Thursday, February 5, 2009


Are you having problems commenting? If so, please email Thanks. (And no, we're not blocking anyone.)


  1. Hi! I just tried using Firefox and it didn't post my comment (on the post about a new forum). I came back using IE, and I was able to comment just fine. Maybe I changed a setting in Firefox that prevented my comments from posting, I'm not sure. Everything was fine until yesterday.

  2. I'm Anon @ 2:37. Posting via Firefox, everything works..

  3. Anon 2.59, also Firefox, all ok.

  4. I'm officially done checking out the NS website. I admit that I'd still wonder over there once in awhile; it was like an accident on the side of the road-horrible, but I couldn't look away. However,reading the article you posted "Becoming Julia Allison" was like a slap in the face. Our society needs independent, intelligent, educated women who are engaged in the world around them, not flippant stories about how much fun it is to mooch of off of the men you're dating. Julia and co contribute to the destructive strain in our society that tells women to worry primarily about who they date, what they wear, how they look, and what they own. I think we all have a right to a comfortable and healthy existence, but please, ladies, don't perpetuate the stereotype that women are vapid and self-obsessed; There are plenty of other sources catering to this destructive idea (women's magazines, marketing geared towards women, "chick lit", "chick flicks", etc.). By all means, be successful. But please channel your ambitions and abilities to promote a more substantial, less stereotypical view of the modern woman.

  5. Thank, Mandy. Paul Carr, takes notes!

  6. I agree, Mandi. I've said it before, but I think that following the every move of Julia Allison, Mary Rambin and Meghan Parikh just contributes to the problem. They are obviously pursuing their destructive and often offensive venture for perceived fame and fortune and the more attention they receive from us - even bad attention - the more we are becoming part of the problem.

    It's sort of tiring and tedious to even be offended by the stupid things they "put out there" because they never change. They are shallow, uninteresting and unchanging caricatures of everything that is wrong with the "Sex and the City" / Web 2.0 generation. Perpetuating these stereotypes has gotten them no where - in fact, I would say it has harmed them greatly.I think they touched a nerve with so many people because they were so shameless in their pursuit of ill-gotten "fame" and success, but they haven't really achieved anything worthwhile at all. I'd say they are in the same place they were a year ago - or even farther behind personally and professionally.

    So what is all this worth to us as readers? What is it worth to them? In the end: nothing.

  7. holy mother of the new tmi episode.

  8. i'm at work and can't watch it...what do they say?

  9. Anon 11:49, this is what I am talking about. Julia Allison, Mary Rambin and Meghan Parikh have pretty much resorted to blogging, taping and talking about the most offensive, dated and stereotypical things possible, just to get page views and any last shred of attention they can. And it's working. They have become Ann Coulters with a trite Sex and the City spin.

  10. Hi Kasey, nicely put. However, sadly. I think they have achieved something from their website-they've achieved a certain type of success. They have endorsements, free products, a certain social celebrity, etc. Of course, this type of success gets to the underlying problem-namely, that no one should be promoting this understanding of success for women. There's nothing wrong with getting free stuff and gaining notoriety. However, to imply (as their site does) that this type of success is the best type of success for a woman is extremely damaging. I think it's akin to Cosmo implying (pretty overtly) that sexually pleasing a man is a woman's number one concern and greatest purpose, or "chick flicks" implying that a woman isn't a woman unless she has a shoe addiction and a boyfriend. You're absolutely right about about attention being part of the problem. Like any other product, consumers have control. We can let NS know that we don't support their idea of women by boycotting their cite.

  11. The JA purge has begun..I wonder what happens to Girls egos when no answers on QOTD make it pass the human filter?

  12. I think it goes further than that Mandi. I don't believe that their content is valuable or interesting so not analyzing and focusing on their content period, instead of just not going to their actual site to focus on it, seems the best choice for me.

    Dissecting everything they say and do here as far as their content goes to me says that their content IS that ineresting and IS adequate for maintaining an entire business and web site, and I just don't believe that.

    The things they post about, like their haircuts, how they react to each others' hair, who they may have a crush on today, what they did at the gym today, who might be mad at whom this week, etc. isn't the kind of content I'm interested in thinking or talking about. I find I have as little interest in talking about it critically (I have done so and found it not the least bit satisfying) as I would in thinking or talking about it approvingly.

    Basically following and analyzing minute details of their lives, even if it is with the intention to critique, seems like that is exactly what they want for their site and it's precisely that angle that has, among other issues, frustrated me about their concept to begin with.

    The self absorbed or empty content passed off as quality material is something I've taken issue with from the start so now analyzing and discussing that same content here in a critical way doesn't make it any more palatable or interesting to me.

    My frustration with them has always been over their business model, concept, shallow, shoddy content, and shady practices, all issues that can grow stale to discuss after a while since it can have the tendency to become like a broken record (and I think it has grown stale because it seems to be less and less a focus here and I find it tiring to talk about myself and it was my main issue!).

    So what's left once the business stuff grows old and the new stuff they post is no longer of interest?

    Add to that some conflict and comment policing among commenters that's made the site feel like less of a pleasant, cooperative place to me, and I think my time commenting here here run its course. With the shady business issue having grown old and the other stuff just not being up my alley, I think I've just simply run out of material : )

    I realize "I'm outa here comments" are generally considered obnoxious. But since I've been a pretty heavy commenter here from the start and really appreciate and want to thank our hosts giving a forum for our voices that have been silenced elsewhere, and I've enjoyed interacting with so many of you, I wanted to at least explain my future absence (even if no one happened to notice or care). Felt weird to just go suddenly silent after commenting here so consistently.

    Ineffably, indefatigably (and what the hell I'll throw defenestration in there too, it's a big enough word) yours,


  13. May I ask a question?

    Do you really care about their business practices? Really? Does their practice of spamming Google really bother you? Do you really feel offended that Julia is asked to sit on a panel for the DLD? If so, why? Is she really garnering any kind of anything from these things?

    I'm hearing a lot of "Well, you're not talking about what I want to talk about, so I'm leaving" stuff. Yes, I find the "I'm outta here" comments pointless and annoying. If you want to leave, leave. No need to make an announcement. Ineff, I hold yours as an exception because, well, you're you and have provided consistently strong feedback. But the others? Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Most , I'm sure, are from people trying to undermine this site and give the impression that "nobody cares." Others are, no doubt, from people who came under fire and wish to give the impression - as an anonymous poster - that attacks made on "faves" have turned them off. You blog long enough and you can spot these types.

    I think the latest TMI episode is a great example of why talking about the "minutiae" is just as interesting or valuable as discussing their professional pursuits. Really? Those 3 are trying to act above the fray? Wasn't the purpose of this site to offer a voice to people so that others may think twice about working with them or advocating them? You can highlight a person's personal flaws and demonstrate why these three are horrific examples of both women and business people.

    Basically following and analyzing minute details of their lives, even if it is with the intention to critique, seems like that is exactly what they want for their site and it's precisely that angle that has, among other issues, frustrated me about their concept to begin with.

    See, I don't see it as giving them what they want. I think they are three incredibly naive and sheltered girls who are being led by the nose by Julia, with absolutely no clue as to how they are destroying their ability to ever, ever have the life they truly want. All this minutiae? All this simple dissection about headbands and haircuts? I think it throws them on their ears. They read this site, then they scuttle on over to their blogs and miraculously address things we said they should. Know what that does? That shows how little they actually know about their business. It shows that they blog not for themselves, but for approval. Hardly the sign of maturity or leadership.

  14. I meant to applaud Mandi's interest in meaninful descisions of content. That's what I'm interested in. I may still comment here but I've decided not to water down my criticism with anything that might be construed as a superficial attack (construed by me).

  15. I think that it is OK to leave when you want to leave, and to announce it too--in fact, I think it is good for the trio to realize that some people can take or leave the minutia of their lives. At some point, I don't care if they have 12 or 40 crushes between them--or what they do with their hair on a regular or irregular basis. Another thing: Not commenting as often or at all anymore though doesn't mean not keeping up with the site. I will continue to be an ardent supporter of PVs for RBNS.

  16. Christan, I applaud you for that insightful comment. As long as JA and crew are putting themselves on pedestals and shilling an empty and false lifestyle, it's our duty to say that the empresses have no clothes. We need to speak up loudly and often, lest more young women get duped into following in their sad footsteps.

  17. I just came back from shopping. You know, I always used to pick up the latest US and Star to sift through. I don't think I've bought either in months. The content is manufactured and manipulated by publicists and image consultant. It's not real. They just want us to think it. Kind of like NonSociety. Maybe it comes with age, maybe it comes with living in a bad economy, maybe it just comes from looking closer and realizing that it's all just fabricated drama created to get you to spend money. I'll save my $7 a week and go on vacation. My money is better spent on things that matter.

  18. Ima Bunny,
    No, no, no. There is no "duty". Seriously. You CAN look away. NS is a lot of things, but it's not ilegal and it doesn't kill people.

    You may think it's helpful (for young women or whoever might get influenced) to counter their NS take on life, love etc. But no one's making you read/watch. Turn away.

    I have enjoyed (and been angered by and laughed at ) NS,kinda as a way to clarify the way I feel about web stuff in general (and am glad to see other people here on RBNS take it half-seriously as a critique, too). And celebrity. And writing.

    As vapid as they are, they provide the perfect jumping off point to talk about quality (they dont' really have any). It';s a guilty pleasure, I guess, but seeing something you so object to, I think, can help you firm up how you don't want to be/work/write/act, and therefore, how you DO. Stupid people, make me feel smarter. I don't think people should be afraid to admit that. Especially when the stupid people ask for it. It's true and it's what NS doesn't get: they assume adverstisers and investors will see all pageviews as dedicated fans. But a lot of web people are bgining to realize: hold it, that's not how I, personally use the web. I view stuff for other reasons. So....

    I assume it will lose its appeal for me (hey, I went through a weird electro-music phase for a few months too). There aren't endless lessons for the NS crew to illustrate, even unwittingly. And their stumblings and failures and arrogance and ignorance of the real world already has begun to teach the same lessons, over and over. I'm hanging in there now for the vinication I'll feel when they JUST GIVE UP.

    But at most, this whole study of NS is a weird intellectual exercise. And a laugh. These are not "dangerous people". They have no "power". Ease up.

  19. Maybe it's the influence of the Internet. All that glossy veneer applied by PR firm gets eaten away by the caustic commenters. We're rejecting that hype and embracing people who share themselves with honesty and humility.

  20. Flatface, I respectfully disagree. I think when we turn a blind eye to bad behavior, we are allowing it to flourish. Do you remember how savagely South Park ripped on Paris Hilton because of the effect she was having on the lives of young girls who were trying to emulate her "sexy" ways? She was well on her way to being proclaimed Princess of America (joke), but the tide turned against her, and people began to see what a bigoted, selfish, pissed-up slapper she is (true). I only wish we could have cut her down sooner, then we might have avoided this whole Kardashian fiasco (another joke).

    You gotta take my comments with a grain of salt. I don't think I'm saving the world, but I'm not letting JA & Co. get off scot-free.

    Some of us are here for a giggle, some of us are here because NS stirs up real emotions and opinions that we feel are important to express. None of us has a better or a worse reason for being here.

  21. Ima,
    well said. Fair enough.

  22. I just finished catching up with all of today's comments and turned on my TV. I wish my TV had screen capture, because this is what it said:


    NonSociety is brain-dead, agreed, but I don't think I'm ready to stop hating vegetables.

  23. (Yes here I am again)

    -Anon 242, I feel similarly. Not commenting or not commeting regularly doesn't necessarily mean not checking in with the site now and then or even often.

    -Despite my long winded goodbye comment I just wanted to respond and clarify a few points mainly in light of Christan's reply.

    Do I care about their business practices?

    Absolutely. As I said that was my primary purpose for being here.

    -Why do I care?

    I think Ima Bunny said it very well: "I think when we turn a blind eye to bad behavior, we are allowing it to flourish. Some of us are here for a giggle, some of us are here because NS stirs up real emotions and opinions that we feel are important to express."

    To me not speaking up equals implicit approval and agreement. And I do care when I think businesses are lying, cheating, misrepresenting themselves to mislead the public, consumers, and/or other companies, and I do consider it wrong.

    One company's actions can set the stage for many other negative changes to come, can eventually affect what is considered the norm in society, and at the very least can negatively affect those consumers and companies they come into contact with. NS just happens to be a company I had contact with whose practices I found disturbing.

    Granted NS (may or) may not have much influence in the larger scheme of things but even smaller scale damages it may cause matter IMO. I also think pointing out unethical behavior, even if there is no clear "victim" of the behavior, is still important. It sends the message that people aren't going t just passively accept behavior they find wrong.

    That's part of the role of society (hmmm, NONsociety...) isn't it, to play the part of valueskeeper and help as a whole to shape what behavior is accepted and what is shunned. I obviously cannot and will not do much on my own but I think a group of people speaking out do send a message and can have effect even if the only effect is to reaffirm a collective agreement about behavior and reinforce shared values.

    Interestingly enough JA herself once pointed out that gossip served such a purpose in society, to help establish and promote shared values and try to keep in check those straying from those accepted norms. It's a shame that when some of that "keeping in check" is directed at her the feedback seems to lose all its validity and contexual value and become in her eyes nothing more than envy, catty bitchy mean girls yapping away (yes I watched part of that horrid episode), and the rantings of haters with empty lives.

    But enough of my ranting. Their lack of change leads to repetition on my part and then I bore myself. That is why I no longer will be commenting not because of any flaws in the site or others comments. And that is how I should have expressed it. It would have been true, more clear, and more tactful.

    See y'all when NS has its going out of business sale hopefully (although I know some of you want them to stay for the entertainment value alone if not other reasons, so forgive me my hope that they either change for the better or just go away).


  24. I hear ya, Ineff. I have had the same thoughts of, geez, I'm so bored with these girls and with the repetitive criticisms. I've even gone the "I'm outta here" route. Then, a week later, they do something incredibly stupid and I'm back with a new nick, hoping that THIS time I'll get to be cheering at THE END. This place is like crack to me.

    I have the same problem with Dunkin' Donuts.