are actively seeking out and coaching others to damage a business reputation in the eyes of their customers. As an attorney myself, I sense that there are already enough damages and plenty of malice to bring this to trial.No, I don't know these 3, nor do I really care about any of this. I just found some of the writing here enjoyable; but, thought you should be careful in crossing the line.
I can't imagine what it must be like to be an intern over there, what with all the comments and Gawker articles and constant chaos. No doubt this is not what they signed up for.
Oh nice try, Julia. Jesus.
Exactly, Kasey! I've cut it out almost completely.
It's funny how "the lawyer" comment shows up at exactly the same time JA is online, posting some more amazing content -- doggie photos!! -- and Twittering. What a coincidence! Usually we see little from her til later in the afternoon and then til 4 in the morning or so.Really, Julia, everything you do is so utterly transparent. Try a little stealth, will you?
anon lawyerYou're probably not a real lawyer. If you were you'd know 1. Truth is a defense (if the NS buisness is encoding for google hits, shilling for Blue Print, or doing any of the other things talked about here that might harm their business, there is no claim) there's nothing illegal about pointing that out 2. the standard for libel rises drmatically for public figures, which by dint of their biz model they are 3. and there is also nothing illegal about protesting one businesses practices to their advertisers. Similar to calling for a boycott on a restaurant or other business because you object to their practices. Free speech. Even calling for NS's decline is not illegal.Free speech rights trump buisness rights almost always. And I've never heard of anyone winning an internet defamation suit.
^i think julia's plan b to get famous was just erected: be The One who wins the internet defamation suit. think of all the glory, the name-recognition you'd get, j!
Oh lord Julia please. If you spend just as much time writing a decent, intelligent, professional response to the decent, intelligent, professional email I sent you, you would at least still have that many more people in your corner. Instead you brush off the FACT (dear lawyer : FACTS are not illegal to share, especially when EVIDENCE was posted) that you had hidden keywords in your page codes, and ignoring completely the direct question about the Blueprint cleanse... preferring to instead get emotional and talk about how you aren't worth the trouble and want to cry yourself to sleep.I think I'm crossing over to the other side. And to Bob who asked on my comments box, yes I sent all the links etc to Gawker this morning. But if Denton is the Charlie to these Angels, it's a crapshoot whether or not they will choose to expose this.And lawyer, what exactly has come out about my identity? Nada. Oh, don't get your panties in a bunch. It WILL. But on MY terms. And as I said before posting facts and evidence is not defamation.Screw off.
o hai, kin i bez spekin law 2 u? u mean, i soo, kthanxbaiJA errrrr.. realz law perzun
Libel? Are you serious, lawyer? I don't think so. I'm not going to outline my credentials but, rest assured, there is NO CASE.
Gawd, I'm loving this SO MUCH!
Julia is dumber than I thought (and that is saying something) if she thinks she has the money to bring a defamation lawsuit. Her business is broke and she can't pay lawyers with juice and makeup. I don't even think dear old Dadsers would touch this. Nice try though, sweetie! But we all know you sleep until noon and don't start terrorizing the Interwebs until the afternoon or very late at night but your post was real cute.
"As an attorney myself, I sense that there are already enough damages and plenty of malice to bring this to trial."To the alleged lawyer (aka Julia): truth is an absolute defense to defamation.... and also defamation only exists where you state something as a purported fact ... not merely where you express your opinion.
It's SO cute when Julia Allison/Julia Baugher breaks out her old com law textbooks! Maybe if she devoted more time to actual studying in college and less time to plagiarism and making excuses for missing exams she might have noticed that her threat is full of holes.
Funny it comes after the exchange with Scary too. She obviously lay awake all night, knowing people were onto their shady business practices, and thinking what her next move should be."I know!!! I'll post on that mean, nasty site and pretend to be a lawyer and try to scare them!!!"
I'm fucking shaking in my Manolo's.
The thought of Julia Allison staying up all night in her pink Barbie Dream Shoebox writing reader emails to herself, dreaming up threats to detractors, stalking uninterested men, planning her next outfit, outlining her 2009 resolutions, writing her "screenplay," pursuing her business school/religion interest of the day, writing her Time Out New York column with made up sources, and looking at old pictures of herself gives me such a case of the lulz.
Anon 1:11, you forgot the best part: planning new ways to scam PR companies for free stuff!
Actually, please sue me Julia.The PR it would bring to my various ventures would be priceless.Sued by Julia Allison for exposing her shady methods of gaining page views. Please, do it.
ScaryMary,"The PR it would bring to my various ventures would be priceless."And there we have it - the total and complete hypocrisy of what you are doing. Your whole reason for being right now is to attempt to ride the coattails of Julia - just like your arch nemeses Mary Rambin. You get more and more desperate to make that happen as you see your following of 10 people tire while NS grows exponentially. Parasite scum!
Oh Julia. Please speak not of hypocrisy. Serious LOLsYour point really holds no weight. If ScarMary was trying to ride your coattails, she would not be writing an anonymous blog. And if ScaryMary is willing to disclose who she is and still comes out alive, I commend her. Not many people are willing to publicly associate themselves with you. And speaking of riding your coattails, isn't that what your whole venture IS. I don't know how you did it, but you found Mary and Meghan: the two people left on Earth willing to be attach their name to yours.
Oh Julia. Don't you have a flight to catch?Guess what? I don't have any PR to gain. I just think you're an asshole.
And once again, a pro-Julia sympathizer shows up just a few minutes after she's been Twittering. It must be hard to concentrate on packing, Jules, when you're obsessing over yourself.
defamation only works if any of us our taking money from you so that we can profit financially.well, if NS shut their site down Scary or any of us wouldnt benifit finacially. their are no ads on this site or any way to make money. you have to think of it as a bussiness. no one ever wins a defamation suit for personal injury. only money loss.so i guess if we conspired to tell kodak that julia killed a puppy with her bare hands instead of doing ces coverage mabe that would be a start at defamation (but we still dont profit) instead some people wanted to do the right thing and make sure people werent getting scamed.ohhh thats it: use the screw the good samaritan defense!! that always works!!
You know, I'm seriously thinking that the trio isn't trying to scam readers. I think they're just so clueless they're completely ignorant to the fact that they are even doing it.
Glad everyone is not buying the b.s. "lawyer" stuff. They don't have truth on their side and their critics do so they try for the fear tactic instead.You cannot be sued for telling the truth about things that are out in the open for all to see and which are true. If so every writer who wrote something about a company that wasn't flattering but was true would be sued for defamation or libel. First law of libel: it must be a lie. And actually now that I think of it, I wish a writer would write about this company but rather than writing some shallow profile write an expose on their shady practices and questionable claims of being journalists instead. All truth. We are all telling the truth about what is going on at their site so why does it bother them. If they don't like it why don't they address it instead of repeatedly telling critics to get a life? They tell us to email feedback but when that's done, look at the response like JA's email to ScaryMary. They just want it to go away instead of addressing what the cricisim is about in the first place. Wonder if she'll call someone from this site a c*nt next as miss turn the other cheek did with Owen from Gawker. It didn't take much to set her off did it? Just calling her an egoblogger. If she can't handle that she's most defintiely in the wrong line of business.
I'm willing to bet JA's flight's delayed.