Talk:Erica Jackson

Weird. Very weird.  − Reaganaut  04:25, 8 June 2007 (EDT)

Indeed it is weird...

That three people are so obsessed with me they posted a bunch of lies and half truths about me and spent so much time reading my website to find 3 typos. Thanks for drawing attention to some of my most salient social commentary. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but really, this character assassination is. It's amazing how important I still am in your life, 18 months after I graduated (by the way, that's class of '06 and I've never been an English major - my first BA is in Political Science/Women's Studies, thus the subjects of the pulled quotes, and the second, from Columbia, is Literature-Writing).

Hmm, as one of the three people "so obsessed" with her, I feel obligated to do a bit of self-reflection because I don't really consider myself to be a mean person, nor do I like to mock people for the sake of mocking them. That said, if I expected Erica to actually read her own article on here, I perhaps would have been a bit more hesitant to write. My view on this whole site is that it's a resource to collect information on everything campus-related, including "campus characters". I've never met or heard of Erica outside of comments on Bwog, which described her as self-aggrandizing, hypocritical, and overly critical of other writers. When I saw someone post a link to her site, I read through it, including the blog and it did seem to resemble the caricature painted on bwog. I posted quotes from her blog, not because they were syntactically incorrect, but because they were indicative of the fact that there was some substance behind the comments on bwog (the fact that there were spelling and grammatical errors I just thought was funny). So thinking about it, I agree with her that inaccurate information should not be posted, nor should personal judgments, but as she is a writer, I feel like she would agree that a writer should stand behind the words they publish. I don't feel that quoting her was out of line.

As for the edits she made to her page, I feel like she's missing the point. In response to an article that mocks her, she makes edits that confirm exactly the qualities being mocked. She responded to the claim that she's self-congratulatory by making multiple references to her charity work. She responds to the claim that she can't let go of Columbia by posting an article about her returning to Columbia after graduating to organize a thesis reading. She responds to the claim that she broadcasts her poverty by... broadcasting her poverty. Is there some sort of intentional irony here that I'm not giving her enough credit for? In any case, if she sincerely thinks the article is funny, then this is a mutually beneficial situation, because I too am pretty amused by all of this, though I am going to correct the - I guess "vandalism" she added to the article. --Nonsensical 22:51, 10 June 2007 (EDT)