Rogue publishing

If you haven’t heard about Issue 1, you should know two things:

1. You’re probably in it!

2. You’re probably not in it!

It’s hilarious, it’s great– it’s much cleverer and more awesome than an Outside Voices Anthology ever could have been.  Just compiling the list of authors is kind of a huge feat! And where did this crazy text come from?  This was a lot of work! 

Also, the more people are pissed off about it, the funnier it is to the rest of us– so please, keep blowing it way out of proportion.  (If someone sues then I will be extremely disappointed. I mean come on.)


About Jessica Smith
This entry was posted in Contemporary Poetry. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Rogue publishing

  1. I hereby advise that although anyone can sue (file a lawsuit) about just about anything, the chance of a lawsuit against Issue 1 succeeding based on copyright, defamation, privacy, intellectual property, or related concepts is very, very, very, low.

    The guy over at the big pond, bless his heart you betcha, flummoxed me yesterday when he threw down the “Uncover” lawsuit (which involved a company selling the work of others, for money, without permission) when getting huffy about the parody or prank that is Issue 1. “Unocver” was a true rip-off. This ain’t.

  2. Ron certainly isn’t the only one overreacting.

  3. Also, listing 3,000+ names on your site is a cheap way to get hits.

  4. Reen says:

    Ha! That’s true, Jessica. Instant page visits!

    I posted about this yesterday but quickly deleted the post after being swept by a sudden waive of ennui caused by all the handwringing and agrification surrounding the project.. I am amused that they drafted a wispy haiku-thing under my name, but am already bored by the surrounding hue and cry. The internet has reduced my patience for such fervor to milliseconds. Now all I want to do is watch monkeys ride bicycles on YouTube.

  5. I’m happy, at least, that it’s an actual joke that inspires actual anger and actual laughter with computer-generated (actual) poetry. Instead of other, uh, poetry stunts that take themselves way too seriously and compose terrible poetry but can’t decide whether they mean to write such bad poetry or not (ha ha? ha? wait, were we joking or not, i forgot–), with supposedly automatic/generated methods that are not actually automatic or generated but are very much in keeping with the Authorial tradition.

  6. yesisaidyesiwillyes says:

    Speaking of hit-attracting method used by those who post, I’d prefer an internet in which want there were NO stat keepers, hit-counters, and the like.

    Why is it important to know how many visits there’s been?

    It seems it’s only important for commerical – profit-making sites.

    Am I missing something?

  7. Michael Ford says:

    What’s really absurd about the irrate reactions to this is that people seem to think that something claiming to contain new work by Confucius and Shakespeare could somehow harm their reputations. It’s so transparently not a real anthology.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s