Pages

Friday, September 21, 2007

Visits to Candyland - is getting the word out!

A new commenter, Sue Bee wrote:

About a year ago I disagreed with Candy on a few things (KJV-only, comma Johanneum and the ten commandments) and found it frustrating that my well-thought-out comments (or diatribes) went unpublished or were edited to her advantage in Q&A sessions. I quit going to her site, but a few weeks ago I thought I'd stop by and see if she was still there. And wouldn't you know it, it was the day after the Sister Charlotte story. I wondered if the RCs were fighting back and a few mouse clicks later I found this site.



I think this comment is significant for a number of reasons:
1. To those nay sayers who think there were just a few Catholics lying about the way Candy handled her visitors in her comment section and on her blog, here is yet one more witness to say, "it happened to me to!"

2. And since Candy seems to favor the "abused victim coming forward" type of story when it suits her purposes, I enjoy it when they come out of the woodwork against her.

3. Candy wrote that she has me handled and she no longer has to be concerned with opposing thoughts on her blog. Yet the search engine is a powerful tool and in just a few clicks the other side of the story is easily accessible.

4. This blog really has grown to be more than just Elena vs. Candy. With the addition of new bloggers and a growing blog roll it's clear that Candy's tactics are offensive to a lot more people than you would ever guess by reading her heavily censored comments.



11 comments:

sue said...

It's a little like watching a trainwreck. I don't want to keep reading this stuff but I just can't turn away. The Candy vs. Elena saga continues.

It occurs to me that if you were interested in simply getting the truth out, you'd do just that. Instead, you use her name repeatedly - funnily enough, this time it was to say it's not about her. It reads like a crazy vendetta. I suppose it's a lot more juicy than just sticking to writing about what Catholics really believe.

I have to admit it's clever using her name to attract readers.

Part of me wants to make excuses or apologize for my harsh words here but I can't find other words to express my thoughts at the moment and I do stand by my opinion here. Of course I'm also a little afraid of your scathing wit.

sue said...

for clarification, I'm not the same Sue that Elena referenced in this post.

Elena said...

It occurs to me that if you were interested in simply getting the truth out, you'd do just that. Instead, you use her name repeatedly - funnily enough, this time it was to say it's not about her.


For search engines to pick up some key words they have to be used on the blog and in blog posts. The keywords that people tend to use to find this blog are Candy and Elena among others.



It reads like a crazy vendetta. I suppose it's a lot more juicy than just sticking to writing about what Catholics really believe.


Nonsense. Many Candy supporters told me personally that what happened to me "never happened" or that I was not telling the truth. Yet many ladies have come forward with basically the same story.

Part of the purpose of the blog was to set the record straight. Every time a blogger or a commenter comes forward and says, "I tried to post this" or "Candy wouldn't allow my comments" or "Candy edited my comments to her favor" its more documentation that what I originally said and have been saying all along was true.

I have to admit it's clever using her name to attract readers.

It's basic search engine 101.


Part of me wants to make excuses or apologize for my harsh words here but I can't find other words to express my thoughts at the moment and I do stand by my opinion here.

Which is what exactly? That Candy should be able to bash Catholics to her hearts content and we should not ever dare to challenge her on that? Or that if Candy doesn't want to take negative comments that disagree with her particular view of theology we should just suck it up and leave it alone?


Of course I'm also a little afraid of your scathing wit.

Why? At least here you are allowed to make a comment, even a disagreeable comment, as long as it is on topic and conforms to the commenting guidelines. We were never afforded the same courtesy over in Candyland.

Elena said...

Oh and Sue, I forgot to mention - I took this blog down after Labor Day. I felt that if Candy was going to stay away from anti-Catholic rhetoric there was no need for this blog. When she posted that she was getting ready to post some big anti-Catholic I commented that if she did, I would bring this blog and the boycott back for an entire year in protest.

This blog is of Candy's own making.

sue said...

My first point is that not everyone that comes here is here to be enlightened.

My second point is that it SEEMS like anger and revenge are your driving motivators and not a desire to educate.

Thirdly, thanks for the search engine tutorial. I am pointing out that you are purposely "working" the search engines. Good for you.

Elena said...

My first point is that not everyone that comes here is here to be enlightened.

Uh...I know. I wouldn't even begin to debate that point.

My second point is that it SEEMS like anger and revenge are your driving motivators and not a desire to educate.

I have several motivating factors that keep me blogging. I have a strong sense of justice.


Thirdly, thanks for the search engine tutorial. I am pointing out that you are purposely "working" the search engines. Good for you.


Absolutely! I was always up front with Candy about that as well. Thanks!

Kelly said...

Sue, I'd like to point out that Candy also knows what she's doing to attract people by search engine. One of the first things you find if you google her name, is an article she wrote about how to make money online. Some have wondered if her blog exists to add extra income to her family by selling her e-books.

As Candy obviously wouldn't mention this blog at her place, it is only natural to look to the search engines as a way to make it easy for people to find this blog.

Sue Bee said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sue Bee said...

Trying again, without the stupid typos...

Thank you for adding me to your blogroll...now I have to actually blog something...

Connected said...

*IF* Candy is so right (and righteous), and *IF* Candy's motives are truly pure and spiritual then *WHY* would she or any of her minions,um, I mean *supporters* care about a blog such as this? Where there is smoke, there is fire and deep down even the most staunch of Candy-a-likes know this. Sorry to be so blunt, I was just taught to call a spade, a spade!

Mama to One Without Blinders On!

Elena said...

Good point Kelly. Candy made a big point of saying that my name was going to be stricken from everywhere on her blog. It was a dramatic statement, but there was also a practical side to it, that being that it would be more difficult for search engines to make the connection.