Author Topic: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers [MERGED]  (Read 45736 times)  

Offline dgaughran

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3554
  • Gender: Male
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
    • David Gaughran
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #75 on: April 05, 2018, 02:19:02 PM »
The person casting doubt on whether stuffing is against the TOS, despite court papers clearly showing that, is someone who has admitted to stuffing.

Prolly something to keep in mind.
Stuff for writers thisaway

Offline Crystal_

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Gender: Female
  • Portland, OR
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #76 on: April 05, 2018, 02:21:29 PM »
I read the sections that David highlighted from the court papers. It seems pretty darn clear that book stuffing is against the TOS regardless of what anyone told you from the customer service department before this suit was made public. Relying on what some random person said instead of Amazon's lawyers ... that's sort of crazy to me.  It seems like you're just hoping that Amazon won't come down on everyone who is stuffing and you're willing to roll that dice. I get that its hard out there with a lot of other people stuffing but you're risking being sued by Amazon or having your account banned, etc.  Are you REALLY willing to risk it for more page reads? The quoted material that David has pointed out makes it crystal clear that book stuffing isn't allowed. It's not a matter of opinion anymore, if it ever really was. So you can't say if they come after you: well, random customer service person said it was okay!  They'll say you had notice because of this case that it wasn't.  I'd be very nervous if I was a stuffer. Seriously nervous.

Have you ever tried to get clarification on anything with Amazon? It's nearly impossible.

I'm not using any bonus books at the moment. I'm not a regular bonus book user. (But the veiled threat is really not classy). If I was currently using bonus books, I wouldn't be worried by this. Maybe if they start sending take down notices. But only maybe.

I hope that happens. I hope I look at the romance charts next month and see absolutely no bonus books. But, well... I'm not holding my breath.

Offline Usedtoposthere

  • Status: Edgar Allan Poe
  • *******
  • Posts: 5718
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #77 on: April 05, 2018, 02:25:20 PM »
I don't think so. If people wanted to do this for legit reasons then they could have bundled their books once and been done with it. Readers would have found those bundles with a link.

Did they really think readers wouldn't start to complain? Give them something free once and they're happy, keep giving them the same books over and over and not so much happy as cheesed off. Then there are the readers who expect full length books and end up with a hundred pages. It had to come back to bite them eventually.

Yepppp.

For the record, you do not have to stuff to do well in contemporary romance, even in KU. I know many authors who do extremely well and do not stuff.

Perhaps it's harder to compete if you don't stuff. It sure has become harder to compete in general in CR given these various practices. I would guess though that stuffing (much less botting, hiring armies of ghostwriters (which isn't against TOS), and review-purchasing) doesn't result in satisfied readers, if time after time they pick up your book and find it's only 10% new stuff--and varying-quality ghostwritten stuff at that. Even in KU. So long-term, I don't think it's a great plan. Short-term--it sure has been profitable. There's a price you have to pay, though, I'd think.

It was real clear to those of us who got the initial response from Executive Customer Relations that stuffing was not OK. I'm aware of the sort of "workaround" people have used to justify it. But if, after reading those documents, you STILL think stuffing is OK by Amazon, I think you're running a risk with them. My own judgment/opinion only.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2018, 02:27:37 PM by Usedtoposthere »

Offline Just Griff

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #78 on: April 05, 2018, 02:26:15 PM »
I don't think so. If people wanted to do this for legit reasons then they could have bundled their books once and been done with it. Readers would have found those bundles with a link.

Did they really think readers wouldn't start to complain? Give them something free once and they're happy, keep giving them the same books over and over and not so much happy as cheesed off. Then there are the readers who expect full length books and end up with a hundred pages. It had to come back to bite them eventually.

As a reader, I don't buy bundles very often, but if I really loved a story and the next books or other books by the author were at the back, I wouldn't be p*ssed. I'd only be p*ssed if the motive was to hide the actual page count. I forgot that motive in my response to Rick. That's cheating, and it really cheats readers more than anyone so I can't see how that's going to work out well.

Offline Melinda W. Burt

  • Status: Lewis Carroll
  • **
  • Posts: 104
  • Pixel Perfect Publishing
    • View Profile
    • Pixel Perfect Publishing
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #79 on: April 05, 2018, 02:26:44 PM »
I see stuffing as something very specific. I think if you have set of 10 or 12 romance novellas and you insert the same lengthy bonus novel at the end of each book, you are violating the TOS because you have the exact same novel repeated in all the offerings. You are in essence selling the same material over and over again with a different novella acting as a teaser. This is problematic for KU because the reader will often skim and jump through it to get to the end looking for new bonus material that isn't there. This results in the author getting paid for a thousand or more extra pages of material.

Amazon has been saying one thing and doing another by allowing this to go on unabated. It will be interesting to see how much of what this particular publisher was doing gets addressed with corrective action of some sort. It may be that they strongly objected to botting and just threw the rest in for good measure.

Also, I believe that if you are stuffing extra stories from you back list that you do not currently have for sale, that is not stuffing if you have a different one in each book you sell. If you are stuffing with a book currently for sale in KU, you are double dipping. If you are stuffing with a book that you didn't enroll in KU you are definitely in violation of their TOS. Just my two cents worth.

Pixel Perfect Publishing is where the rubber hits the road for indie authors.
Melinda W. Burt | Pixel Perfect Publishing

Online X. Aratare

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
    • Raythe Reign
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #80 on: April 05, 2018, 02:27:01 PM »
Have you ever tried to get clarification on anything with Amazon? It's nearly impossible.

I'm not using any bonus books at the moment. I'm not a regular bonus book user. (But the veiled threat is really not classy). If I was currently using bonus books, I wouldn't be worried by this. Maybe if they start sending take down notices. But only maybe.

I hope that happens. I hope I look at the romance charts next month and see absolutely no bonus books. But, well... I'm not holding my breath.
I'm not threatening you, veiled or otherwise. And I have no idea why you are suggesting that as nothing I've said could be construed that way.

I'm just saying that the court documents are crystal clear that this is against the TOS and it seems like you keep saying it doesn't matter because they might not enforce it and my point is: you really want to risk that?  Hope that Amazon doesn't enforce it even though they sued this guy?  I guess that's your business. Not what I would choose, but okay, you do you.

Offline Kyra Halland

  • Status: Scheherazade
  • *****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Gender: Female
  • Arizona
    • View Profile
    • Welcome To My Worlds
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #81 on: April 05, 2018, 02:27:37 PM »
I don't stuff. I haven't written enough titles to stuff. So forgive me if it's just my own ignorance, but aren't romance writers stuffing so that people keep reading books conveniently at the back? I know scammers are using bots, but aren't the legit authors just doing it so they can capitalize on a new readers attention? Using bots is clearly wrong, but I thought legit authors for doing it for reader convenience. If new stories are there, they can just continue on without needing to browse. Reader convenience = more page reads. No?

Here's the easiest, clearest explanation of stuffing that I've seen (don't remember who came up with this):

Title Book A
contains Book A, B, C, D, E

Title Book B
contains Book B, A, C, D, E

Title Book C
contains Book C, A, B, D, E

Title Book D
contains Book D, A, B, C, E

Title Book E
contains Book E, A, B, C, E

The main points here are that the different titles each have the same books, just in different order, and that the book is advertised as just the first book in the lineup.

(the rest of this is my explanation)

The difference with legitimate box sets is that they are advertised up front as a box set containing the different books. for example Title Books A B C box set.

The difference with legitimate bonus content is it isn't just the same titles in different order. for example, Book A plus a short story at the end. Book B has a different short story at the end. Book C has yet a different short story at the end.

ETA: There's also the method of "throwing in random gobs of Google-translate junk and whatever you can scrape off the internet to increase your page count." but that needs no explanation to know that it isn't cool.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2018, 02:33:50 PM by Kyra Halland »


Tales of fantasy, heroism, and romance.
Kyra Halland | Website | Facebook | Google+ | Twitter | Goodreads

Offline kw3000

  • Status: Jane Austen
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Rocky Mountains
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #82 on: April 05, 2018, 02:31:55 PM »
I can't blame them for one simple reason: it's survival.

It's not survival. It's greed.

Quote
Not stuffing to compete is just surrendering every high rank and KU bonus to low quality content mills with enormous ad budgets.

And?

The right thing, the ethical thing, to do would be to "surrender". So, you achieve a lower rank and make fewer dollars than the "low quality content mills with enormous ad budgets". So?

Ken Ward

Offline lilywhite

  • Status: Scheherazade
  • *****
  • Posts: 1207
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #83 on: April 05, 2018, 02:36:36 PM »
Bold is mine, I really don't understand this. If a book is already readily available for sale on Amazon, is it TRULY "bonus" content just because it's stuffed in the back of another totally unrelated book by the same author? To me, bonus content is something that cannot be found or bought elsewhere. So I don't think it's as cut and dry as people may think.

Yes, but the people who want to continue to do it (and take money out of your pocket while they do) would prefer that you not think about this.

The fact is that vague questions like "is bonus content okay?" get a yes. Specific questions like "Can I take Published Book A and Published Book B, both of which are in KU, and put them at the back of my next release, Book C?" the answer is no. I've asked it several times, in several ways.

But whatever floats your [general you, not you you, Felissa :) ) boat. "Because I'm gonna get mine even if it's not right" has never been my business philosophy and it never will be.

Offline Usedtoposthere

  • Status: Edgar Allan Poe
  • *******
  • Posts: 5718
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #84 on: April 05, 2018, 02:36:54 PM »
It's not survival. It's greed.

And?

The right thing, the ethical thing, to do would be to "surrender". So, you achieve a lower rank and make fewer dollars than the "low quality content mills with enormous ad budgets". So?
It'll be short-term money at best, seems to me--but the folks who are really doing this aren't writers per se (or per anything), they're more entrepreneurs who switch from one new scheme to the next. Short-term is kinda what they're all about.

A fair number of people survive on mid-six to eight-figure numbers in romance without stuffing any books. It's not survival.

Offline Just Griff

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #85 on: April 05, 2018, 02:37:10 PM »
Here's the easiest, clearest explanation of stuffing that I've seen (don't remember who came up with this):

Title Book A
contains Book A, B, C, D, E

Title Book B
contains Book B, A, C, D, E

Title Book C
contains Book C, A, B, D, E

Title Book D
contains Book D, A, B, C, E

Title Book E
contains Book E, A, B, C, E

The main points here are that the different titles each have the same books, just in different order, and that the book is advertised as just the first book in the lineup.

(the rest of this is my explanation)

The difference with legitimate box sets is that they are advertised up front as a box set containing the different books. for example Title Books A B C box set.

The difference with legitimate bonus content is it isn't just the same titles in different order. for example, Book A plus a short story at the end. Book B has a different short story at the end. Book C has yet a different short story at the end.

But are they doing this for the reasons I thought or some nefarious reason I'm not understanding? I get how other authors would look at this and assume they're getting duplicate reads with this octuple-dipping, but if Amazon killed the jump to the back/skipping reads, would that tactic legitimately work for scamming (outside of bot reads), or would it just be a way for an author to lure a new reader into reading their back-list with every title they release and with the greatest ease for the reader?

Online SallyRose

  • Status: Jane Austen
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
  • Gender: Female
  • California
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #86 on: April 05, 2018, 02:40:10 PM »
I'm glad to see Amazon taking a first step to squash this practice. Hopefully, this is only a first step and they'll roll out a coordinated effort to get those books/authors out of KU.

I also dabble in selling on Amazon's POD platform, and the thing I don't understand about KDP is the lack of communication to authors - and to/among their own reps.

On the POD site, right on my sales dashboard is a message board from Amazon. They regularly post policy changes and clarifications...and even when to expect slower processing times because of a holiday or other issue....What a novel idea.

Awhile back they notified us that they were going to crack down IP infringement and people "copycatting" designs. The notice advised everyone to review their listings over the coming 30 days, and remove any infringing designs. After the 30 period they said accounts found in violation would be terminated. Period. End of story. And yes, over on the POD platform, they use the account ban hammer regularly and without apology. Are there still some scammers? Of course. But it sure culls the herd.

So why does KDP seem to prefer that everyone operate in the dark? At the very least it's like playing the old "telephone" game where the message is relayed through so many sources and layers that everyone just shakes their head in confusion and those looking for ways to exploit/scam the system can ask questions/interpret answers in a way that makes them feel justified to scam money from the pot.

A message board with clear communication along with a judiciously-wielded ban hammer seem long overdue in KDP Select.

Offline Usedtoposthere

  • Status: Edgar Allan Poe
  • *******
  • Posts: 5718
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #87 on: April 05, 2018, 02:41:14 PM »
But are they doing this for the reasons I thought or some nefarious reason I'm not understanding? I get how other authors would look at this and assume they're getting duplicate reads with this octuple-dipping, but if Amazon killed the jump to the back/skipping reads, would that tactic legitimately work for scamming (outside of bot reads), or would it just be a way for an author to lure a new reader into reading their back-list with every title they release and with the greatest ease for the reader?
One way is that they put an epilogue in the back so the reader has to skip to get there. A different epilogue in back of every book, and then, as they see it, they can argue that it isn't "duplicate content" because there is new content in every book, even if it's only 10% of the total content.

It is done for the purpose of inflating page "reads." The authors will probably claim that people really did read all those pages (who knows, if Amazon truly cannot count them?), so they aren't getting anything to which they aren't entitled. From the lawsuit, Amazon clearly does not agree.

Nobody's going to say, "Ha HA! I cheated and lied, mwah-ha-ha, you suckers," like Snidely Whiplash. But I took what I read as Amazon saying it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, so they're figuring it's a duck.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2018, 02:44:43 PM by Usedtoposthere »

Offline lilywhite

  • Status: Scheherazade
  • *****
  • Posts: 1207
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #88 on: April 05, 2018, 02:43:27 PM »
I can't blame them for one simple reason: it's survival.

I can, for one reason: it's cheating.

Seriously, this is not hard. Do the right thing, even when it's hard. Do the right thing, even if there's no enforcer standing over you to make you do it. Do the right thing even -- maybe especially -- when so many around you are not.

Offline Rick Gualtieri

  • Status: A A Milne
  • ******
  • Posts: 4773
  • Gender: Male
  • NJ
  • Renaissance Geek
    • View Profile
    • RickGualtieri.com
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #89 on: April 05, 2018, 02:49:23 PM »
But are they doing this for the reasons I thought or some nefarious reason I'm not understanding? I get how other authors would look at this and assume they're getting duplicate reads with this octuple-dipping, but if Amazon killed the jump to the back/skipping reads, would that tactic legitimately work for scamming (outside of bot reads), or would it just be a way for an author to lure a new reader into reading their back-list with every title they release and with the greatest ease for the reader?

The nefarious reason is double dipping or more.  Now, Ive seen the argument here Im just putting the whole series there as a convenience for the reader. Im not forcing them to read it.  Sound logic, except theyre counting on those people who will read it again.  And since its under a different ASIN than the original, they get paid again ... and maybe even again.  Now, whether we should be paid for multiple reads of the same book is kind of irrelevant since were not. But this is a way around that. 

Fine, box sets are allowed, so one could argue double dipping is okay.  Ill give them that, but the fact that those same books exist in more than two KU titles goes beyond that.  If even a fraction of their readers continue on to the bonus books, then the scheme is a success and they profit where they shouldnt be profiting.


Making fantasy fun again, one corpse at a time
Rick Gualtieri | Website | Twitter | Facebook | Bill The Vampire on Facebook | YouTube

Offline lilywhite

  • Status: Scheherazade
  • *****
  • Posts: 1207
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #90 on: April 05, 2018, 02:50:32 PM »
if Amazon killed the jump to the back/skipping reads

They didn't. Amazon lies. :)

It still works in cloud reader, for sure (I've tested it myself). And I hear there are hacks/workarounds for other devices. That part I can't vouch for personally.

Offline Rick Gualtieri

  • Status: A A Milne
  • ******
  • Posts: 4773
  • Gender: Male
  • NJ
  • Renaissance Geek
    • View Profile
    • RickGualtieri.com
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #91 on: April 05, 2018, 02:51:36 PM »
I can, for one reason: it's cheating.

Seriously, this is not hard. Do the right thing, even when it's hard. Do the right thing, even if there's no enforcer standing over you to make you do it. Do the right thing even -- maybe especially -- when so many around you are not.

(Searches fruitlessly for the LIKE button)


Making fantasy fun again, one corpse at a time
Rick Gualtieri | Website | Twitter | Facebook | Bill The Vampire on Facebook | YouTube

Online Atlantisatheart

  • Status: Jane Austen
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #92 on: April 05, 2018, 02:52:16 PM »
I can, for one reason: it's cheating.

Seriously, this is not hard. Do the right thing, even when it's hard. Do the right thing, even if there's no enforcer standing over you to make you do it. Do the right thing even -- maybe especially -- when so many around you are not.

Yep, it shouldn't be about those authors who do it and get away with it, it should be about the authors not doing it and being cheated by those that are.

Online ShayneRutherford

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3560
  • Toronto, Ontario
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #93 on: April 05, 2018, 02:52:36 PM »
I can, for one reason: it's cheating.

Seriously, this is not hard. Do the right thing, even when it's hard. Do the right thing, even if there's no enforcer standing over you to make you do it. Do the right thing even -- maybe especially -- when so many around you are not.

THIS! ^^^^^
     

Offline Crystal_

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Gender: Female
  • Portland, OR
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #94 on: April 05, 2018, 02:54:38 PM »
It'll be short-term money at best, seems to me--but the folks who are really doing this aren't writers per se (or per anything), they're more entrepreneurs who switch from one new scheme to the next. Short-term is kinda what they're all about.

A fair number of people survive on mid-six to eight-figure numbers in romance without stuffing any books. It's not survival.

There's a group of marketers doing this to make bank, but most authors are just copying what they see in the charts. A lot of high profile authors could stop stuffing and still make a living, but why would they? Why would say *not going to use actual name* an author currently in the top 20 with two bonus books and a .99 price just say later to those extra pages when her strategy has worked so well for years?

Lots of authors who are just scraping by are stuffing bc Big Fancy KU Author is doing it.

Fair number is actually not really fair. The last author earning report I saw said about 250 romance authors make six figures. That's not a big number. The amount who make mid six is likely much lower. And it's not easy.

It won't end until Amazon makes it clearly against ToS and regularly enforces their policy. It may state this clearly in the court docs, but 99.9% of authors won't see that.

Offline dgaughran

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3554
  • Gender: Male
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
    • David Gaughran
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #95 on: April 05, 2018, 02:55:55 PM »
Just FYI there are several other current tricks that stuffers now use to get the full 3000 KENPC payout, since Amazon (kind of) closed the skip-to-the-end payout.

Not going to publicize them for obvious reasons but Amazon has been made aware.
Stuff for writers thisaway

Offline Just Griff

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #96 on: April 05, 2018, 02:57:39 PM »
One way is that they put an epilogue in the back so the reader has to skip to get there. A different epilogue in back of every book, and then, as they see it, they can argue that it isn't "duplicate content" because there is new content in every book, even if it's only 10% of the total content.

It is done for the purpose of inflating page "reads." The authors will probably claim that people really did read all those pages (who knows, if Amazon truly cannot count them?), so they aren't getting anything to which they aren't entitled. From the lawsuit, Amazon clearly does not agree.

Nobody's going to say, "Ha HA! I cheated and lied, mwah-ha-ha, you suckers," like Snidely Whiplash. But I took what I read as Amazon saying it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, so they're figuring it's a duck.

Oh. I thought Amazon had shut down that skip-to-the-epilogue mess. That's disappointing it's still up in the air. I thought if anything, page flip was robbing reads. Thanks for explaining. The lesson kboards seems to be teaching me these days is: I'm naive.

The nefarious reason is double dipping or more.  Now, Ive seen the argument here Im just putting the whole series there as a convenience for the reader. Im not forcing them to read it.  Sound logic, except theyre counting on those people who will read it again.  And since its under a different ASIN than the original, they get paid again ... and maybe even again.  Now, whether we should be paid for multiple reads of the same book is kind of irrelevant since were not. But this is a way around that. 

Fine, box sets are allowed, so one could argue double dipping is okay.  Ill give them that, but the fact that those same books exist is more than two KU titles goes beyond that.  If even a fraction of their readers continue on to the bonus books, then the scheme is a success and they profit where they shouldnt be profiting.

I only know my reading habits, and I wouldn't reread many books (mostly beloved series), but maybe that's just me. I assumed that this would only appeal to new readers, thus duplicate reads would be negligible except for using bots.

They didn't. Amazon lies. :)

It still works in cloud reader, for sure (I've tested it myself). And I hear there are hacks/workarounds for other devices. That part I can't vouch for personally.

Thank you for reiterating this. I was under the impression that case was closed.

Offline Usedtoposthere

  • Status: Edgar Allan Poe
  • *******
  • Posts: 5718
    • View Profile
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #97 on: April 05, 2018, 02:59:20 PM »
There's a group of marketers doing this to make bank, but most authors are just copying what they see in the charts. A lot of high profile authors could stop stuffing and still make a living, but why would they? Why would say *not going to use actual name* an author currently in the top 20 with two bonus books and a .99 price just say later to those extra pages when her strategy has worked so well for years?

Lots of authors who are just scraping by are stuffing bc Big Fancy KU Author is doing it.

Fair number is actually not really fair. The last author earning report I saw said about 250 romance authors make six figures. That's not a big number. The amount who make mid six is likely much lower. And it's not easy.

It won't end until Amazon makes it clearly against ToS and regularly enforces their policy. It may state this clearly in the court docs, but 99.9% of authors won't see that.
I could make the whole ethical argument for why somebody's strategy shouldn't be, "Get everything you can; every man for himself," but others have made it better. If I were doing it, personally, right now? I'd sure as heck change my books. Obviously not for ethical reasons, but because it's clear to me that Amazon is at least going after some of these people.

Offline Randall Wood

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 786
  • Gender: Male
  • Florida Gulf Coast
  • Are we there yet?
    • View Profile
    • RandallWoodAuthor
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #98 on: April 05, 2018, 03:00:25 PM »
 It may state this clearly in the court docs, but 99.9% of authors won't see that.
[/quote]

Don't speak for 99% of authors and claim that they believe as you do or do as you do.




edited
« Last Edit: April 10, 2018, 03:34:06 AM by Ann in Arlington »


Does this smell like Chloroform to you?
Randall Wood | Randall Wood | Facebook | Goodreads

Offline dgaughran

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3554
  • Gender: Male
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
    • David Gaughran
Re: Amazon Files Suit Against Book Stuffers
« Reply #99 on: April 05, 2018, 03:02:06 PM »
It won't end until Amazon makes it clearly against ToS.

Would you like Jeff to get a tattoo?
Stuff for writers thisaway