As for staff changes, what right does RWA have to say there can’t be staff changes or staff changes are a sign of a problem. EC had a huge staff change not long ago. And what did RWA do? Nothing.

The discussion keeps going off course every time Anon pipes up. If you want to discuss the issues, discuss them, but stop belittling everyone that’s happy there. You apparently had a bad experince, doesn’t mean everyone else has to just because you did. If you want people to take you seriously, then say your name. Tell us who you are and give us ACTUAL examples.

It’s your choice, at the end of the day. There are no outstanding debts to authors at Triskelion, the 20 or so cheques that were drawn on the wrong account were rectified as soon as the mistake was discovered. Believe it or not, as you wish.

Furthermore, there is no breach of contract that I’m aware of. Triskelion had to renege on some promises, but these were not contracted and they regret that sincerely, but the print program would have led to the company going bankrupt, if it had not been cut back and controlled better.

Triskelion is a new company. I am willing to cut them some slack, especially considering the favors they have done me which I don’t really want to go into details about. I’m also aware of things they have done for other people which have gone above and beyond their obligations.

I can think of 2 authors with NY pubs in the last 5 years or so who went public with accusations of breach of contract. One ended well, but only after protracted negotiations, the other didn’t. But I would still send submissions to that publisher, because that was 2 authors out of hundreds, and for all I know it could have been individual idiosyncrasies.

I want numbers and I want facts. Failing that, I want the majority decision. I don’t base any business decisions on the basis of a few anonymous opinions, however they are reported and whoever they were reported to. In this case, I am making my decision on the basis of established fact – the way I’ve been treated as an author at Triskelion, and the full and frank way the situation was explained to us. Other publishers have not been so forthcoming.

Do you investigate a crime by asking bystanders if the suspect stole their purse, too, and if they refrained from doing so the thief gets to go home instead of to jail?

Seriously, that’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard. This is business, not high school. When an author at a NY pub makes accusations of missed royalty payments and breach of contract it’s news, and you know why? Because it shouldn’t and doesn’t happen with any regularity.

Does it seriously not even bother you that your publisher has treated people this way?

RWA is not the only writers organization that revisits these matters and sets such policies. Mystery Writers of America has recently done the same thing.

My point, regardless of what sparked the situation, is that there have been members who, any time a “recognized” publisher gets into trouble, the cries go up of “why didn’t you warn us.” There are always people who don’t research and take the presence of a publisher at conference as a seal of approval and the situation is far older than ebooks, digital printing or the growth of the small presses.

All the accusations against Triskelion seem to have been explained by either Gail, or it’s authors here on the blog. RWA needs to make an unbiased investigation, not only listen to *disgruntled* authors, but also those that are quite happy with Triskelion.

AND…no publicity is bad publicity…if nothing else comes of this, Triskelion’s name is out there…hehe!!!

Valerie

For example, I know an author some while ago complained about the fact she was sacked from her publishing company just because she fought for the right to retain her voice. What she neglected to say was that she was in breach of her contract by refusing to adhere to the in-house style. Not being published, I fail to see how adhering to an accepted house style of editing would affect her voice. But I digress…the point is she was so upset, she neglected to give the entire story, and thereby, by her omission, people thought that publishing house was terrible and should be avoided.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we only know what people choose to tell us. With everything that has been said today, and conveyed privately, are we getting the complete picture?

I would hope they would list each and every offense that lead to thier decision

While I think we’d all like to know exactly what the complaints were, it would’ve been completely unprofessional for RWA to list them and IMO, they were right to maintain the confidentiality of the contents of private complaints they received. One assumes that RWA is investigating the complaints, and I’m sure that an author or two have contacted lawyers in the matter. This isn’t a situation where more public airing of diryt laundry is going to be beneficial for anyone but the curious who are dying to know all the dirt. (Myself among them–I know some of the situation because I have close friends who’ve had a helluva time with Trisk, but I’d love to know ALLLLLL the dirt.)

Enough with the name-calling, people. RWA hasn’t revoked Trisk’s publisher recognition. They’ve just said that due to the author complaints (that, no matter how much it seems some authors don’t want to believe it, aren’t without basis) and financial difficulties, Trisk can’t do their publisher spotlight and editor appointments this year. Yeah, it sucks for Trisk, but it sounds to me like they acknowledge there’s been problems and this restructure is aimed at sorting them out, but it’ll take time. I’m sure RWA will reevaluate the editor appts thing next year.

Terri, you raise a very interesting point. Firstly, do Triskelion authors get paid advances on their print titles? And secondly, are they obliged to return such advances with the changes in print policy?

Terri

All I want is a substantive justification of the de-certification of a publisher. Seems to me that the RWA should have issued an in-depth statement and and provided DA with a link to such statement. Anything less appears to be less than professional.

I also saw the response as a non-answer. But then I find the RWA kind of a baffling creature to begin with.

They’re not a labor union like SAG, but they “represent” authors in some capacities. They’re not a critics organization, but they have the RITA. They’re not the genre police, but they survey members regarding the acceptable definition of Romance. They have so many different fingers in so many different aspects of both the genre and the industry, plus they’re the only organization that has such an official-type status, that they almost seem imbued with some magical authority over Romance writing and publishing.

I don’t know where that comes from, but as a total outsider to the RWA (being merely a reader), I find that I have to check myself from putting too much stock in whatever it is they are or aren’t doing about any number of things. IMO, with so many different functions, and absolutely no official competition for any of those, the RWA is bound to get caught up in a number of battles, in no small part because IMO their interests and influence is not as focused and as singular ( as a writers organization) as they sometimes insist.

So OTOH, their refusal to let Triskelion solicit authors at the nationals is an act on behalf of RWA member authors. But OTOH, as long as people put stock on RWA admission (the stamp of approval as Allison Kelley put it), and as long as RWA is seen to have some vetting function apart from the nationals (e.g. approval for RITA submissions), their actions are going to be seen as possessing more weight and more meaning, and perhaps, more policing, than it would seem they want. It’s like they’ve become the Romance Parliament or something.

Sorry, what exactly is unclear or nonsensical about that statement?

I’m not saying it isn’t serious – I’m saying that it isn’t supported.

a) What are the new RWA policies for publisher accreditation? If there is a change in policy, publishers, authors and readers need to know the new policy. Surely a professional agency should be able to articulate a new direction. Be specific.
b) How many author complaints? How does this compare to other publishers? How does this compare to other e-pubs? Again – be specific.
c) How many authors are negatively impacted by changes in print titles? Or better yet: How many authors who are negatively impacted by cancellation in print titles have asked the RWA for support?
d) What are the negative consequences of changes in editorial staff and management? How many RWA members have submitted supported complaints that can be attributed to changes in staffing?

All I want is a substantive justification of the de-certification of a publisher. Seems to me that the RWA should have issued an in-depth statement and and provided DA with a link to such statement. Anything less appears to be less than professional.

In my opinion that statement is fairly clear except for one thing. No where in RWA’s response is there a concise explaination as to whether they investigated the reported complaints. I would assume, hopefully, that RWA wouldn’t just take the announcement of management restructuring and rumors as a basis to recind Triskelions invitation. I would hope they would list each and every offense that lead to thier decision, at least to everyone at Triskelion Publishing who is impacted by this. But, unfortunately that is not the case.

As an author with Triskelion, I have never experienced any of the rumored complaints. I can say my experence has been one hundred percent positive.

Sorry, what exactly is unclear or nonsensical about that statement?