The quote that catches my attention is this:
It is disheartening, to see to confidential information being posted on a forum but that is the nature of the Internet.
What I'd like to ask is: why oh why oh why do these people that run epublishing houses like to play the "You are all so bad people for talking behind my back!" guilt card so easily?
A simple and professional answer would have done nicely, without trying to discredit the whistle-blower, no? In this case, Deanna Lee straight up admitted that the whistle-blower was right: there were some hiccups in royalty payments and distribution of ARCs to reviewers throughout the summer. And yet she can't resist trying to pull a passive-aggressive "I'm so nice to answer that person whom I believe is beneath me!" crap on the whistle-blower in her response.
And since when are complaints about late royalties and review hiccups "confidential information". If we go by this logic, it would be dishonorable to blow the lid on Enron as well, because of all that "confidential information", you know. Not that I'm saying that Cobblestone Press is Enron here, in case some of the context-challenged fanatics are out there ready to swamp the comment thread with their drama llamas, I'm just saying the logic behind the whole "confidential information" thing is seriously flawed.