The Daryl Eisenberg Twitter Thread — Page 2

I want to know how anyone did not discern the cellphone or labtop (whatever posting tool she used). Did anyone notice it?

Updated On: 8/12/09 at 09:46 PM

^what he/she said^

---

"I have no idea how they know."

Someone mentioned earlier about a bias because of the relationship to the poster. But, whatever.

Whether this thread existed or not, I still stand by what I said about the tweets being rude and uncalled for. Yes, I don't know her personally, and she seems to have accomplished a lot for someone her age, but to see her as someone who runs a business, I believe she acted quite unprofessionally.

Well, I guess some people are right. The tweets were extremely helpful. If I ever auditioned for her, I'll remember to sing Total Eclipse of My Heart in anything but a skirt.

---

If I ever auditioned for her, I'll remember to sing Total Eclipse of My Heart in anything but a skirt.

How about some chainmail?

---

"Also, sing the Family Guy theme."

I actually don't know the Family Guy theme. I guess my audition will be a train wreck. Maybe wearing the chainmail will make up for it.

---

The difference is I'm not throwing stones at someone for doing the EXACT SAME THING that every single person on this board does, simply because they happen to be in the industry and a professional.

You can't be so ignorant to think that NO ONE on here works in the industry too, can you?

---

Didn't bww report this? Weird. They are so afraid of burning bridges. All good journalism ends up doing that.

Kelly, please correct me if I'm wrong here, but you just finished a tirade in which you criticized the posters on this board for saying cruel things "beyond the realm of constructive or legitimate criticism," yet you then turn around and call me ignorant? Are you serious? You certainly epitomize your own judgements of others.

You've clearly missed the entire issue here. What you say in an "official" professional position and what you say "anonymously" on a message board are two different things that are covered by two different sets of decorum.

Daryl Eisenberg opened herself up to this criticism by posting these things in a public forum like Twitter. If she didn't want both positive and negative feedback, she shouldn't have said anything at all.

The fact that she's gone stone silent in recent hours proves just how strongly she stands behind her own convictions, and your continued hypocrisy proves the legitimacy of yours.

---

Updated On: 8/12/09 at 10:23 PM

somethingwicked, sorry, I don't see the difference between "Anonymous2" coming home from a casting session and posting rude things on BWW about certain actresses or actors and DECasting twittering during auditions and being careful not to name the people she was referring to, except that one is more a coward and a hypocrite than the other.

What exactly are you objecting to so strongly about the twitter? The fact that she did it and attached her professional name to her comments, the fact that she made any comment at all, or what? I mean, it doesn't make sense to me that someone who spends a great deal of time essentially bitching (yes, BEYOND the realm of legitimate and constructive criticism. Sorry, I don't think debating performers' genitalia and insulting them on a personal level falls under the realm of "discussion of their performance") would take such a personal and loud exception to someone else exhibiting the exact same behaviors.

Whatever my personal feelings about DE's behavior are, I know I'm in no position to call her out for what she does, because I post on this board, under my real name, and say plenty of things that I'm sure people could take offense or exception to. It would make me a hypocrite to shout her down.

---

"She opened herself to the risk of criticism, so now she has to lie in what she's created."

Weird, I don't think she has a problem with that. She seems to be taking the criticism with a fairly even temper, if a somewhat sarcastic and humorous one.

And I'm not judgmental of others, I just think hypocrisy is pretty annoying. I don't really have the free time to read through your entire post history (which I assume is sizable based on the "Broadway Legend" status), but if you really have never personally attacked anyone ever on this board, then fine, who am I to tell you that you have? But you have to realize that's the exception not the rule.

And somethingwicked? If the argument "If you don't like it, leave" is in play now, then might I suggest if you object to strongly to DECasting's twitter, you don't read it? :)

---

Updated On: 8/12/09 at 10:41 PM

But Craig, Daryl wasn't posting on something that would be considered "private." Those Twitter postings were meant to be a public "tool" for people to learn from, so she is getting what she wanted by her dialogue being spread. That's where it becomes something different than what's been posted here.

And Kelly, it's good to know you make assumptions in publicly criticizing people with no attempt at being aware of whether or not they're actually accurate. It proves everything I've already said.

---

You directly criticized me for participating in a specific thread that I had no involvement in at all. When confronted with that, you basically said you didn't have time to look as to whether or not I actually did participate in the alleged discussion, but you said I did anyway in an allegation that was clearly unsubstantiated. That goes beyond what you've said about everyone in general, though that's equally as bad.

There is a distinct difference between the venues involved here. As her defenders have been so quick to say, Eisenberg has promoted her company Twitter page (different from her private one) as an educational "tool" to give people insight into the casting process. This board claims to be nothing more than a platform for discussion on things related to Broadway.

When you make marketing assertions like that, you set the ground rules for how you should act accordingly. Saying negative things in two differing mediums comes along with two very different rules for behavior, plain and simple.

---

Updated On: 8/12/09 at 10:52 PM