| From: | David Stroud |
| Date: | 29 Oct 2000 at 01:13:40 |
| Subject: | Re: Amiga Active |
To all,
As Editor of Amiga Active, I feel I should put a few things straight for
anyone who has read this post from David Connolly:
> I can forgive comments like those made in Amiga Active about them
> being the only UK magazine despite not getting an ABC to prove how
> much they are selling.
What's to prove? We *are* the only remaining mainstream Amiga magazine in
the English speaking marketplace. The Audit Bureau of Circulation has
nothing to do with this fact.
> I can forgive them covering up their
> distribution problems.
The only distribution problem we have with Amiga Active is that it isn't in
every newsagent in the world. This is the same problem faced by every other
magazine on the planet. Furthermore, Amiga Active's distribution is no
concern of David Connolly's.
> What I can't stand is biased journalism in
> favour of their old mates.
What I can't stand is unsubstantiated rumour and wild speculation, something
David Connolly seems all to happy to provide, thus:
> Offering three pages to Power and Eyetech
> for £1,000 while demanding £1,800 from me is not acceptable.
I do not know where these figures have come from. Anyone who thinks Power
Computing, Eyetech or ourselves would disclose such information should think
again.
> Neither
> is offering credit to Alive Mediasoft and not CS&E. Isn't that saying
> something about their opinion of my company?!
What about the fact that we reviewed Max Rally?
> Mark Hinton recently responded to my attempts to contact him about
> this by getting my home number from the Amiga Survivor egroup and
> deliberately calling during office hours to speak to other members of
> my family who were very upset by his threats.
This, too, is untrue. Mark Hinton responded to one of David Connolly's
emails by calling the number at the bottom of the email. David Connolly's
mother answered the phone. She obviously works at his office.
> He threatened court
> action for mentioning his distribution problems. He should try
> WHSmith first. He's only trying to cover up his own dishonesty.
Accusing the Publisher of Amiga Active as being dishonest is a serious
accusation. I wonder if Mr. Connolly recognises this. I for one would not be
working for him if he was.
> I've tried to contact him many times since but he is not replying to
> e-mails or messages.
Perhaps as a result of the things Mr. Connolly has been saying.
> I've let everyone on the Amiga Active list know my side of the story.
> It will go a little way to explaining why CS&E is not featured either
> through the editorial or advertising in Amiga Active.
It does nothing of the sort. Mr. Connolly's post does, however, explain why
I have now banned him from posting to this list, which was intended for
discussion of Amiga Active and its content. It was not intended for wild
accusations and unsubstantiated rumours to be spread by the likes of Mr.
Connolly.
Regards,
David Stroud.
Quote carefully and read all ADMIN:README mails