Reach Gawker Executive Customer Service

If you have feedback or questions about Consumerist or any other blog on the Gawker Media Network, there’s now a handy Feedback link at the bottom of our front page. Click and you’ll go to a nice place where you can post questions and comments and watch as Gawker employees and other readers respond.

Customer service & support for Gawker [Get Satisfaction]


Edit Your Comment

  1. ALaterDayTD says:

    I was wondering if you would ever do this. Well Played.

  2. m4ximusprim3 says:

    Can’t I just EECB Denton?


  3. TurboWagon00 says:

    Only if they take my concerns seriously

  4. ciscokidinsf says:

    Finally. I don’t think I am getting my money’s worth of advice here.

  5. Trai_Dep says:

    “For the love of gods, bring back Carey & Chris?”

  6. ianmac47 says:

    Gawker Media is taking it seriously.

  7. seanhcalgary says:

    So if we get ridiculously poor customer service from Gawker, will Consumerist still help out or give advice on how to deal with the bastards?

  8. Git Em SteveDave loves this guy--> says:

    Gina’s there, and that makes me feel better.

  9. little stripes says:

    So when male editors make light of rape, will someone actually respond or just ignore it?

    • Tmoney02 says:

      @little stripes: Didn’t you say “You pigs are disgusting. I’m done with gawker.” in that other thread?

      Say it with me in your best brokeback mountian voice – “Gawker, I cant quit you!”

      • little stripes says:

        @Tmoney02: I will admit I responded in anger. But I was hoping when I did send in a well-mannered, professional complaint, I’d get a response. Surprise, surprise, I did not. Looks like they aren’t even “taking it seriously.”

        • Riddar says:

          @little stripes: Or maybe we like that this blog takes the liberties slang and other colloquialisms that other outlets don’t use. Yep, occasionally they will run upon the trigger word for one or two uptight commentors, but it does keep the rest of us less sensitive to political correctness coming back.

          Then again, maybe we could have a bland version of the Consumerist, too. Could be called the Corporatist or something, where the writer will always talk in generic corporate pleasantries and avoid harsh language or inflammatory suggestions. By avoiding stories where either party may be at too much fault, and avoiding all that harsh slang, there is no doubt us commentors would bicker less. The Corporatist can even tell you that they will take your suggestions and concerns very seriously, if it makes you happy.

          • little stripes says:

            @Riddar: Oh, come on. Using rape so flippantly is unprofessional and just plain disgusting. It’s interesting that Gawker is horrible at customer service, eh? I mean, isn’t that what consumerist is all about? Decent service? And yet…whenever I’ve made a complaint, I SURPRISE! never get a fucking response.

          • Real Cheese Flavor says:

            @Riddar: I’m probably one of the more politically incorrect people out there whose conversations and jokes would make the things said in the article in question sound like polite speech.

            Thing is, there’s a time and a place for things like that. It’s one thing to act that way amongst friends and in places where there’s no way in hell that anyone else could overhear. It’s entirely different to use language like that to sensationalize a story to garner a few more pageviews.

            This is a slightly mainstream blog, not the somethingawful forums. The people who are offended are not uptight people who need to “lighten up,” but people who have a legitimate beef that so far has been ignored or dismissed as irrelevant.

            • little stripes says:

              @Real Cheese Flavor: EXACTLY. I’m fucking tired of being told to “lighten up” when people are rude, inconsiderate, UNPROFESSIONAL, and can’t even respond to complaints from their readers.

              • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

                @little stripes: So are you bringing it up? Because I totally want to know what their response is.

              • glacier206 says:

                @little stripes: I’m waiting for the story about a guy with a high APR that Ben decides, in all his professional wisdom, to title “Man gets lynched by his credit card company”.

                But I guess it’ll get page views, and that’s all that matters to them these days.

                • little stripes says:

                  @glacier206: Telling, innit, that everyone got all up and arms over the “Dumb N***” post, but rape? Oh, who cares about silly rape! We’re just too SENSITIVE!

                  • little stripes says:

                    @little stripes: they got up in (not and) arms about the receipt, not the post itself. can’t type today.

                  • Apathy says:

                    @little stripes:
                    Probably because N*** has only one meaning and connotation, more or less (rap aside, and AFAIK that’s more of an ironic thing), whereas rape can mean sexual assault or plunder (you know, the sense it was used in the article in question). Google ‘define:rape’ or ‘define:rapine’ if you’re confused. Deciding nobody can use the word ‘rape’ in any of its forms because one of its meanings is emotionally disturbing to you is a little self-centered.

                    • bria says:

                      That’s not what she’s saying; of course rape has multiple meanings.

                      And Consumerist? Epic fail. An employee there said the feedback system was JUST FOR technical issues, not editorial or anything else.

                    • MercuryPDX says:


                      An employee there said the feedback system was JUST FOR technical issues, not editorial or anything else.

                      Can you really blame them after the method several of you have chosen to abuse the system?

                • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

                  @glacier206: They wonder why they are loosing readers (and staff) when this is their attitude towards complaints.

                  • BrawlerBarbie says:

                    @Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin: I have no idea why they’re losing readers, but it was my impression they are losing staff because they can’t afford to pay them anymore. You know, tanking economy and all.

                    • bria says:

                      They’re losing staff because Gawker Media is going in a new direction and putting its staff into blogs that actually make money for them. Consumerist can’t take ads, so it’s kind of a loss leader.

                    • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

                      @BrawlerBarbie: Huh, I wonder if replying to complaints and disemvoweling completely offensive remarks instead of making excuses would help them to up their readership, and thus up page views and thus up popularity, making this a more profitable blog.

                    • Rectilinear Propagation says:

                      @Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin: I usually, if not always, get a reply when I e-mail the moderator.

                      Just remember that it’s a moderator not moderators. That article was posted yesterday so it hasn’t even been two full days yet. Just because you didn’t get a same day response doesn’t mean you’re getting ignored.

                    • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

                      @Rectilinear Propagation: Roz has always replied to me as well. I am not the one who has a problem with getting a response.

                    • crazedhare says:

                      @Rectilinear Propagation:

                      No, but I think that the fact that the article has not been changed when so many have objected, certainly does.

                    • BrawlerBarbie says:

                      @Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin: Huh, I wonder if replying to complaints and disemvoweling completely offensive remarks instead of making excuses would help them to up their readership, and thus up page views and thus up popularity, making this a more profitable blog.

                      It would certainly make it a more challenging read.

                • crazedhare says:


                  I thought the same thing – or wondered whether we would see an article about “jewing down” the rate on a credit card. Of course, because using those terms would be simply slang, and a joke, it would be FUNNY, no?

                  I sent a polite, clear, respectful letter in response to the rape joke, and didn’t even get the typical Gawker auto-response.

                  Looks like the Consumerist crew is just spewing whatever will get them on TV and get ad revenue without having anything to stand behind it – not that I am shocked!

            • bria says:

              @Real Cheese Flavor:
              So much agreed :)

          • bria says:


            I will assume you’re talking about me, since I started the discussion, and I’d like to say please don’t call me names.

    • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

      @little stripes: Word. Maybe someone will respond with “rape jokes aren’t against Consumerist rules.”

    • silver-bolt says:

      @little stripes: Apparently, female editors get a free pass at making light of rape….. -_- Sexist.

      • bria says:


        The event which you’re referring to… there was a HUGE debate on Jezebel and almost everyone was upset at the writers for their statements. Anna, an editor at Jezebel even said she was disgusted.

        That being said:(also wrote this on the feedback thing)

        Those who’ve directed comments towards me that I haven’t responded to

        Okay, I have officially received the fourth message on my personal/gawker page that says “I hope you f****** die, stupid b****,” so I’m abandoning this thread and all others related to this issue because it’s scaring me.

        I’ve emailed people at Gawker and I’ll wait for their response about the rape issue, and that is it.

        • Tmoney02 says:

          @bria: “I’ve emailed people at Gawker and I’ll wait for their response about the rape issue, and that is it.”

          In other words – the one and only thing you should have done in the first place.

          But the question is did you learn this lesson yet?

          • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

            @Tmoney02: Ok, What? What lesson did she learn after getting death threats? How about “some people are big bullies who will stop at nothing to shut a woman up” or do you not comprehend the depravity when a person on a website discussing rape causes her to get death threats?

    • kyle4 says:

      @little stripes: +1 for Little Stripes and +1 for Bria as well. To reiterate a post I just made in that actual topic:

      I’ve been a reader of four Gawker sites for a very long time and am a very, very large fan who reads almost every post on here. I am also not PC at all and make very crass jokes to my friends, but there is a limit, and even I wouldn’t use the term “Rape” in that context. It is completely unprofessional and seems to be there with no other intent then to boost page views for a site that is unfortunately not getting enough ad revenue. Was it there just to controversial? The fact of the matter is that there is a difference between saying it to your friends and writing it on a serious Consumer helping website that is read by thousands. I don’t like it when my friends say it and I certainly don’t like it when it’s written by someone who is the head editor. The fact that Gawker is pushing it to the side is quite frankly bullshit, and I think feminist sites and Digg should get a hold of this and make an example of it. This and Jesus Diaz’s posts reflect very poorly on some of the great Gawker writing staff. Meg, Owen, Molly, the two Brians and Luke etc. It has no place here, and I wish it were removed and changed to a different word.

      Lastly: rape 1 |rāp|
      the crime, committed by a man, of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse with him without their consent and against their will, esp. by the threat or use of violence against them : he denied two charges of attempted rape | he had committed at least two rapes.
      • figurative the wanton destruction or spoiling of a place or area : the rape of the Russian countryside.
      • poetic/literary the abduction of a woman, esp. for the purpose of having sexual intercourse with her : the Rape of the Sabine Women.

      • RandomZero says:

        @kylo4: Err, your own definition supports the context we saw yesterday. To wit: “figurative the wanton destruction or spoiling of a place or area : the rape of the Russian countryside.” it’s a bit more figurative here, being that it’s talking about the wanton destruction and spoiling of a reader’s credit rating and financial future, but that sort of extension happens in English all the damn time.

        @little stripes: I’m a survivor of a devastating car accident that left me with an injury that causes me pain on a daily basis and limits my work and my ffavourite hobbies. Should I demand Consumerist stop talking about the stock market “crash”? Perhaps I should tell them not to mention employees “abusing” policies because it reminds me of my childhood? Perhaps you shouldn’t hypocritically use the word “fuck”, which in at least one of its definitions is a sexual act, with strong implications of voilence and/or aggression?

        Or perhaps we all need to dial our berserk buttons down just a hair and THINK about context and meaning before we attack people for using colloquialisms (and valid words!) we don’t like.

        Words are tools. it is (or at least should be) the context and use of the word, and not the word itself, that is offensive. You’re not offended by hammers, I imagine, but you’d probably have an issue with ebing hit in the head with one. This was hardly George Carlin’s “Rape Can be Funny” routine; it was a somewhat hyperbolic way to succinctly convey how devastating this issue would be to the reader’s future.

  10. twophrasebark says:

    This is kind of… odd.

    Shouldn’t we just call the Gawker executives on their home phones?

  11. Mary says:

    I actually had occasion to use this the other day, and it was pretty simple and super helpful. Two thumbs up.

  12. ElizabethD says:

    Y’all: I’m happy that Gawker media has a convenient way to contact them with concerns and complaints. That is always good business practice.

    That being said: As we’ve just seen, this blog operates with a tiny staff. Do we really want them constantly responding to our ruffled feathers — legitimate complaints included — instead of digging up more dirt on bad businesses that we actually fork over our money to on a daily basis?

    I think we need to get our priorities clear before we go bashing a relatively small organization. That being said: rape jokes are always wrong. :-)

  13. downwithmonstercable says:

    Wow. One company, in one quarter, lost more than Latvia’s yearly GDP.

  14. Xerloq says:

    Remember to contact the executives of Gawker media ONLY after all avenues have been exhausted. They will be more likely to respond if you are polite and courteous.

  15. glacier206 says:

    @little stripes: I know. I read through that whole thread thinking Surely I can’t be the only one who sees the hypocrisy in this? The consumerist commenters, despite the new popularity of banning/disemvoweling, continue to behave like a bunch of irrational cranky idiots.

  16. Applekid ┬──┬ ノ( ゜-゜ノ) says:

    Gee, I hope I don’t get raped by bad customer service stories! If I get lynched one more time with dagger-like words stabbing me I’ll just die. I don’t think I can stand any more holocosting or Barbara Streisanding of my eyes.

  17. kate not the plumber is ready for november says:

    @undefined: I did bring up some of the comments to Roz yesterday and basically it was said that it was a bad joke but they weren’t against the comment code. The one I specifically mentioned was the comment about dinner/lube. To me it go against the “dont be a jerk” & “hatred” rules.

    I told Roz last night I am done here and I have lurked today to see if something else was mentioned but after today I am done.

    • little stripes says:

      @kate not the plumber is ready for november: Yeah, the dinner/lube comment was WAY WAY WAY WAY out of line. Aaaand, it is OBVIOUSLY against comment policy. I mean, they are CONSTANTLY saying, “Don’t blame the victim! Against comment policy!” And yet … the editor’s flippant rape remark, and the dinner/lube comment AREN’T against policy? REALLY?

      This place is a fucking joke. Pathetic.

    • bria says:

      @kate not the plumber is ready for november:

      I brought it up too, and she told me rape jokes weren’t against the rules at the Consumerist.

      • little stripes says:

        @bria: But! God forbid someone blames victims of credit card fraud or bad customer service. Oh, no, you can never blame the victim in that case. But rape jokes? A-ok!

      • crazedhare says:


        I emailed about that, wondering why we needed a rule that would specifically prohibit rape jokes, when the comments code specifically prohibits hateful, etc. speech.

        Consumerist couldn’t be bothered to respond. I guess they were busy investigating the reader who was disembowled by a 6 cent increase in the price of Tide.

  18. Pink Puppet says:

    @undefined: @Applekid: Okay, okay, okay.

    I was cool with most of that. But ‘Barbara Steisanding’? YOU HAVE GONE TOO FAR.

  19. BrawlerBarbie says:

    @little stripes: If rape is a trigger word, then you might as well campaign for it to be removed from common vernacular, period. I’m sure “sexual assault” is perfectly acceptable as a replacement for most news outlets, it also takes longer to say and to type, and carries the chance of changing the impact of the story.

    While you’re at it, make sure you campaign to have the Gawker network remove all pictures of succulent, fatty comfort food so those in ED recovery aren’t triggered, and any reference to drunken behavior is removed for those suffering from alcoholism. Campaign against the word “fuck” and the use of profanity in general.

    “Rape” is a word used in many contexts. Because it means something different in your context is not enough reason to ban the word entirely from a website. If you want an apology you will need to ask for one directly. Complaints about a single word aren’t going to get you anywhere. In this case, it’s only going to make you look like a perpetual victim, and not the survivor you actually are.

    • bria says:


      So… as RedwoodFlyer said, are you a “rape survivor” if you credit card rate was increased against your will?

      (direct quote from my personal page:)
      “I’m a rape survivor…my credit card rate was increased against my will – according to the dictionary, that makes me a rape survivor.”

    • MercuryPDX says:

      @BrawlerBarbie: You forgot “gay” and “retarded”, but +1 all the same.

  20. glacier206 says:

    @kate not the plumber is ready for november: I also think the whole “It’s not against the comments code” justification is a cop-out along the lines of “we’re taking it seriously.”

    It would be one thing if it had been just some fool commenter, but it was a fool editor. And if posts like that aren’t against the Gawker Employee Ethics Code, then they need to change the code.

    Ben’s been going around to all the media outlets pitching various stories and trying to take Consumerist mainstream. Posts like that one will keep it in the realm of little children playing at being adults.

    • bria says:


      glacier206, ftw! I agree wholeheartedly.

    • kate not the plumber is ready for november says:

      @glacier206: I didn’t even bring up the word in the article to Roz because to me it is wrong but I understand it has other meanings/uses.

      I have a problem with the comments allowed in the thread which is why I didn’t comment yesterday in the thread about the article.

    • crazedhare says:

      @glacier206: Agreed – children playing at being adults is what I’ve long thought about Consumerist.

  21. animeredith says:

    I’m glad others are responding to the “rape” thing, I thought if I commented I’d be the lone angry person in a sea of “IT’S JUST A JOKE, LOL!”

    Let it be known that I also disapprove of your trivializing of a psychologically damaging crime by comparing it to high credit card rates, of all things. (Picture me wagging my finger and tsk tsking here)

    • bria says:

      We’re definitely with you :)

    • oneandone says:

      @animeredith: I don’t think it was meant as just a joke. I think they actually meant it seriously – that a substantial amount of debt with a nearly 25% interest rate could be as mentally terrifying as violent assault. Especially if that debt began due to circumstances outside of your control, and you have no way of getting away from it. I have family emembers in severe debt, and it destroys their lives – can’t leave abusive husbands, can’t get any kind of medical treatment.

      I would not have made the comparison – but I will support the idea that serious debt can be debilitating, and I don’t think it should be taken lightly as well.

  22. BumpinUgglas says:

    Personally, I just hire a bad private detective to follow them around.

  23. Luckie says:

    @undefined: @little stripes: I hope they continue ignoring it. This isn’t a feminist blog. It’s a consumerist blog. If you disagree, of course you have the right to complain. But he has the right to say it, whether you like it or not. I didn’t find anything inappropriate about it. I would hate to see Consumerist turned into an ultra-PC place where you’re watching your ass all the time to make sure you didn’t offend someone. Before you say, “That’s not what we want!” just remember that it has to start somewhere.

    And before you call me a pig, or a chauvinist, or any of those other things, I’m female, I’ve been raped, and I’m a feminist.

    • little stripes says:

      @Luckie: Oh, come on, it’s NOT A FEMINIST ISSUE. The fact that you think it is just makes it obviosu how ignorant you are. It was inappropriate and unprofessional. And on top of that, a consumerist mod actually said that rape jokes are not against policy. RAPE JOKES. And on top of ALL THAT, a gawker media rep told us to “simmer down” when we were upset that a MOD told us that RAPE JOKES are not against comment policy.

      So do you think rape jokes are okay and that we should just simmer down when we find rape jokes offensive? Because if so, you’re not a feminist. Period.

      • LouRawlsParadeofStars says:

        @little stripes: You keep referring to it as a rape joke, but it was not a joke. It was hyperbole. Had Ben written that high interest rates are killing the consumer, I doubt that you would be on here accusing him of making a murder joke. Reading the word “rape” when it is used figuratively will not diminish my ability to recognize actual rape as the awful crime that it is.

      • MercuryPDX says:

        @little stripes: Just wanted to point out that your original comment specifically says “male editors”.

      • BrianDaBrain says:

        @little stripes and @bria: The simple fact of the matter is that “rape” has more than one definition. Ben’s use of the word in yesterday’s article was completely proper, and more to the point, common. Calling it things like “inappropriate” and “unprofessional” is not quite accurate, given that he used it correctly. It wasn’t even slang. Does that make it right, necessarily? No.

        Bria, yesterday you said you “don’t give a shit” about being PC, but your entire argument is based on everybody else accepting your version of PC. Some people are offended by the word “fuck”, but you don’t care about that. Yet, when you are offended by a word, everybody must stop using it. You either get to be completely PC or not PC at all. There is no in between. Don’t expect other people to change so as to not offend you, when you don’t care who you offend. I understand that you’re a rape survivor, and it’s great that you survived and have moved on, but that doesn’t give you the right to dictate what words people use when communicating.

        Little stripes, I highly doubt Gawker is going to respond to you in a way that you find satisfactory. You seem to be looking for an apology and a promise that it will never happen again. That would be violating the First Amendment rights of both Ben and The Consumerist, so it won’t happen. Perhaps they’ll apologize for not adding “rape jokes” to the list of prohibited commenter behavior, but you will likely get nothing else. On that note, Ben was not making a joke. Again, he was using rape as a verb and in a manner consistent with its definition.

        Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s awesome that both of you (well all of you who are commenting on this) are standing up for your opinions, but I don’t think you can expect to either get the word removed from the post or for that particular use of the word to change. Try to remember that words only have whatever power you give them. You choose to be offended by this particular use of the word. Stop letting it get to you. That’s my advice, take it, leave it, or proceed to criticize it in the comments.

        • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

          @BrianDaBrain: Actually a reader on another post explained why the usage of the word was actually not being used correctly. It is semantics but in discussion in definition is a discussion in semantics. I want nothing more then for someone to acknowledge that the rape jokes that appeared in the thread were inappropriate and that the whole situation could have been handled much better. This is a perfect time for Consumerist to do what they consistently call out other companies for not doing.

          • BrianDaBrain says:

            @Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin: I was going to make a counterpoint, however RandomZero beat me to it. And I’m not at all saying that the jokes in the comments weren’t inappropriate – they were. But I think the criticism of Ben’s use of the word in the OP is being blown WAY out of proportion.

        • Real Cheese Flavor says:

          @BrianDaBrain: The First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

          Please tell me where Congress enters into this issue.

          Whipping out the First Amendment in situations like this is just a few baby steps away from a Godwin.

          • BrianDaBrain says:

            @Real Cheese Flavor: Hm, point being that if the law-making body of the US government can’t infringe upon peoples’ right to say what they want, what makes the people freaking out in this comment thread think they can?

            Trying to censor people because it offends your sensibilities (a general statement, not directed specifically at you, RCF) is just a few baby steps away from 1984. Look at it this way, if everybody reacted the same way these folks are every time a word offended them, we’d be reduced to “doubleplus ungood” in no time.

            Oh, wait, no Nazis involved. I’ll have to work a little harder to get that Godwin. /sarcasm

    • Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin says:

      @Luckie: Guess what, you can be female and a rape survivor and STILL be a chauvinist. Of course he has a right to use the word if he wants to. No one is saying that he can’t, we are saying that he shouldn’t. There is a difference.

      • Tmoney02 says:

        @Sarah Vivelafat McCain Palin: Of course he has a right to use the word if he wants to. No one is saying that he can’t, we are saying that he shouldn’t.

        How is throwing a tizzy fit in two diffrent websites, and writing everyone from the top down not saying he cant use the word? You are essentially asking his bosses to tell him to never do it again, don’t act like that isn’t your intention.

        You, Bria, and one or two others having been throwing a virtual temper tantrum the likes I haven’t seen before.

        If you were serious about just informing him that it is a sensitive word you would leave a concise reasonable comment saying such at most, and leave it at that. Preferably you would just drop him a quick email saying the way you feel and why. Not hijack threads all over the internet. It makes it look more like your interested in imposing your will over everyone from the top brass to the readers, even though you are an extremely small minority, rather than genuinely interested in having the writer reconsider his use of the word.

    • G Gordon Liddy says:

      @Luckie: Does it make Consumerist a black issues site if we start using Lynching and N**ger during our posts and comments? Or is that “Too PC”?

  24. minnesara says:

    It’d help if Gawker Media took the comments seriously, rather than just “I think you will survive :)”

    Emoticons don’t really ease my concerns.

  25. BrawlerBarbie says:

    @bria: In that context, yes. However, you are taking your argument to the point of absurdity. If I said “current environmental policy rapes the land of precious resources,” it would still trigger you, but it would not mean that because someone mined your back yard for oil you are a survivor of a sexual violation.

    If you don’t *ask* for your apology, you won’t get one. Use of the word “rape” is no longer the issue — you saw the word and it set you off. There were better words for the author to use, but he didn’t, and that’s that.

  26. ribex says:

    I just noticed that Gawker’s site does not link to Consumerist or the other partner sites. What’s up with that?

  27. silver-bolt says:

    @little stripes: @bria: Actually, I was only referring to your first post on here. I don’t troll Jezebel. You jezebels do that well enough.

  28. consumerd says:

    yea I want phone numbers and personal e-mail addresses dammit… After all what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander!

  29. kyle4 says:

    Thanks. After Chris and Carey have been let go and Gawker hired other people instead of keeping them, they deserve some hell. I’m still bummed by that.

  30. Mary Marsala with Fries says:

    @undefined: Oh come on now. There was absolutely no “making light” in the headline you’re referring to, and your insistence on making a big deal out of it is cheapening the real issue. Those of us who actually care about things like the absurdly low incidence of rape reporting and proper prosecution and support for victims are sick of drama queens like you making us look bad, okay?