loss of reputation

ok darling ones, i haven’t been straight with you. there is more going on than meets the eye.

my sleepless nights of late have been the result of worry over jason hatch’s (of your-site.com) pursuit of legal action against me.

i was trying to be noble. trying to rise above all the nonesense and let it just die. apparently, jason thinks i have defamed him by stating my opinion about your-site.com. today, i was contacted via e-mail by his lawyer. jason wants an apology. any apology i give would be insincere. i have apologized for being a hot-tempered brat, because i was– that i cannot deny. but last time i checked being a hot-tempered brat was not illegal, and if it is, there are a whole hell of a lot of four-year-olds who could find themselves in deepshit.

in my opinion jason is being a big baby about me calling his company a bad name. it seems that you have to couch everything with “in my opinion” so it’s clear that i am stating my opinion and not actual fact. apparently, it’s not clear that everything i write on my own personal website is my opinion.

in my opinion i am not a legal expert. but in my opinion you can state your opinion. i don’t think that’s illegal in the united states yet. this little tidbit of information makes me feel that maybe i am not totally whacked.

i wonder if k-mart sued the makers of the movie rainman. because raymond babbit said that “k-mart sucks.” and i do believe (at least it is my opinion) that a lot more people saw the movie rainman than read iwilldare.com on a daily basis.

in my opinion, i am a bit worried that the makers of digiorno pizza might have a case against me because i said the sausage on their pizza tastes like dirty feet. the makers of juicy juice might also have a case against me because i said juicy juice was 100% crap.

in my opinion i am more than a little worried and upset about this. i could have my facts all wrong, maybe you can’t call someone an unethical bastard, even if that’s what you believe.

in my opinion it would be much easier to just let the disgruntled customer look like a hot-tempered fool than to pursue legal action and look like an intolerant, censoring, cry-baby.

in my opinion i am most angry that i have allowed jason hatch’s threat have a chilling effect on what i write. i am outraged (again in my opinion) that even as i type these words my hands shake with a weird mix of fear and anger.

in my opinion it sucks giant donkey balls that i no longer feel i am free to express my own damn opinion on a website that i make just so i can express my own damn opinion.

in my opinion i wonder if it’s too early to contact the ACLU to see if i can’t get some help with this case. but then (also in my opinion) i am not sure if it’s even a case yet.

in my opinion this situation is making my tummy hurt and causing me to not sleep.

(Visited 11 times, 1 visits today)


  1. laural 21.Dec.01 at 10:56 pm

    They haven’t got a leg to stand on. To be safe just change the bit where you say they’re unethical bastards so that “You want my opinion?” precedes it.

  2. jodi 22.Dec.01 at 12:03 am

    laural, i love you.

  3. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 2:12 am


    You didn’t state an opinion, you stated false information as FACT without taking the time to verify your information. I’m referring to the false accusations you made about us advertising on your domain, which is the ONLY thing I am interested in. What you did was nearly a textbook definition of libel, in my “unlegal” opinion.

    You started it all by making threats of legal action to my staff and me and accusing us of unethical practices in public. Now, all you do is complain about the attention we are giving you in return.

    I am not being a “big baby” about this. In my opinion, you caused a serious disruption in our work flow and committed a series of torts against my company that do not start or end with libel. We wasted nearly an entire day researching the issue and consulting with our attorney in response to your irresponsible and haphazard threats and defamation. As far as I am concerned, you committed an act of violence against my company. You refuse to accept responsibility for this and instead choose to hide behind the first amendment, which has no bearing on person-to-person issues whatsoever.

    I’m getting tired of being accused of being the bad, unprofessional guy because we took your threats and libel seriously, which is the smart and proper thing to do in any company. It is the “business-like” thing to do. I have an obligation to take this matter seriously and respond in kind. I am a person too; I am just as upset as you are. I wish to put this behind me as much as you do, but I wish to do it properly. Just because I run a company doesn’t mean that I must take a “Welcome to McDonald’s, how may I help you?” approach to this situation. I’m going to be reciprocal, and I can feel pain, too. Don’t assume that this is a small matter to me and that I am going out of my to be difficult. I worked hard for the good reputation we have, and I must defend it just as I would defend a patent or a trademark or copyright. Failure to do so sends a message that I don’t care and I then deserve whatever I get.

    I wish you would just take responsibility for this so we can all get on with our lives. If you think I am completely off-base, then state your case in detail here and respond directly to my challenges instead of hiding behind the 1st amendment and Joe Peacock.

    Happy Holidays.


  4. jena 22.Dec.01 at 8:09 am

    i still don’t understand this whole mess, and maybe that is good. what i do understand is, as professional as this person claims to be, why does he feel the need to discuss this in the comments section of a *personal* website. IN MY OPINION, it is a less than professional way of dealing with it. perhaps it is an attempt to take a more, human approach to the situation. there is nothing wrong with that, but in all honesty, all the comments that have been made should have been made in a formal communication, such as email, or even a letter. not in an informal interactive comments system. it simply makes the person look worse, and slightly less serious.

    but hey, it’s just my opinion. if you want to sue me too, you won’t get much.

  5. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 11:26 am


    I came here originally to simply post one thing: that we didn’t advertise on Jodi’s domain. I would have been happy to leave it at that.

    You say that I should be privately communicating with Jodi instead of posting here. You’re right, to an extent. Perhaps you’ll notice I wasn’t here all week? (Dec 17 – 21) That was for 2 reasons: 1) apparently no one posted anything here about the situation; and 2) I was communicating privately with Jodi.

    But as you can see, discussions of my private communications with Jodi have once again surfaced on the front page of this site, so I am here once again. I would prefer to deal with this matter privately, but Jodi has consciously chosen to conduct matters in public by consistently discussing the matter in public.

    I’m not the one who brought this to public forum, yet everyone seems to agree that I have no right being here.

    Being professional does not mean eat it and smile. This whole thing has exploded way beyond the customer->host relationship and has now become personal. Professional courtesy and customer service have no place here. I’m just another “member” of this site.

    Your remark about me suing you was certainly not constructive. Since you admit you know little about the situation, it was unfounded as well. If I made a sarcastic remark like that, it would be called “highly unprofessional”. Why is there a double standard here?

    Happy Holidays

  6. jodi 22.Dec.01 at 12:16 pm

    jason wrote: You say that I should be privately communicating with Jodi instead of posting here. You’re right, to an extent. Perhaps you’ll notice I wasn’t here all week? (Dec 17 – 21) That was for 2 reasons: 1) apparently no one posted anything here about the situation; and 2) I was communicating privately with Jodi.

    no one wrote anything about the situation because i was trying to let the whole ordeal slide from conciousness.

    i let you say your piece and i hoped that would be the end of it. but you won’t let the issue die. you continue to say that this should be a private matter but you want a public apology to persist at the top of my site for two days.

    if i am going to be forced to make a public apology under duress, you better damn well believe that people will know how i really feel about this matter before that apology comes.

  7. jodi 22.Dec.01 at 12:24 pm

    jason, there is an easy way to end all this senseless hooha. you leave me alone. you drop the pursuit of this silly lawsuit, you stop e-mailing me, you stop posting comments to this site.

    you stop, i’ll stop it’s as easy as that.

    but as long as you continue to threaten me with a trial in a court of law, i will continue to let you be tried in this small court of public opinion.

    really jason, wasn’t it much better when i was silent and letting you say what you want?

    before December 21st, i had only made 2 comments and 4 posts about this whole situation. but since you will not let this matter go, since i am no longer sleeping out of worry over this situation, i am not going to be silent anymore.

  8. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 2:31 pm


    I actually prefer it now that you are not silent.

    As I pointed out in my latest post, you consistently claim that I am making a bigger deal out of this than you are simply because I have posted more than you have. As I pointed out earlier, everything I have said is in response to a new post about the issue, and they all stem from your original posts.

    This isn’t a matter of letting it go in my opinion. This is now a matter of what I consider would be an appropriate way to conclude the issue. If you don’t agree with me, then don’t post an apology. In my e-mails to you, I went out of my way to highlight the moral significance of posting an apology in hopes you would see my side and post a sincere apology. A coerced apology is meaningless and I don’t want that.

    However, aside from apologizing, I think you have an obligation to retract certain things and clarify and underscore the fact that we did not act unethically.

    I’m sorry to learn that you are losing sleep about this. If there is one thing, at all, that we share in common, is the fact that we lose sleep and worry over things that upset us. I’m not enjoying this either; and it has been a significant disruption to me.

    Jodi, if you can prove to me that I was wrong, that I initiated this and deserved the defamation, then I’ll be the first one to apologize.

    Frankly, I’ve read several of your posts and between those and your communications with me you seem to be a reasonable person, notwithstanding what you originally posted here about us. I don’t understand why you can’t accept responsibility for this.

    This is not a customer relations issue. Professionalism doesn’t come into play here. The First Amendment doesn’t apply here. It’s about two people, you and me, and what is right and what is wrong.

  9. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 2:38 pm

    I’d also appreciate it if you’d focus on the issue at hand and refrain from personal insults such as calling me a “cry baby” and what not. This doesn’t bring us any closer to resolving the issue and only serves to aggrivate the situation.

  10. spoony 22.Dec.01 at 8:42 pm


  11. greg 22.Dec.01 at 9:01 pm

    shut the fuck up man. leave jodi alone and she’ll leave you alone, isn’t that enough for you?

  12. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 9:51 pm


    We don’t live in a world where you can attack someone and then say “uncle” when things don’t go your way.

    I’ll drop it as soon as Jodi concludes the matter appropriately, which is something she’s had the power to do all along.


  13. Jason 22.Dec.01 at 9:52 pm

    I’ve made my case. Unless Jodi posts a rebuttal to something I’ve written or decides to prolong things by making another front page post about us, I’m pretty much done posting here.