There's an Article in the LA Times...

[Brightsy]

...about KC and the Hall of Fame-Gate

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-scrap ... topstories

[my_three_reasons]

Wow. Its crazy I know we all take our craft seriously but I think some people took their critisism a little or should say a LOT too far. So she over looked a rule. I dont think we needed to banish her the far ends of the universe, SHEESH. I guess every circle need a "Brittney" lol
I actually didnt even know anything about this little contriversial subject. How did I miss that??

[Cori in California]

*edit*

I decided to delete my post. I had a flash back to when this all started and I really don't want to go back there again

[my_three_reasons]

Wow. Its crazy I know we all take our craft seriously but I think some people took their critisism a little or should say a LOT too far. So she over looked a rule. I dont think we needed to banish her the far ends of the universe, SHEESH. I guess every circle need a "Brittney" lol
I actually didnt even know anything about this little contriversial subject. How did I miss that??

well I did go and research and I still dont know everything cause stuff like post were deleted and what not but I retract my above comment solely because I really dont know both sides of this story.

Anyone wanna shed a little light?? or should I just not bother???
Anyone??

[celticscrapper27]

Wow! That article is nuts. I don't think she should have won if she clearly violated the entry rules, but seriously, those evil comments say more about the author of them than the recipient in my opinion. And since when did scrapbooking become so competative and have warring factions?? I've only been doing it for two years, but I don't care what some one is scrapbooking or how much journmaling they do, they are expressing themselves, and I appreciate their effort. Silly me.

[journeyfan]

Wow. Its crazy I know we all take our craft seriously but I think some people took their critisism a little or should say a LOT too far. So she over looked a rule. I dont think we needed to banish her the far ends of the universe, SHEESH. I guess every circle need a "Brittney" lol
I actually didnt even know anything about this little contriversial subject. How did I miss that??

well I did go and research and I still dont know everything cause stuff like post were deleted and what not but I retract my above comment solely because I really dont know both sides of this story.

Anyone wanna shed a little light?? or should I just not bother???
Anyone??

I've done several blog entries about this, if you DO decide to read about the drama.

And now it makes sense! I was just checking my blog stats for today and already had almost 300 visitors read one Kristina Contes entry (I have a few). I'm thinking, "Why all the sudden interest in this old issue?" and now I get it...a new LA Times article. TFS ~ I'm off to read it!

[cme37]

My question is, why is the LA times interested in this now? I don't get it. And I still don't think she comes off looking that great. What people said about her on some blogs was cruel and mean and really out of line, but she is no ray of sunshine either, KWIM?

[jlshurts]

I just don't like how the article made her look like a victim. She CHEATED. Whether on purpose or inadvertently, she didn't follow the rules and she signed a CONTRACT that said she had followed the rules. And, am I supposed to feel sorry for someone who has spent the last couple of years traveling the world, scrapping, who got dq'ed from one competition. Sorry, just not feeling it.

I'm not trying to start anything here, I haven't said much about this before now, but that article BUGGED me.

[kelliannie]

In the newspaper world most stories are pitched by somebody. Obviously this is just now hitting the LATimes because somebody is not done with this issue, and from the article content I have a feeling it was given a green light because of the stance of the article, most of what we've seen make it to the media has been the on the other end of the spectrum with this contest. It still bothers me that editors are allowing their reporters to PRINT anonymous comments made on a blog, that just seems so unethical to me. When you start allowing your article to become filled with anonymous faces what's to stop the reporter from imputting their own opinion and calling it an anonymous source?

[Planet]

what's to stop the reporter from imputting their own opinion and calling it an anonymous source?

WOW, You know, in the big picture, I never gave that a thought, smart, and reporters are allowed, to some degree, to protect their sources. HUH, Makes me wonder now how many reporters really do use their own opinion, it cant be proven because they are only protecting their 'source'