Tag: Authors Behaving Badly

Bookish Thoughts: Santino Hassell, Sarah Lyons and Riptide Publishing, Crimson Romance and RWA Awards

Posted March 16, 2018 by Holly in Discussions, News | 0 Comments

A lot has happened this week in Romanceland.

Santino Hassell Dropped by Publishers

As we mentioned in our statement earlier this week, last week the romance community exploded with the news author Santino Hassell was maybe not everything he’d been purporting himself to be. At that time we were still sorting through everything, but we felt the allegations were serious enough that we didn’t feel comfortable promoting his books. Since our statement, both Riptide Publishing and Berkley have dropped him. He posted a second statement on his website, explaining his side, though again it didn’t really feel like a true apology. “Sorry I’m an asshole” isn’t really the same thing as “I’m sorry I hurt everyone by being an asshole.” Or maybe that’s just me.

If you haven’t had a chance to sort through the whole thing, here’s a list of links:

For the most part, this played out on Twitter. A lot of authors and readers were pretty fierce in their initial defense of SH, including Megan Erickson, who co-wrote the Cyberlove series with SH, and Sarah Lyons of Riptide Publishing. When more and more stories started coming out (with proof) and the depth of the deception was made public, the apology posts started to pour forth. There wasn’t a whole lot of people who weren’t affected by this and we can’t stress enough how sad we are that our community has taken a hit like this.

Isobel Starling commented to let us know Amazon is offering no questions asked refunds for any SH book you’d like to return, no matter when you bought it.

Sarah Lyons Resigns from Riptide Publishing Amid Claims of Inappropriate Behavior From Authors

Author Xen Sanders/Cole McCade recently posted about his experiences with Sarah Lyons. He details extremely inappropriate behavior and abuse in her role as Editorial Director for Riptide Publishing. She resigned as ED shortly thereafter.

It’s really disappointing to see this happening in our romance community. It’s such an ugly situation especially since, for the most part, this community was formed as a safe haven where we could discuss romance, a genre often looked down upon. It’s truly appalling to see someone in a position of power in this industry hurt others like this.

Riptide has since posted a Pledge for the Future, promising reform:

Crimson Romance is Shutting Down

Crimson Romance announced on Twitter their intention to shut down. This comes just days after The Ripped Bodice published their annual Diversity in Romance Study (view the study here), which named Crimson as a leader in publishing diverse romance. I haven’t seen an official announcement outside of Twitter, but PW says S&S attributed the closing to:

“changing consumer reading habits and the continual evolution of the marketplace.” The publisher said these factors made continuing with the business “unfeasible.”

It’s disappointing to hear about any romance imprint closing their doors, but when the imprint closing down is one responsible for publishing such a large number of diverse romances, it hurts even more.

RWA Award Recipients Announced

In one of the only bright spots of the week, RWA announced the winners for this year’s RWA Awards.

The full list:

RWA Nora Roberts Lifetime Achievement Award: Suzanne Brockmann
RWA Emma Merritt Service Award: Leslie Kelly
RWA Service Awards: Xio Axelrod, Robin Covington, Katie Dunneback, Sarah Hegger, Jeannie Moon
RWA Vivian Stephens Industry Award: Pamela Jaffee, Avon Books
RWA Cathie Linz Librarian of the Year: Fran Cassano, North Bellmore Public Library
RWA Steffie Walker Bookseller of the Year: Crystal Perkins

Congratulations to all of the winners, we’re super thrilled for all of you! We’re sure there will be plenty of celebrating in Denver this year and we hope you guys have the best time. Hugs from Book Binge!

Tagged: , , , , , ,

A Statement About Santino Hassell

Posted March 13, 2018 by Holly in Miscellaneous, News | 11 Comments

Recently some allegations have come out about MM author Santino Hassell. It seems he was caught catfishing. There are a good number of reviewers and authors who feel betrayed by Santino Hassell.

For those of you who aren’t plugged into the online romance community, let me sum up: MM author Santino Hassell cultivated an online persona and became friends with a goodly number of other authors and readers. He presented himself as a bisexual single dad with serious health problems and massive medical bills. He asked for readers to donate to help with said bills so he’d be able to continue writing. It was then revealed that he was married, and did not in fact suffer from liver cancer liked he previously claimed. It seems there is also some question about whether or not he’s bi-sexual or if he said so to take advantage of the LGTBQ community. This is a brief summary and I’m sad to say there are a lot of accusations against him, including deceit, abuse toward readers – specifically those in the LGTBQ community – and much more.

If you want the full story, the entire thing is laid out here on Tumblr: The Santino Hassell Debacle. Riptide Publishing has broken all ties with Santino Hassell. Santino Hassell posted an apology, though, as far as I can tell, it admits no wrongdoing and only asks that other authors aren’t abused because of the allegations against him.

To be honest, Rowena and I are still sorting through the entire mess. Not everything is clear to us at the moment (there is just too much to get through and we haven’t had time to read through it all. As a result we don’t fully understand all that’s happened yet). However, we at Book Binge do not condone the abuse of readers, nor do we support those who Catfish, Doxx or deceive readers for personal gain. We have removed all Santino Hassell content from this site and will not post any in the future. Our hearts go out to those who have been victimized and hurt by the actions of this author.

Tagged: , ,

On Jane of Dear Author Writing as Jen Frederick

Posted March 26, 2015 by Holly in Discussions, News | 38 Comments

In 2013 I discovered new adult author Jen Frederick. Her first book was problematic for me, but I absolutely loved her second. Over the last two years I’ve read most of her other works. I also followed her on Twitter and exchanged a few reviewer/author emails with her. Based on her familiarity with authors online, and the community as a whole, I suspected she was an author or blogger writing under a pseudonym. Yesterday, Jane Litte of Dear Author confirmed my suspicions when she came out as best-selling author Jen Frederick.

The response from the DA readership has mostly been positive. The comments on the article are all along the lines of “Awesome! Go you!” or they were up until about 175, which is when I stopped reading them). There was some anger and confusion on Twitter, but it wasn’t until an anonymous author posted at The Passive Voice that any real dissent was brought out into the open. The majority of comments on that article have been overwhelmingly negative toward Jane/Jen. I’ve seen claims elsewhere that the angry commentors at TPV are just the “Pro-EC crowd” attacking Jane and being jealous because she’s selling better than they are. I don’t really agree with that.

The fact is, Jane deceived a lot of people. They have the right to be angry about that.

Jane emailed me a few days before her confession went live to tell me she was Jen Frederick. Prior to that, as I said above, I suspected Frederick was a blogger or author, but I did not suspect Jane. To be honest, that Jen and Jane are the same person has no bearing on my enjoyment of her books. While I found some of them problematic, the fact is I absolutely loved Unspoken. I still love it, even knowing that Jen is Jane (and vice verse).

As Jane said in her post, she wanted to be judged on her own merits as an author, not as Jane Litte writing a book. I can understand and even support that. For years authors, bloggers and readers have criticized Jane for her reviews and commentary; often saying she has no knowledge of what it is to be an author, so she can’t/shouldn’t comment. There are many who don’t agree with the politics at DA, and I can see why Jane wouldn’t want her position as a prominent blogger to influence sales of her books one way or the other.

That Jane chose to publish her novels under a pseudonym, and keep that pseudonym a secret, doesn’t bother me at all. Authors often write under pens names – sometimes multiple pen names – and no one bats an eye. I know many bloggers who are also writers (aspiring and published). I know many authors (aspiring and published) who are also bloggers. I don’t see that it matters one way or another.

But I think Jane made two huge mistakes.

First she kept her secret for far too long. Once she’d published a book or two, and did well enough to know whether it was something she could continue, she should have come forward at Dear Author. That she decided to publish her books isn’t a big deal to me. That she chose to publish many, which ended up as bestsellers, including co-writing books with another best-selling author, which were picked up by a traditional publisher and optioned for movie rights, is harder to swallow.

Her second mistake – and this is the big one , in my opinion- was in creating a full, separate identity for Jen Frederick. A website? Sure. A Twitter or Facebook profile where she could announce information about her books? Absolutely. But Jane took it a step farther. She befriended many authors, bloggers and readers. She joined private author loops. She commiserated  over reviews, and the writing process, and publishing, and any other number of things, all while she was also what many refer to as the Watchdog of the romance community.

I don’t see anything wrong with Jane and Jen being the same person. I do find it harder to swallow that she deceived – whether deliberately or not – the entire romance community. Would authors have been as open and honest with her if they’d known? Should they have been open and honest with her, considering her position at Dear Author?

I do not think Jane set out to purposely deceive anyone. I also don’t think – as some have speculated – she created this author persona as a way to glean information for the purpose of reporting at Dear Author. Nor do I think she used the information she was privy to as an author to hurt any fellow authors in her role as a blogger. But now everything she and Dear Author stood for is suspect.

I also think, had it been another blogger who did exactly what Jane did, Dear Author would have jumped all over them. The community feels deceived and I understand why. More importantly, Jane’s credibility as a forthright blogger and as an author, is being questioned. Considering the amount of works she’s done for the good of the community as a whole, I’m really sad about that. I’m also a little disappointed that she did something I know she would have questioned someone else for. It’s especially frustrating considering her stance on things like this in the past. For example, the disclosure she included when another author reviewed Slave to Sensation by Nalini Singh at Dear Author.

DA Reviewer Disclosure

Of course, I haven’t even touched on the ethical questions this situation raises. Like the fact there were several mentions of Jen Frederick books at Dear Author, including Kati’s “Best of 2014” post, along with a mention in a Daily Deals post and an “If You Like” post, wherein Unspoken was recommended to those who like military roms. None of those are really Jane herself promoting her own work, but naturally it makes her claim that she kept the two separate a lie. A small one? Sure. But a lie nonetheless.

There’s also the fact that she was contracted with Berkley while still reviewing Berkley books. Did she positively review books from her publisher because they were her publisher? Probably not. But again, had she disclosed the relationship it wouldn’t be a question now.

For my part, I don’t plan to stop reading Jen Frederick’s books. But I do think she (as Jane and Jen), and Dear Author both, are a little tarnished now. In the end it comes down to trust. Jane broke ours. It’s as simple as that.

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

#BloggerBlackout: On Entitlement #HaleNo

Posted October 28, 2014 by Holly in Discussions | 15 Comments


Things have been pretty intense in the blogosphere as of late. A publisher is suing a blogger; An author stalked a reviewer, going so far as to visit her home; An author complained that Amazon’s Vine program tanked her book; An author actually assaulted a reviewer. The explosion of the interwebs since Hale’s article has not shown many in a flattering light.

Like many others, these events have left us feeling pretty battered and bruised. Our faith in our community is sadly waning. When the Blogger Blackout was proposed, it seemed like a good way to get back in touch with our roots; to remind us why we started blogging in the first place. I, personally, am not blacklisting any publishers. I’m not even boycotting any (and yes, despite what some think there is a difference).

[Though, in light of recent comments and attacks by author Deborah Smith, Rowena and I are both adding her to our Will Not Buy list. Which, without getting into another long rant, is our prerogative. It isn’t bullying, or us being assholes. It’s our right as consumers to put our dollars – and our promotional efforts – into authors we respect, rather than those who call us “The Reviewer Taliban”.]

This thing with Hale and Blogger blackout seems to have brought out the worst on both sides of the board. Authors and bloggers have said and done some really questionable stuff.

Here’s the thing. I see a lot of authors who think they’re entitled to promotion from bloggers. They aren’t. They’re owed nothing. Even if they send a book for review, they’re owed nothing. With the exception of paid content, which isn’t something we deal with here, there’s nothing an author can do to make me owe him/her anything.

But I’ll share a secret with you. That goes both ways. Authors owe us nothing. They don’t even owe us stories. If an author decided tomorrow to stop writing, that’s nothing to do with me, or you. They may breach a contract with their publisher,  but bloggers and authors have no such contracts.

I often seen review blogs complaining that they didn’t get the books they requested for review. Well guess what? You aren’t entitled to review copies just because you have a blog. Just as authors aren’t entitled to promotion just because they visit a blog.

I just want to clarify, we didn’t join the Blogger Blackout to punish anyone. I feel like we have a pretty solid relationship with most publishing houses and the authors we work with, and we’re not trying to take away from that. I wouldn’t mind some reassurance from some of the publishers who have our address that our private information won’t be shared, but that’s a separate issue.

We aren’t “punishing all for the actions of a few”. Our decision to take a step back and breathe was about us. Not anyone else.

Authors, if you have a problem with us taking a step back to think about where we are now, that’s on you. You have the option of not visiting, not sending in review requests, and not asking us to do promo for you.

Bloggers, if you have a problem with the Blogger Blackout, you have the option of not joining. As someone said on Twitter recently, it’s an Opt-In kind of thing, not Opt-Out. No one cares if you choose not to participate. We aren’t trying to force anything on anyone.

I owe authors nothing. They owe me nothing. Period. The end.

For the curious, you can visit the #BloggerBlackout and #HaleNo hashtags on Twitter, or visit the links in this post for more information.

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

“Catfish”, “Doxx”, and “Stalk” – What You Need To Know About Kathleen Hale #HaleNo

Posted October 21, 2014 by Holly in Discussions | 22 Comments

Last week, The Guardian posted an op-ed piece from YA author Kathleen Hale titled, ‘Am I Being Catfished’? An author confronts her number one online critic (I’m using a Do Not Link filter so the site doesn’t get a hit from your click). Let me break down the article for you.

In response to a query on Twitter asking for ideas for her next book, someone tweeted at Kathleen Hale. Hale followed the blue link road to Goodreads, where the reviewer gave Hale’s book a 1 star rating, after a series of reading updates, which chronicled what she didn’t like about the book (this is fact, as you can see by the link above. The reviewer in question gave the book 1 star after outlining her reasons for not liking the book).

Per Hale’s account in The Guardian article, this had a snowball effect in which other readers changed their ratings and/or quoted the 1 star review with caveats in their own higher ranking reviews.

Curious to see if Blythe had read my book, I clicked from her Twitter through her blog and her Goodreads page. She had given it one star. “Meh,” I thought. I scrolled down her review.

“Fuck this,” it said. “I think this book is awfully written and offensive; its execution in regards to all aspects is horrible and honestly, nonexistent.”

Blythe went on to warn other readers that my characters were rape apologists and slut-shamers. She accused my book of mocking everything from domestic abuse to PTSD. “I can say with utmost certainty that this is one of the worst books I’ve read this year,” she said, “maybe my life.”

Other commenters joined in to say they’d been thinking of reading my book, but now wouldn’t. Or they’d liked it, but could see where Blythe was coming from, and would reduce their ratings.


In the following weeks, Blythe’s vitriol continued to create a ripple effect: every time someone admitted to having liked my book on Goodreads, they included a caveat that referenced her review. The ones who truly loathed it tweeted reviews at me. It got to the point where my mild-mannered mother (also checking on my book’s status) wanted to run a background check on Blythe. “Who are these people?” she asked. She had accidentally followed one of my detractors on Twitter – “I didn’t know the button!” she yelled down the phone – and was now having to deal with cyberbullying of her own. (“Fine, I’ll get off the Twitter,” she said. “But I really don’t like these people.”)

– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian article)

Despite many telling her not to, Hale then began a months long campaign to find out everything she could about the reviewer. She found some information that made her believe the reviewer wasn’t blogging under her real name, and she set out to solve the mystery of who she really was.

thinking back through what I knew of Blythe – her endless photos and reviews complete with Gifs and links, which I now realised must have taken hours to write. The only non-generic photo on her Instagram was of a Pomeranian. It occurred to me that a wife and mother with papers to grade might not have a lot of time to tweet between 6pm and midnight. That said, I had a fiance, friends and a social life (if you can believe it), a lot of writing projects, and I still managed total recall of much of what Blythe had said online. I noticed that two of her profiles contradicted each other – one said 8th grade teacher, one said 10th grade – and that most of her former avatar photos had been of the Pomeranian.


Was Blythe Harris even real?


Over the next few months, my book came out, I got distracted by life and managed to stay off Goodreads. Then a book club wanted an interview, and suggested I pick a blogger to do it.

“Blythe Harris,” I wrote back. I knew tons of nice bloggers, but I still longed to engage with Blythe directly.

The book club explained that it was common for authors to do “giveaways” in conjunction with the interview, and asked if I could sign some books. I agreed, and they forwarded me Blythe’s address.

– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian article)

Just so we’re all on the same page up to this point: Hale saw a 1 star review and some things the reviewer said on Twitter, and began obsessively following said reviewer online, trying to find proof of her real identity. When given the opportunity, Hale then gained the reviewer’s physical address from a third-party book club.

The exterior of the house that showed up on Google maps looked thousands of square feet too small for the interiors Blythe had posted on Instagram. According to the telephone directory and recent census reports, nobody named Blythe Harris lived there. The address belonged to someone I’ll call Judy Donofrio who, according to an internet background check ($19), was 46 – not 27, as Blythe was – and worked as vice-president of a company that authorises disability claims.

– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian acticle)

Hale looked up the address she was given on Google maps and, when she decided this must be the real reviewer’s name, paid for a background check on the owner of the house. Hale also claims she verified the reviewers address with a contact at a publishing house (I’ll get to the problems with this in a little bit).

[Incidentally, the online book club has since posted their side of the story, which details how they came to give Hale the reviewer’s address (another Do Not Link address): My side of the story… | Y.A. Reads Book Reviews. In the post, they confirm Hale asked to be paired with this particular reviewer and wanted her address so Hale could send her a “gift” for agreeing to host her. (They also, in my opinion, took this opportunity to make the situation all about themselves. “Gosh, do you see how this affected me??” when they could have taken the opportunity to support the reviewer and apologize for the part they played in the whole debacle).]

 A contact at a publishing house confirmed that they’d been sending books to Judy’s address all year, and as recently as two weeks ago.

– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian article)

Once Hale had the address of the reviewer, she booked a rental car with the intention of driving to her house and confronting her about using a fake name to give bad reviews. But first she tried to find a better way to confirm her suspicions. She tried setting up a phone or video interview, but the reviewer blew her off. So, in the end, she was left with no choice. She drove to the address she’d been given but chickened out at the last minute and left a book, Anna Quindlen’s A Short Guide To A Happy Life (which even Hale admits was passive-aggressive), on the reviewer’s doorstep instead of knocking. Then she went home and decided to call the reviewer at work.

First she pretended to be doing a factcheck survey and asked the reviewer to confirm her identity. When it seemed like the reviewer was going to hang up, Hale finally broke down and asked if she wrote book reviews under a different name.

“I can’t help you,” she said. “Buh-bye…”

“DO YOU USE THE NAME BLYTHE HARRIS TO BOOK BLOG ONLINE?” I felt like the guy on the Howard Stern show, screaming, “I exist!”

She paused. “No,” she said quietly.

She paused again, then asked, “Who’s Blythe Harris?” Her tone had changed, as if suddenly she could talk for ever.

“She’s a book blogger,” I said, “and she’s given your address.”

“A book blog… Yeah, I don’t know what that is.”


– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian article)

Hale has already crossed so many lines here I don’t even know where to begin. But it gets worse. She tries to get the woman to admit she’s really the reviewer, and even asks whether or not she has kids who might be doing it. She admits to us, the readers of the article, she already knew the reviewer had kids. Which is utterly terrifying.

“She uses photos of your dogs,” I said, feeling like the biggest creep in the world, but also that I might be talking to a slightly bigger creep. “I have it here,” I said, pretending to consult notes, even though she couldn’t see me, “that you have a Pomeranian, and another dog, and she uses photos that you posted.”

She gasped. “I do have a Pomeranian.”

“She uses your address,” I repeated. “Do you have children who might be using a different name online?” I already knew she had two teenagers.

– Kathleen Hale (From The Guardian article, emphasis mine)

Hale goes on to detail how she stalked the Twitter, Facebook and Instagram accounts of the reviewer and the woman she believes she’s gotten her online identity from. Eventually , after many months, she gave up and went back to living her life, though she admits she sometimes she grows nostalgic about the situation.

Let’s recap (aka The Too Long;Didn’t Read version):

Author Kathleen Hale receives a bad review via Goodreads and spends months cyber-stalking the reviewer, before gaining her address and visiting her home. Then Hale tries to prove the reviewer’s real identity and calls her at work. Then Hale writes an article about it for The Guardian in a tone which makes it clear she has zero remorse for what she did, and in fact seems to want sympathy for being “catfished” by a reviewer who dared to give her a 1 star review and possibly wasn’t using her real name online.

There are a couple things I want to talk about here.

1) The term “catfish” generally refers to someone who creates an online persona with the specific intention of creating a romantic relationship under false pretenses. By Hale’s own account, the reviewer in question didn’t create an account simply to deceive Hale. She didn’t even engage Hale, with the exception of possibly tweeting her direct in response to an invitation from Hale herself.

2) The term “doxing” generally refers to the act of searching for, and publishing, information about a person online, in an attempt to serve up some vigilante justice. What Hale did was doxx the Goodreads reviewer. She makes it sound like it was in response to bad things the reviewer did to Hale first, but all evidence I’ve seen points to the reviewer doing nothing more than talking about how she didn’t like Hale’s book, citing specific reasons for her dislike. Even if she went on a campaign to stop others from reading the book, the reviewer did nothing wrong. A book is not its author.

3) The term “stalking” refers to unwanted or obsessive attention from an individual and can include “following the victim in person or monitoring them” (per Wikipedia). While it seems the reviewer did nothing more than give Hale’s book a negative review, Hale’s actions read like stalking to me. Going to a person’s home, calling her at work and obsessively monitoring her social media accounts obviously rides the line

4) Hale mentions Stop the Goodreads Bullies (STGRB) in her article (link to our piece about STGRB, with links to other sites with info about their actions). Lest we forget, that website is owned and maintained by an anonymous person or persons who got their start by doing exactly what Hale did here: Searching for and posting personal information about those they consider bullies on their website, even going so far as to post real names, favorite restaurants and photos of their children. The irony of Hale quoting a blogger who uses a fake name in reference to the reviewer she wants to out as having a fake name should be noted (and dare I say mocked?).

5) Jim C. Hines posted on Twitter today that he read an article in response to Hale’s actions that included her address and photos of her house. I don’t know Hines (I don’t follow him on Twitter or anywhere else online) and I didn’t see the post in question, but I really hope it isn’t true. To reveal personal information about Hale makes us no better than she is.

6) I’ve seen quite a number of well-known authors and prominent figures in the book community speak out in support of Hale. Like literary agent Jessica Faust who says Hale was “brave” to post about her account. Kat of Book Thingo put together a great list of others who have shown support for Hale. Buzzfeed also posted a good round-up of those who support Hale, and those in the book community who think her actions were heinous.

7) The fact that this article was published at The Guardian, in the book section, gives it a legitimacy it doesn’t deserve. By posting the article, The Guardian is basically saying they condone Hale’s actions. Which is just as terrifying as Hale having done it in the first place. The majority of the comments on the article are from other authors who think Hale should be applauded for trying to out her critic.

Personally, I have to say Hale’s article scared the crap out of me. The idea that an author would spend months trying to discover my real identity, show up at my house or call me at work because I didn’t like her book is terrifying. The idea that an author would question my identity and try to find proof of my real name is equally terrifying. It’s also a bit hypocritical, considering the majority of authors write under pen names. I’m not sure why a blogger using an alternate is so wrong or different. The irony of an author questioning why a blogger would use an alias after spending months stalking one isn’t lost on me, either.

Not only that, but when I think about the number of publishers and authors who have my address, I wonder if this is the beginning of the end of publisher sponsored giveaways/ARCs. Hale says she confirmed the reviewer’s address with a publishing contact. So what she’s saying, essentially, is that my personal information isn’t protected. Can any author, disgruntled or otherwise, confirm my address with the publishing houses who have them? Do I need to be concerned about the fact that my daughter has received review copies from publishers? Do I need to worry about forwarding a reader’s information on to an author/publisher when they win a sponsored contest on our site?

Hale’s article brought up a lot of feelings, but none of them are the ones she seemed to want. I didn’t find it funny that a neurotic author fell down that rabbit hole. I hope you don’t either.

Here are some additional articles about this situation:

Dear Author – On the Importance of Pseudonymous Activity http://dearauthor.com/features/essays/on-the-importance-of-pseudonymous-activity/
Dear Author – Poisoning the Well  http://dearauthor.com/features/letters-of-opinion/poisoning-the-well/
Smart B*tches – The Choices of Kathleen Hale http://smartbitchestrashybooks.com/blog/the-choices-of-kathleen-hale
Blame My Bookshelf (blogger is 15) – A Response to Kathleen Hale http://blamemybookshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/an-response-to-kathleen-hale.html
Sunita -The Rising Costs of Membership in the Booktalk Community http://vacuousminx.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/the-rising-costs-of-membership-in-the-booktalk-community/



Tagged: , , , , , ,