For those LAObserved readers unfamiliar with this BBS, suffice it to say that Sterling was to showbiz message boards what Luke Ford is to L.A. blogs. Love him or hate him, he was always spirited, opinionated, unapologetic and passionate.

Part of the appeal also was his regular supporting cast of posters (aka 'Denizens'): casting director Billy DaMota, actor Jim Chevalier, manager Phil Brock, and so on. For the moment, we can only ponder the Big Brother implications of an actor who claims to have been scolded for straying from the scripted page.

Once again our freedom of speech has been censored!

In the near month since Wolfesden.net has been shut down, I have read several postings on other message boards, as well as an article about it in Backstage West, and it seems to me that there is one very important point that isn't being addressed.

I have no reason to doubt Sterling Wolfe's claim that retaliation from casting directors and other industry professionals for what he, and other people, had posted on his board had adversely affected his career. After all, the phrase, "You'll never work in this town again," originated in Hollywood, and I am truly sorry to see this happen to anyone. Wolfesden was a place where very contentious issues - SAG politics, casting director workshops, alerts of different scam agencies, ect - were discussed in a very spirited, and often acrimonious manner. And to me, herein lies the issue. There was a lot of name calling, finger pointing, and other irresponsible behavior by a few regular posters on that board. For example, actors who continue to do CD workshops were often called "turnips," (as if they had just fallen off the turnip truck and didn't know any better) or referred as being "desperate to be discovered," which many, including myself, and perhaps many industry professionals too, took humbrage at. Is it wrong that Sterling was considered guilty of being associated with people who wrote this, and was being punished for what other people were saying? Of course it is, but it was his board, and he is ultimately responsible for what is written there. If you own a restaurant, and a server spills water on the floor, and a customer slips on the wet floor and seriously hurts themselves, do they sue the server who spilled the water? No, they sue the restaurant owner who allowed that wet spot to get there. Life isn't fair sometimes.

As for Sterling himself, however, I think his own behavior trumps that of others in leading to the retaliation he spoke of. Sterling has a way with words, and expresses himself in a very entertaining way, and he would go for the jugular in exposing people who would "shill" for workshops or scam agencies, or whatever. This I applaud because these individuals deserve it. However, he used the same reckless abandon in insulting and humiliating people whose only crime was asking the wrong question at the wrong time. I would log on to Wolfesden at least once a day because it was a source of information, and the train wrecks (many initiated by Sterling himself) were entertaining. But since, as Sterling often bragged, many top industry folk lurked and even posted there, how do you think they reacted to this kind of behavior? I don't claim to know a lot of heavy hitters in the industry. I'm just a regular working stiff trying to advance his acting career. But everything I've read about the industry, and been told, and experienced myself tells me that this is a business of relationships. First impressions go a long way in this town. A long, LONG way. People have long, LONG memories, especially when it comes to behavior of the kind Sterling regularly and proudly displayed on his board. Could it be that the reason he is being retaliated against isn't as much the fact that he spoke the truth openly about things going on here, and allowed others to do so, as much as the fact that many would understandably consider him to be difficult to work with and be around? I'm sure he's a fine actor, but having a good relationship with people, getting along well with others, showing up on time, knowing your lines, and not creating any drama goes a long way towards making an actor employable. As many will tell you, it often goes further than actual talent itself.

I'm sorry to see the Den go, and I'm sorry that Sterling's career has suffered setbacks, but I don't feel sorry for him. He has only himself to blame for this. Being outspoken and passionate is one thing. Being pompous, arrogant, and obnoxious is another, and you don't necessarily need one to have the other.

To James Redwine Scott........KUDOS AND BLESSINGS TO YOU!!!!!! for getting to the heart of the matter and dissecting what was inherently wrong with the Wolfesden forum. I was crucified personally on the forum for speaking my mind about the arrogance and self-pitying attitude displayed by the "denizens", who resented actors who CHOSE to attend workshops to possibly further their career and hone their craft. Even though the Labor commission had established currently adhered-to guidelines, the Wolfesden refused to say "die". Rather than being greeted by a forum who wished to intelligently debate acting workshops, I was immediately dismissed as a desperate, amoeba-brained, fungus wanna-be who had no clue how the business of acting was run (although I have worked extensively in TV & "legitimate" film more than most denizen members). Yes, I agree, being outspoken and passionate is what we ALL need to be as actors, but I also agree with you that being pompous, arrogant, libelous and obnoxious is unacceptable.........thus, the demise of The Wolfesden.
Again, thanks James for your candor and for stepping up to the plate.