Message
ShaqNanny wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I refuse to subscribe to the magazine for a few reasons. The people involved in the magazine are immature and it was obvious at nannypalooza that they have no idea what they are doing. $39 for 6 magazines is outrageous and why even consider buying the online edition when they keep posting their articles on their Facebook page for free. No thanks. I'm sure whoever started this thread is somehow involved in the magazine.
I agree 100%! I always thought the girls involved in this magazine were a little naive and immature, but it was very apparent at Nannypalooza. I wanted to support them, but after that debacle will not be giving them any of my money.
I was at Nannypalooza and while I thought the intern and associate editors could have acted better, it's hilarious to call this debacle the fault of the executive editors. If your charges misbehaves, does that mean you are a terrible nanny? No. Then maybe you should take what happened with a grain of salt. What I find most humorous about the Nannypalooza incident was that it was one of their members that were accosted and assaulted but they're at fault. I am all about taking personal responsibility for their actions but the logic being used here is hilarious.
100% agree. I'm new to the area and DCUM. I've been following Nanny Magazine on their Facebook page and became addicted. I really like it. So it is upsetting to wonder on here and read this stuff....I mean, aren't we all supposed to be loving and caring nannies for our little ones?? This is a magazine for nannies, not some political FOX News garbage. Lighten up people.
Anonymous wrote:Wait wait wait....there was assault? Someone needs to dish. What happened at nannypalooza?
Apparently Nanny Magazine representatives that were there (not the editors/owners) were harassed and assaulted by some crazy nanny...which in turn, Nanny Magazine got the bad rap for it. Doesn't make sense to me..I was going to go to Nannypalooza with a friend, but I had to stay behind. I mention that because I remember talking to my friend who was there later that night. She was telling me about it and then a few days later, I started hearing different versions...crazy versions. As most rumors get spread, they tend to become exaggerated and deviate further from what really happened.
But the argument on this forum right now is more about attacking the two girls who started the magazine...who again, were not even there. However, some people think they should be held responsible. This illogical thinking is small-minded. Back where I grew up (small town in Mississippi), most small-minded people think that all muslims are terrorist because of the actions of a terrorist group...so I guess the answer is that an entire ethnic group should be held responsible for the acts of the few. This example is a radical difference between the two...but it's the same small minded thinking...I'm glad I'm in DC (just moved here 4 months ago); I love the diversity...but I guess there's no escaping the ignorance of that small-minded town.
Anonymous wrote:lol.
Two posters in this thread have called it a professional journal. I'm not going to waste my time finding the post times but if you read the thread through you'll see both claims.
And why does not thinking highly of this "magazine" make me bitter? Nice try.
Random posters called it a professional journal...so therefore it is....? Okay....I'm Jesus Christ...I guess that's true too seeing as I'm a "poster". Do you need more examples pointing out your flawed response?
|