But we had a discussion about the ethics of all this online community and business stuff. Some people thought you should be able to say whatever you like no matter how it effects someone, others thought you should use care.

End result, I think, is that the whole social media sphere is moving at such a rapid pace that we need to think carefully about how we use it on all sides.

Business owners and blog writers with huge readership need to use special care in how they treat customers and readers. One of the things about the whole fiber arts community is that we ARE community, like it or not, and we need to be sensitive to how our actions, quick comments, or deep analysis effect others.

Social media is about public relations and community. I hope we’ll all think carefully about our comments. Remember how you had to learn about not shooting off reactive e-mails too quickly. My personal mantra is “Respond not React.”

You’re doing a great job with your blog. Keep at it.

Whilst Magknits was a free service, income was generated by advertising in the same way as places like Google are. Kerrie had very little to do, the designers did the hard work, and it was a good advertising tool for Hipknits and Yarnforward. Taking it down in the manner in which she did it proves how unprofessional Kerrie is.

Personally, I would not be at all surprised to see those businesses follow Magknits into oblivion.

A business is not required to underwrite your enjoyment merely because you feel entitled to access. If you are generating content for the site’s profit, I feel very differently. I am a big believer in “free” online in those cases. However, Magknits is an online magazine. Website users only supply ad hits in this case, and may not generate the income needed to even cover the cost of bandwidth. Ending your access isn’t emotional or immature, in this case it appears to be very astute business decision.

Commercial sites that use a great deal of bandwidth do not run like a hobby site. (Others in the various threads on ravelry have explained this better.) They may pay per hit, or pay overages, and a run on the site may cost them thousands of dollars. It’s not something that is free for the owner. Given the nature and consequence of the threads I’m not sure why she should underwrite anyone’s access. The online world spoke: she runs her site poorly. If people believe that, then they got what most people want when something is so poorly run: something to change. (And the thing with change is, you may not always like the change you get.) Certainly, she’s in a much better financial position to pay outstanding bills if she’s not trying to cover the cost of a final run on Magknits.

I disagree that ravelry plays no part. For all the complaints that have a basis in truly poor business acumen, ravelry ultimately provided a platform that allowed it to be deeply and irreparably damaged to a much wider audience. Her business is going to have a very bad time recovering from this, if it ever does. I personally know I wouldn’t purchase from her, and many more people who will only read you posts and others, will simply know that there’s something wrong with this company, and will be less likely to purchase. Even if she does managed to fix her problems, it may be too little, far too late.

Ravelry’s role in this concerns me a great deal. Knitting/Crochet are considered niche markets. Niche markets are small by definition. They are filled with 1 and 2 person operations that can be easily overwhelmed by the attention of a site like ravelry. If ravelry users now use the site to publicly shame everyone who has a problem with orders, good small business may be prematurely closed. No one wins in that scenario except larger companies that can afford to ride out bad press, or pay PR people to help them change their image. Would you like a yarn world without your favorite small label?