Pitchfork: Within 10 minutes, a tumblr representative responded: “Hi, Megan. Those URLs are now free. Please let me know if there’s anything else I can help you with. Thanks for using Tumblr!”
VS
Tumblr: "After you failed to respond for 72 hours, we released the domain."
VS
Tumbledore: "Tumblr stole my subdomain"
ROUND II
Tumblr: "There were not “several posts,” on that account, there were zero."
VS
Pitchfork: "...the last post that had been made was on November 18, 2009, and said, “This filter is obsolete.” [ includes screenshots of posts]
VS
Tumbledore: "I had several posts up and I followed 28 people with the account."
There is only 1 contradiction: the part about notifying the original owner through email. There is really no way to verify this since the screenshot of the email may have been forged.
The part about having 0 posts was explained by Meaghan all the way at the bottom of the page. The RSS feed shows deleted posts.
> The part about having 0 posts was explained by Meaghan all the way at the bottom of the page. The RSS feed shows deleted posts.
The screenshots that Pitchfork Media posted would have to be RSS screenshots because that is the only place that you can access the old posts right now, no? Pitchfork Media had no reason to screenshot the old pitchfork.tumblr.com before this whole drama-fest started.
I think that it's telling that Pitchfork Media also dealt with a 'Megan' (the same person?). To me, it's equally likely that this Meaghan was the person that deleted the account and turned it over to Pitchfork Media, and now she's trying to cover her ass by saying that the person was notified, and that the blog was completely empty. Has she really stated anything that could not be a lie on her part? This whole thing looks like it could just be a he-said-she-said deal.
Well, Pitchfork claimed that the subdomain was handed over by tumblr 10 minutes after their inquiry. That would imply that it would have been impossible for tumblr to have sent a "72-hour notice" mail.
Also, it appears that the person was actively using the account as a filter (following people and reading news), so the "inactive" part seems to be a contradiction as well.
Tumblr lets you change subdomains easily. If Pitchfork chooses to relinquish the subdomain, the original owner could take it back immediately, regardless of how Tumblr Support acts.
Pitchfork's response implies that they will give back the subdomain if the guy asks. That should be the end of this. Except I'm almost certain this guy is going to continue complaining in order to keep attention on himself.
and hey, why not? i was amazed at the attitude difference between his blog post (extremely angry, implying that tumblr SOLD it to pitchfork and did not care of his interests) and the letter he sent to tumblr (polite, to the point). whats more, it doesn't look like he waited to hear back from either party before the letting loose the slander and finger-pointing. did he even email pitchfork for an answer???
hopefully tumblr will release some sort of official position on it like pitchfork did. and 3.5 months is not very long, but the its not like the posts were actually anything important accorindg to that screen shot. maybe tumblr should add a new feature that shows a message on login to let the user know that their domain may be reclaimed.
ROUND I
Pitchfork: Within 10 minutes, a tumblr representative responded: “Hi, Megan. Those URLs are now free. Please let me know if there’s anything else I can help you with. Thanks for using Tumblr!”
VS
Tumblr: "After you failed to respond for 72 hours, we released the domain."
VS
Tumbledore: "Tumblr stole my subdomain"
ROUND II
Tumblr: "There were not “several posts,” on that account, there were zero."
VS
Pitchfork: "...the last post that had been made was on November 18, 2009, and said, “This filter is obsolete.” [ includes screenshots of posts]
VS
Tumbledore: "I had several posts up and I followed 28 people with the account."
Someone is wrong on the internet!!!