With Love, Meghan on Netflix

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or, to be clear, since I was quoting a thread where they didn't say that, pretending to be a separate poster. So like, writing "I think XYZ" and then commenting again, "Yes, I agree with the poster above who said XYZ" (when they are both the same person). I am not suggesting that simply replying to a thread multiple times in an effort to follow the conversation is sock puppeting.

I’m one of the people you accused of sock puppeting, and I did use NP perhaps one time incorrectly in that I had posted earlier on this long thread, but I was jumping in and responding on a new sub topic that was mid discussion and thought it was appropriate to indicate I was new. I certainly wasn’t ’pretending’ and I am still curious about your hypersensitivity to MMs/ her show…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv?

Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets.

PP I think Jeff should consider whether posters like you are being paid to post by MMs team or otherwise have some personal connection

Jeff couldn't care less about these royal threads and never reads them unless absolutely necessary. If you read his daily summary, you would see that is especially true now.

I know he is no longer doing his write-up of the popular threads. I was under the impression he did read them though because I remember from old blogs he said he had to shut down several royals threads.

Not that I think this thread should be shut down by any means and it's his board so it's his call anyway, I am simply saying I think there are a few people here all pretending to agree with each other when it's really one person. I am not just saying "A lot of people are replying a lot," because I'm replying a lot to keep up with the conversation.

He only reads them when posts are being reported.

Well, it seems he jumps in elsewhere as well. Like when someone uses his name or I’d assume if there are banned words used.

Not unless you are posting in Website Feedback or he is already reviewing posts when responding to reports. He doesn't have time to read all the threads in the forums so he relies on those reports to give him the heads-up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched two episodes with my dh who chose it. When he first turned it on, I didn’t realize what it was and assumed it was a joke/parody/‘mockumentary’ type show. It is that cheesy.

She’s obviously not a real chef/cook. Her clothes are pretty but totally unpractical for a real cook. Her speech sounds like she’s trying to follow the inflections and intonations of Martha. The substantive banter sounds phony and forced. And it is so tone deaf in today’s environment and especially given MM’s previous claims about caring about social justice issues, etc. Also how do you try to present yourself as a caring, warm hostess after you’ve bashed and cut yourself off from both sides of you and your husband’s families???

She needs to find something else. This is really really bad.

Such a smart point. If these were random new neighbors and the topic of extended family casually came up and both of them were crickets when it came to siblings, parents, nieces and nephews I’d be so sketched out. Nothing makes it more obvious you’re dealing with creepy toxic messy people than, “Oh, we’re both estranged from all sides of our families…”

They’re not estranged from all sides of their families. They both still speak to their mothers’ sides of the family.

I’m sure Doria contains multitudes, but I’m less sure Meghan Only Mommy Came to My Wedding Sussex née Markle is in touch with other members of her mom’s side.

I don't think Doria has that many relatives, does she? Out of her three half siblings I'm pretty sure two are dead. Some people just don't have big families, I dated a guy whose dad had no family. If he was estranged from his mom's side, he wouldn't have had anyone either. (My ex's dad was one of two kids, the other brother died before having kids, so my ex had no living aunts, uncles, or cousins, on his dad's side.)

And I forgot, Meghan is close with her niece on her dad's side. She was in their docuseries.

Meghan seems to want to not think about it, but she carries DNA from her dad's side. If they're all crazy, ignorant folks who should be ostracized, then she should be concerned for her kids. Same for Harry's genetics.

That is patently ridiculous and you know it. You think DNA is like kooties? If one person is an a-hole, everyone in the family will be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv?

Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets.

PP I think Jeff should consider whether posters like you are being paid to post by MMs team or otherwise have some personal connection

Jeff couldn't care less about these royal threads and never reads them unless absolutely necessary. If you read his daily summary, you would see that is especially true now.

I know he is no longer doing his write-up of the popular threads. I was under the impression he did read them though because I remember from old blogs he said he had to shut down several royals threads.

Not that I think this thread should be shut down by any means and it's his board so it's his call anyway, I am simply saying I think there are a few people here all pretending to agree with each other when it's really one person. I am not just saying "A lot of people are replying a lot," because I'm replying a lot to keep up with the conversation.

He only reads them when posts are being reported.

Well, it seems he jumps in elsewhere as well. Like when someone uses his name or I’d assume if there are banned words used.

I think he has it set so that banned words can't actually be posted.

Someone used an example the other day of a word that was forbidden but ok in a different context. Wish I could remember what it was

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv?

Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets.

PP I think Jeff should consider whether posters like you are being paid to post by MMs team or otherwise have some personal connection

Jeff couldn't care less about these royal threads and never reads them unless absolutely necessary. If you read his daily summary, you would see that is especially true now.

I know he is no longer doing his write-up of the popular threads. I was under the impression he did read them though because I remember from old blogs he said he had to shut down several royals threads.

Not that I think this thread should be shut down by any means and it's his board so it's his call anyway, I am simply saying I think there are a few people here all pretending to agree with each other when it's really one person. I am not just saying "A lot of people are replying a lot," because I'm replying a lot to keep up with the conversation.

He only reads them when posts are being reported.

Well, it seems he jumps in elsewhere as well. Like when someone uses his name or I’d assume if there are banned words used.

Not unless you are posting in Website Feedback or he is already reviewing posts when responding to reports. He doesn't have time to read all the threads in the forums so he relies on those reports to give him the heads-up.

I think he probably gets some alerts on words

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I tried it but unfortunately for her, the timing sucks. Not her fault since this was planned and filmed last year, but it’s really hard for me to enjoy watching a wealthy person craft for kicks wearing a $30,000 watch in a cottage at her $10 million home. I like her and I wish her well, but I don’t think I’ll keep watching.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, to be clear, since I was quoting a thread where they didn't say that, pretending to be a separate poster. So like, writing "I think XYZ" and then commenting again, "Yes, I agree with the poster above who said XYZ" (when they are both the same person). I am not suggesting that simply replying to a thread multiple times in an effort to follow the conversation is sock puppeting.

I’m one of the people you accused of sock puppeting, and I did use NP perhaps one time incorrectly in that I had posted earlier on this long thread, but I was jumping in and responding on a new sub topic that was mid discussion and thought it was appropriate to indicate I was new. I certainly wasn’t ’pretending’ and I am still curious about your hypersensitivity to MMs/ her show…

Well, I don't know who I was accusing. I did think your response to my post two or three times in a row with different acronyms looked suspicious, hence reporting them. But I was also referring to someone who said, something like "Meghan should do this" and then a few minutes later someone else was like, "Someone above said Meghan should do this and I agree" when the writing style made it sound like they were the same person.

But to your question, I am not on MM's payroll. I simply think you are mean spirited and not arguing in good faith. For example, if you are the poster who just said that Meghan's kids have the same DNA as her sister and so they should be concerned...that is a weird thing to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv?

Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets.

Posts like this should be posted in Website Feedback. But since you have already disrupted this thread, let me ask you how you define "sock puppet". Because you have now reported a poster who replied to your own post and asked if they are a sock puppet. That suggests an understand of "sock puppet" that is different than my own.

Is it not someone who replies multiple times? I was more referring to the fact that they replied to my post twice claiming "DP" and "PP"

A sock puppet is someone who replies to their own posts. If you reply to someone else it is not sock puppeting.

Well, learn something new every day that I was using the term incorrectly. That's my bad and I apologize to Jeff for a comment that was made in jest but came across as snarky.

I was under the impression that someone replying repeatedly and claiming to be "DP" "NP" etc. counted as sock puppeting.

Sorry, but aren’t you also replying a lot? Did you think you were a sock puppet?

See below - I am not suggesting that anyone pro- or anti-Markle is a sock puppet for replying a lot in the sense of following a normal conversation. I am more referring to people who quote the same post three times in a row saying "DP!" "NP!" or agree with themselves. I was under the impression that was sock puppeting.

When someone starts their post with new poster (NP), it means they are posting for the first time on that thread. DP means they are a different poster than the one being quoted or the previous poster (pp). Sockpuppeting is responding to your own post not replying more than once in a thread.

Thank you, I am the one confused by it who reported a couple posts and this was helpful.

What is it called when someone claims they are a DP or NP and they actually are not?

How do you know they are not? I have been on this forum and the royal threads and there are multiple return posters on each side (pro and anti-Meghan).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone made a good point above. What gracious hostess trashes family on tv?

Dear god, Jeff, I'm begging you buddy, please look into these sock puppets.

Posts like this should be posted in Website Feedback. But since you have already disrupted this thread, let me ask you how you define "sock puppet". Because you have now reported a poster who replied to your own post and asked if they are a sock puppet. That suggests an understand of "sock puppet" that is different than my own.

Is it not someone who replies multiple times? I was more referring to the fact that they replied to my post twice claiming "DP" and "PP"

A sock puppet is someone who replies to their own posts. If you reply to someone else it is not sock puppeting.

Well, learn something new every day that I was using the term incorrectly. That's my bad and I apologize to Jeff for a comment that was made in jest but came across as snarky.

I was under the impression that someone replying repeatedly and claiming to be "DP" "NP" etc. counted as sock puppeting.

Sorry, but aren’t you also replying a lot? Did you think you were a sock puppet?

See below - I am not suggesting that anyone pro- or anti-Markle is a sock puppet for replying a lot in the sense of following a normal conversation. I am more referring to people who quote the same post three times in a row saying "DP!" "NP!" or agree with themselves. I was under the impression that was sock puppeting.

When someone starts their post with new poster (NP), it means they are posting for the first time on that thread. DP means they are a different poster than the one being quoted or the previous poster (pp). Sockpuppeting is responding to your own post not replying more than once in a thread.

Thank you, I am the one confused by it who reported a couple posts and this was helpful.

What is it called when someone claims they are a DP or NP and they actually are not?

How do you know they are not? I have been on this forum on and the royal threads and there are multiple return posters on each side (pro and anti-Meghan).

^^for a long time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched two episodes with my dh who chose it. When he first turned it on, I didn’t realize what it was and assumed it was a joke/parody/‘mockumentary’ type show. It is that cheesy.

She’s obviously not a real chef/cook. Her clothes are pretty but totally unpractical for a real cook. Her speech sounds like she’s trying to follow the inflections and intonations of Martha. The substantive banter sounds phony and forced. And it is so tone deaf in today’s environment and especially given MM’s previous claims about caring about social justice issues, etc. Also how do you try to present yourself as a caring, warm hostess after you’ve bashed and cut yourself off from both sides of you and your husband’s families???

She needs to find something else. This is really really bad.

Such a smart point. If these were random new neighbors and the topic of extended family casually came up and both of them were crickets when it came to siblings, parents, nieces and nephews I’d be so sketched out. Nothing makes it more obvious you’re dealing with creepy toxic messy people than, “Oh, we’re both estranged from all sides of our families…”

They’re not estranged from all sides of their families. They both still speak to their mothers’ sides of the family.

Sure, sure. We're only estranged from my dad's entire side and Harry's entire side of the family... but we like the titles from Harry's family, which is why I publicly bullied my fake friend Mindy.Megan is all over the place. It's all so sketchy and messy and fake. And so incredibly thirsty and desperate!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or, to be clear, since I was quoting a thread where they didn't say that, pretending to be a separate poster. So like, writing "I think XYZ" and then commenting again, "Yes, I agree with the poster above who said XYZ" (when they are both the same person). I am not suggesting that simply replying to a thread multiple times in an effort to follow the conversation is sock puppeting.

I’m one of the people you accused of sock puppeting, and I did use NP perhaps one time incorrectly in that I had posted earlier on this long thread, but I was jumping in and responding on a new sub topic that was mid discussion and thought it was appropriate to indicate I was new. I certainly wasn’t ’pretending’ and I am still curious about your hypersensitivity to MMs/ her show…

Well, I don't know who I was accusing. I did think your response to my post two or three times in a row with different acronyms looked suspicious, hence reporting them. But I was also referring to someone who said, something like "Meghan should do this" and then a few minutes later someone else was like, "Someone above said Meghan should do this and I agree" when the writing style made it sound like they were the same person.

But to your question, I am not on MM's payroll. I simply think you are mean spirited and not arguing in good faith. For example, if you are the poster who just said that Meghan's kids have the same DNA as her sister and so they should be concerned...that is a weird thing to say.

You strangely assume there are just one or two people on here who don’t like Meghan’s show. It’s odd. I didn’t say anything about her DNA. And I didn’t respond to any of your posts 3 times in a row, claiming to be different people (unless of course we are talking about different posts YOU made, and then how would I know that they were all made by you?). As I mentioned, I said I was a NP once when I was jumping into a new conversation I’d never previously commented on that seemed to have people replying to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched two episodes with my dh who chose it. When he first turned it on, I didn’t realize what it was and assumed it was a joke/parody/‘mockumentary’ type show. It is that cheesy.

She’s obviously not a real chef/cook. Her clothes are pretty but totally unpractical for a real cook. Her speech sounds like she’s trying to follow the inflections and intonations of Martha. The substantive banter sounds phony and forced. And it is so tone deaf in today’s environment and especially given MM’s previous claims about caring about social justice issues, etc. Also how do you try to present yourself as a caring, warm hostess after you’ve bashed and cut yourself off from both sides of you and your husband’s families???

She needs to find something else. This is really really bad.

Such a smart point. If these were random new neighbors and the topic of extended family casually came up and both of them were crickets when it came to siblings, parents, nieces and nephews I’d be so sketched out. Nothing makes it more obvious you’re dealing with creepy toxic messy people than, “Oh, we’re both estranged from all sides of our families…”

They’re not estranged from all sides of their families. They both still speak to their mothers’ sides of the family.

I’m sure Doria contains multitudes, but I’m less sure Meghan Only Mommy Came to My Wedding Sussex née Markle is in touch with other members of her mom’s side.

I don't think Doria has that many relatives, does she? Out of her three half siblings I'm pretty sure two are dead. Some people just don't have big families, I dated a guy whose dad had no family. If he was estranged from his mom's side, he wouldn't have had anyone either. (My ex's dad was one of two kids, the other brother died before having kids, so my ex had no living aunts, uncles, or cousins, on his dad's side.)

And I forgot, Meghan is close with her niece on her dad's side. She was in their docuseries.

Meghan seems to want to not think about it, but she carries DNA from her dad's side. If they're all crazy, ignorant folks who should be ostracized, then she should be concerned for her kids. Same for Harry's genetics.

That is patently ridiculous and you know it. You think DNA is like kooties? If one person is an a-hole, everyone in the family will be?

Huh? You don't believe in genetics? Facial features? Hair color and texture? Mental illness? Intelligence? Height? Athletic ability? If one entire side of a family is a problem, then there's reason for concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched two episodes with my dh who chose it. When he first turned it on, I didn’t realize what it was and assumed it was a joke/parody/‘mockumentary’ type show. It is that cheesy.

She’s obviously not a real chef/cook. Her clothes are pretty but totally unpractical for a real cook. Her speech sounds like she’s trying to follow the inflections and intonations of Martha. The substantive banter sounds phony and forced. And it is so tone deaf in today’s environment and especially given MM’s previous claims about caring about social justice issues, etc. Also how do you try to present yourself as a caring, warm hostess after you’ve bashed and cut yourself off from both sides of you and your husband’s families???

She needs to find something else. This is really really bad.

Such a smart point. If these were random new neighbors and the topic of extended family casually came up and both of them were crickets when it came to siblings, parents, nieces and nephews I’d be so sketched out. Nothing makes it more obvious you’re dealing with creepy toxic messy people than, “Oh, we’re both estranged from all sides of our families…”

They’re not estranged from all sides of their families. They both still speak to their mothers’ sides of the family.

I’m sure Doria contains multitudes, but I’m less sure Meghan Only Mommy Came to My Wedding Sussex née Markle is in touch with other members of her mom’s side.

I don't think Doria has that many relatives, does she? Out of her three half siblings I'm pretty sure two are dead. Some people just don't have big families, I dated a guy whose dad had no family. If he was estranged from his mom's side, he wouldn't have had anyone either. (My ex's dad was one of two kids, the other brother died before having kids, so my ex had no living aunts, uncles, or cousins, on his dad's side.)

And I forgot, Meghan is close with her niece on her dad's side. She was in their docuseries.

Meghan seems to want to not think about it, but she carries DNA from her dad's side. If they're all crazy, ignorant folks who should be ostracized, then she should be concerned for her kids. Same for Harry's genetics.

That is patently ridiculous and you know it. You think DNA is like kooties? If one person is an a-hole, everyone in the family will be?

Biology. Not "kooties." You receive half your genes from each parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s just weird for her to be showcasing how to cook and host on a show when she isn’t an expert in either. She has zero background in either field and likely didn’t host or cook beyond basics prior to marrying Harry. Even since then, she mostly hires out and does very little of it herself. So I just don’t get why this got made into a show.

Again, this was basically the concept behind the Tig, a website she ran for three years prior to marrying Harry. She is an amateur but, like Gwyneth, she had good taste and was known in her friend circles for being good at this kind of thing.

I actually have no idea if she "mostly hires out" now or not. When they show her cooking on the show, she looks to me like someone who cooks at home. Also when her actual friends appear on the show, you can tell that they appreciate this aspect of her personality, that she's hosted them many times and they appreciate the extra mile she goes as a hostess. So to me it seems like this is a genuine interest of hers, that she has some skill and background in it, and she is sharing real tips and tricks from things she has done before.

Is it much more impressive than what your best hostess girlfriend might do at her house or put up on her Pinterest? No. I know women who do stuff like this and they are as skilled as Meghan is. But she's famous and they aren't, she has a Netflix deal and they don't. It's the same with Goop -- is she the only person who could possibly have created that website? No, there are lots of women with similar tastes and interests who could have produces something similar. But she's famous and rich so she had a built in audience and other women don't.

Some of you are watching this show like you are totally unfamiliar with the concept of an already-famous person parlaying their fame into a lifestyle brand. It's not that uncommon! You've seen this before.

No, I’m more impressed with my girlfriends because their hostessing efforts are genuine. Meghan’s looks like she hired everything out and is just scripting it. Not impressive. Jennifer Garner makes cooking videos. She does it in her own kitchen, doesn’t pretend to be some expert, and they are genuine and funny. Sorry I just didn’t get that from Meghan’s. It looks like she is just trying to sell her hired out lifestyle

Well congrats, when one of your girlfriends makes a show about their hostessing efforts, please send us the details so we can evaluate it.

If Jennifer Garner ever takes a break from making Capitol One commercials to make a show about cooking and hostessing, I will check it out, too.

Who cares?

That’s the point. One of my girlfriends would never get a show because they are just ordinary “good” and not doing anything groundbreaking or original. Meghan got a show because she is Harry’s wife- not because of her amazing cooking and hostessing ideas, of which she has none. So if she is going to be having a show on the premise of being married to a prince, then at least make it authentic about their home and family life. But it is neither a glimpse of her authentic life, or a good cooking/ hosting show. It’s just this middle ground of fake pretty

Yeahhhhhh....two things:
1. The show isn't based on the premise of her marrying a prince. It's based on the premise of her being a basic aging millennial who likes easy recipes and crafts. As the other poster said, she had an entire blog about it.
2. If she showed Harry and the kids, you would accuse her of monetizing titles, monetizing her royal connections, monetizing the kids....and frankly, I can see WHY she does not show you her kids. You are insane. I wouldn't film at my house so that creeps like you could see the layout. And yes, you are a creep. It's really, really weird to be hyperfixated on wanting to see kids you don't know.

You are really having a difficult time grasping the concept of fame. And that's okay, I don't think you're bright so we can walk you through it! Here's how it works. People get famous from an avenue - acting, singing, marrying into royalty - and then they parlay that fame into other money making opportunities. Meghan Markle isn't any less "qualified" to give cooking advice than any of the actresses who have parlayed fame into a "lifestyle influencing career." You can not like her, for sure! I myself find her a little cringey and awkward. But to imply that she's less qualified to bake some treats and make floral arrangements than Gwyneth Paltrow and Pamela Anderson of all people based on some flimsy argument that "she's not an expert" is just because you don't like her. Okay, so Meghan's not enough of an expert but Pamela Anderson is a Michelin-starred chef?

The point is she would never have this show if she weren't married to Prince Harry.She was not a recognized lifestyle expert. The Tig did not have a national following.

O-okay?

Gwyneth would never have Goop and Pamela Anderson would never have her show if they weren’t actresses. Honestly Martha Stewart probably wouldn’t even have a show if she hadn’t been married to a rich guy who was able to bankroll her catering jobby.

You really aren’t getting this, are you?

Gwyneth Paltrow made multiple feature films and won an Oscar. Her acting career was much more high profile than Meghan Markle Sussex.

Lol. I missed the memo that you need a certain number of acting awards to *checks notes* make a tv show about floral arrangements and kids' birthday parties.

You were the one who compared Meghan Markle to Gwyneth Paltrow as actors. Their acting careers are not comparable at all. Meghan Markle gave a blow job on "90210." Goop would never.

I didn't compare them as actors. Quite the opposite. I simply said that all three are actresses with lifestyle careers. I don't think MM's or even Pamela Anderson's career is comparable to Gwyneth's.

But the point is that Meghan Markle was not prominent enough on her own as an actress to get a whole network lifestyle show. Anderson was the star and main draw of Baywatch and Paltrow was an Oscar winner. They both had way more professional credibility than Markle. Markle's lifestyle credibility is based on being married to a prince.

Pamela Anderson hadn't been on television in years when her Netflix show premiered.

But she was once one of the biggest stars on TV. Markle Sussex was never on the level of Pam Anderson on "Baywatch."

I mean, I feel like you're just making excuses and saying six of one, half a dozen of the other. Someone was a moderately successful TV actress within the last ten years, another person was a wildly successful TV almost 30 years ago. Meghan is certainly more culturally relevant to the time.

Yes, Meghan is more recent. But the point remains that she never would have had this show if she were not married to Prince Harry. No one was going to seek out a former "Suits" supporting actor for their culinary prowess. It is only because of the "Duchess" thing which she insists on using even though she has no use for the royal family that gave her the title and there is no royalty in the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought the exchange when the pot with her specially made creamer boiling over was funny and telling. Her reaction was super defensive. Seemed random to leave in the show.

It's like she got the a- hole edit of a reality show. Except it's her scripted show that she produced.