Advertisement
Guest User

Ben Tomhave vs. Infosec Island

a guest
Jan 8th, 2012
367
0
Never
Not a member of Pastebin yet? Sign Up, it unlocks many cool features!
text 3.96 KB | None | 0 0
  1. Plain and simple, you didn't post the text that was submitted. Nowhere are people told that this should be expected or that it will happen. Moreover, you don't provide a means for contributors to fix things after submitted and published.
  2.  
  3. In terms of "professional" - your first response was to delete the post. The second was stating that I could edit it (untrue). When I pointed out that this wasn't true, your response was to delete my account! Clearly there are deficiencies in the site, but talk about jumping off a cliff. How is it my fault that the site is broken, that submissions aren't handled in the manner expected, and that your apparent preferred "resolution" is to delete, delete, delete?
  4. On Jan 7, 2012 10:50 AM, "Michael Menefee" <mmenefee@wireheadsecurity.com> wrote:
  5.  
  6. I think it's completely appropriate given the way you started the conversation by stating that we had made a "grievous error", display "egregiously bad editorship" and the like. We work with over 100 professionals in the IT Security/Compliance space, and have for almost 3 years, allowing people to get more visibility into their articles than they otherwise would. For each article our bloggers post, we spend hours promoting them on various social media outlets, and make no profit on this site.
  7.  
  8. We simply do not have the time to work with people that act as though they pay for the services we provide.
  9.  
  10.  
  11.  
  12.  
  13. On 1/7/12 10:34 AM, Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
  14. >
  15. > Seriously? This is your response?
  16. > On Jan 7, 2012 10:32 AM, "Michael Menefee" <mmenefee@wireheadsecurity.com> wrote:
  17. >
  18. > Ok, man. no worries. This is a free service we offer for people to promote themselves and their ideas. I'll remove your blogging credentials
  19. >
  20. >
  21. > On 1/7/12 10:27 AM, Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
  22. >
  23. > It does not appear to be unpublished, and the site still says I can't
  24. > edit it because it's "published." See the attached screenshot.
  25. >
  26. > This is way more hassle than it's worth. You should put a disclaimer on
  27. > the text-entry box that the text will be completely lost and unused.
  28. >
  29. > On 1/7/12 9:54 AM, Michael Menefee wrote:
  30. >
  31. > You can login and correct the text yourself. I unpublished the
  32. > article...is re-available under your account to edit
  33. >
  34. >
  35. > On 1/7/12 8:18 AM, Benjamin Tomhave wrote:
  36. >
  37. > Don't delete it! People have already been posting the link around,
  38. > giving it a good review! I can send you the correct text.
  39. >
  40. > On Jan 6, 2012 10:20 PM, "Michael Menefee"
  41. > <mmenefee@wireheadsecurity.com<mailto:mmenefee@wireheadsecurity.com>>
  42. > wrote:
  43. >
  44. > Ben,
  45. >
  46. > I believe we had an issue with the new editor interface that were
  47. > causing user submissions to be deleted before we could approve
  48. > them. So Anthony probably grabbed the text from your blog,
  49. > assuming it was correct and not full of errors.
  50. >
  51. > No problems, Ill delete your post
  52. >
  53. > Mike
  54. >
  55. >
  56. > On 1/6/12 10:11 PM, tomhave@secureconsulting.net
  57. > <mailto:tomhave@secureconsulting.net> wrote:
  58. >
  59. > Username: Ben Tomhave/btomhave/
  60. >
  61. > Email: tomhave@secureconsulting.net
  62. > <mailto:tomhave@secureconsulting.net>
  63. >
  64. > Whomever posted my piece made a grievous error. Rather than
  65. > approving the text submitted, they instead went out and
  66. > grabbed the earlier version from my blog, which had errors and
  67. > omissions. I find this egregiously bad editorship and do not
  68. > approve.
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement