My last blog post (Quechup.com -- online dating gone spammy) hit a nerve with the company's VP Glenn Fine, who fired off a email accusing me of 'cut and paste journalism' and threatening to call in his legal beagles. What blogger could resist this kind of bait? But rather than muddy up the last entry with corrections, I'm posting a new one here, detailing Mr. Fine's concerns and my responses to them. Here's the My last blog post (Quechup.com — online dating gone spammy) hit a nerve with the company’s VP Glenn Fine, who fired off a email accusing me of ‘cut and paste journalism’ and threatening to call in his legal beagles.What blogger could resist this kind of bait? But rather than muddy up the last entry with corrections, I’m posting a new one here, detailing Mr. Fine’s concerns and my responses to them. Here’s the first one:1. we have never used the words “share address book” it has always been check an address book for who is on Quechup.[My response: True. Quechup.com does not use those words. But the difference between ‘sharing addresses’ with a site and allowing it to invite everyone inside your address book is pretty thin, IMHO.] 2. “But instead of presenting you with a list of friends, Quechup sends an invite from you to everyone in your book” – this is not correct and has never been correct. Quechup has always presented a list of friends who are on Quechup.[ My response: True again. Quechup does present a list of friends; it also sends invites to everyone else who’s not on the service. Though to be fair, when I signed up for the service it did not send invites to any of the addresses I shared with it. Whether that was intentional or just a glitch only Mr. Fine can say.]3. “which of your 10,000 close personal friends is also trolling for dates on Quechup” (aside from the fact that it should be “friends ARE also” not “is”) you completely misrepresent Quechup as a singles/dating site, Quechup has friends networks, blogs, online games, video posts – all things commonly found on social networking sites and rarely, if ever in my experience, found on a singles/dating site.[My response: I cop to the grammatical error. (Bad Cringe, no donut.) But if Quechup isn’t primarily about hooking up with dates, I’m Britney Spears. (Oops, I did it again.)]4. “Since the outcry, Quechup has modified its ‘viral’ techniques somewhat. The ‘Who do you know on Quechup?’ page now warns you that “by inviting contacts you confirm you have consent from them to send an invitation,” – This is completely inaccurate. Quechup’s page has, since 2005 when the feature was introduced, stated the section you have quoted, furthermore it has also ALWAYS stated that invites would be sent…[My response: I have to go with Fine on this one. I don’t know what the site looked like in 2005. And yes, it does tell users what it’s about to do, but it’s not entirely obvious. If it were obvious, fewer people would be upset about this.] Fine also says “We have recently changed how our system works and the wording” but doesn’t say how. Maybe that will become more clear when Quechup releases its official statement.As always, I regret any errors (especially the grammatical ones). Apologies to Cringesters for devoting yet more space to this less-than-brand-name company; I’ll return to bashing Apple and Microsoft later this week. Software DevelopmentSmall and Medium Business