Some readers of this short subject resource, may believe that authors who are attacked, should not feel that it is wrong for those who are doing so or that reviewers who are attacked, should not feel that it is a wrong action by those perpetrators either. In reality, both parties should feel that the other involved party has a right to express her/his opinions about a book or a review but that it should be done "within reasonable decency." By this term, I simply refer to published opinions directed at other living people, not containing attacks, defamation or purposeful twisting of what a book - or of what a review expresses generally (purposeful misrepresentation), via one's own public response to them. I've made similar statements before but I will say again that "freedom of speech" has had its definition expanded upon by people who would like to see an anything goes society (at least they think they would). However, there are laws and online website guidelines that are supposed to prevent this from happening. They are not placed there to take away a free society but so that threats of murder, public rants or threats expressed otherwise, about a persons race, religion, sex or orientation, are all disallowed. By setting limitations on a freedom, you prevent chaos from evolving from it and you actually protect many other rights at the same time. For example, if one threatens someone else with bodily harm, publicly, this is an illegal expression that is not free to be practiced and can lead to the arrest of the guilty party. When you hear some proponents of freedom of speech and expression, defending that right (a very proper thing to do, when done in-balance), you would think that they believe these freedoms were granted to free societies, so that anything can be said or expressed. However, try expressing your perceived freedom to walk naked in a public place for example, and you are guaranteed to be thrown in jail or at least fined for either misdemeanor or felony "indecent exposure." There have been blogs created addressing both sides of the "authors-reviewers wars" issue, being that of authors feeling that some reviews are going overboard by including attack type language within them. Some authors on the other hand, are not willing to receive critical reviews of any kind, even those that are written in a straightforward, honest fashion but that include some strongly-dissatisfied language within them (something I have been falsely accused of complaining about). Anyone... and I do mean "anyone," who does not see that there literally are two extremes that exist within the author and reviewer arena, either are in purposeful denial or they simply aren't paying attention. There are in fact authors who can't take even honestly-offered criticism and who actually attack reviewers for giving them an unfavorable review .... (Much more is covered within the three book Headings listed below). TABLE OF HEADINGS: HEADING ONE: Is the Authors-Reviewers War Real or Imagined? HEADING TWO: Integrity Eventually Always Wins Out... Always HEADING THREE: My Previously-Written Works that Address This Problem from Other Angles (Total approximate word count: 7,100 Words)