Sheepdog staring at the horizon

At this point, there will never be anything like a final comment on Sad Puppies 3. I myself have been talking less and less about it, as my block of overseas time nears. Once I am in the Middle East, I may not address the Sad Puppies issue again, until the Hugo voting is closed, and the actual results have been made known in August. With the voter packets now being reviewed, people are reading, and making up their minds. Which is ultimately the only thing that matters for this season anyway. But this hasn’t stopped the rest of the internet from chattering about the Hugos — whether it’s pro-Puppy chatter, anti-Puppy chatter, or that special kind of vindictive ad hominem commentary I like to call Puppy-kicker chatter.

Some of the anti-Puppy discussion has been reasoned, and makes its points without resorting to ad hominem language.

Most of the Puppy-kicker discussion focuses on how Larry Correia, Brad R. Torgersen, John C. Wright, et al., are horrible writers, horrible human beings, and deserve to die in a fire for their endless crimes against all that is good and decent in the universe.

A few Puppy-kickers remain convinced that Sad Puppies 3 was nothing but racist, sexist, homophobic cis-straight old white men fighting the future. Despite all actual evidence to the contrary. Which (to my mind) simply speaks to the fact that many armchair activists are far too invested in narratives to actually take the time to discover that Sad Puppies 3 had lots of women, it also had minorities, and didn’t give a hoot what the authors looked like, what was between their legs, or who the authors preferred going to bed with.

But then, armchair activists are forever inventing bogeymen to battle. They are forever winning, the future is forever theirs, but the present is forever besieged with (insert bad people here) so we have to FIGHT and PROTEST and NEVER GIVE UP, because having actual measurable objectives and quantifiable goals — the vast bulk of which have been reached or surpassed already — might mean you have to find a new line of work. And for armchair activists, that’s unthinkable.

So, today, Sad Puppies are the ultimate evil. Tomorrow, Joss Whedon is the ultimate evil. Or George R. R. Martin is the ultimate evil. Or Martin’s producers, at least, for the HBO rendition of Game of Thrones. I forget, who are the armchair activists attacking this week? There should be some kind of memo circulated, or something:

AT DAWN, WE TWITTER-BOMB J.J. ABRAMS FOR THE RACIST, SEXIST, CISNORMATIVE HELL-HOLE THAT WILL BE STAR WARS VII.

It might be funny, except for the fact that the whole reason I am going overseas in the first place, is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Most folks know them as ISIS, though the Arabic and Islamic nations partnering with NATO and other countries to fight ISIS, call those guys DAESH, which is derogatory towards ISIS/ISIL. DAESH are the charming folks who throw gay men to their deaths, from rooftops. And chop the heads off of innocent women and children.

That stuff is happening right now, in the real world.

But apparently, going after a writer or a director — for movies and TV shows — is the best way armchair activists can spend their time?

No, I don’t get it either. I don’t think I ever will.

For God’s sake, if you’re going to have a cause, shut your flapping (digital) mouths and put your bodies where your talk is. Get involved. Do something measurable. Concrete. Pursuing a quantifiable objective. Maybe even stick your necks out, and take a real personal risk? And I don’t mean tweeting fake threats to yourself, to gin up publicity and sympathy. I mean actually putting your body on the line for what you claim to think and feel. That’s why I joined the military in the first place, after 9/11/2001. I wasn’t satisfied being just some guy who gets pissed off on the internet. I took Roosevelt’s adage — about the man in the arena — seriously.

As my friend and author (and Sad Puppy critic) Eric Flint recently noted, he’s put his body on the line for what he believes. Other people spew a lot of hot air about being “warriors” for social justice. Eric’s a man who can actually claim that title, and be taken seriously; by allies and opponents alike.

So you will pardon me if I can’t spare much serious thought for those who think being some guy who gets pissed off on the internet, is somehow going to make a difference — a real, lasting, actual difference.

Which takes me back to a point Larry Correia and I have both made, about the Hugo awards: loads of people loved to complain about how the Hugos suck, and almost nobody was doing anything to make an impact. I say “almost” because there were interested parties working hard to effect the kind of change they wanted — Seannan McGuire didn’t get five Hugo nominations in a single year on accident — they just didn’t conduct their operations in broad daylight, nor on a scale to compare with Sad Puppies.

Which takes me back to a comment Michael Z. Williamson once made: we’re bad because we’re competent?

Well, whatever people have against Sad Puppies 3 — legit, or imaginary — it’s clear that the various narratives will continue without my input. I can only restate the obvious, in the hope that it sticks with people who have not decided to be dead-set against us. We (Sad Puppies Inc.) threatened nothing, demanded nothing, and closed no doors in any faces. We threw the tent flaps wide and beckoned to anyone and everyone: come on in, join the fun!

The Puppy-kickers have threatened and demanded a great deal. They most certainly do not want the “wrong” fans being allowed to participate in “their” (the Puppy-kickers’) award.

Sad Puppies 3 was a thoroughly transparent operation. We hid nothing. Concealed no ulterior motives. We said what we wanted to do, we invited people to help, and with that help, we did it. We transformed the Hugo landscape — at least for one season — and we got the spec fiction world talking about the Hugos like never before. In both good, and bad ways. How this all shakes out in coming years, remains to be seen. There are individuals — again, Puppy-kickers — who will mobilize to install new Worldcon rules that prevent the “wrong” kinds of people, from voting on the award. Either by eliminating the nomination and voting rights of supporting members, or by driving up the cost of attending membership, or both. Or perhaps they will simply alter the assembly and selection process of the final ballot proper? No more crazy democracy. A juried system. Who knows?

I do know that if Worldcon actually boasted even a third of the attendance of an average Comic Con — say, 25,000 people — almost no slate or push or bloc of any sort, could have the same effect such efforts have had in the past. Which is, again, a goal of Sad Puppies: to bring in more voices, more votes, more fans. We never turned our cold, wet noses up at anybody. We happily wagged our tails for any living soul who cared to participate. Because we (Puppies Inc.) believe participation was the overriding, validating factor in the extant process.

Others will doubtless disagree — and some of them are long-time beneficiaries of “small” participation which kept the voting pool puny, thereby making it easier for the quiet blocs to exert influence.

To wit: “I don’t know why people think the Hugos are broken, I get nominated and I win all the time!”

You could probably write a doctoral thesis about the privilege contained in that sentiment, eh?

So, I stare to the horizon. Aware of the fact that there won’t be any last words. Just maundering. My first month of active duty is ended. I’ve got a lot of work still ahead of me — both military work, and writing more books for Baen; which have been contracted. I won’t have the luxury of being able to keep my finger on the pulse of this whole ongoing argument. Nor will I try. Others — pro, con, neutral — will say most of what needs to be said, and they will say it far better than I could.

For this year, I hope every category sees a human being called to the podium, to receive a Hugo award. Because I still think Science Fiction is the best, most imaginative game in town. It’s a remarkable and marvelous field. That’s why it’s been worth getting involved — and not just talking.

Because — love us or hate us — the Sad Puppies give a damn.

Advertisements

940 thoughts on “Sheepdog staring at the horizon

  1. 1) Prayers for your safety (I assume you will accept them even from a cranky old agnostic…)

    2) Congrats on your Anlab.

    3) SP3 will, eventually, become murky history – presuming it succeeds. If not, it will be enshrined forever in the victimhood narrative. Which narrative will reach fewer and fewer people, so it’s a wash in the long run…

  2. Cue demands for proof of an open, transperent process and claims that SP3 was a BT led self licking ice cream cone in 3, 2 1….

    Meanwhile, stay safe, best wishes to the T clan during your deployment and thank you for the hard work on SP3.

  3. Reblogged this on The Arts Mechanical and commented:
    I think that the puppy kickers have a LOT to answer for. I’ve seen this kind of crap, but really are few little plastic rocketships worth destroying people over? Apparently the puppy kickers think so. Just pathetic.

  4. Brad, you and Larry have my undying thanks for bringing true democracy to the Hugos, and my utmost for what you yourself are about embark on. As I watched Game of Thrones tonight, the battle at Hardhome, the parallels were just too, too apparent: the Bad Guys win, all of us are dead, Puppies and CHORFs alike.

  5. This is a stacked deck argument you will never be allowed to win. No quotes are floated about as actual quotes, actual quotes are dismissed just… because. Other quotes are taken at face value… because. That’s because society’s rules about such things are simply ignored. At the Hugos you had rules and now those rules will be ignored in a similar manner… just because. They will move the goalposts. You will run after them.

    Look at all the statistics about women not having won Hugo Awards together with claims of tacit discrimination over decades but with no real proof in actual quotes or mission statement that speak to anyone saying it was a male-only space. These are the same people who laugh at others for saying there is a “cabal.”

    For some reason no one runs a similar analysis of WisCon’s Tiptree Awards. They are allowed to openly discriminate so their awards will forever ideologically skew female AND those same people run after the Hugos. But which one gets accused of sexual discrimination? Sure, men are technically eligible for the Tiptrees… technically. Guess which one has openly racially segregated spaces and dinners? Guess who whines about which?

    If you didn’t know either award and had to guess using gender feminist rhetoric, you would be certain it was WorldCon all these years which had male-only “safer-spaces” and dinners. So affirmative action and “diversity” is initiated where it is not appropriate and laughed at where it is appropriate. So in a bizarre display of logic, the Hugos moves ever closer to the gender feminist ideology and mission statement of the Tiptree Awards.

    If you push back? That’s right… MRA. Add in “right wing,” “reactionary,” Rush Limbaugh,” “misogynist” and “racist” for good measure. In more Orwellian doublethink, the Hugos move in that “diversity” direction because of an accusation it has been secretly operating like the Tiptree Awards. My mind is whirling trying to catch up to these “rules.”

    Meanwhile a mountain of quotes that openly admit to collusion to initiate affirmative action at the Hugos are simply ignored. This is also known as lying.

    You will never win an argument with minds that can embrace that kind of doublethink. WisCon has an entire convention set up for women even while their members not only LOL at the idea of a mirror image of themselves – namely Men’s Rights Activists – but say anyone who is against them is automatically an MRA whether they are or not. In other words WisCon is technically against themselves… technically. It depends. It always depends. And what it depends on is your race and sex, not right and wrong.

    You will never win an argument with such people. Their rules move in a way where you are forever running after them to catch up. This is also known as lying. There are no two ways about what it is these people do. And “these people” are not 100 million Americans or half of all people on Earth. They are a couple hundred people with actual names and are an ironically racially and sexually “diverse” bunch… of ideological gender feminist bigots.

    “Misogyny” – everywhere. “Misandry” – LOL. In a world of humans, it’s both or neither. This is also known as lying.

    This was recently retweeted by one of our gender feminists who is on a Hugo-nominated team. She Tweets anti-male rhetoric every day, all day. It is completely typical of gender feminist rhetoric:

    “Alex Blank Millard ‏@Hippoinatutu May 10

    Real:
    Systematic Racism
    Police Brutality
    Marginalized Voices
    Patriarchy

    Not Real:
    Reverse Racism
    White Genocide
    Gay Agenda
    Misandry”

    Who will our Hugo-nominated misandrist vote for? Literature? Here’s my LOL. You’ll have a slate, as if you needed such a thing in an echo chamber.

  6. Puppy-kickers… appropriate, and just as much reasoning involved in most of their diatribes as someone who tries to explain why they are kicking a puppy.

    The thing is, they always seem to think they are the ‘future’… always the future.. because when their arbitrarily designated future period arrives and they aren’t ‘it’ then it is just… they are ‘the future’ again. So, the goalposts constantly move…

  7. Fight against ISIS? Don’t you know how Islamaphobic that is!?
    Those not in the know may think I’m being hyperbolic (I think that’s what that word means…), but I believe the UK (my lovely home country)’s NUS were the ones who refused to publicly denounce ISIS on those very grounds. Maybe they’re still upset with gay men for ‘appropriating African-American female culture’, and don’t mind seeing one or two getting thrown off a building?
    Still, let me urge you to instead stay at home, where you can fight for justice worldwide just by sending a strongly worded tweet to Joss Whedon, rather than putting all that… shudder… ‘effort’ in to going to another country? Or just #GiveYourMoneyToWomen?
    (Seriously though, stay safe. 🙂 )
    #BanJJAbrams!

  8. Brad, I sympathize with *you*. My kid is deploying again and I can only worry. Because he has to go and do his part against real evil. As you will be doing. And I truly wish and pray that one day it won’t be necessary.

    And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk. Because I have read too many of their warlike screeds and their rantings vs people to not find them truly real-world evil. Not like ISIS, but in the mindset or rhetoric that allows them to think that a SJW can be nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors. I don’t say the anti-Puppy side has clean hands but mostly they have not shown the same low of discourse in the threads I have read (which is following File 770 ‘s roundups in particular) — obviously I don’t see everything but the open posts are mostly very different in tone.

    So I am going to pony up my forty dollars and vote my conscience — and I have bought on my own dime AND READ — the nominated books and stories. I did not go in with any prejudice towards any writers and I have judged as fairly as I can. That is all a visually impaired and tottery old grandmother can do.

    But, again, I wish you all the best and will continue to read and enjoy the books you write.

  9. “And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk. Because I have read too many of their warlike screeds and their rantings vs people to not find them truly real-world evil. Not like ISIS, but in the mindset or rhetoric that allows them to think that a SJW can be nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors. I don’t say the anti-Puppy side has clean hands but mostly they have not shown the same low of discourse in the threads I have read (which is following File 770 ‘s roundups in particular) — obviously I don’t see everything but the open posts are mostly very different in tone.”

    *eyeroll*

  10. BTW, to put my money where my mouth is, books I have bought and read this month include Mike Z. Williamson ‘ s newest, your short story collection, several of Eric Flint ‘ s 1632 series, a Baen reissue of Andre Norton ‘s Beast Masters Planet, The 3 Body Problem, and Uprooted by Naomi Novik. I read what I like. I like a lot of books. I own a lot of books. I gave never stopped reading sf and fantasy since the very first book I held in my two-year-old fists and devoured. I didn’t stop when my Dad made me burn my books because I was reading Kurt Vonnegut. I didn’t stop when I had no money and a new baby and I had to save for weeks to afford a paperback. I haven’t stopped when every book seems to be a retread of old tropes and or urban fantasy. I look for books that tell me new stories and take me to new worlds. If those new worlds happen to be written by women, cool. If thy are written by men, cool. If they have social structures that are odd, well, I am not living there, I am only visiting. I don’t understand the people who have said they couldn’t stand sf after ” things changed”. You love a grnre, you support it by reading. End of story.

  11. Hi Brad! First of all, all the best in your endeavours, and make good choices (sorry, just re-watched Pitch Perfect, so am stuck in random quotation mode)!

    “Sad Puppies 3 was a thoroughly transparent operation. We hid nothing.”

    I think calling open and democratic previously, and I’m not quite seeing it. I’m trying to figure out just exactly how the slate was determined. Works that were never even nominated or recommended by *anyone* in the open thread (i.e., Juliette Wade’s, and the KJA novel) made it onto SP3. Works with the highest number of recommendations (Domo, by Joshua M Young, which had as many recommendations as Interstellar) didn’t make it onto the slate. I’m basing this on the original recommendation thread: https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    And this summary:
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KsUUULAR4McYiosUfFT1lr9IRnJgYabSuX6qgSEs19s/edit?usp=sharing )

    So I guess what I’m trying to figure out is how exactly was the selection made?

  12. We have our first winner @ snowcrash : June 1, 2015 at 9:00 am! You get to choose between the fresh cheese roll and the stack of unused FDX boxes!

  13. Either by eliminating the nomination and voting rights of supporting members, or by driving up the cost of attending membership, or both. Or perhaps they will simply alter the assembly and selection process of the final ballot proper? No more crazy democracy. A juried system

    Brad – the process of making changes to the Hugos is really transparent. You can go to this webpage and see every proposal up for consideration. As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights. None. The proposals on the floor are merely designed to prevent a slate from locking up the entire ballot. These proposals have to survive two (2) business meetings – business meetings attended by real people like me who sometimes are only supporting members paying their own freight.

    I mean actually putting your body on the line for what you claim to think and feel. That’s why I joined the military in the first place, after 9/11/2001. And I thank you. However, you’re by no means the only person who joined the military. I did my bit, as did others who are criticizing you.

    For this year, I hope every category sees a human being called to the podium, to receive a Hugo award. Then for heaven’s sake, don’t nominate crap like “Wisdom from my Internet.” I’m sorry, I *like* Mike Z., and I’ve bought his books. But that’s neither related nor funny.

  14. “I did my bit”
    ‘Chasin Haitians’ in between bouts of Olympic grade soft serve ice cream ingestion while seated in air conditioned, mess steward served comfort in a Navy wardroom is hardly the same as spending six months to a year in Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Get fucked Gerrib.

  15. “As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights.”

    But yours would just erode them by reducing the choices a nominating voter can make. Sorry, your precious idea is punitive and just as prone to being games. I wish it, and any other proposal designed to punish Worldcon voters, the success of the Titanic. (The ship, not the movie.)

    “Then for heaven’s sake, don’t nominate crap like “Wisdom from my Internet.” I’m sorry, I *like* Mike Z., and I’ve bought his books. But that’s neither related nor funny.”

    “Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded” says hello on both accounts.

  16. There’s not much you can do with people who are more than willing to turn an entire genre upside-down as an affirmative action Kickstarter to correct the ancient expulsion of women, gays and people of color from the Land of Golden Age SF. The reality looks something more like what drives Field and Stream and Cosmopolitan but let them have their delusion they’re fighting the Civil War all over again and that cis-misogynist everything-phobes have it in for them. We’ve tried reasoning with them time and again and they are immune to facts and logic. Virtually everything SJWs say on this issue are easily proven lies. Yet SJWs hold onto this like it’s their Precioussss.

    My idea going back to the last SP was to just start your own award, maybe rotating it between sites and eventually hooking it in with a convention, one not yet infested with the feminist virus. Or you could rotate that as well to stay ahead of that virus.

    Although I think the Hugos deserves every bit of mocking it gets, it’s frankly not even worth pranking. If one wanted to delegitimize them you could start a petition on a website where anyone who thinks they may ever be eligible for a Hugo signs it stating they will never accept a Hugo nomination until WorldCon deals openly and forthrightly with their hate speech problem. One thing’s for certain: they don’t see it – not at all. Fine – forget about ’em.

    Without the intervention of SP you would’ve seen the same white privilege conference at the Hugos already gearing up at the disgrace known as Nebula Weekend. Why anyone would let morons from other countries come to the U.S. or a genre by their own definition they didn’t create and call everyone a bunch of culturally appropriating Anglophone racists and then get rewarded with Nebula nominations is a mystery for the ages. Plus they’ve burned down all their own museums in the process because… shame. The shame of Field and Stream and Cosmopolitan. It takes a lot of naivete, meds and hate to fuel that Reichstag fire.

    It’s never too late to start your own award and just ignore these daffy Freedom Riders all pushing to the back of the bus for the privilege of most oppressed. That’s what the Nebulas and Hugos have partially turned into: The Most Intersecting Vectors of Oppression Award defined by John Scalzi and his gender feminist mentors themselves – the gay non-white female. If the Nebula Award was changed to the Audre Lorde or Octavia Butler Award, it would be far closer to the truth, just as the Tiptree Award is for WisCon.

    So start a Burroughs Award, one that’s about the actual genre and its art.

  17. FWIW, I told my father (retired USAF Officer) ((he who introduced his children to RAH and SF)) about the kerfuffle; gave him a cliff notes version of both sides. When I said the opposition claimed the list was wrong, his response was “bullshit”. There’s nothing wrong with sharing a recommendation list.

    When I said you were “over seas, location undisclosed” he said “Well, I hope he comes back safe.”

    So there ya go, someone who was not, is not, involved that says the Puppy-kickers are full of BS.

  18. “And that is why I am going to stand against the Rabid Puppies and the Ilk.”
    “So I am going to pony up my forty dollars and vote my conscience — and I have bought on my own dime AND READ — the nominated books and stories. I did not go in with any prejudice…”

    These statements are contradictory. Either you are coming in with any prejudice OR you are taking a stand against RP – which btw, have nothing to do with SP.

    Typical double speak.

  19. It’s not necessarily fair to ::eye roll:: the grandma who opines that decent people stand up and speak out against those who call a group of people “nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors.” because for all we know, she’s done her part in now and in previous years to stand up and denounce communists, radical Islam, as well as, like James May, taking time to speak out against those whose rhetoric shows nothing but contempt and ridicule for consevatives, Christians, white people.

    It’s a strict standard she hews to, but an honorable one. If there were more people like her requires hate wouldn’t have been applauded and nominated for awards.

  20. Snowcrash: Brad discovered the slate of recommended titles carved on the gravestones of a ghoul-haunted (his name is Mort) cemetery; buied in the trackless rainforests of the Cascade Mountains, and deep within the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlichlitzl. We have photographic cartoon evidence!

    Brad: Your willingness to go out on a limb for what’s right, to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness, inspired my husband and I to create Tempest in a Teardrop. We hope, in a small way to provide aid and comfort to folks like you. I hope we can live up to your example. Thank you for all your service. Godspeed.

  21. Stay safe Brad and hugs and prayers for the family.
    I’m working through the Hugo materials and plan to do so annually as long as I can be a voting member of whatever.
    By the end of the month I’ll get back to my reading queue (Kratman, Correia, Gannon, Flint, Drake, Hoyt, Gemmell, Stirling, L. Anderson, K. Anderson, Dietz, Weber, Conroy, Green, Lawhead, Gabaldon, Shaara, Iggulden, Cameron, Meluch, McMurtry, Bujold, Torgersen, Freer, Day, Friesner, Kennedy, etc. and a few non-fictions for balance).
    I’m retired and I love to read good stories.

  22. “Brad discovered the slate of recommended titles carved on the gravestones of a ghoul-haunted (his name is Mort) cemetery; buied in the trackless rainforests of the Cascade Mountains, and deep within the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlichlitzl. We have photographic cartoon evidence!”

    Careful, some of the folks on the other side might take that seriously. 🙂

  23. Wyldkat— No doublespeak. I read the nominated items after buying them. Before I made up my mind. I never said I would no award anyone whose writing I liked. Because I *have* said that I would have voted for The Chaplain’s War as best novel if it had been on the ballot. And I do give Brad a lot more credit for being sincere than a lot of anti-Puppies do. So I did approach the works with an open mind. Or at least a willingness to be blown away by stories that harked back to the Golden Age. Some of the nominated stories were cool enough, but by no means all. IMHO.

    However, the “rhetoric” and meanspiritedness of some of the commenters here and on VD’s blog have inspired nothing more nor less than a wish that they should be forced to live in the world they see. Which is not the world I would like to live in. Maybe I am too Pollyanna-ish, but the world I see has respect and courtesy and a willingness to grok the views of others. IDIK, in the Vulcan. 🙂

  24. Bill S.— another Meluch fan! I love her books. I think I own every one she has ever written. Which is your favorite? The Queen’s Squadron is my most recent reread so it’s my current favorite.

  25. Overgrownhobbit– another hobbit? Cool! And, yes, I have spoken out against things I consider wrong and mean-spirited in the past. I certainly have no love for radical Islam although the Islamic women I have met have been awesome (of course, they were now American citizens and wanted to remain so). My son has fought against the Taliban and I support him and our military. I spoke against Requires Hate, too. So… I may not be physically able to do much, but I do try to stand for my ideals.

  26. Yes, love R M Meluch. Wish her older stuff would get reprinted.

  27. RM Meluch has a new one coming out in August, Twice and Future Caesar. My favorite tour stop was Strength and Honor.

  28. Good luck and stay safe. And thanks for your work in exposing more places where self-appointed “thought leaders” lurk.

    Fun fact: Thanks to SP3, today I joined Worldcon so I could vote. Researching the Best Novel authors led me to discover some very interesting connections in their Twitter followers. Especially how many of the people Ann Leckie follows use the Anti-GG blocker.

    Anyhow, thanks for SP, and thanks for risking yourself in a real way to help keep the world safe and free!

  29. Which one of these phrases is from Audre Lorde’s 1979 keynote speech “When Will the Ignorance End?” at the National Third World Gay and Lesbian Conference, and which one from the Book Smugglers link above?

    A.) “transphobia or ableism or classism”
    B.) “beyond racism, beyond ageism, beyond classism, and beyond homophobia”

    It’s all about the rocket ships.

  30. Vile Faceless Minion here, a follower of the Evil Overlord of the Evil League of Evil, Vox Day. Twilaprice? You want to see the kind of world you wouldn’t want to live in? Take a look at the world social justice warriors are trying to impose on all of us. Ask yourself why you would prefer to live in a world with thought-crime controls instead of freedom of conscience. Your comment made me snort. But then we Vile Faceless Minions snort a lot….

  31. Here’s a Tweet from Leckie a day after the Eric Flint post and aimed at no one in particular:

    “Ann Leckie ‏@ann_leckie May 19 Oh, honey, if you ever met an actual radical feminist I suspect you might keel over from shock.”

    If this sheltered darling grinning housewife ever Image Googled “birdshot Egypt” she’d have a fainting spell taking that aimed at photographer’s eyes and then going back for more the next day… and the next… and the next.

    Leckie’s Tweet is a perfect example of the brave diving bell SJWs live in. I’m trying to imagine Leckie standing alone in a circle of 12 of Mubarak’s secret police and telling them to fuck off and somehow I can’t dredge that up. That’s feminist hashtag territory there. The bravura fades outside the internet and diving bells.

    Shocked at a radical feminist? Sure, honey. Keep dreaming and womansplaining. Watch how fast your career fades the instant you stop pandering to gender abolition SF novels. That gimmick is a one-trick pony and you can’t get shot out of a cannon at SF conventions to help sell drudgery.

    I know what I’ve done. What have you done? Put out a frying pan fire? Try that when someone’s targeting your eyes with birdshot. Then we’ll see who keels over.

  32. Doesn’t ‘The Three-Body Problem’ read like a Solzhenitsyn novel (I think I read all of them) in a scifi context?

  33. “RM Meluch has a new one coming out in August, Twice and Future Caesar.”

    FINALLY!

  34. @Twilaprice: Ma’am, here’s the thing. If there were an actual war, chances are a bunch of Vox Day’s boys and girls would end up getting shot by Torgerson’s or Correia’s crew for either shooting prisoners or for executing people for demonstrating insufficient offensive spirit. Vox would end up with a jail sentence.
    Based on the available evidence, the shooting of prisoners and purges of the ideologically impure would be either rewarded or explained away by the anti-Puppies.

  35. “If there were an actual war, chances are a bunch of Vox Day’s boys and girls would end up getting shot by Torgerson’s or Correia’s crew for either shooting prisoners or for executing people for demonstrating insufficient offensive spirit. Vox would end up with a jail sentence.”

    LOL, come on, man! Vox’s actual fans are far more sane than they get credit for. 😀

  36. “It’s not necessarily fair to ::eye roll:: the grandma who opines that decent people stand up and speak out against those who call a group of people “nothing but a contemptuous liar and object of ridicule, which, as history shows, can lead to real-world horrors.” ”

    My eyeroll was specifically aimed at the part of her message that I quoted. She is, of course, completely entitled to her opinion, even if I think she’s completely wrong. Yes, it’s very rough-and-tumble over at Vox Popoli, and you need a thick skin, but if you go in there with respect, the vast majority of the regulars will give respect right back. If you go in there with your Troll Pants on, God help you.

    “Brad: Your willingness to go out on a limb for what’s right, to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness, inspired my husband and I to create Tempest in a Teardrop. We hope, in a small way to provide aid and comfort to folks like you. I hope we can live up to your example. Thank you for all your service. Godspeed.”

    Totally agree, stay safe and come back, Brad! @overgrownhobbit, while we’re on the subject, I just wanted to say that I love your webcomic and appreciate the work you’ve put into it. It’s very “Inside Baseball”, but I love that about it. Trying to figure out the references is great fun! Thanks for doing it!

  37. “LOL, come on, man! Vox’s actual fans are far more sane than they get credit for.”

    The reaction to Kloos and Bellet withdrawing themselves says that there’s a fairly good chunk of crazy, and I’ve been through the comments section a time or two, which reinforces the impression. Some things said there make me twitchy, and if you click through the link you’d see that I tilt…rightward.
    But it’s true, y’all’re nowhere
    near as bad as the anti-Puppies would make you out to be (Let’s face it, though, every last commenter on there could be the hypothetical offspring of Vlad Dracula and Ivan the Terrible’s children and not be that bad) and in fairness I should have said that y’all would likely end up doing some of the shooting yourselves.
    However, the larger point, which I think we agree on, is that the Puppies tend to discourage such behavior. The anti-Puppies go so far as to encourage it, which indicates that twilaprice, much like Eric Flint, really needs to take a closer look at who’s doing the killing. They really need to remember Kerensky.

  38. Pingback: Jonathan Stray and Mr. Norwich Terrier 6/1 | File 770

  39. Brad,

    I suspect that we don’t really need 25,000 people, and it would be extremely hard for Worldcons to grow (physically) to anywhere near that size. Likewise there is no need to push the award in the direction of becoming an internet-based referendum voted on by fans who would never attend the convention. All it would take is for folks who are currently sometime-attendees – or even those hoping to attend an occasional Worldcon in any year they can do so without taking out a second mortgage, falling asleep at the wheel or crossing the International Date Line – to wake up to how important this fan award is to them and start to read and nominate the stuff they think is great. That goes double for any stray pups who did not take time to do that job properly and lazily filled their ballot with the things some author summarily listed for them on a blog. (It goes triple for any minions who did so intentionally, and I suspect that if next year everyone simply went ahead and participated in the awards actively and conscientiously, minions would have succeeded in making their point, but it might be better to listen to what they say they want than try to guess.) Whatever else one says about SP3, you have already done more than a thousand “rules changes” could to motivate people to bring that future closer to reality. Thank you.

  40. But its okay for Tor to buy forty or so memberships for their employees and for them to be told how to vote, right?

  41. Listen to the voices of stupid and what you’re dealing with:

    “Noah Body on June 1, 2015 at 9:38 pm said:
    Always love getting caught up in the latest episode of Torgersen’s Puppy Night Lights. You never know where the goalposts will turn up next.”

    That’s coming from a cult (of readers and authors mind you) in the 21st century that can’t come up with a definition of the word “racism.” They see segregation where there factually is none and can’t see it where it factually is. With these people the words “racial defamation” is a revolving door on wings. These are Orwell’s kiddies in the Ministry of Romper Room.

    *

    “Martin Wisse on June 1, 2015 at 11:54 pm said:
    Why does ANYONE listen to someone as blatantly phony as this guy is?

    “Because he flatters their prejudices and taps into a huge pre-existing audience for ‘white men are the REAL victims’ stories, cultivated by Fox News, Limbaugh and related rightwing media. If you’re not in that bubble it’s hard to understand how prelevant that narrative can be, but Brad and Larry both, consciously or unconsciously, tap into it.”

    That’s coming from a guy in the Netherlands who wants to talk how much he understands being in an American conservative bubble that exists only in his stupid head and who gets his news about America from an internet bubble. This has nothing to do with “REAL” victims and everything to do with a fair standard for hate speech and racially offensive remarks. Wisse knows more about Limbaugh than I do. Since I default to “right wing” merely by disagreeing with open racists and an arrogant, privileged and protected class of gender feminists who’ve never seen the inside of a draft office, Wisse’s idiocy about conservatives is laughable. He and other commie lunatics put me into a party I don’t belong to, in front of a TV I don’t watch, and a radio I don’t listen to and then he uses the word “prejudice” without his nose growing out to the Oort Cloud made of windmills and wooden shoes I’m certain Wisse lives in and wears… because stereotypes.

    Next time Nazis invade Holland we’ll agree in advance it’s a bridge too far and leave you to exchange your wooden shoes for jackboots. Go visit an American misogynist patriarchy military graveyard near you and then fuck off. Here’s a hint: there’s no feminists in it.

    Maybe Putin will save you and put you in a nice post-structural collective.

    Nuance is a thing lost on people like Wisse. If someone told him there were Mughal sepoys fighting under a French tricolor Republican flag against Hindu sepoys fighting under a Bourbon flag and with a Zuffur Plutun of Mughal women musketeers on one flank in 1795 he’d probably reduce it to redcoats with monocles, pip-pip, cheerio and eh wot! plus The Duke of Rush Limbaugh.

  42. I’m sure I’m not the first person to try to tell you this, but the people who spew hot air about “warriors for social justice” are all over here with you. That’s not a thing people called themselves. It’s a pejorative made up to dismiss people, a la calling someone “PC patrol” or “feminazi” or “thought police”.

    Some people have taken it as an ironic badge of honor or made geeky riffs on it (like “Social Justice Paladin” or “Social Justice Bard”, but by and large, you’re chiding people for not living up to the standards of a label that was foisted upon them in the first place.

    Which is actually part of the function of the label. Most of the people I have seen getting slapped with the “SJW” label not only don’t describe themselves as social justice warriors, they don’t describe themselves as activists. They’re just people, living their lives, dealing with their own problems, and acting their consciences.

    Example: I’m not an activist. I’m a writer. Like most writers, I try to write the books that I want to read. As a reader, it’s really kind of important that books 1) acknowledge the reality of my life, that people like me exist, or failing that 2) don’t openly insult me, or 3) portray people like me in laughingly unrealistic ways that jar me out of the story. For “people like me”, you can read queer, women, disabled… any of that.

    Now’s the part where you blather on about I-Dentity Politics and PC Police and imaginary quotas and the censorship you think I’ve just called for and wonder “What ever happened to telling a good story and not caring about politics?”

    But is a story a good story if it is otherwise good portrays Christians all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools? I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?

    Some of this is subjective, obviously. We all have different life experiences, which means different things will ring hollow to us (which is one reason that so many thoughtful writers suggest having beta readers with different experiences). One example that I believe came up in the comments on File 770 is that it’s a sure sign a man wrote a piece if the female viewpoint character is described admiring her perfect breasts in the mirror. That’s a very small, very mundane, and fairly innocuous example of bad writing that happens essentially because of an empathy gap or experience gap, but it’s not going to jar every reader the same way.

    Now imagine a book full of things that are all just “off” by that same amount.

    Well, you probably don’t have to. You’ve probably read books that are like that, in their treatment of men, or Christians, or the military. And it didn’t just strike you as insulting, but also as bad writing. Right? Your ability to enjoy the story suffered, because while disagreeing with a writer’s politics is one thing, seeing yourself replaced by caricatures page after page is another.

    When you talk about taking politics out of writing, what you’re doing is demanding everybody else stops noticing these things as they affect us, but you haven’t announced any plans to do the same.

    Anyway, if all you wanted to do was open wide the tent flaps, then you weren’t competent. You were horribly inefficient. You stirred up a ton of bad will, you’re still spending your time and effort fighting the negative impression of you and yours that your actions have fostered, and you only succeeded in the wrong goal (getting a slate of nominees on the ballot isn’t “opening the tent flaps”, is it?), and if we are to take you at your word, you only did that accidentally (because it was demonstrably only the push from that totally-not-with-you guy and his rabid pack of dreadful elks that got any of your nominees on the ballot).

    As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!”

    That’s all it takes. It won’t succeed in getting a slate of hand-picked nominees on the ballot and blocking people you think don’t deserve to be on the ballot because the wrong people like them for the wrong reasons…

    But hey, that’s not what Sad Puppies is about, is it?

  43. Pingback: Because hope springs eternal… | Blue Author Is About To Write

  44. Sigh, I see Ms. Erin has “blessed” us all with another one of her drive-by postings.

    “You were horribly inefficient.”

    You wouldn’t be complaining about Sad Puppies on a daily basis if that were the case.

  45. Or erecting a pack of straw puppies to kick, either. The projection and ineffectual mind reading is strong in this one…

  46. Are you seriously trying to lecture us about *microaggressions*, Alex? SERIOUSLY?

    We don’t care.

    “As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!””

    You really expect us to believe that lie? We can read what gets said all over on places like Making Light and Tor.com, you know. As for next year, Kate Paulk is running SP4, as has been said a million times. Why don’t you go tell Kate the Impaler what you think she should do? Just let me get my popcorn first.

  47. BTW, You Know Who is in Erin’s comments, spouting his usual crap.

  48. Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.

  49. You’re right, it is meant to dismiss you.

    We are already aware you are blind to your own activism. You support a bizarre race-gender cult obsessed with patriarchy. It is anti-white, anti-male, anti-Western and even anti-Anglophone it is so steeped in racial hate, misandry and heterophobia. I regard it as nothing more than a hate movement, and that’s using your own paper-thin standards. How you get around that is by claiming the “marginalized” are never racists, sexists, misandrists, etc. I reject that.

    Here’s the dividing line and the crucial issue: I don’t care what you do. I don’t care about any of your initiatives. What I care about is it is never expressed without dehumanizing men and whites as racist, women-hating, homophobes who have conspired and continue to conspire to keep everyone but the straight white male out of SFF. That is a lie we have proved with facts over and over again. The history of SFF as portrayed by SJWs is a hoax. It has never been any more exclusionary than Field & Stream.

    We have also proved with facts over and over again that SJWs do exactly what they claim we do: namely advocate for and discriminate against people based on their race and sex.

    You claim you are against Vox Day and John Wright but in fact you were throwing us under the bus in swaths of no less than 100 million people before you ever heard of them. You are a protected and privileged class of goofball feminists who will never pie-chart a military cemetery as long as you live because intersectional gender feminists are liars.

    The idea we as an entire sex and racial group oppose women, gays and non-whites entering any arena whatsoever is laughable. Pretending we are all conservatives is Bigotry 101: paint an ethnic or sexual group as an ideology. Boom! Done. Let the Anita Sarkeesian “critiques” begin. We are aware of what your so-called “allies” have to do to escape the shame of being straight white men and so escape their “ideology” by showing their bona fides. We are aware of how quickly you turned on “ally” GRRM. Crime? Oops! He reverted to a straight white male and forgot to only torture men in his books. Concern for the in-group while ignoring the out-group is just more classic bigotry. Either you’re against violence or you’re not.

    And notice how I myself have gone out of my way to show you are not liberals or Marxists and nor do I light up entire demographic groups. Although your cult laughingly pretends to represent all women, gays and non-whites – with radical feminist shit-titles like “Women Destroy SF” – you don’t. Gays are not the problem – gays who are bigoted supremacists are. Women are not a problem – female bigots are. Non-whites are not a problem – non-white racists are. If you claim to be human, then claim those human failings, since it is so self-evidently true of your cult. Whites are not a problem – white supremacists are. And that is a principle any race or sex can embrace. Wake up to that. My pushing back against this cult is no more pushing back against women, gays and non-whites than pushing back against the KKK makes me anti-white.

    SJWs continually use random demographic spikes as if they are Jim Crow – but only if they benefit you. Otherwise random demographic spikes are fine as long as they aren’t straight white men. Boxing, Arab film, Samba, the NBA – no prob.

    Say this over and over again: demography is not ideology.

    Say this too: group defamation is always wrong – ALWAYS.

    Stop lying and pretending you critique anything but our race and sex. No matter what we say, no matter the facts, you move the goalposts so straight white men remain in the crosshairs. Go look at Nebula Awards Weekend. It is a disgrace. Literature? LOL

    I am not interested in your stupid con game or your hateful brand of feminism which pretends to be the successor to equal rights feminism, a thing I do support.

    We cannot even converse until we agree on rules that work for all, not just some. This is called a “principle.” We have rightly portrayed your cult as one which rejects principle in favor of identity.

    I reject everything your cult stands for.

  50. “Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.”

    Yeah, the ending always hits me right in the feels too. I wish they’d make more, somehow. Een side stories would be cool. Make sure you check out the movie. It takes place between episodes 22 and 23:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Bebop:_The_Movie

  51. I did watch the movie, but I messed up and saw it after Session 23.

    Eh, close enough.

  52. A few thoughts:

    Ratseal – I rather doubt that a Reserve Warrant Officer on his first tour is leading patrols outside the wire. I could be wrong, but I suspect he’s at an FOB somewhere. At any rate, I suspect I’ve stood a crapload more midwatches than you have.

    Chupik – the definition of an open process is that the people running said process can and do answer basic questions about how it was done. (Such questions as “how many votes” and “how many nominees”). The fact that Brad can’t or won’t answer them means it is not an open process. It is a closed process, by definition.

    Draven – who says Tor buys memberships for their employees? Do you have proof of that? Can you prove that Tor tells people whom to vote for?

    James May – I’m trying to imagine Leckie standing alone in a circle of 12 of Mubarak’s secret police and telling them to fuck off and somehow I can’t dredge that up. I’m trying to imagine anybody, including you, doing so. Here on Earth, Ann’s point was that she’s no more a radical feminist then you are the Pope.

  53. Example: I’m not an activist. I’m a writer.

    Quick rule of thumb test for anyone trying to argue definitions: do an internet search for the definition of the term involved. Like everything, the internet can be biased, but if your claim clearly goes against the internet, you’re going to need to explain why the definition is wrong instead of just casually dismissing it.

    Activist:(n): An activist is a person who campaigns for some kind of social change. When you participate in a march protesting the closing of a neighborhood library, you’re an activist. Someone who’s actively involved in a protest or a political or social cause can be called an activist.

    You’re involved in a social cause! Guess what? You’re an activist! Just about anyone that has chimed in on either side of the issue can be called an activist. You can be both a writer and an activist.

    Here’s another definition:

    Social Justice; justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society

    Anyone that is voicing their concerns about privilege is an activist for Social Justice. You might not like our dismissing concerns and activism for Social Justice using the pejorative terms, but the inherent multilayered flaws in the whole concept of ‘Social Justice’ deserve some form of contempt from anyone with any understanding of logic, be it scorn or mockery or outright anger.

  54. Well, I finished watching Cowboy Bebop last night. Not entirely sure how I feel about the ambiguous ending, but at least it has an ending. It’s good they didn’t drag the concept out too far.

    The idea of endlessly dragging series out for syndication rather than plotting tight stories with an ending has turned me off from a lot of TV series (as well as most Shonen anime).

  55. Anyway, if all you wanted to do was open wide the tent flaps, then you weren’t competent. You were horribly inefficient. You stirred up a ton of bad will, you’re still spending your time and effort fighting the negative impression of you and yours that your actions have fostered, and you only succeeded in the wrong goal (getting a slate of nominees on the ballot isn’t “opening the tent flaps”, is it?), and if we are to take you at your word, you only did that accidentally (because it was demonstrably only the push from that totally-not-with-you guy and his rabid pack of dreadful elks that got any of your nominees on the ballot).

    If the ‘activists for Social Justice’ (ASJs) hadn’t spent so much effort trying to keep us out of the tent, we wouldn’t have needed to bulldoze our way in. If you didn’t even try to compromise with us when we were on the outside, don’t complain about the solution we came up with to get in.

    The story goes like this: ASJs complain that sci-fi literature doesn’t acknowledge the reality of their lives, openly insults them, and portrays people like them in laughingly unrealistic ways. Rather than acknowledge that this may be subjective, that humans are flawed, and that people are individuals, not just aggregations of groups, they demand that sci-fi conform to their every whim. At the same time, the ASJs don’t acknowledge the reality of others lives, openly insult others, and portray them in laughably unrealistic ways.

  56. Did Chris Gerrib just mansplain a woman?

    Qasr al Nil Bridge, 2010. Were you there, Gerrib? Thanks for the back-handed compliment. Thanks for confirming we don’t live on the same planet.

    I can parse English, Gerrib. The idea I’d keel over meeting a radfem is monkey shines. They don’t even go where I go. At least I’ve never seen one whining about trigger warnings in places where the action is. If you get hysterical over shirts, the Black Widow, patriarchy and bikini ads, what’re you going to do when lava bombs are flying at you? Surrender? LOL.

    If I play Devil’s Advocate and use their own silly language which divides up the sexes and takes credit accordingly, radfems don’t go where men go. See: Feminists of Guadalcanal: Vol. 0. Let’s see Clarkesworld pie-chart a Vet’s Hospital. I think we’re down to only 97.7%. Let the diversity and affirmative action begin. They’re not exactly scrambling for that door over at the Book Smugglers’ round tables about Anglophone naughty people.

    But then, I don’t divide people up like that.

    Let me annotate that in advance so I don’t have to listen to some dumb answer to something I didn’t say: I don’t divide people up like that. However, I do weaponize stupidity.

  57. Blue Falcon Chris, I see you are noticably silent on the punitive nature of your proposal, one that strips away options from Worldcon voters.

  58. Alex asks us to imagine books that are attacks on our identities and admits that these would be “bad” writing and that examples are easy to find. Hello? This is what comes from not bothering to listen to other people or believe what they say about their own lives.

    But when the most important thing ever is constructing a straw army of people who simply MUST be against inclusion, accepting that they have legitimate reason to feel pissed upon and that they understand what it’s like to either encounter the sucker punch or cringe because they know it’s coming is out of the question. If there wasn’t the need for that straw army and a need to create the pretend oppression and exclusion to fight against and anyone bothered to agree that hey, maybe it’s rude and exclusionary to issue a random rant about Boosh Hitler while on a con panel or a just-so soliloquy on how all evil in the world is because of Christians…. Followed by the completely unironic explanation that conservatives just aren’t very *creative* so the fact that none are around isn’t because they’ve been run off… Maybe Sad Puppies would have never existed.

    Also, in the interest of TMI, I’ve looked at my breasts in the mirror. Maybe I’m the only woman on the planet who has but it wouldn’t strike me as obviously “off” and worthy of angst if I ever happen across the book that happened in.

    By all means write alternatives with characters that make sense to you. People are wonderfully different. Just stop unpersoning people who see themselves in characters that you find alien. There’s room for everyone.

  59. Nathan – it’s not punitive. It’s a move to prevent 20% from blocking 80%. If I’m wrong, then the people being “penalized” AKA attendees at Worldcon won’t pass it.

  60. Well, that was a nice piece of drive by condescension from A. Erin. Honestly, the notion that I can only relate to characters that are the same ethnicity, culture, sex, and religion as me is offensive.

    “I am human and nothing human is alien to me.”–Terence. And that includes aliens written by humans.

    What makes me relate to character is not their demographic breakdown. It’s what happens to them, what experiences they go through. Has a character had his heart broken? I have. Has a character experienced betrayal from someone she loved and trusted? I have. Has a character been denied the opportunity to have something he wanted his whole life? I have. Has she struggled with questions of faith and doubt? I have.

    I reject the notion that I am being cheated or deprived when the stories I read and watch don’t happen to include single white heterosexual left-handed Mormon women who are conservative.

    And if you are so in favor of diversity, how about including a conservative woman in your stories without implying that she’s either brainwashed by the patriarchy or a gender traitor, fit only for the deepest circle of hell.

  61. Julie Pascal— In the event of looking upon your bodily parts in the mirror, did you then rhapsodize mentally at length about how wonderfully round and perfect they were? If so, you must either have breasts of ultimate perfection (congrats!) or you have escaped the social conditioning that leads most of us to concentrate our attention on our bodily flaws (and, again, congrats if that’s so). Most women I know do not describe their self-examination as one of mental lusting. Maybe that’s my generation talking…. but maybe it’s true that how a woman would observe/describe her own body is very different to how a man would describe the same body. Unless one is very careful as a writer, it is woefully easy to write from one’s unconscious assumptions about how to frame things.

  62. Arwen– if what I wanted was a protagonist exactly like me, I would never read or watch anything. And I don’t expect that. I can identify with male protagonists perfectly well— a large chunk of my childhood was given to collecting and reading all twenty-some Tarzan books, while I wasn’t rereading L’Mort de Arthur by Thomas Mallory or whatever sf book I had found and glommed onto. But I see no reason why I can’t ask for a few iconic women to go along with the giant cohort of guys.

    And, to be perfectly frank, I have read Heinlein and Clarke and Asimov and Eric Frank Russell and Clifford Simak and Poul Andersen, and a hundred other classic sf authors. I enjoyed those books. Still do, when I get the urge to reread them. But now and here I want something more, something refreshing and not the same old story I have already seen a thousand iterations of. I want Cherryh and Bujold and Elizabeth Bear and, yes, Anne Leckie and even Aliette de Bodard… because the worlds and characters they write are awesome and thought-provoking and fun.

    So my question is: What is wrong with liking what diversity and new writers are giving me? It doesn’t mean Heinlein isn’t still awesome. It doesn’t take away from all the books that have been written before. No one is asking anyone to be a fireman and get rid of any books, at least no one who isn’t totally insane.

    All I want in this I’d to read who I want when I want and not to be told I am stupid or an SJW or a whole-word reader or whatever because I happen to read Ancilliary Justice and think it’s a rocking space opera with some interesting world-building. I don’t really care what you read, either. Unless it is super cool and then I want to read it, too.

  63. Brad has explained how they got the books for the list. The puppykickers just keep ignoring that it wasn’t JUST on his blog, but other places including… email! Keep building those strawmen, Chris Gerrib. We know you’ll ignore what we say anyway and argue something nobody is either discussing or has said. You’ve been doing it for years, ever since I encountered you back in Jordan179’s LJ, more than 7 years ago.

    Screenshot of Brad answering that question.

  64. “All I want in this I’d to read who I want when I want and not to be told I am stupid or an SJW or a whole-word reader or whatever because I happen to read Ancilliary Justice and think it’s a rocking space opera with some interesting world-building. I don’t really care what you read, either. Unless it is super cool and then I want to read it, too.”

    Fair enough. All I want is to read whatever I want whenever I want and not be told that I am stupid or a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot because I read the Dinosaur story and thought it was utter tripe. I haven’t read Ancillary Justice and I am not going to because the pronoun gimmick is off putting. I don’t care what you read either. But I do think it’s fair to say that what you consider super cool, diverse, thought provoking and fun and what I consider super cool, diverse, thought provoking and fun might not match well enough for us to swap recommendations.

    Also, I also like iconic women in science fiction and fantasy stories. But I am firmly against the notion that there weren’t awesome female characters and writers in the Golden Age. And that only now, with the authors you mentioned, are women finally getting their due.

  65. There’s nothing wrong with diversity as long as they aren’t relentlessly attacking me morning, noon and night for not allowing it, including reaching the point they won’t review me cuz skin.

    How many times to we have to repeat that? Leave me alone and you’re a reader. Attack my skin and sex and you’re an SJW – end of story. And stop mischaracterizing what we’re saying about Ancillary Justice. No one’s attacking anyone for just reading it. The author writes obscenely stupid stuff about whites and men and we’re sick of listening to it, plus it was levered into awards cuz of feminist affirmative action. If you like the novel no one cares. it’s not like it’s the worst novel ever written, it just doesn’t live up to being the most awarded SF novel in history. That’s our beef, not just liking it. Who cares if anyone likes it? Just please don’t lever it into the stratosphere via the feminist grapevine and gay Queer Theory author Judith Butler’s post-structuralist gibberish about gender “performativity” and then pretend that never happened.

    That’s how that novel got levered and every review starts with the pronoun thing and now they want to pretend those reviews never happened and that it’s just so good. Well, that’s bullshit and it’s bullshit written down in black and white. When 3 anti-male gay intersectional gender feminists like Foz Meadows, Liz Bourke and Alex MacFarlane are frothing at the mouth about Hugos and pronouns from day one you can’t stick a feather in that hat and call it macaroni.

    In a humorously racist article at Tor.com called “Why I’m Voting for Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Justice,” a member of the intersectionalist collective named Justin Landon writes that SF is “a genre predicated on white cis men doing hero stuff.” Since what Landon writes is not true in any kind of sense which would merit the words “white” or “cis,” Landon can only go downhill from there:

    “Published in the middle of a cultural revolution within the science fiction and fantasy community, Ancillary Justice has become something of a clarion call for women and other underrepresented populations fed up with the kyriarchy.”

    Guess what? I’m fed up with this stupid cult.

    Then in a podcast at Tor hosted by Landon, N. K. Jemisin says Ancillary Justice has been “stripped of the male power fantasy… which is what that story managed to do successfully.”

    That’s not including Jemisin’s comment in that podcast that epic fantasy “embraces white male power fantasies… in which, y’know the white guys do everything”

    Got it? That’s our beef. We’re tired of these people putting the anti-white, anti-male feminist bicycle pump to unremarkable SF novels and then blaming it all on 100 million white men. Screw these weird people.

  66. Gerrib: Ice cream warriors who post about their Caribbean duty on a FFG making multiweek runs out of Mayport and claiming to have stood more midwatches in order to justify their dismissive acknowledgement of someone on active duty need to check their soft serve privilege.

    I really doubt that either your sea service counter or number of watches (stood at balls or any other time of the day) is more than mine after only 4 years AD. Hell, I could have had back to back shore tours and still have been deployed double your total service time.

    And the one upsmanship battle you just lost matters not at all because the grownup with kids and a wife who is now volunteering to deploy to a FOB in ‘stan has a lot more at risk than a snot nosed ensign right out of ROTC who plans on quitting as soon as his obligation is up so he can climb the ladder to be a 1% banker.

    And before you run your untutored, under-informed SJB mouth about how ‘safe’ the FOBS are, you might look up the relevant news articles on the ‘non-combat action’ ‘activity’ happening in the various ISAF regions. Unsurprisingly, the risks there are somewhat different than the risks of high cholesterol that you bravely faced across the wardroom table.

    Now go look for the mail buoy.

  67. “Nathan – it’s not punitive. It’s a move to prevent 20% from blocking 80%. If I’m wrong, then the people being “penalized” AKA attendees at Worldcon won’t pass it.”

    Bullshit, Chris. Every single Worldcon voter loses the ability to nominate five works per category. It’s punitive. Go five and seven and preserve each voter’s current ability

    And the fact that you can’t see how easily this can be gamed is also telling..

  68. It’s fascinating watching the Puppy-kickers in action. They demand answers we’ve already given, are outraged by sentiments we never expressed and upset by things we never did. Now some of them are attacking Sad Puppies 4, which means they are now outraged by things we haven’t even done yet.

    Two months of this crap. Two. Months.

  69. Just be glad we’re not GamerGate – they’ve been dealing with the back and forth (including legit bomb threats called on them by the anti-ggs, or aGGros, if you’ll pardon the gamer lingo) for like nine months now. (Might be off a month either way at this point, as almost entirely an observer and not a participant details get fuzzy for me.)

    Of course, something funny hit me today.

    They’ve been going on and on about how there aren’t any whisper campaigns, no conspiracy, (never mind that Brad and Larry didn’t actually call it a conspiracy, nor does it need to be one. To use a simple analogy of course the results will skew democrat if only the democrats are bothering to show up to vote, and of course they’ll disagree with the republican choices when they finally get off their keisters and vote) and that of course they aren’t coordinating anything.

    Well… I’m going to take them at their word.

    Of course taking them at their word means arguing with them is pointless, as by their reasoning they only influence a single vote each, and all the outspoken kickers combined don’t get you very far when you’re dealing with what? Around 10k voters now?

    Really, how much pull does an apparently very angry author who thinks we care far more about his social habits than we actually do (which is to say, not at all) have with the average fan when he hasn’t published a new book in a decade or two anyway? (As a simple example) Insiders? Okay, maybe. But they are limited in number and were already voting anyway. They’re not among the masses of newbies.

    Everything said by both sides aside, I’m willing to bet most of those 10k voters don’t give a single dried fig what the kickers have to say, or the puppies for that matter really.

    So, with both sides out of the way the logical assumption is they’re not ponying up money just to give awards to no-one, so it is a reasonable assumption they’re just reading and voting according to their own tastes.

  70. Nathan:

    I’d like to see the 4 to nominate 6 go through — ie, you can nominate 4 and there will be 6 on the final ballot. It’s so much simpler than the SDV-LPE system that will be proposed.

    Here that one is:
    http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/archives/016262.html#016262

    I suspect that the SDV-LPE proposal will fail due to this simple reason: the answer to their FAQ #1 is “no”.

    FAQ’s:
    1. Can you explain the system in plain language?
    The important thing to remember is that nothing changes in how you nominate. If you think a work is Hugo-worthy, then nominate it. That’s all. There’s no need to rank your choices at the nomination stage, and there’s no reason not to nominate something you think even might be Hugo-worthy. All we are doing at this stage is throwing names into a hat. The final Hugo voting system, which actually chooses the winner, is unchanged. We could, in theory, simply put everyone’s nominations on the final ballot, but that would make for a very long ballot indeed. We therefore need to narrow the nomination list down. This system narrows down the list by eliminating the least popular works until only five (under current rules) finalists remain. Here are the basic steps to the elimination process:
    a. You have one nomination “point” for each category that will be divided equally among the works you choose to nominate in that category. So, if you nominate two works in a category, each will get half a point; if you nominate three works, each will get one-third of a point, and so on.
    b. All the points given to each work from all nomination ballots are added together. The two works that got the least number of points are eligible for elimination. One of these works is the least popular and will be eliminated. (We call this the Selection Phase.)
    c. To determine which of these two works is least popular, we compare the total number of nominations they each received (that is, the number of nomination ballots on which each work appears). The work that received the fewest total number of nominations is the least popular and now completely vanishes from the nomination process as though it never existed. (We call this the Elimination Phase.)
    d. We start over for the next round and repeat the process, however, if one of your works was eliminated, then you now have fewer works on your nomination ballot. This means that each work gets more total points, since you aren’t dividing your point among as many works. For example, if one of your five nominated works was eliminated, your remaining works now get one-fourth of a point each instead of one-fifth of a point. If four of your nominated works are eliminated, your remaining work now gets your full point.

  71. Twila, I’m not arguing that the passage in question wasn’t poorly done, but lots of stuff is poorly done and if there was some way to objectively prove my point, I’d put money on the fact that an author, male or female, who does a bad job at writing “women” also does a bad job of writing “men” because the real problem is that the author is weak at characterization. If they’re popular it’s because they have other strengths.

    What I find irritating is this notion, somehow, that women have been put upon by “stuff written by men” because men can’t write women well. (And women can’t write men and blacks can’t write whites and only a Native American could write indigenous and humans can write neither Artarians nor sentient vegetation… ad nauseam.) And that somehow this is a horror and an aggression and we’re supposed to curl up and die because someone wrote something silly. I’ve got three words for the whole thing.

    Big. Girl. Pants.

  72. “As I said on my blog: next year, if you want the world to believe that your goal is to raise awareness that anyone can nominate whoever they want for the Hugos, make a blog post that says, “Hey, everyone! Did you know that the Hugo Awards, one of the top awards for science fiction, is awarded by the members of WorldCon? And did you know that for $40 you can buy a supporting membership in WorldCon? Now’s your chance to nominate whoever you want!””

    And everyone nominates Larry Correia’s latest novel and the world explodes, sort of like it did when Warbound was nominated.

    A memory longer than two years… who’d’a thunk?

  73. “…I want something more, something refreshing and not the same old story I have already seen a thousand iterations of. I want Cherryh and Bujold and… ” Asaro and Wrede and Moon… Doyle and Lee and Duane…

    I realize I’m being nit-picky but I’m not trying to be snide or mean just… none of these women authors are NEW. I could have added women’s names of the generation before them, too, Norton at least. Bujold is not NEW. Vorkosigan books were published in the 1980s. Cherryh is not NEW. I was arguing with college friends how to pronounce her name 35 years ago.

    The thing is… when you list a bunch of old white men authors and then list a bunch of “new” (white?) female authors, you’re implying something about the History of the genre that is not true, and *true* matters. The rewriting of the genre such that there used to be some particular *absence* of women’s voices is… not true. Listing some of the most influential female authors who are absolutely *establishment* in the genre in a way that implies that they *didn’t exist* or have their success when they actually had it, and moreover to do so in a way meant to imply that someone, somewhere, wants to take them away from you? Why do that?

    People make very persuasive arguments, have great rhetoric about this vital battle that they are fighting for diversity and women in science fiction and in order to do that they’ve got to position the opposition as wanting something the opposition is not at all interested in… which is a return to the pretend-History where you only got to pick from those seminal *male* authors.

    Incidentally, a new-ish female author you should check out is Wen Spencer. If you’re not into elves start with “Alien Taste”.

    Also, I’ve been trying to decide who “boobs in the mirror” lady was, since it seems to be something I’m supposed to have been aware of. I don’t recall ever reading that scene but I wonder, if it was in Friday by Heinlein, her doing that, even to describing the perfection of her form makes absolutely perfect sense since the book was about her struggle with the fact that she was a non-human construct… genetic, but legally an object, and that warped her perception of herself as a person. I can think of a few other books I’ve read where the scene as described makes sense, but I doubt that anyone is going to fuss about John Ringo. (Honest, what would be the point?) Having kittens over Heinlein is far more fashionable.

  74. @ Julie,

    I’m wondering if the ‘boob mirror’ is from Saturn’s Children – But isn’t Stross a CHORF lapdog?

    As for Wen Spencer, I didn’t know she was a she until you just mentioned it – I just enjoyed Tinker, and thought Wolf who Rules was good, but could’ve been great – plumbing wasn’t an issue. But then again, she was Baen, and I I usually liked Baen books. Go figure.

  75. Christopher M. Chupik: They demand answers we’ve already given, are outraged by sentiments we never expressed and upset by things we never did. Now some of them are attacking Sad Puppies 4, which means they are now outraged by things we haven’t even done yet.

    I notice that the anti-puppy platoon heretofore maintained “SJW” is just a slur aimed at anyone to the left of Margaret Thatcher, and that it would be impossible to have a discussion with “the other side” about what it means. But when Brad stated clearly that by SJW he means people who spew a lot of hot air about activism without putting themselves on the line for the principles they claim to hold – the actual, you know, meaning of the term, invented on the left, no less – eyes rolled in unison and Alexandra Erin showed up to mansplain that he has a reading comprehension problem. I’m not the greatest fan of the SP3 campaign, but I have to say that this is a sad day.

  76. As for next year, Kate Paulk is running SP4, as has been said a million times. Why don’t you go tell Kate the Impaler what you think she should do? Just let me get my popcorn first.

    I dunno, I think I’d rather have one of those sheets of plastic like they hand out to the people in the front rows at a Gallagher show.

  77. I love Tinker, Orgell, but I’m a fangirl over Ukiah Oregon. 🙂 I’ll admit that she writes herself into a corner by book 4, but look up Alien Taste. Really.

  78. In the list of “characters for whom Julie has named cats” we have “Miles” and “Ekatarine” and “Ukiah” and “Indigo.” Now nevermind that “Indigo” had to become “Inego” on account of the girls I got him from insisted he was a girl kitten and he wasn’t, but that’s entirely beside the point.

  79. “Laura Resnick on June 2, 2015 at 8:34 pm said: I love that David Mack essay. The original public letter he wrote in response to his angry reader, last August, is also well worth reading. Makes me want to go get a couple of Mack’s books.”

    Welcome to John Scalzi’s career. There’s the mentality you’ve been up against. They say stuff like this every day all year and that’s how they vote. It’s so natural to them they don’t even see it, and nor do they see it results in an entire genre of shit with awards going to shit.

    I’m trying to imagine myself buying an SF book because the author has a proper social stance on gay marriage, or on price subsidies for milk for that matter. Isn’t that how Lovecraft became famous? Even worse is sticking that stuff in an SF novel. Why not have Star Trek investigate John F. Kennedy-era milk subsidies on Altair-6?

    A steady stream of this stuff in boring and kills art.

    In looking at SF stories from 1912 to 1960 there is no great trend toward overtly politicized stories based on current events. Welcome to the career of a man like Jack Vance… and art – art worth reading.

    As an example, it’s rather remarkable how much SF seemingly tried to pretend WW II wasn’t happening. When B-25s were flying from aircraft carriers dubbed “Shangri-La” in April 1942, Astounding Science Fiction was publishing Robert A. Heinlein’s Beyond This Horizon. The following month which saw The Battle of the Coral Sea saw the first Foundation story by Isaac Asimov. During the Battle for Stalingrad in Aug. of ’42 Heinlein published “Waldo.” As the Battle for Guadalcanal drew to a close in Dec. ’42 A.E. Van Vogt published “The Weapon Shops.” That trend continued in Astounding with “Mimsy Were the Borogoves (1943) by Lewis Padgett (C.L. Moore & Henry Kuttner), “Judgment Night” (1943) by C.L. Moore, “City” (1944) by Clifford Simak, “First Contact” by Murray Leinster as the war in Europe ended in May, 1945, and A.E. Van Vogt’s The World of Null-A as twin atomic bombs ended the war with Japan in Aug. 1945. Not only did Golden Age SF writers set out to explore human problems rather than white or male problems, they sufficiently divorced their themes from real world events to make that precise point. The fact intersectionalism sees that in the opposite way (white male power fantasies) but without proof to back that assertion up leads one to believe the SJWs are getting a whiff of their own self-obsessions and supremacy, not someone else’s.

    Here’s quote from an SF Livejournal: “… if you have a single default position for most of humanity in your novels and you don’t have a clear reason for such a thing, you’re not living in a complex world.”

    Actually you’re living in a world of literature, allegory, metaphors, symbolism and myth with a clear purpose. SFF is not meant to be a census or pie-chart. SFF that splits groups up according to contemporary provincial views doesn’t work. One (generally) aims towards a type of futuristic classicism. To do otherwise has a clang of discordance as idiotic as having people wear bell-bottoms in ancient Rome or a far future. Put all that in the context of a type of parochial Third Wave feminism that is nothing more than hate speech directed at men and whites and any claim to artistry dives into a trench.

    Here’s more from that LJ: “As writers, unless we do this active questioning, we don’t say ‘Which characters need to be gendered in a particular way’ and then make active decisions for all the others, to make them more interesting or demonstrate a more complex world or simply to make sure that 90% of the cast isn’t male, we give all the characters default male heterosexual gendering and only give other-than-this where the story absolute demands it… Gendering is a part of building a world for a novel. If we don’t build women in and other genders and different sexualities then they don’t exist for the reader… You’re living in a simpler more straightforward world of gender dominance and heteronormativity.”

    All that’s written without a hint of awareness, pretending provincialism is universal, as if the world gets frozen in Jacques Derrida and Judith Butler’s post-structural French Theory and Jacques Lecan and Claude Levi-Strauss become settled cultural custom and practice in another galaxy 2,000 years in the future. That’s children’s lit, not adult. Ancillary Justice was as clangy as an untuned engine. Feminist SJW SF has the same clanking sound as Lebron James using basketball to defeat an alien invasion, Christian pornography, Gays for ISIS or Hulk Hogan in Star Wars.

  80. What’s really funny, James, is that even when they do it on purpose they fail their own tests. I watched a sci-fi TV trailer for a new show being promoted by an “I’m super into inclusive stuff” person… not as his main focus but there whenever the subject comes up… and made by “Hollywood” right? Total bastion of diversity rhetoric and inclusion rhetoric. The cast was unbelievable. I don’t even generally CARE and I’m all… waitaminute… the Asian guy is into martial arts… the white guy is the leader pulling them all together… the black guy is the pilot… the skinny white chick with purple hair is a frightening mental danger… the other white chick… something… it was sort of hard to tell which stereotype the women were going to fall into from just the trailer.

    I could do better than that in my sleep with one hand tied behind my back and a set of fantasy dice… otherwise known as “random number generators.” You know what? How about put TWO black men in there. OMG.

    Really, the show is probably going to be great, but at no point is casting EVER not analyzed to death, and they can’t manage better than that? Fer pities sake… at least swap and make the Asian guy the pilot and the black guy the super ninja master.

  81. Actual reality can be far more nuanced if you pluck it from a distance in time and disguise its cultural markers.

    I earlier mentioned Hindu and Islamic Mughal sepoys fighting under revolutionary French Jacobin vs. Bourbon flags, with an all-female platoon of musketeers in action on a flank. Those French officers in turn took orders from an Islamic Mughal Nizam and a Hindu aristocratic confederacy. The British East India company had their own small armies, observers and envoys on both sides and refused to get involved in the war, though having treaties and living with and having their brigades stationed in the respective capitals of Pune and Hyderabad. All of that would soon be played out against Napolean’s invasion of Egypt and a then threatened invasion of India by Napoleon in alliance with yet another power, the renegade usurper Tipoo Sultan at Mysore, India.

    Now if you wanted to investigate complex power politics, why not strip out the culture, find the humanity, and use something like that bit of discordance instead of Andrea Dworkin in space? If you want to investigate colonialism and imperialism I find the idea of a fight over Greece with a Spanish Catalan mercenary army against a Frankish Burgundian army of nobles with Turkish and indigenous Greek mercenaries on each side an interesting example of how one can look at an event removed in time and take what is classic and generic about it and use it. The same stuff happened in China and pre-Columbian Mexico. What were those people doing there? How did that all come about? Removed in time they become humans dealing with human issues, not the Huffington Post. Turned into a generic everyman they sure as hell wouldn’t default to “whiteness” or disappear PoC from the future as is so often stupidly charged.

    Please spare us any more stories about Jim Crow and intersectionalism in space, Regency England, the Old West and 7th century Britain. You’re killing your own genre and turning it into a trailer park. I can read The Mary Sue and Jezebel if I want this week’s crying jag about patriarchy, whiteness and gender.

    Asimov’s Foundation wasn’t white, it was an everyman – get that through your thick skulls. There was a reason for that and it wasn’t racism or exclusion, no more so than the Arabian Nights. Human’s are going to adventure, but they have to be humans first rather than some neighborhood you know. This is like pouring wine: let it breathe, give it some distance, or it’s nappy sleeping pill time. Montag’s wife wasn’t watching the Montel Williams Show.

    “Oh, look Montag! It’s the Kardashians and I get to be Paris Hilton!” “Not now dahling. I have to go disemvowel some Robert Heinlein books at the Jane Austen fire-not-fire station.”

    That sure works for me. When’s Hildo II coming out?

    And don’t forget this classic bit of non-classic frippery from an SJW fem author: “‘For a moment, Dharthi considered such medieval horrors as dentistry without anesthetic, binary gender, and as being stuck forever in the body you were born in, locked in and struggling against what your genes dictated.'”

    Why not the horrors of the days of no racially segregated safe-zones at bus stops?

    That sure works for me. I bang my head against a wall every time I read that short treatise in how to preach me out of a story by the nape of my neck-of-the-week. What other “classic” horrors await? Walking around in bad medieval days without a cell phone? How did people do that? Were they a race of super-beings? What clown could live without a cell phone? There’s your SF story right there. Activist Suey Park was so afraid she was being tracked she ditched her phone and used a “burner.” It never occurred to her to just not have one. How could a human live like that cuz reality and the machine might stop. She rode a subway for hours hoping the signal would die, kinda like science fiction.

    Let’s all use “burners,” like Montag.

  82. Sad Puppies has never been about who gets a little rocketship trophy.

    It’s been about inclusion in the community of science-fiction and fantasy writing.

    By trying to limit who can get one of those little rocketship trophies, a small clique has for years been trying to exclude people on basis of their gender, race, political views, religion… anything which they personally find to be somehow offensive to their own sensibilities. To them, the author becomes more important than the story, as though quality of fiction were something achievable by a racial or gender quota.

    No one should care whether the author identifies as male, female, black, white, or dinosaur. What’s important is what they put in their work, what they give to the community as a whole.

    It’s time the Hugos once again honored that concept.

    That is why we fight.

  83. Right. Wrote a looong post talking about Hollywood casting and comparing the above example to the main cast of my current story, but decided it would be boring.

    The short version basically is this – as writers we should be making characters, not checks on a list. What makes a character interesting is so much more varied than skin pigmentation or even who they want to take to bed.

    Human beings aren’t just round pegs trying to be forced into neat square holes – we’re not pegs at all but weird things with all kinds of odd sides and contradictory faces. There isn’t a hole in existence any of us can be neatly shoved into.

    Morgan (protagonist of said story) is interesting to me because she’s a blue collar gal who escaped a heavy gravity mining world masquerading as a utopia. She’s interesting because she doesn’t hesitate to defend herself with guns at need, but usually falls back on her mechanical knowledge to get out of trouble. She’s compelling because she grew up in something _we’d_ consider a backwater, yet has to interact with the cosmopolitan cultures spread across chunks of our arm of the galaxy.

    All of that, just the tip of the iceberg. Isn’t that what we should be going for? Memorable characters that aren’t just some lazy stereotype?

    None of this has anything to do with the fact that her ancestors were Aztecs and Zapotecos. (That detail isn’t even in the book because she has no clue where she comes from, and Earth is gone anyway) It isn’t even particularly relevant that she happens to be straight, at least not until the romance subplot gets kicked off. Heck, the only reason she’s a she to begin with is because I started with the basic plot and asked myself “which makes for a more interesting story?”

    (Yeah. This was the short version of this post. This is why I’m here and not still editing. I get verbose when I get tired. 😛 )

  84. Julieapascal:
    “And everyone nominates Larry Correia’s latest novel and the world explodes, sort of like it did when Warbound was nominated.

    A memory longer than two years… who’d’a thunk?”

    Wasn’t that when the lies about Larry being sexist, racist etc. started?

    IIRC, his wife had people calling her, concerned because someone implied Larry was abusive.

    Ten to one, nobody on the Social Injustice Bully side had the decency to admit responsiblity for the latter.

    Five to one, none of them had the decency to apologise for lying about Larry.

    Even money, nobody on the Puppy Kickers side will have the decency to condemn the people making those false statements, either about Larry then or Brad now (wouldn’t want them to fight amongst each other).

    Anyone want to see if their local bookies will take the bet?

  85. There’s a reason fables use foxes instead of disabled gay Hungarians and that’s because writers don’t want morality (or lack of it) frozen into an identity.

    There’s a reason fables use foxes instead humans and that’s so a principle can become so disassociated from identity one can bypass bias more easily. Fables act as tools of self-criticism.

    Distance in time can serve the same effect. Sinbad or Jason and his Argonauts can become so meaningless in terms of their culture they become archetypes. That is a lesson for SF writers.

    I have no interest in reading self-absorbed fiction by identity supremacists and narcissists. Their work operates in precisely the opposite direction as the above. Diversity as it’s used by this hate movement in literary terms is as shallow as a spoon. Ask a literary question and you’ll get a literary answer. Ask a question about identity and that’s what you’ll get: nothing. The Orwellian SJWs claiming so much is embedded in identity will probably get awards from the KKK at some point. The KKK doesn’t use foxes in their sordid morality tails, and neither do SJWs. They embed morality (or lack of it) in specific ethnic and sexual groups in their entirety. The Ministry of Anti-Racism, promoting segregation. What a bunch of buzzards.

  86. Ah, James May. The gift that keeps on… churning? Roiling? I don’t know. I guess it’s a weird gift, but whatever it is, you keep doing it, and that’s fun.

    You guys pop off like that, and then you all turn around and wonder where people get the idea that Sad Puppies is some kind of regressive culture war thing instead of being about opening the tent flaps?

    Priceless.

    The thing is, the more consistently I fail to be anything like poor James describes, the more sure he’s right, isn’t he? It’s just so terribly dishonest of me to not ever say any of the things he knows in his heart I believe, isn’t it? I’d say it’s almost unfair, but of course my dishonesty in not saying any of those things proves that I am exactly what he thinks I am, because who else except the thoroughly evil person he believes I am would be so dishonest?

    James, if you ever have any inclination towards tiptoeing back into the reality-based community, go look up what actual radical feminists say about trans women like me. You’d find that you and they are natural allies on a lot of things. Like many of the commenters here, actual radical feminists are biological essentialists; i.e., they don’t believe gender even exists as anything distinct from a simplistic binary sex. If I wanted to be reflexively misgendered and this venue wasn’t available, all I’d have to do is strike up a conversation with a radical feminist.

    Yeah, they talk about gender abolition, but if you actually listen to them talk about their imagined post-gender utopia you’ll notice they still recognize a difference between the sexes. Where they would part ways with you is what the roles of the sexes should be… and while their vision isn’t the emasculating matriarchy that you seem to have nightmares about, I don’t doubt that would be the end of any alliance you might found with them on common cause.

    But that’s a digression. Like I pointed out to Brad about origins/meaning of “SJW”, I point it out to you only in the hopes that recognizing one point on which your view has diverged from observable reality might prove the start of a process of self-examination that leads you somewhere better.

    Back on topic:

    Of course we have reason to complain that you’ve opened the tent flaps inefficiently. We’d have nothing to complain about if you had run a competent campaign to increase Hugo awareness in the ranks of general SF/F fandom. What would we be complaining about?

    Oh, okay, maybe there would be some stiffs, some downright snobs, who are part of the WorldCon set who would sniff and look down their nose at all the Hugo-Come-Latelies, and if you guys had run an actual awareness-raising campaign and this happened, you could point to them and say what jerks they are and pretty much everybody else, inside WorldCon and outside it, would have agreed with you.

    But you didn’t do that. While I have no doubt that more people are now aware of what the Hugos are and how they work and how they can get involved than before you began, you did at a great cost in terms of noise and heat (loud noise and waste heat being the sure signs of an efficiently running engine, right?) and with the side effect (if we are to believe it’s a side effect and not a goal) of getting a number of people worked up over the personal grudges and imagined grievances of the slatemongers.

    What, I ask, does any of that have to do with “widening the tent flaps”?

    Should I take it that the opinions of this group is that I’m wrong in thinking that “HEY EVERYBODY, MEMBERSHIP IS OPEN AND YOU CAN NOMINATE AND VOTE FOR WHOEVER YOU WANT!” is a better way of letting people know that membership is open and they can nominate and vote for whoever they want than ramming through a slate of handpicked works?

    Because I’d be interested if anyone would like to explain why.

    Note that if your reason involves phrases like “make SJW heads explode” or “poke a stick in people’s eyes” or allusions to some cabal-clique-conspiracy to keep people out that’s somehow defeated by 5 or 6 nominations for the same writer in a single year, you’ll have to explain what the actual connection between this and opening the tent flaps is, in something other than Underpants Gnome logic.

  87. Pingback: Sad Puppies Review Books: THE POKY LITTLE PUPPY | Blue Author Is About To Write

  88. ” I’d like to see the 4 to nominate 6 go through — ie, you can nominate 4 and there will be 6 on the final ballot. It’s so much simpler than the SDV-LPE system that will be proposed.”

    I’m not against expanding the nominations to be greater than the number a single voter can make. That part’s a decent idea. I’m against taking a choice away from the voters. A 5 and 7 version would preserve the five nominees a Worldcon voter can currently make.

  89. “4 and 6” or “5 and 7” are not necessarily bad ideas. My only reservations would be: 1) the current system, which was pretty successful at selecting excellent books for a span of decades, sends the message to voters: “We are a community of serious readers. Read as widely as you can, and think hard about what to nominate.” In my experience, I can usually name three picks of books or stories in any given year off the top of my head. Picking a fourth is tougher, and picking a fifth really takes effort. I don’t have to choose five, but the fact that the option is there pushes me to rise to the challenge and consider things I might not normally have read. Also, 2) 20 works of short story to novel-length fiction plus related works and so forth is already a hell of a lot of summer reading. It would be tough for a lot of people to read 7 novels, 7 novellas, etc., etc., between March and July.

    I think SDV-LPE is a bad idea because it sends the message: “The goal of this exercise is not excellence (to shortlist the five works identified by the greatest number of voters as best of the year). The goal of SDV-LPE is fairness (to compromise by shortlisting five things that are make the greatest number of voters “happy” by virtue of at least one of their nominations making the final list). My “voter happiness” doesn’t come from seeing one of my favorite things get on the shortlist – it comes from an author being honored in accordance with the collective wishes of the community.

  90. Yeah… perhaps I missed it, but I don’t seem to remember anyone here really talking about transgendered anything besides you.

    There certainly are radical feminists that think that way, but they’re hardly the only group of rad fems out there. They don’t even all agree about sex-positive sex-negative.

    As for being an ‘inefficient’ get out the vote initiative, well, let’s put it this way. If the democrats don’t bother voting in a given area, of course the republicans are going to win much more often. If some of the democrats recognize this and start trying to get their side involved again of course they’re going to be much more successful among their own base, and of course they’re going to be targeting people who tend to agree with them. To suggest that they’re doing it wrong because they’re not also increasing the republican vote is ludicrous.

    No conspiracy needed, really. I’d also point out that Larry and the other authors involved weren’t the ones to bring up a ‘conspiracy’ until they had to start responding to people on your side accusing them of thinking it was.

    Really I find it quite silly to complain that the people reached by the Hugo messages of the SP authors tend to have similar taste in books – how many people do you really think read Brad or Larry’s blog regularly that don’t like their books?

    To use another parallel its just about to the level of you complaining that the people who decided to join and vote by hearing it on a knitting blog are almost all knitters. Of course they are.

    Going back to the D/R example, it isn’t the democrats job to drum up the vote among the republicans.

    As for complaining about the suggested books in this case again we already have overlapping tastes in books so it isn’t odd at all that we’d like a lot of the stuff on the list.

    And then there’s the little fact that the overwhelming majority of people who talked about voting SP said things along the lines of “I nominated some of them, but in other places I nominated different things.”

    I know I nominated a bunch of stuff from SP, and a bunch of stuff that wasn’t on it. Skin Game and Nemesis would have been on my list all the way back when I first read them last year, and it’s undoubtedly the same for a huge chunk of the voters.

    There were some things I nominated that I hadn’t read until Brad pointed them out, but again, I only nominated them because I read them and agreed with him that they were worth nominating.

  91. @Shadowdancer at 3pm

    Thanks for that screenshot – it’s literally the first I’ve seen that there were other sources for recommendations than Brad’s announcement post. I don’t really follow Brad on FB or etc, so that may be why I missed it out. Thanks again.

    It still doesn’t really answer the question many people have of why Brad keeps calling it open, democratic, and transparent if he’s going to say that there were a source of nominations where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received. (note, I’m not asking for names or details of who recommended what obvs – just something in line with what the data Hugos organizers release)

    If that part has been answered (i.e., what I stated above, or something else as to why SP3 was a open & democratic process) elsewhere, I apologise for bringing it up again and would appreciate a similar pointer or link. Thanks.

  92. @snowcrash Who cares? Obviously you’re all worked up about it and seeking the use the question as a platform to attack Brad. But the question has been answered. You just don’t like the answer. “I don’t care” if you like it or not.

    @Alex You know, Vox Day asserts that “SJW’s always lie.” I was only dimly aware of the fact before reading his blog, and then sought to challenge it. But you know what? He’s right. Your entire post is quite an example, almost paradigmatic. Truth is, you and your cohort got your asses handed to you by the SP/RP efforts, even with your typical SJW campaign of outrageous lies and character assassination. Didn’t work. So now “all of a sudden” you want to know why Larry and Brad weren’t all “reasonable” and why didn’t they proceed in your SJW-approved way. What bullshit. How typically SJWish.

  93. Erin if by “regressive” you mean live and let live and not demonizing vast populations of people based on their skin and sex then I’m regressive, but I understand you have to use Newspeak to get there.

    And since you brought up the topic, what makes you think I have to look up anything? I’m not going to get too far into the TERF-radfem wars for the precise reason it is insane, plus I don’t care, but suffice it to say when men posing as women get a 40 yr. old lesbian music festival like MichFest shut down that’s a delicious double-edged sword of “priceless.” Frankenstein’s monster comes after Frankenstein. Who predicted that? I’m already aware the insanity is so far advanced that people like you are accusing Third Wave Intersectional Gender Feminists of being Men’s Right’s Activists and vice versa. Maybe they all watch Rush Limbaugh too. It doesn’t get any nuttier than that. Let me remind you of what the radfems you oppose write:

    “Male supremacy is centered on the act of sexual intercourse, justified by heterosexual practice” – radical gay feminist Sheila Jeffreys.

    Suddenly that’s not insane enough. Who can keep track of all the “observable reality” where someone like Jeffreys is now out of her own movement, the gay Radfem 2013 London conference shut down, and you’re in? Maybe radical feminists were actually right about misogyny and patriarchy. But then again, what color is the sky in this world? No one knows. And you say I’m the gift that keeps on giving? There is no irony in your daffy movement, as one can tell when people like you use terms like “manfeels” and Brianna Wu “mansplaining.”

    But I digress. You are once again forgetting I don’t care what you do. I don’t care about anyone’s politics either. I care about the hate speech. All the hate speech your movement generates is nothing more than a biological hatred and phobia dressed up in finery and passed off as “politics” and “social justice.” When you routinely take out 3.5 billion people at a time using demonization and dehumanization theories like “patriarchy,” “rape culture,” and “misogyny” that’s the same bullshit we saw at Heidelberg University in the early ’30s, and I’m not buying it.

    As for the Hugos, we warned you about the hate speech for 3 years and not a single one of you would even address the issue, and will not to this day. So, you got pranked. Get used to it. I offer no logic or reason to a movement which hates me. I’m pushing back. I don’t care if you don’t like it. There is nothing more stupid than a movement supposedly based on opposing hate speech but which has no definition for the term other than “you not me on Wednesdays when the stoplight turns red.”

    Let me be as clear as I can be. I feel I owe this “feminist” movement the exact same respect and politeness black folks owe the KKK and Jews owe neo-Nazis, which is to say, none. Not one fucking iota. You can take your “white privilege” and “cis white dudes” and shove it.

  94. Let me mention Mixon’s Hugo-nominated expose of Requires Hate. In classic supremacist and bigoted movements, there is concern for the in-group vs. the out-group. In a humanistic view, there is concern for all.

    We recently saw the former in the Sansa Stark furor from feminists. They simply don’t care about violence against males. They are interested only in the protected group. Mixon and her cohorts didn’t care a single fig for Requires Hate when she went after white men hammer and tongs. It was only when she went after precious “women of color” that they ran up the flags.

    In fact several of the people whining used to leave sympathetic comments at Requires Hate’s website, including 3 current Tor.com bloggers. That’s cuz it’s okay for RH to write “… we consider buffaloes especially stupid as animals go. The perfect analogy for white men.” But don’t touch the Preciousssssss.

    Why be surprised the 3 doofuses of the Skiffy and Patriarchy Show Tweet with this madwoman to this very day. Burn, patriarchy, burn.

    Principles. Equal protection. Human rights. These have been excised from this movement’s vocabulary other than to be used in an Orwellian sense.

  95. There’s no point in engaging Alexandra Erin. It’s quite clear that she’s trolling us for views on her blog. She’s riding the anti-Puppy bandwagon for all it’s worth.

  96. I found one of Alexandra Erin’s earlier comments interesting. In part:

    But is a story a good story if it is otherwise good portrays Christians all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools? I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?
    […] You’ve probably read books that are like that, in their treatment of men, or Christians, or the military. And it didn’t just strike you as insulting, but also as bad writing. Right?

    No. Not right. A story written from a viewpoint I don’t agree with can be superb writing. It can also be enjoyable. A story’s portrayal of stupid women, airheaded liberal-arts college graduates, socially inept mathematicians, and/or pretentious bloggers (to name just a few potential categories) does not disqualify the writing as writing at all.

    (Just for example, John Brunner hateses him some Americans [we will ignore for the moment that all his American characters seem to actually be Englishmen in disguise]. I would argue that his portrayal of Americans is both “unrealistic” and “meanspirited”, but that doesn’t make Stand on Zanzibar bad writing. Nor did it prevent me from enjoying the book. Greg Egan frequently portrays Christians “all as being wrongheaded, narrow minded superstitious fools”. And his science fiction is superb; there is simply no way that any rational person could claim that such portrayals disqualify it as writing.)

    That Erin assumes this – assumes that any story that unflatteringly portrays a group you’re part of must ipso facto be “bad writing”, and moreover assumes that everyone agrees with that and the only difference is which groups are portrayed – is revealing, and it may point to the real source of the disconnect here. If the “message-fic” fans literally cannot see quality in such a story and can’t enjoy it, then it’s no wonder they police fiction for “problematic messages about women, GLBT, or POC”. And it’s also no wonder that they like message fiction – because a story that pushes the messages they agree with is the only kind of fiction they can like.

  97. Erin doesn’t hear what she doesn’t want to hear. Goes on with the silly claim that if only Puppies were more seemly they’d have been welcome, and if someone really was rude that all the good people would rally in support.

    It’s not true. You need to actually look at the behavior around you. If you can’t see it, try throwing out a test balloon. Go somewhere SJW is and say really really nicely that you sort of love stories where colonists triumph over an untamed land. Find out how many people rush to your defence because you were nice about it.

  98. There’s another interesting bit in the part you quoted: “I mean, can it be a good story if a significant cross section of humanity is rendered in an extremely unrealistic—say nothing of meanspirited, let’s focus on the fact that it’s realistic—fashion?” How many characters are there in this story, anyways? The fact that one character, or even multiple characters in a story have something in common doesn’t necessarily mean that their characterization extends to all members with that common trait. The fact that the author assigned negative traits to one woman or even several women in the story doesn’t mean that the characterization applies to all women. Very rarely is a ‘significant cross section of humanity’ characterized in a story.

    Social Justice theory, which includes both identity politics and theories of privilege, necessarily reduces people to their group identities. Social Justice theory would have it be ‘justice’ to punish a white man for the collective actions attributed to white men. Once you’ve gone down that road, there’s almost no difference between insulting ‘the Patriarchy’ (the group), ‘Men’ (members of the group) and an individual man. Likewise, insulting one woman is an affront to all Women.

  99. Chris, I enjoy exposing the insane gibbering thing that squats at the core of SFF’s old institutions like one of Lovecraft’s things. There is nothing crazier than a “social justice” movement which indulges in or widely supports racial segregation, racism, sexism, supremacy, hate speech, censorship, refusal to debate, institutional intolerance, review censorship, group defamation, banning products, assembles lists of editors and authors strictly according to their sex and race.

    This is a KKK with affirmative action and that’s all it is. Since principle operates on precedent, SJWs inadvertently give the clowns at Stormfront more credibility every time they open their stupid mouths.

    SJWs have set things back 50 years and a lot of battles are going to have to be fought all over again.

    I call it “The Battle of Field & Stream.”

    “I wanna fish, why can’t I? I never see myself fishing. I fish. Where do I see me fishing in those old Field & Stream’s? I don’t. Surely there were people like me fishing. I want gay fishing stories, cuz fishing. Latinos fish. Where are those stories? Gays and Asians don’t fish like whites, and then there’s gay Asians. We have things to say about fishing. What’s up with the cis-hetero fishing? Most fishing as you know it is shaped by white patriarchal bias of people who claimed authority on it. I’m interested in fishing. See this big metal thing with torpedo tubes and a conning tower? That’s fishing now. I am redefining fishing… cuz patriarchy. Let me in racists. Everybody fishes. What’s with the Anglophone Western-centric fly rods n’ shit? You think there’s no fish in Singapore? Hah! There’s lots of fish. It’s an island. There’s rivers in Asia; lots of them. Don’t make me fish like you do. I have my ways. The marginalized fish, but we have no power. You have white power. I want some. Let me in. You never heard of the gay fisherwoman of medieval York? She could fish like anything. Jane Austen could outfish the lot of you assholes. Charlotte Bronte once caught a bass with her teeth while swimming the English Channel. Mary Shelley’s recipe for beer batter would shame any male who ever lived. Andrea Dworkin of Innsmouth could stay submerged for up to 12 hours. Ph’nglui mglw’nafh Cthulhu R’lyeh wgah’nagl fhtagn.”

  100. juliepascal —

    Oh, I have read Leigh Brackett and Andre Norton and C. L. Moore and Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Tanith Lee and Le Guin and P. G. Hodgell and R. M. Meluch and Wen Spencer and Jo Clayton and Judith Merrill and all of the other wonderful writers who happened to be women who were published pre-1980. Heck, for a lot of them, I bought the paperbacks as they were being published. I adore Andre Norton with a passion that means I reread her work at least once a month (though not Witch World. I do not LIKE Witch World.) I know there were always women authors in the field. I collected books by them avidly when I was but a wee lass who had to scour the bookstores when I actually got to go to a bookstore (once a year, perhaps), to see what I could afford on my $1.00 budget. I don’t say that I don’t like having MORE of them, because I happen to find their books more sympatico with me than the latest milSF (well, depends on the author, there, too, as I have enjoyed Brad’s books and I like some other authors of same — but if they are going to go hog-wild on the weapons and space battles, I am so out of there! though, of course, my husband eats that up with a spoon and I will read his books if there’s nothing else around — how I finally got to read some John Ringo and the last few Harry Dresden books, actually). I’m not saying that I dislike male authors in the slightest. Because I don’t. I just read what sounds good to me, and if that means that a lot of the books I’m reading these days are called “pink sf”, so be it. I am unapologetic about liking what I like — I buy Baen books and Tor books and self-published books and DAW books and whatever else piques my interest. I just read Michael Z. Williamson’s new time travel book, because the cover caught my eye. I thought it was pretty cool, though I was bummed to discover it was a trilogy. I thought it stood alone well, and I really hate it that over half the books I pick up are parts of a series. If there’s one thing I’d change in SF publishing, it would be that there are very few stand-alone novels coming out now. That’s the old school vibe I’d love to see come back.

    And, btw, I will give ANYTHING a chance to catch my attention. I’ve deliberately bought and read bad books because they were so bad; I’ve picked up Westerns and sports novels and other books way outside my normal channels of interest, just because I thought I’d give it a try and see what I thought.

  101. Yes, I believe Larry is on record stating that he’s not interested in a Hugo and would refuse a Hugo in the future. I can’t remember if it was for winning, or for merely being nominated. Either way, I think Larry’s done with the Hugo and done with Worldcon too. These are ‘small’ things for a guy working at Larry’s level, and he’s tired of being tarred and feathered for trying to simply tell the truth.

    Frankly, I am about there myself. I’ve said it before in this space: the market value of the Hugo (as an accolade) is highly suspect. There is no cash prize attached to the Hugo — unlike the Dell Magazines awards, or the Writers of the Future award — and it’s almost impossible to point to anyone and say, “She won a Hugo, and it made her career!” Usually the ‘made’ people have careers, with or without awards; and that’s Larry right now. Mainly, the Hugo (in the 21st century) goes to writers with tons of buddies and/or social media hangers-on. It in no way foretells sales potential, nor is it a signifier of broad audience appeal.

    I think this can be changed — but only if the CHORFs don’t lock people out of the selection and voting process. If the CHORFs do that (and there are many ways they could do it) the Hugo is doomed forever to being insignificant.

    And I will happily walk away from it, just as I walked away from SFWA (and the Nebula.)

    But at least nobody can say I didn’t try to fix things first — to make the Hugo live up to its reputation again.

  102. “Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin 9h9 hours ago ‘SFF has never been more exclusionary than Field & Stream,’ the puppy tells me. ‘You will never pie chart a military cemetery.'”

    “Alexandra Erin ‏@alexandraerin 6h6 hours ago @dj_kittycat It’s part of a stream of non-sequitur from a Sad Puppy calling himself ‘James May’. Oddly, I’m pretty sure I know what he means.”

    My comment was precisely on point. The reason you see it as a non-sequitor is because you don’t understand principle, nor does any SJW or radical feminist. You first pretended not to be an activist and clearly are part of a movement committed to anti-male anti-white initiatives. My point was those initiatives are based on lies. Part of those fibs lies in the fact you can tell as much about an intersectionalist by what they never say and do as what they do say and do.

    In a movement obsessed with pie-charting everything under the sun, they will never pie-chart a military cemetery. The reason for that is obvious in a movement that splits humans into men and women and then takes credit accordingly: you have not done your duty and nor do you have any interest in pointing out the demographic spike of dead men to the tune of 97.7 in the Middle East in the last decade plus. Suddenly demographic spikes are of no interest to you. You will never pie-chart a military cemetery or try to introduce diversity there. It is a tabu subject. Intersectionalism also has a heightened interest in colonialism, as long as it’s never Ottoman, Mughal, Aztec, Incan, etc. In short, your movement is a fraud based on lies, convenient pie-chart blindness and a hatred of men and racism.

    SFF – which was almost exclusively a magazine literature from Burroughs in 1912 to 1950, has been proven over and over again to have been no different that any other few magazines out there that catered to cultural whims and tastes. Those magazines didn’t exclude anyone any more than the usual marketing whims of Field & Stream, Cosmopolitan, or anything else. The idea SFF pulps were cis-white male in any ideological sense is pure paranoia and fuckery.

    Look at your Twitter stream: it’s anti-white anti-male central.

  103. Yeah. I hadn’t looked at her twitter stream. I have now. A few things make more sense, like why an actual debate is lacking with her appearances here. Silly me for operating on the assumption that people want to debate as opposed to mere posturing.

  104. Brad, there is little doubt the Hugos have been transformed from a thing that operates like a hall of fame or museum into a movement to highlight the oppression of men, whites and heterosexuals. We have quotes from every influential figure in core SFF that speak not only to an affirmative action movement but one where those uplifted figures are obsessively anti-white, anti-male and anti-heterosexual in their non-fiction rhetoric.

    SJWs reply to that by simply ignoring it, redefining words, or pretending their own quotes dont’ even exist. You will never win an argument with such brazen liars.

    All of that trumps any consideration of neutral artistry and even the genre itself, as witness stories like Hild and “Wakulla Springs” which have no genre elements whatsoever. In each respective case, gay feminism and Jim Crow trumped the genre itself. “The Weight of the Sunrise” could’ve been written by Derrick Bell. Ancillary Justice doesn’t even exist without French Queer Theory and Judith Butler. The now Nebula-nominated “The Fisher Queen” (my vote to win) could’ve been written by Andrea Dworkin. The now Nebula-nominated “We Are the Cloud” could’ve been written by Allen Ginsberg. “The Lady Astronaut of Mars” could’ve been written by Betty Friedan. “Selkie Stories Are For Losers” could’ve been written by Simone de Beauvoir or Monique Wittg. I could go on and on. It’s all about the rocket ships and neutron stars. That is a dead literary movement; dead on its feet. And here’s a love letter from Wiscon. It’s a true Two-Minute Hate from some truly sick and stupid people:

    https://storify.com/tinytempest/misandry-reverse-racism-and-other-imaginary-creatu

    “Nivair H. Gabriel@nivairface We don’t want to nominate ppl just bc they’re in a certain category… unless that category is fucked-up white men! #ImaginaryMisandry”

    “Miss V@incitata Misandry & mansplaining are twins but one comes out during the day and one comes out during the night. #ImaginaryMisandry”

    “Chinelo Onwualu@chineloonwualu #imaginarymisandry Another imaginary creature: The man-hating feminist”

    “SoosheBot@SoosheBot The final imaginary creature: The Truly Objective Historian, armed with “facts,” “logic” and the [whitest of] truthiness #ImaginaryMisandry”

    You can kiss A Canticle For Leibowitz, “The Big Front Yard,” “The Dragon Masters” and The Demolished Man good-bye. There is no longer any interest in such artistry.

    These arguments – no matter the facts – are just running in circles. You will never win an argument with such people. They are racial and sexual fanatics fronted by idiotic naive water-carriers.

  105. @ct236 Who cares? Obviously you’re all worked up about it and seeking the use the question as a platform to attack Brad.

    I think that’s not entirely accurate. I’m not hiding the fact that I’m opposed to the concept of slates in general, but for it to develop into a well-informed position (instead of a reflexive opposition), the least I should do is try and find out how they were created.

    So far I get that there was a call for recommendations, and then there was a slate. Those are the elements visible to me, and as per Shadowdancer’s screenshot, Brad has mentioned that there were other sources that were not openly visible. Given that it’s also been called an open and democratic / transparent system, I’d like to know more about those features as well.

    I know it’s annoying to have a question that’s already been answered asked again, but I’m being completely honest when I say that *I’ve not seen those answers*.

    I’m keenly aware that many of us exist in our own bubbles of reinforcing media narratives and like minded people, and as such our views become a little bit of an echo chamber. One of the reasons I’m here is to try and get that *other side*, because in my bubble the narrative seems to be “We keep asking Brad how exactly this was open and democratic, but he keeps refusing to provide any proof or details”,

    Again, I’m sorry that you keep getting the same questions again and again, but I’m being completely honest in my, well, for lack of a better word, ignorance and curiosity.

  106. “open and democratic” isn’t referring to how the slate that Brad posted was formed. It refers to the SP3 campaign being carried out in the open and nominating democratically. There was no back-room dealing for who would vote for what in exchange for something. No vote buying occurred.

    And as many people have said already, The “slate” was a list of recommendations, I voted for those items on the slate that I had read and liked. I didn’t vote for some of the things there because I hadn’t read them, and I voted for things that weren’t on the “slate”

    but you keep harping on how Brad came up with the list of recommendations, and it frankly doesn’t matter how the list was generated. What matters is that the SP3 campaign was in the open from the moment it was announced, and that everyone who participated did so out of choice (paying their own money to do so) and there was nothing forcing anyone to vote in any particular way.

    When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

  107. I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.

  108. When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

    You know, since the admins have all the ballots, they could fairly easily compute and release a single number: The size of the largest set of ballots that are duplicates of one another. This could be done without revealing the number of votes for any given nominee and without revealing anyone’s ballot, or any other information that is embargoed or non-public.

  109. “…but I’m being completely honest when I say that *I’ve not seen those answers*.”

    Ya know, I really have to mention that… “what you know” and “what happened in the open” are not fully overlapping sets.

    What pops up from Google – dem·o·crat·ic (dĕm′ə-krăt′ĭk)
    adj.
    1. Of, characterized by, or advocating democracy: democratic government; a democratic union.
    2. Of or for the people in general; popular: a democratic movement; democratic art forms.
    3. Believing in or practicing social equality: “a proper democratic scorn for bloated dukes and lords” (George du Maurier).
    4. Democratic Of, relating to, or characteristic of the Democratic Party.

    There’s variation and more or less emphasis on politics depending on where the definition comes up but really, Snowcrash? People have been coming here like clockwork crying about how Brad said this was democratic! But he just chose what he liked!… I’m a bit tired of it because people aren’t that dense by accident. They’re only that dense on purpose. “Democratic” is a fully functional descriptive word that can be applied in a number of ways to various areas of human life that don’t include “One Man One Vote.”

    Even if the ONLY way that his process was “democratic” was that it was the rabble in opposition to the elite, his choice of that term is sufficiently justified.

  110. “People have been coming here like clockwork crying about how Brad said this was democratic! But he just chose what he liked!… I’m a bit tired of it because people aren’t that dense by accident.”

    What she said.

    SJW’s always lie. Always.

  111. Twila, I wouldn’t have even mentioned it except that there are a lot of people who really are trying to “disappear” those women authors. Also, I agree about the “series” problem. If something can stand alone, that’s great. Bujold was awesome that way with the Vorkosigan books. You really can pick up any one of them or start in the middle because they are separate stories. I’ve been burned so often I stopped reading books that are a series until I have all the books. What happens often is that I’ll read the first one, like it a whole lot but realize that it’s not the end, so I wait for the author to “get done”. While I’m waiting I loose interest. At least it’s *possible* now to buy all the books in a series at once instead of having to worry about missing book 2 because it was off the shelf (or never on it) when you remembered to check. That really sucked.

  112. I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.

    Look for Snowcrash over in File 770.

    davidelang replies to the rest. We did this openly, so the antis bitch and moan and complain that ‘we didn’t.’

    You know what? Fuck it. I’ve had enough. Hear that snap? That was my patience and tolerance for bullshit breaking. Apologies to Brad for the profanity-ridden rant.

    Seriously, Snowcrash? That’s the ‘first’? Then you didn’t do your research enough. I was in the hospital for pre-eclampsia risk when the nominations were being discussed and missed most of the discussions, but there were mentions of it being discussed in places like Facebook (which I don’t have), or According to Hoyt, or Mad Genius Club, maybe over at Larry’s in the discussions and comments, and that there were people emailing their suggestions in and that those were forwarded on to Brad.

    I’ve been saying over and over again that it wasn’t just on Brad’s blog that suggestions were being given. I’ve MENTIONED the emails BECAUSE BRAD AND THE OTHERS MENTIONED THEM TOO BEFORE. What happens? That inconvenient truth is ignored, like how the antis ignore James May when he quotes the people they uphold with their racist, sexist hateful quotes.

    Then – bad timing for you anti’s – my infant son died of SIDS while this was really heating up and I couldn’t focus on your fucking trivial nitpicky bullshit and constant accusations of us being racist, misogynist, homophobic, insert-checklist of social justice bully gotcha accusations here – bigots. This actually affected us all – Brad, Larry, Sarah Hoyt, TL Knighton, etc. – Go look at Larry’s blog around the early April weeks if you don’t fucking believe me. It was on Brad’s blogpost about his family that I first wrote anything about my son Brandon’s death, because I couldn’t take how hateful your side was being to him and his family. We lost the pace because of grief, and here are you assholes nitpicking about stuff we were all above the board on and behaving as if this award for books is more important than life. Awards for fiction. Sorry for the inconvenience of a sudden death that threw us for a loop and kept me from replying again and again repeating myself, not that it clearly was important enough for you.

    So yeah, so fucking sorry real life got in the way, we can’t deal with your stupid bullshit at the moment. That goes for both me who’s mourning, and Brad, who’s off to fight ISIS, while you sit here and bitch about ‘not good enough, we’ll no award everything Puppy!’

    Yeah, sorry if that shows to everyone exactly how petty you lot are. That is not OUR fault. Keep saying it is, then I guess none of you are capable of making your own decisions nor have agency of any sort. Because guess what? Your actions your responsibility. You can’t own that, then you’re not worth paying attention to or treating like adults regardless of your age.

    I’ve reached my absolute limit with you lot. We’re evil if we disagree, that much has been clear. If we don’t do things ‘the exact right way’ the way ‘you wanted’ – vis a vis Alexandra Erin – we are ‘inefficient’ at best and descend from there to evil hellspawn. You’re all throwing tantrums because the Hugos ALLOWS PEOPLE TO NOMINATE AND VOTE FOR WHAT THEY WANT IF THEY PAY THEIR 40$ – and we just got together to discuss and pull together a slate of suggestions that, even when the list came out, several people said they didn’t agree with everything on. But no, that truth, that reality, doesn’t mesh with the straw men you lot of anti-Puppies have built up that we’d be voting ‘lockstep’ and that ‘slates lock out other books.’ Hey, guess what? Not all of us read the same stuff, not all of us like the same things you do, and if we missed out on books because we didn’t read them in time, you’ve been howling that it’s OUR FAULT TOO. Ultimately, this is all because we didn’t agree with what the social justice bullies think is good, and nominated for what we thought was good and worthy, and now you’re all panicking because our numbers were enough to get those works nominated, and you’re all TERRIFIED those unapproved works WILL GET HUGOS. OH NO! SLATES OF SUGGESTIONS THAT DON’T AGREE WITH WHAT YOU LIKE! WAAAAH! DID THOSE AUTHORS AGREE TO BE LIKED BY THOSE UNCLEAN WRONGFANS ENOUGH THAT THEY INCLUDE THEM ON THAT LIST!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOO! DESTROY DESTROY DESTROY – that’s what you guys have been doing.

    It’s getting clear and obvious that no matter what we do, no matter how much we explain, you’ve already painted us as evil and are simply mining us for quotes to parade in front of the rest of your antis that we’re evilbadmeanies AND THAT IS WRONG AND NOT ALLOWED. You’re not interested in honest discussion. What you have is a witch hunt.

    You’re not even going to read the works or decide fairly. That much is clear. Hell, you lot have been proud of it. Proud of your bullying. Proud of your false Amazon review mongering and trumpeting about it being all Right And Good because it’s against Puppy-nominated authors.

    And if you can’t fucking deal with Vox Day, don’t bitch and moan about him here. Too scared that he and the Dread Ilk will rip you guys to shreds, but prefer to pretend that it’s because ‘he’s scum and not worth addressing?’ Then stop bringing him up on Sad Puppy blogs to BEAT US WITH, you hypocritical abusive two faced treacherous double-standard holding, goal-postmoving cowards.

    I’m done. Call us bigots, call us racists, call us misogynists, whatever – you’ve overused them to the point we don’t care about those terms any more. You have the real bigots and racists, and hateful people on your side. You have Brianna Wu “My husband has four Hugos, and half of everything he owns is MINE so I HAVE TWO HUGOS” stupidity, and Arthur Chu, and were the ones who drove an immigrant writer, a lesbian/bisexual leftist woman, and independent magazines off the Hugo Awards because you didn’t approve of their being liked by us. By your actions and words, we clearly see what you are.

    Oh yeah. And you have Clamps / Yamamanama on your side. The misogynistic stalker who has been stalking me and threatening my children over several years because I’m against Sharia law, has been repeatedly banned here on Brad’s site, banned from several other blogs, including Monster Hunter Nation, According To Hoyt, Mad Genius Club, and probably more that I don’t know of, for his excessive, hateful, spewtastic harassment. He’s shown up on Alexandra Erin’s and she’s obviously fine with his presence because VOX DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY.

    Yep, Vox Day. The man who is ‘worse than Sharia law and ISIS to the Puppy Kickers.’ Y’know, despite the fact that he isn’t likely to kill you for being a willful woman, being gay, being not Muslim, being an atheist, or being a Christian/Jew/Buddhist… but in Social Justice Bully reality, NOT LIKING AND NOT APPROVING IS SO MUCH WORSE THAN BEING KILLED OMGZ.

  113. *looks at carnage, decides to do his best to avoid doing anything that makes Shadowdancer angry at him*

  114. Y’know the trope of the big beefy soldier with a tiny Asian wife and how he tries NOT to make her mad? That’s why. I don’t get angry often. I’m easily irritated, but not easily angered – there’s a difference and if you don’t know what that is, you’re a moron (Not you, Patrick, but addressed to the antis taking offense at every tiny little fucking thing.) I have a long fuse – not as long as Brad’s holy crap that is a patient man – but this nitpicky bullshit over several months and constant goalpost moving and taking advantage over the fact that HI THERE BRAD IS PREPARING FOR DEPLOYMENT YOU FUCKING DOGPILING SODSUCKERS just skipped several feet of fuse and snapped the wrong wire to nuclear.

    The last time I did this on someone else’s blog was when that stupid little SJW cunt came over to According to Hoyt, made snipey comments at Sarah, said that Sarah was unlikely to show the comment… and Sarah did. “I’ll behave badly and EXPECT YOU TO BE NICE TO ME” is manipulative bullshit worthy of emotional abusers and I am sick and tired of that crap being pulled on us.

    And yes, I said cunt, because that what that whiny little cunt was. I call them as I see ’em. Don’t like it? Sod off, I don’t give a rat’s diseased arse.

  115. The “oh please martyr me while I act like a complete jackass” type posting? Yeah, I’ve seen that before. Very annoying, though mocking them sometimes throws them for a loop.

  116. For the record, the reason why Yamamanama’s a misogynist is because over a long period of time, we observed that he was consistently more awful in his behavior towards female commenters versus male commenters, while he was at Jordan179’s livejournal, especially if they held political opinions he disagreed with. Since he was commenting at a largely conservative blog…

  117. By the way, for the people who are unaware of Yamamanama’s history – his history of being misogynistic includes being hostile to people like Mary Catelli, Sarah Hoyt, Kate Paulk, the female commentators other than myself at Jordan179’s blog, and has a proven history of lying and misrepresenting the people he doesn’t like, and accusing people who disagree with him as Vox supporters.

  118. Ah, Clamps. I don’t believe I’ve had the misfortune of having you respond to one of my comments with some lame attempt to smear the person you hate so much.

    What a sad and pathetic little man you are. Full of loathing, projection and spite which is somehow someone else’s fault.

  119. Clampsy, why do you waste your breath repeating the same tired lies? No one believes you, least of all anyone here that’s dealt with you before. Go back to the kid’s table, the adults are talking.

  120. Yep, in Clampsy’s tiny overheated little head one can engage in misogyny with a clean conscience: simply claim they’re “extremist” and that makes it okay!

    Oh, and the “extremists” made him do it!

    Oh naughty, wicked Zoot!

  121. Oooo, you’ve added Markku into your bilefest now! Congratulations, Clampsy-poo, you might actually have succeeded in making a Finn laugh out loud! 😀

  122. You’ve already spent weeks (months? Years?) whining about Shadowdancer– and those who notice when you try to stir up e-mobs with your pathetic lies– compiling screen shots of your misbehavior.

    You threaten kids, and when people take screen shots and object, try to make yourself the victim.

    You have no power, Clamps; you don’t get to control others and demand evidence time and time again, especially not when everyone is already familiar with the evidence and your lying denial of it.

    About the most honest thing you’ve said is to clarify that examples of your woman-hating behavior span beyond this decade, and even that honesty is probably an accident on your part.

  123. 1. I’ve given evidence of Vox and Markku stalking my friend. Brad deletes it.
    2. Ok. Link me to something I wrote that’s misogynist. When I said it doesn’t matter.

  124. A known stalker and harasser finds the catalogue of his deeds ‘creepy’ because it gives his victims something to refer to. Classic abuser DARVO tactics. “It’s the victims’ fault that they’re being stalked by me! I’m stalking them because I think they’re hateful” is Yama’s attitude.

  125. “Your cataloguing is creepy. Mekadave is merely unpleasant.”

    Awww Clampsy, you’re gonna make me blush with pride! 😀

  126. This has some interesting reading…
    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41
    ….and by “interesting” I mean in the “morbidly fascinating” sort of interesting.

    (This is more for those whom have not read much about Clamps. I’m sure much whingeing and other complaining will come from Clamps in a frantic attempt to deflect attention from it.)

  127. Stalking women, threatening children, going to random places and lying about the targets of your stalking, demanding evidence that you’ve ever done it:
    not “creepy.”
    Collecting evidence:
    “creepy.”

    Watching public youtube videos, and informing someone that a person they know is a long-time stalker of women, is not “stalking your friend.” I can see how you might get upset about your behavior becoming public knowledge, especially since you obviously know it’s wrong– you wouldn’t keep accusing others of it, otherwise.

    Following a woman around the internet, lying about what she has said in an attempt to get people to make accusations and threats, slandering her in strange places and insulting her writing in totally random locations, on the other hand…. (Have you heard, by the way, that she usually finds out you’ve been doing that again because she gets a sudden spike in sales, and confused notes from people who look and find out she’s not actually Satan?)

    Please note the continued attempt to demand evidence right after complaining about there being a pile of evidence.

  128. There was that particularly creepy one where he flat out says, on finding out Aff is my housemate, that I
    ‘spread my legs for another man.’

    A housemate is a person who just lives with someone else, usually sharing rent and cost of bills. Yama’s thread of thought goes like this: “Aff lives with Shadowdancer. Therefore, Shadowdancer is sleeping with Aff” – a thread of thought that makes no sense unless he believes that a man merely living with a woman = gives that man sexual rights to her body.

    Also, the rather slanderous implication that I’m cheating on my husband and that I’m a slut is there.

  129. Translation: “Quick! Pay attention to my constant deflection attempts! Ignore me declaring people not worth my time yet spending so much time on them anyway!”

  130. Fool me once shame on me, especially if I wasn’t paying attention. Snowcrash is a disingenuous time-waster with a gigantic sense of entitlement.

    Seriously people, “where did Brad get the slate of recommended nominees” has been asked and answered over and over again. Five minutes with google and voila!

    From now on the only proper response is mockery. We got the recommendations from the N-dimensional super-mentalities buried beneath the dread pyramid of Ichlichlichlitzl. That’s why they swept the Hugos.

  131. “See, Dave, I know you said you’d dedicate your life to making me miserable.”
    Finish the sentence, you sad little troll: “if you didn’t leave Shadowdancer alone”. So typical of you. I love how you think you’re being devious. It’s adorable!

  132. Yama is lying in the hopes that nobody will click through to Vox’s site.

    http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/the-trolls-new-target.html

    This is a quote directly from it, and you can click through to confirm a faithful copy and paste of text.

    Friday, December 27, 2013
    The troll’s new target
    It seems that Mr. Marston, aka Yama, Clampps, Arachnothera, Will le Fey, and a plethora of other pseudonyms, has now taken to vandalizing the Quantum Mortis Wikia in his copious spare time.

    18:49, December 25, 2013

    Welcome to the Quantum Mortis Wiki

    Nobody’s ever going to read this piece of shit.

    Thanks to Wikipedia, I’m accustomed to everyone in my private life knowing what I do online. The trolls, however, are not, and I’ve learned they really don’t like the people in their daily lives learning about their online activities. So, as promised, I’m gradually going to bring every banned troll’s online activity into his real life. Each time a troll shows his head after being banned, I will disclose one more piece of personal information about them.

    As you can see from his IP address, 72.93.116.138, Andrew Marston lives in Marshfield, Massachusetts. He works at a wildlife center, which is why he uses bird names for so many of his trolling identities.

  133. GRRM explains the rape in his work; obsession is right on the job:

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 2h2 hours ago @john_zeleznik @eruditeogre Which is a tool of systemic patriarchy and should be resisted at every turn.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 2h2 hours ago @john_zeleznik @eruditeogre The impulse to defend him and accept his explanation is the implicit pressure of bro solidarity,”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 3h3 hours ago About 1 of every 20 men is a rapist. My theory is that the mechanisms which allow them to operate differ but number is a constant or close.”

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane 6h6 hours ago OH YEAH @ghostwritingcow’s story ALSO ACES THE BECHDEL TEST 0 dudes, 0 mentions of dudes, I approve #Misandry”

    Ghostwritingcow is Sunil Patel, the guy at Lightspeed Magazine who won’t review white men. Lightspeed is responsible for the falsely named Women Destroy SF (and Queers Destroy SF) because in truth it was Ideologues of Gay Feminism Destroy SF. It was also a lesbian ideologue who created the absurd Bechdel Test. Why do people who so obviously have a thing for men make hashtags like #ImaginaryMisandry?

    Considering so-called misogyny is so rampant, where are the Twitter feeds across the SFF community which daily and obsessively take down all women as moral inferiors, or review censor non-whites, or make cracks about blacks? Exactly what are they pushing back against other than the inside of their thick skulls? In fact there is nothing that can remotely match the impulsive racism, misandry and paranoia of these insane gender feminists.

    There’s your literature, your love of art and the infestation that squats at the core of this community like a cancer.

    “Cecily Kane ‏@Cecily_Kane Jun 1 @jsuttonmorse So I ended up taking African lit with the same professor and that class was pretty wonderful. Hence me reading + Sundiata, an Epic of Old Mali, which is short and highly readable and awesome btw. + It kicked the shit out of Beowulf, other boring white boy epics, and the rest was history”

    With Kane as a new addition to the Hugo-nominated Skiffy and Fanty franchise, I feel sure they have more nominations on the horizon. The truth is there are no quotes about “boring black boy epics” and women-hating that even exist in SFF let alone the massive flood that comes from this sick gender feminist ideology. It’s all about the rocket ships and neutron stars and Ringworlds, isn’t it?

  134. The link here explains the connections between Yama and Sunlight, and one of them is the quoted IP from the forum logs.

    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=41#p60

    Which matches the IP from Vox’s post.

    Yama defending Sunlight for hating Aff for ‘being a creep with an elf fetish’ makes no sense on a gaming forum for a Lineage II MMO clan – a game that has elves, dark elves, humans, winged humanoids, orcs, and other fantasy races as playable characters. Plus, the certainty in which Yama asserts his statement is, as Dr. Mauser observes, Yama referring to himself in third person.

    As I note, how is Yama supposed to know what Sunlight thinks, given that it is a statement of certainty with no ambiguity, if Yama is not Sunlight?

    There are other corroborating data in that link, which Yama is conveniently ignoring, that I use. With the use of the list of pseudonyms, it is also clear, along with Yama’s use of “Sasha”, “Pieter de Graz” “Clamps” and the latest, “the Chevalier de Graz” that Yama uses lots and lots of pseudonyms in attempts to disassociate himself from his past commentary, but the history I’ve compiled illustrates that despite the use of pseudonyms, he is identifiable by a variety of means.

    It’s six, nearly seven years of data gathering, so it’s a lot of info.

  135. Clamps is also apparently blissfully oblivious that he has committed two felonies.

  136. Sorry, guess you’re not up on U.S. laws. Cyberstalking, which he has provided more than enough evidence off *that i have seen him post before I even saw your thread documenting it*, is a felony in the state he lives in, compounded by the fact that he is circumventing security measures on a site he has been banned from in order to gain access. Even when this is done simply by creating an alternate login to access the site, it still counts as illegal access to a computer system he is not allowed on, and use of system resources on a system he has been specifically bidden not to access- colloquially, ‘hacking’. Both are felonies in his state of residence, the first with up to five years in prison and the second with up to two and a half years.

  137. Interesting link, Shadowdancer.

    I had no idea this person went so far as to stalk you to continuer harassing you.

    A truly sick individual.

  138. (and on that note, this while thing needs to be logged, Brad, before you delete him… and Shadowdancer, you could make screen grabs before he suddenly realizes that yes, his stupid BS can land him in prison and deletes the posts himself.)

    By the way, no, this is not a ‘threat’, Andrew. A court of law would tell you it is ‘a statement of fact’

    You want someone to stalk? in the modern vernacular, “Come at me, bro.”

  139. Ah, well, it would have to be Brad, or Larry, or Sarah, etc, who would have to file. There was that interesting request he made of Jordan179 to make him an account on our forums back when a friend had a story there behind locked access forums for members only, and he complained that our forums didn’t allow browsing by proxy. Jordan refused, and Yama was that it wasn’t bad to allow him to bypass the user registration process.

  140. Take note of how SJWs typically back up their stupid remarks with “research.” Merely being white and male gets you thrown into an advantage which never existed and so Foz Meadows has to retract and edit an article at the Huffington Post. Write a short comment and suddenly you’re thrown in front of a radio listening to Rush Limbaugh. Merely exist and write stories for 5 decades and you’re thrown into a woman-hating Ku Klux Klan. Articles at The Guardian simply make shit up out of their heads about white cis SF.

    Now let’s take real research that’s called “random quotes” by SJWs:

    Thousands of quotes from:

    The presidents of literary organizations
    The officers of those organizations
    Their most activist rank and file
    Editors
    Comics writers
    NY Times best-selling SFF authors
    Influential bloggers
    Con runners
    Convention Guest’s of Honor
    Multiple award nominees and winners
    Serial panelists
    Bloggers at the web site associate of the largest publisher of SF in the world

    What’s significant about that? They all share the peculiar fake academic language of a gender feminist ideology created by obsessively anti-male gay feminists for gay feminists and with an anti-white racial intersectional kicker later added on. Normal Americans don’t use that lingo. It looks like this:

    White privilege, rape culture, male gaze, patriarchy, whiteness, white saviors, tools of the patriarchy, misogyny, safe-space, trigger warning, ableism, cisnormative, neuroatypical, heteronormativity, transphobia, Bechdel Test, toxic masculinity, manpain, manfeels, mansplaining, marginalized voices, decolonize, de-white, gendered slurs, cultural appropriation, people of color, genderblindness, gender-fluid, etc., etc., etc.

    What does this mean for awards? Last year over 85% of the most important Hugo nominees and all five winners of the Nebulas were activists fully on board with pushing this ideology. That’s based on research, not fat-headed assumptions – quotes.

    Now ask yourself how many people you know use that lingo every day? No matter where I’ve been in this world, whether Rio, Cairo, Malta or Denpensar, it’s 0%. That is the very definition of a cult. These people live in an insulated fucking diving bell.

  141. (Sighs) Clamps, again? Hasn’t he figured out that he defeats his own arguments by showing up wherever one may find Shadowdancer?
    Meanwhile, as to accusations regarding Vox Day and his friend, it’s a little like Hermann Goering complaining about Hamburg and Dresden.

  142. davidelang

    “open and democratic” isn’t referring to how the slate that Brad posted was formed. It refers to the SP3 campaign being carried out in the open and nominating democratically. There was no back-room dealing for who would vote for what in exchange for something. No vote buying occurred.
    ….
    When we finally see the nomination numbers, Chaos Horizons will do their analysis on them and show that the SP folks did not vote as a monolithic block, and you will ignore this and keep claiming that we did.

    Fair enough if that’s what your impression, I’m going by Brad’s statement earlier that “…the shake-up was conducted 100% in the open, democratically, using a democratic process” and how this compares with Larry’s post that “here is what the Evil League of Evil authors came up with in discussion”., and it was “put together by the ELoE being all strategic like

    *THAT’S* something that (unsurprisingly!) I’ve heard of, because it fits in well with the narrative in my usual stomping grounds that SP3 is just Brad and his friends kicking over the tables. As I said in my earlier post, I’m here trying to get a different perspective, and I’m doing it in good faith (poorly no doubt, but in good faith). It’s really hard for me to search or get details that I don’t usually frequent, like Brad’s FB, or MGC, or Baens Bar, which near as I can figure is where a lot of discussions have taken place.

    I can’t force anyone to answer, and at the end of the day, I’m just here, trying to get a more complete picture of this kerfuffle. It’s a different environment, so I behave somewhat differently, and I would hope that I don’t offend- unreasonably or overly anyway.

    Regarding your last paragraph, I agree with you – I think very few people voted straight line SP3. I’ve put my thoughts here in the last comment thread, but basically I agree that SP3 probably didn’t have the adherence level of RP. I am looking forward to seeing the full nomination numbers as well.

  143. No, you don’t offend, Snowcrash. It takes time to measure white privilege, white racism, the patriarchy, misogyny and the heterosexual matrix. We’ll get back to you as soon as we’re finished.

    Meanwhile, why don’t you join Weimer, Ann and Erin and crowdsource what color the sky is, because side effects.

  144. Pingback: Mercenary Writers and the Meaning of Awards | Lisbet Wilson

  145. You really are physically incapable of helping yourself, aren’t you Clamps?

    Guess what? It doesn’t matter what Vox did or didn’t do. The simple fact that you are here posting on Brad’s page after being banned so you can harass Shadowdancer is all the proof we need.

    That we have tons besides this is just icing for the cake.

    Protesting your innocence by doing what you’re accused of *more* only makes you look even more pathetic.

    Seriously, you’ve reached the level of protesting your innocence of a breaking and entering by breaking and entering to shout at people that you didn’t do any such thing.

    And the people you’re shouting at saw you do the earlier one.

    Get professional help. Or get bent. Either way, piss off pinche pendejo.

  146. Don’t worry, I’ll be plugging this ruthlessly come August. You’re not just supporting me, but other members of my writing group as well. 🙂

  147. “the Chevalier de Graz says:

    June 3, 2015 at 11:23 pm

    It’s not like she believed him anyway. Vox desperately wants to be manipulative but he sucks at it.”

    Hmm. More projection I see. It’s almost like Clamps is a decade long parody project of a stereotypical misogynist manipulator. In the end maybe he will compile a book of all his quotes and the subsequent smack downs?

  148. I hope he sticks around; I’m one square away on my ‘Nutcase Bingo’ card.

  149. @ s1al: “I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.”

    This times 10.

    Snowcrash: looking at you. Have you captured enough material to go back and shit post at F770?

  150. Hey, Clamps. You obviously skim until offended, because you missed the exchange up-thread where I said that if this ever got to a real war, Vox would end up in jail for war crimes, right alongside a good chunk of the anti-Puppies. I’d defend Stalin himself against the charge that East Prussia justified Barbarossa, while condemning him for the Holodomor.
    Of course, since this is all based on what people have said and done online, so would you.

  151. Note which side has literally scores of people who openly admit to rather serious mental health issues with an anti-social bent.

    As if you needed that confirmation, they react (complete with trigger warnings) to a scene in Game of Thrones, an ad with a bikini, and how the Black Widow is depicted in a film as if it is hate speech.

    They claim the handful of SF magazines 1900-50 acted like an informal Jim Crow for non-whites and women though there was no sign of anything like the culture-wide racially and sexually insulting and supremacist rhetoric (including open support for racially segregated rooms and reviews) SJWs themselves deploy every single day. Since that is all a sham, the call for diversity to counteract a non-event itself is a sham meant to disguise sex and race-hatred.

    This is lapped up like kool-aid by our middle-class SJWs eager to make SFF and the world a better place. The problem there is it was never broken. Now it is. Neil Gaiman is himself racially insulted and put to the question the same way his buddy Jonathan Ross was and bends the knee and takes selfies with his inquisitors. His 2 million Twitter followers could’ve been put to better use. Instead Gaiman does a Scalzi and lends his support, and the last WisCon celebrates by acting like what can only be described as a white hate-fest. Alexandra Erin, a man unsurprisingly pretending to be a women, is WisCon to his core and Tweets with the most viciously anti-white voices from the margins of SFF. He dashes in here to count coup and then triumphantly dashes back to write satire damning to himself because… unawareness.

    These are not people you can take seriously. Even the most sane of them have turned SF literature into shallow novelizations of Jonny Quest. Others write stories dressed up in awful over-literate writer’s workshop prose where Jonny and Hadji switch sides (if not sexes) and declare themselves “edgy.”

    While doing that, SJWs claim to be the literary descendants of Roger Zelazny and Alfred Bester at the same time they reject those writers as privileged cis-whites. It just depends on what SJWs are lying about at the time.

    To say SJWs subscribe to an ideology of pathological falsehoods who can’t be reached by any form of logic ever known to mankind is accurate. There’s not even a strike zone in this Mudville, so Casey can’t even strike out; or do anything really. It all depends on who’s lying about what at the time.

    One of the funniest parts of this is SJWs celebrate the very SF they have turned their backs on: The Three Body Problem. It’s a good novel, but by SJW definitions is nothing more than a shallow act of cultural appropriation of mid-century American SF which might’ve been considered daring at that time. It’s ’60s Norwegian blues music with some Tron thrown in. Does it pass the lesbian Bechdel Test? Who the fuck cares? Diversity.

    http://www.vulture.com/2015/04/bechdel-test-creator-surprised-by-its-longevity.html

  152. In fairness to our resident troll, his work appears to be a reasonably well-made piece, but there’s not much more to recommend it than that.
    (Shrugs) Anyway, it’s immaterial. Two different styles, in two different mediums, and he wants us to call one or the other better?

  153. In fairness to our resident troll, his work appears to be a reasonably well-made piece, but there’s not much more to recommend it than that.
    (Shrugs) Anyway, it’s immaterial. Two different styles, in two different mediums, and he wants us to call one or the other better?

    The fact that he’d compound what could already be criminal violations of cybersecurity laws to attempt to argue for his artistic ‘talent’ is either hilarious or sad.

    I also love his Archer postings as if posting those actually helps his arguments or makes him look sophisticated.

  154. Classic! Clampsy is on a roll today.
    Compared to what? R2-Double-D2 and her fucked up hands?

    LOL! literally. You are going to criticize hands? Have you looked at the hands on your drawing? Her whole left arm is particularly bad. Since you have baited me into it, the nose and mouth need some serious help as well.

  155. I saw no reason to comment on hers, mostly because she didn’t demand comparison. I also didn’t know what she used to make the picture.
    Also, it’s not like I’d use either picture for aid in taking an anatomy exam.

  156. “Her whole left arm is particularly bad. Since you have baited me into it, the nose and mouth need some serious help as well.”

    Correction the left arm from the viewers perspective.

  157. Of course we have reason to complain that you’ve opened the tent flaps inefficiently. We’d have nothing to complain about if you had run a competent campaign to increase Hugo awareness in the ranks of general SF/F fandom. What would we be complaining about?

    Extrapolating from the success rate of SP2, it seemed reasonable to guess SP3 would put one or two—maybe three—nominees on the ballot in any category. (Which, by the way, would have gotten us the same furious denunciations we got last year.) Except at the blogs already associated with the “Evil League of Evil”, there was just about no interest in any get-out-the-nomination campaigns, so the best bet for broadening the Hugo ballot seemed to the same sort of campaign as SP2, only with a more politically-diverse list.

    Oops.

    Next year we can try a different tactic. My personal favorite is the “Let a Thousand Puppies Bloom”, but we’ll see what Kate comes up with.

  158. 101 DangWrongFans, and their attempts to avoid being turned into a coat (or a shield?) by Cruella DeTor.

  159. Which, by the way, would have gotten us the same furious denunciations we got last year.

    This shouldn’t be thrown down the memory hole, either. The line that “Oh, we’re like totally open to other people’s nominations, we’re just angry because SLATE!!!! and LOCKSTEP!!!11!!!” is complete nonsense in light of the comprehensive loss-of-composure event of last year.

    Not everyone’s forgotten, but to read File770 comments and some people’s blogs, you’d think it had never happened.

  160. Lisbet Wilson wrote in response to Brad’s comment that “the market value of the Hugo (as an accolade) is highly suspect”, saying:

    But I’m beginning to suspect that some Sad Puppy authors have more mercenary motives. For them awards are not about honoring achievement or excellence. It’s about dollars and cents. It’s not about recognition of hard work, of risks taken. It’s solely about what the award will do for their careers.

    Which misses the point. An award for Best Story ought to signal “This is Good Stuff”; and if it does, then an up-tick in sales ought to follow, consumers of books being on the perpetual look-out for Good Stuff.

    When Brad et al. point out that the Hugos do not lead to increased sales, they are not saying “they deserve awards because they sold x number of books and made x dollars.” Quite the reverse: They’re saying, “If the Hugos & Nebulas recognized Good Stuff, increased sales would follow awards; to the extent that such sales do not materialize there is evidence that the genre’s most prestigious awards are not recognizing Good Stuff.”

  161. Anti-Puppies: “Larry just wants a Hugo!”

    Larry: “I decline my nomination.”

    Anti-Puppies: “You see? He still wants a Hugo!”

  162. “… you’d think it had never happened” is the key phrase.

    I can tell from the remarks of those people they aren’t really in touch with what’s been going on these last three years. Eric Flint was a perfect example of that. Somehow Grant and Lincoln became on a par with Ann Leckie’s “white straight cis guys.”

    I don’t blame anyone for that. It’s a bunch of nonsense of connect-the-dots that’s so obtuse it’s difficult to grasp at. What I do blame these folks for is speaking with so much opinionated authority about a thing they don’t know anything about. “I don’t know” isn’t a phrase in their vocabulary. They do know. They know everything. They know so much even quotes don’t move them. Probably nothing would.

    In a sense if you don’t know about the hate-fest at the just finished WisCon, then it never happened. The problem is it did happen and the most influential people in core SFF are pushing that hateful ideology into every corner of SFF they can.

    Were I a writer I’d ignore this entire crowd as if they didn’t happen for the simple reason they’re a bunch of fucking idiots. There’s just no other way to describe people so incredibly lacking in even the least degree of civilized sophistication or comprehension. It’s like talking to retarded people. They have no tools of self-criticism whatsoever and so of course, without principle – a thing as old as civilization – there is no “compared to what?” In real terms that means just existing can make you a racist and being a flat out racist can be “social justice.”

    Were I a writer I’d do the Peter Hamilton thing. He has a blog with no politics and his Twitter feed is barely alive. If you don’t Tweet or get on the radar of these insane feminists they can’t get to you. Hamilton has a good career and he is a better writer than any SJW that exists. I don’t mean the casual drive-by’s like GRRM but these intersectional fucks always bitching about whites and diversity.

    Peter Hamilton’s not stupid. I don’t know but he probably looked at a core genre which would actually honor someone like N.K. Jemisin or K. Tempest Bradford let alone talk to them as too stupid to endure. Hamilton has a total of 190 Tweets compared SFF panelist Mikki Kendall, friend to all whites, who has a staggering 176,000 Tweets. She doesn’t write but she bitches about whites a lot so onto convention panels she goes. Meanwhile, this community ignores one of the greatest SF authors of his generation.

    It’s all about the rocket ships and black holes.

  163. @Joel: Ah, but therein lies the rub. For such as the anti-Puppies (subtracting the ones who’ve actually been able to make a living while writing) sales and good writing are inversely correlated.
    It’s a mentality I understand–I’m still steamed over the fact that
    Avatar made hundreds of millions dollars while Serenity barely broke even, if that–but it’s straight-up snobbery.

  164. I will render my judgment of quality on both works of art after a full analysis:

    First my assumptions:
    The first piece of art, I am assuming, is done in a digital medium in the anime/manga style and I will analyse it based on those assumptions.

    The second piece of art, I am assuming, is done in watercolor and pen in a loose ‘sketchy’ style, but is not intending to cross into true impressionism or cubism and will analyse it based on those assumptions.

    In both cases if a different style was intended then the artist needs to re-visit the work.

    First over all:
    Artwork one: This piece of art has successfully achieved it’s style. There are a few vagaries but they are within the range of the style in which they appear to be set.

    Artwork two: This piece mostly achieves it’s style. There are several pieces that seem to be shading towards cubism, but they seem accidental rather than deliberate presentation choices.

    Line work:
    Artwork one: The lines here are thin and unobtrusive and serve well to define the shape without drawing attention to themselves.

    Artwork two: Many of the lines are too sketchy even for the style, particularly around the hand and sleeve to the viewer’s left. The hair also is an area where the line work needs to be cleaned up to clarify the flow of the piece.

    Shading:
    Artwork one: The highlights and shadows are where they belong. The transitions are smooth and appropriate to the style.

    Artwork two: The shading is blotchy. The hair looks intentionally mottled so I have disregarded that. Again, the left arm to the viewer’s left has a streak of red above the wrist. The front finger of that hand and the elbow of the other arm have similar issues. The shadows under the bust and neck are in the right place and mostly do what they’re supposed to do, though I think the ones under the bust-line could use a little more clarity in a sketchy style. There should be some shading on the jacket in watercolor as well as in ink.

    Colors:
    Artwork one: The colors are well chosen and complement one another well. Things that need to be emphasized are, those that don’t aren’t. There are a few spots I think might be programatically added patterns, but that’s speculation (and stylistically appropriate.)

    Artwork two: The hair color seems mottled deliberately but the chosen colors do not blend well and wind up looking muddy. The muddy does not looks ‘wrong’ in that it does not seem to be intended to make it look like she has mud-colored hair, rather that the paint bled together and the colors should have been more pure. By and large the skin is skin colored, the clothing is colored in ways that make sense.

    Clothing
    Artwork one: Very anime. Well executed. I’m curious if the lace was hand done or a pre-made template. I suspect the former but wondered enough I thought I’d mention it. I expected more ‘curve’ in the lace but that may be unrealistic on my part. Over all, I am envious. I wish I could do clothes HALF that well.

    Artwork two: The dress and jacket are recognizable, and the jacket does give the feel of going ‘over’ the dress, at least on the viewer’s left. The bottom of the jacket on the viewer’s right needs more definition, especially where it is overlapping the dress itself. They’re bleeding into each other and that muddies your art. Trying to shade the jacket with the pen was not your best choice, it obscures, rather than defining the garment. The medallion on the dress seems to just be floating. If it’s supposed to be attached to the darker pink point on the collar it needs to be adjusted. If it’s there for some other reason, it needs to be clarified. By and large the clothing has a very ‘flat’ feel like the entire drawing.

    Anatomy:
    Artwork one: The arm on the viewer’s left has a few issues, mostly with the shoulder. It seems more pointed than it should be. Other than that (and it took me several ‘views’ of the image to actually spot that) the anatomy is spot on. I love the face and eyes. The arm on the viewer’s right is not in an easy position to portray. Well done.

    Artwork two: Here’s one of the major issues: The anatomy is painfully off in several areas. The Hand on the viewer’s right is very off. The thumb appears to be nearly severed from the hand. The bones of the fingers are improperly proportioned. The hand to the viewer’s right is a little better, but not greatly so. The eyes are off center and their shape and size don’t really mesh with the rest of the face. The upper and lower parts of the nose do not match and the mouth looks like you were attempting one shape on the viewer’s left and another on the viewer’s right. The features are very mismatched within themselves. The collar bones are oddly positioned, but only minorly so, that is the most minor of the anatomical issues. Also… where are her legs given what her skirt is doing? Either the skirt needs to ‘catch’ on the leg to the veiwer’s left then ‘fade’ (as is done with the blowing skirt to the viewer’s right), or there needs to be leg shown. If the legs move off with the skirt, then you have an even bigger anatomy issue.

    Pose:
    Artwork one: A dynamic pose that draws the viewer into the picture. As with the anatomy I had to look more than once to find anything even just ‘off’. The wrist with the clipboard seems a little off though I can’t tell if it’s angle or something else. It’s a very minor thing, especially with how dynamic the rest of the drawing is. The eyes are drawn to her face and expression which are excellent!

    Artwork two: The pose here is very flat. There is no sense of motion, nor really any sense of true pose. The character may as well be a store mannequin. Even with one hand up the straight ahead face and blank expression seem to be default rather than intentional. I covered the anatomy of that face above. I think a good reference photo could have helped this immensely.

    Overall Impressions/success of the image:
    Artwork one: This is a dynamic and interesting piece of artwork. Definitely something I’d hang on my wall.

    Artwork two: It’s a good start. It’s a solid concept and an interesting character but the execution is still very rough. It is over all very flat. It lacks even the illusion of 3 dimensionality and doesn’t get to the ‘deliberately flat styles’. If something other than a rough style was intended, then there’s even more work that needs to be done. Not something I’d really want to have hanging on my wall.

  165. On the non-SF front, there’s humor to be had with watching the SJWs go after Anne Rice for the unforgivable crime of getting ‘Bully Reviews’ removed from Amazon. I have a feeling that it’s going to end up in much the same way as a drunk person trying to lick a running bandsaw.

    Anne may write vampires, but she knows how to wield a stake.

  166. “Mikki Kendall ‏@Karnythia 23m23 minutes ago I want folks to imagine a week with no fast food, no retail, no caregivers (childcare, orderlies, etc), no ‘unskilled labor’ at all.”

    Imagine an America when teenagers taught Latin did those jobs instead of 35 yr. olds raised in a country where they can’t pass basic English in the college they don’t go to.

    SFF has it’s own version: they don’t actually write anything but they seem to have time to whine about patriarchy in SFF all day on Twitter and then get put on SF writing panels.

    I’d still like to know what the non-SFWA member and then unpublished Sunil (no white man reviews) Patel was doing on a Nebula Awards Weekend panel last year. I mean… I know why: he bitches about white people on Twitter a lot. But I’d like to have someone in the SFWA explain that one to me.

  167. @60guilders – “It’s a mentality I understand–I’m still steamed over the fact that Avatar made hundreds of millions dollars while Serenity barely broke even, if that–but it’s straight-up snobbery.”

    This is something I also noted a while ago with regards to a general attitude among the common commentators at F770. Avatar was a ground-breaking piece of work with regards to 3D work, camera capture, etc. Serenity had a better story and characters, but it was a conclusion to a TV series that required significant background to really grok. They’re two very different works, and one had mass appeal while the other was rather esoteric.

    But frame this in the context of the Hugos and suddenly anyone who prefers the blockbuster work to the esoteric one has poor taste (at best). It’s especially hilarious because their complaints/insults are ALWAYS about style – possibly the most subjective aspect of writing.

  168. Well, to borrow a term from elsewhere, I think Clamps just got rekd. Nicely done wyrdbard.

  169. My mom & I (Firefly flans both) watched Serenity with a cousin who’d never heard of the show before he walked into the theater with us. I’m sure there were character details he missed because of this, but he was able to enjoy the movie—and be angry at Wash’s death—almost as much as we were. (Though the death of Mr Universe affected him more than it did us. Odd, now that I think of it: Joss created as aspect of the movie which long-term Browncoats could appreciate less than could newcomers.)

  170. But frame this in the context of the Hugos and suddenly anyone who prefers the blockbuster work to the esoteric one has poor taste (at best). It’s especially hilarious because their complaints/insults are ALWAYS about style – possibly the most subjective aspect of writing.

    Just looking at the dramatic presentation awards, the number of esoteric nominees (much less winners) is incredibly low. So for movies, the masses have the right style, but for literature, they don’t?

    When Brad et al. point out that the Hugos do not lead to increased sales, they are not saying “they deserve awards because they sold x number of books and made x dollars.” Quite the reverse: They’re saying, “If the Hugos & Nebulas recognized Good Stuff, increased sales would follow awards; to the extent that such sales do not materialize there is evidence that the genre’s most prestigious awards are not recognizing Good Stuff.”

    What matters is that there must be some reason for the disconnect between what the awards voters think is the best and what readers spend their money to buy. It could be a difference in what is considered ‘good’, which is problematic in that what the awards consider ‘good’ becomes meaningless for anyone with tastes significantly different from the awards voters.

    There is another alternative that is equally problematic for the future of Science Fiction: the Hugo and Nebula awards are recognizing Good Stuff, but publishers are unwilling / unable to publicize the Good Stuff to get people to buy the books. People would buy the books if they knew about them; because they don’t they’re buying the authors they recognize. This suggests malfeasance on the part of the traditional publishers to both their authors and their investors.

  171. “The world is changing. It no longer belongs to angry white boys sitting around in their white-wall buzz cuts eating white bread and watching Leave It To Beaver. (I’m not sure it ever did, but they certainly thought so.)” – acclaimed gay feminist author of the Nebula nominated SFF-less but appropriately gay Hildo, Nicolo Griffitho

    http://nicolagriffith.com/2015/05/26/books-about-women-tend-not-to-win-awards/comment-page-1/#comments

    Read the comments. What do you think they vote for awards? Literature? hahahah

    Next up: Nicolo will use her searching analysis to pie-chart military graveyards and ask “Why?”

  172. ratseal

    @ s1al: “I love when people come to Brad’s blog and act like they’re so reasonable and polite… But then go back to other blogs and rip on him incessantly. And then complain when he doesn’t engage them at their leisure.”

    This times 10.

    Snowcrash: looking at you. Have you captured enough material to go back and shit post at F770?

    I think perhaps you’re both conflating me with someone else, as regards to ripping on him incessantly or complaining on his engagement or lack thereof.

    I’m not hiding the fact that I’m opposed to the concept of slates in general, and I realise that puts me in disagreement with a vast majority of people in this particular community. That probably makes me tread more carefully than I do elsewhere.

    Like I said, I can’t force anyone to answer, and at the end of the day, I’m just here, trying to get a more complete picture of this kerfuffle.

  173. At least her character has palms instead of a stub behind extra-long fingers.

  174. Shadowdancer’s emphasis on ass, breasts, and loins makes it creepy.

    The godawful color schemes don’t help either.

    Have some more eye candy to make up for it.

  175. Chevalier, if that’s your real name, I just duplicated the position of her left hand without any strain at all. I couldn’t say why anyone would hold a pen that way, but it’s quite possible to do so. Perhaps she’s about to spin the pen around her fingers?

  176. Upper picture: an elf girl who’s a junior officer in a modern military outfit. Must be an interesting story there.

    Lower picture: a junkie waiting for her next fix.

    I’d much rather look at the elf girl, and I suspect most people would agree with me.

  177. So… Clamps keeps digging. Wonder when a new volcano will form in Massachusetts?

  178. “So… Clamps keeps digging. Wonder when a new volcano will form in Massachusetts?”
    Next time he can’t get the chair to the toilet fast enough.

  179. Michael Brazier-
    Ditto; not difficult, even with my joint pain. No insult to the Vice President, but it appears that some people have picked up his abuse of the word “literally” to mean “not actually.”

  180. And in case anyone thinks that Marston Wiki might be new:
    “This page was last modified on 17 February 2008, at 20:14.” 😀

  181. Apparently the pattern of him 1) stalking women, 2) being freaky, 3) demanding ever more “evidence” and then flipping out when it’s offered is pretty dang long standing.

  182. Let’s see… Shadow’s abilities look to be about as good as current Howard Tayler. Clamps is worse than early Howard Tayler… and Howard hasn’t been stalking people for years. Too busy making an awesome webcomic.

  183. Nope, I can do it, complete with the forearm turned the way she had it, with minimal effort, and I have messed up joints and a smaller-than-normal range of motion.

  184. “May Tree on June 4, 2015 at 4:22 pm said:
    Oh and while I’m blithering about Ancillary Justice (which, if I haven’t said clearly, I think is fantastic), people asking about what a ‘conservative’ is and why some of them have a hate-on for this seriously amazing book….

    “I bring it up because I was reading AJ with half an eye toward trying to figure out why the Puppies hate on it so much, and aside from the I-can’t-tell-who’s-what-gender distress, it occurred to me that the horrifying Radch Empire is founded on the three “moral foundations” that Haidt attributes to conservatives that progressives generally don’t value nearly as strongly: Authority, Loyalty, and Purity.”

    We have said over and over and over again until we are hoarse we don’t hate this book. The actual plot has nothing to do with it. AJ is a signifier. It’s like hearing “gracias” and knowing you’re hearing Spanish spoken. It’s a clue, a brick in the wall as to the origins of SJW ideology. When I hear “performative”… Bingo! “Gender blindness” Bingo!

    It’s amazing watching the folks at Glyer’s talk about Ancillary Justice. Not a single one of them has a clue where it came from. That’s a pretty big insight into their anti-puppy stance. Not only that, they have no idea why we use it as an example. They think we dislike it rather than point to it and say “Bingo, this is why this was pushed.”

    Aside from AJ’s specific issues, which are ironically from Judith Butler’s gender version of post-structuralist gibberish “performative” (we have willed ourselves into heterosexuality by repeatedly telling ourselves we are), many people feel the introduction of poststructuralism destroyed academic literary criticism. Any book can be anything. Doesn’t matter what the author says. Sometimes they’re even told to shut up.

    Leckie’s slumming is straight out of French Queer Theory that says if we stop seeing gender it will largely cease to exist because it’s not derived from nature. Cue the SJW diversity gender-fluid equality movement onstage. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out why gay radical feminists would create such an ideology to explain reality.

    Here is your poststructuralism these people are steeped in:

    “This does not mean that poststructuralism, defined as a politics of the left, cannot fight for causes. It means that the reason for fighting for those causes has to be because they are right at a particular time and given a particular situation, rather than because the causes are cases of a wider absolute and eternal good. The struggle is for these rights now and not for universal and eternal rights. This also means that the poststructuralist political struggle cannot appeal to absolutes and must seek to undermine them as they begin to appear, even in a politics that poststructuralists favour. So, as a politics of the left, poststructuralism cannot depend on certainty and unchangeable convictions.” – James Williams

    Got that? No principles. A given identity at any given time defines morality. Sound familiar? That’s why these people are so convinced they cannot be racists. The problem is this undermines law, fair play, equal protection and even precedents which establish human rights the Left favors. Anything can be anything. There is literally no set definition for hate speech with these people, which is why they refuse to discuss it. You have your anything, I have my anything and we fight. There are no rules. There is only what you can get away with and there is no common sense.

    “… we regularly punish those who fail to do their gender right… the various acts of gender create the idea of gender, and without those acts, there would be no gender at all… Consider that a sedimentation of gender norms produces the peculiar phenomenon of a ‘natural sex’ or a ‘real woman’ or any number of prevalent and compelling social fictions… the action of gender requires a performance that is repeated…. gender is an identity tenuously constituted in time, instituted in an exterior space through a stylized repetition of acts.” – Judith Butler

    If you don’t see gender, you can’t repeat the mantra. That’s what these goofs think. That’s why Liz Bourke and Alex MacFarlane at Tor pushed AJ. Heterosexuality is fake and if you concentrate and ignore it, it’ll just go away; no more binary – no more families either, at least not as we understand them. The difference is Judith Butler is not hateful. But the people using her critiques are nutty and hateful supremacists who regularly write stuff you’ll also find familiar if you’ve been following all this:

    “When did I ever say I support equality?
    Feminism is about anything as half assed as ‘equality.’ Equality for whom? With whom? Who is to be made equal with whom, and at what cost? With white men, the most well off group in our world? But white men only have it so good because they’ve exploited and brutalised the entire world for centuries. Their benefits have come to them at the cost of every one else. God forbid anyone else be equal to them, can you imagine? We need less of that, not more.
    Can’t be done under capitalist patriarchy.
    Feminism is a radical politics that tears down the whole system with all its inherent structural inequalities and beginning anew. It’s revolution. It’s not EQUALITY.

    “I’ve noticed that cis men who insist on being called “feminists” rather than “feminist allies” put their own feelings and need for legitimacy/validation above the actual goals and priorities of feminism.” – from a “feminist blog that strives toward intersectionality and inclusiveness of all people who experience systemic gender oppression.”

    “Retweeted by Natalie Luhrs Fran Wilde @fran_wilde · 17h If you think reframing an eloquent thing a woman said but selectively editing then posting it is ok, you are neither a friend NOR an ally.” – Sunil Patel getting lit up by his handlers for daring to Storify the sacred words of a woman. He abjectly apologized for being a bad “ally.”

    This is a fuck of a movement that will wreck anything it touches.

    “Feminist Frequency @femfreq (Anita Sarkeesian) · Oct 25 Since so many seem confused. Masculinity ≠ male. Masculinity is a socially constructed and performed gender identity…”

    Anybody who thinks these are equal rights feminists are out of their gourd, although they certainly do lie about that when they talk to the general public as opposed to each other. That’s why they don’t like being quoted, but they can’t take their Twitter feeds private and get the same effect.

  185. “Do you believe that women should have equal rights to men? Great! Then you are a feminist.” – Anita Sarkeesian on Colbert

    “We don’t want equality within these oppressive systems.” – Anita Sarkeesian at a feminist symposium

  186. @James May

    “I’d still like to know what the non-SFWA member and then unpublished Sunil (no white man reviews) Patel was doing on a Nebula Awards Weekend panel last year. I mean… I know why: he bitches about white people on Twitter a lot. But I’d like to have someone in the SFWA explain that one to me.”

    I’m not a SFWA member, but I’m at SFWA right now, and they’ll happily take non-members’ money, so my guess would be that you don’t have to be a member to be on a panel, either. (Incidentally, Fred Saberhagen’s widow is a lovely woman.)

  187. “While doing that, SJWs claim to be the literary descendants of Roger Zelazny”

    I certainly wouldn’t claim to emulate Zelazny, nor would I allow children around anyone who claimed to do so.

  188. @Draven, Wyrdbard, Dave, Foxfier, Patrick, Michael – Thanks guys! (If I missed anyone, not intentional, I just woke up.)

    Wyrdbard – that was an awesome comparison, wow. The lace on the stocking is a brush. The piece, Digital Secretary Sophie is a computer avatar for one of my housemate Aff’s computers, which he was entering in a ROG overclocking contest of some kind. He paid me roughly the equivalent of a hundred dollars in takeout lunches and dinners to rush it. Everything except the brushes and lineart techniques there were new ground for me, and the style I was aiming for is not one I do normally. Later on, he gave me an extra fifty dollars – to buy the discount coupon he says I won off me. I didn’t think there was any prizes for the artwork for an overclocking contest, and Aff said well, here you go.

    Regarding the problems with Digital Secretary Sophie; re: the flaws about her shoulder and the hand / arm holding the worksheet data pad, I noticed those only afterward; but the person who commissioned it said he felt they were minor and barely noticeable. To do the hand with the worksheet, I held a transparent clipboard in my hand.

    Yama got what he asked for – a point by point comparison of my art versus his, an objective one too. Inevitably, when the response toward his art was negative, he gets upset, and drags up older pieces of my art, or experimental attempts, or what I call ‘lazy sketches’. I’m sure he’ll drag up the very first attempt I did at a sunset landscape but he won’t bring up better ones. Or he’ll bring up pieces where I deliberately did not care about how well done the anatomy was, because I was practicing things like wet hair, or drawing a beret and the metal things on the shoulder (the elf picture) – and I’ll post them, mistakes and all, to show my progress. Hell, I’ll say outright the sunset landscape sketch was an attempt at speedpainting and the result was pretty bad, but I really liked the little airship I threw in so I posted it. Yama regularly bags on that picture as if it were the summa totalis of my artwork. There are pieces where the proportions are very very bad, but I liked something about it so up it goes. I don’t have any formal training, I never went to art school or classes outside of high school. It’s all learning as I go for me, so every piece, I try to improve slightly, bit by bit, learn something new. I don’t always succeed, but that’s okay. Try again next time.

    I don’t claim to be the best. Hell, I’m still learning. It’s why I don’t regularly take commission requests – I don’t think I’m good enough, and there are much better artists on Deviantart who I feel deliver more bang for your buck. But because someone said they thought my art was better, because there are some people who are willing to pay me to do a piece for them anyway, Yama behaves as though I think I’m the master of all that is art. He took a very bad, exceedingly rushed cover I did and put it on Lousy Book Covers, trying to get people to say bad things about it, under one of his known pseudonyms, Will de/le Fey. That’s what he’s trying to do now. Try yet again, to get people to say my stuff is worse than his. And he takes my crappiest art and puts it up against the best of his, demanding people judge. Then when people like my work better, he gets even more angry, and calls the people who say it’s better idiots or that they have no taste, and more.

    Writing though, I will openly say I think the Eye of Argon is much better than Yama’s drek. At least there’s a recognizable story there, sentence structure, paragraphs. The folks who commented at Jordan179’s blog back then had a look at his work because Yama dragged out my old, old fanfiction, and dared them to compare which was better – mine, or his writing. At one point, we saw that he was lifting livejournal discussions wholesale – discussions usually, about Israel – and shoving them as dialogue into his stories. Objective criticism and telling him where he should work to improve? He throws MASSIVE TANTRUMS. Mark Twain himself could do the critique and Yama would dismiss the advice.

  189. @bearcat, what do you mean by that statement about Zelazny? I get what you’re implying, but I hope you’re mistaken!

  190. Oh, the Gamingforce wiki . . . 😀

    “Easily the most back-biting and cowardly fuck ever to disgrace the boards.”

    “No matter what he tries to tell you through lyrics and quotations from literature, one can easily extrapolate that there is not a single original thought emanating from this frail, hollow shell of a human being.”

    “Once said members grew tired of vapid and out-of-context text passages in their journal comments, they would quickly lost interest (in a matter of minutes in some cases) and either stopped talking to him or banned him from their journals.”

    Yeah, that’s our Yama!

  191. Chris Gerrib said:

    As of today, there are no (zero, none, nada, nyet) proposals to eliminate anybody’s voting rights. None. The proposals on the floor are merely designed to prevent a slate from locking up the entire ballot.

    And who will get to decide which votes are voting “slates” and which aren’t? I suspect that the ones voting the Tor slates will be passed through; the ones voting other slates discounted.

    But that’s okay, because that will simply lead to the Hugos themselves being increasingly discounted. As Vox pointed out to you all, but you’re so dumb that you’re rushing into his trap cheering lustily.

  192. James May said:

    We are aware of how quickly you turned on “ally” GRRM. Crime? Oops! He reverted to a straight white male and forgot to only torture men in his books.

    And for all his opportunism, GRRM is still a giant compared to the others in the Tor clique. That’s why they hate him, really — they know he’s by far greater than them.

  193. @Jordan S. Bassior

    My understanding of the various proposals is that people will be limited from voting for every slot in a category. They do this in different ways, but the gist is that you CAN’T organize an effort to vote for a FULL slate under any of the proposals. I’m not a fan of any of the proposals (and will vote against all of them if I make it to the meeting), mainly because I don’t think ANY award should have rules that are this bizarre.

  194. Caveat – the link Joel gave is me doing fast, lazily drawn comics where the main character is my housemate, relating the dumb things customers have said / done, horrible stuff happening while gaming, or hilarious little things happening RL. I have no art consistency there.

  195. Shadowdancer, I have lots of formal training, including a BA in Film and some time at a traditional art school… and can barely draw people.

    I read some of Yama’s drek. I have notes scribbled in notebooks from high school that are better than him.

  196. Okay… I went over there to look, with my sleep deprived yet uncaffinated brain, and see if this supposed improvement is easier to read than the current rules.

    Short answer: nope. Current rules as per the Hugo ballot printout i have here are easier to read and understand, even for someone like me who has never voted in the Hugos before.


    FAQ’s:
    1. Can you explain the system in plain language?

    The important thing to remember is that nothing changes in how you nominate. If you think a work is Hugo-worthy, then nominate it. That’s all. There’s no need to rank your choices at the nomination stage, and there’s no reason not to nominate something you think even might be Hugo-worthy. All we are doing at this stage is throwing names into a hat. The final Hugo voting system, which actually chooses the winner, is unchanged. We could, in theory, simply put everyone’s nominations on the final ballot, but that would make for a very long ballot indeed. We therefore need to narrow the nomination list down. This system narrows down the list by eliminating the least popular works until only five (under current rules) finalists remain. Here are the basic steps to the elimination process:
    a. You have one nomination “point” for each category that will be divided equally among the works you choose to nominate in that category. So, if you nominate two works in a category, each will get half a point; if you nominate three works, each will get one-third of a point, and so on.
    b. All the points given to each work from all nomination ballots are added together. The two works that got the least number of points are eligible for elimination. One of these works is the least popular and will be eliminated. (We call this the Selection Phase.)
    c. To determine which of these two works is least popular, we compare the total number of nominations they each received (that is, the number of nomination ballots on which each work appears). The work that received the fewest total number of nominations is the least popular and now completely vanishes from the nomination process as though it never existed. (We call this the Elimination Phase.)
    d. We start over for the next round and repeat the process, however, if one of your works was eliminated, then you now have fewer works on your nomination ballot. This means that each work gets more total points, since you aren’t dividing your point among as many works. For example, if one of your five nominated works was eliminated, your remaining works now get one-fourth of a point each instead of one-fifth of a point. If four of your nominated works are eliminated, your remaining work now gets your full point.

    The answer to that should have been “No.”

    Instead the response answers a question that wasn’t asked: “How does your nomination proposal work? What changes?”

    Frankly, this looks like even MORE work calculating the results for the Hugo people, what with all the half-point, and points being divided into fractions of a point, versus the current ranking system, which is straightforward for the voter.

    I don’t actually know how the nomination process goes because I didn’t get to participate in that this time.

    4. How does this system eliminate slate or bloc voting?
    It doesn’t, exactly, nor should a work be automatically eliminated just because it appears on a slate. On the other hand, any slate which nominates a full set of five works will find that each of its nominations only count 1/5 as much. With “non-slate” nominating, some of your works will be slowly eliminated, so your remaining works get more and more of your support. Since slate works tend to live or die together, they tend to eliminate each other until, in general, only one slate work remains. With a large enough support behind the slate (five times as much), the slate may still sweep a category; however, if that many voters support the slate, they arguably deserve to win, and no fair and unbiased system of nomination will prevent that. The answer in that case is, simply, to increase the general pool of voters. Regardless, with SDV-LPE, slates will never receive a disproportionate share of the final ballot, as occurred in the 2015 Hugos.

    What is that I don’t even.

    Trying to read through the rest, it’s overly complicated. By dispersing the points into fractions, versus the rank system, more people are needed to nominate or vote for multiple works in multiple categories, or simply choose a single work per category; ‘this is the only thing I feel is worthy of a Hugo’, which results, I think, in a smaller pool of works for the voters to judge from, as opposed to more.

    The thing is ultimately, the people who will vote on these are the ones who are able to pay more money to actually physically attend, and pay the higher fees, versus the people just nominating, and the addition of people just voting.

  197. And by “female commenters” you mean “you” and you also mean that you are by far the most extremist.

    No, pretty much all the women who commented on my blog. Including the ones who mostly agreed with you at the beginning, because you often have reading (and logic) comprehension problems and assumed that anyone who didn’t hate me and every one of my opinions was EVIL!!! You of course hated the ones who disagreed with you more, such as Oronada, to name one who wasn’t Shadowdancer. I could go through my old blogs and make a list, but I’m working full-time these days and don’t really have the time to obsess about to whom you’ve been obnoxious.

    But you especially focused on Shadowdancer because her very existence offends you. She’s female and nonwhite, so she’s supposed to be an extreme leftist. But she’s more or less on the right. Which meant that she wouldn’t stay in the little pigeonhole you wanted to put her. Also, she’s cute and she totally despises you, which bothered you for other reasons. Because you don’t get that she’s a human being, not a set of randomly-rolled-up attributes with no connections, opinions, personality or history.

    And your hostility toward her particularly offends me these days, because she’s suffered terribly of late. And she’s my friend.

  198. My opinions regarding Vox Day and Markku Kopponen are by far more hostile.

    Okay, I’ll bite: who the hell is Markku Kopponen? And what no doubt virtuous and noble thing did he do to make you hate him?

  199. Shadowdancer:

    I posted over there that the answer to FAQ #1 is “no”, as you confirmed. I pointed out that how the votes are tallied may determine how I nominate, so do not presume that how I nominate will not change. I also suggested the the proposal was doomed to fail because it was far too complicated to explain.

    A kickstarter was, um, kickstarted to send to guy behind it to Sasquan. He’ll be there.

  200. Rory, your crappiest work is better than Yama’s best. When you get sloppy you may get an angle or a proportion wrong, but what you draw still looks mostly like a healthy human being displaying some comprehensible human emotion. Even your bad art tends to be beautiful, and your best is superb.

    Yama draws these hideously deformed and discolored things that if animated would probably give the viewers nightmares. He has this fondness for color schemes that look like feces that someone vomited upon. I shudder at the thought of the implications if “… it was a sketch drawn from LIFE!”

  201. Yama … I’m not Vox. Aff’s not Vox. Rory’s not Vox. We are not responsible for what Vox says or does not say. We are only responsible for what we say or do not say.

    And you are responsible for what you say and do not say.

    Vox could be the most vile and reprehensible person in the history of vile reprehensibility, and that wouldn’t excuse any of your rudeness and cruelty to Rory. Do you comprehend this?

  202. @Viktor – Yeah, the few get to decide how we’ll be allowed to nominate henceforth. It DOES affect how the nomination process works ultimately, and I foresee how this can still result in a slate versus slate war that they think they’re preventing from taking over.

    On one hand, this could result in more money for the organizing body. On the other, the proposal itself feels to me that I am unlikely to get my money’s worth in voting pool choice in the voter’s packet, per the likelihood of a much smaller nomination slate resulting.

    Shh. Don’t tell them how it’ll backfire. It’ll be funny.

    @Jordan thank you, especially for noting that Yama was lying about his behavior towards the women commenting on your blog.

  203. Shadowdancer:

    It would not prevent a slate vs slate war, however it would leave both slates less than fully satisfied. I have no problem with that result.

    If we wanted to preclude slates, then we would have changed the rules years ago. Ignorance was bliss, then.

  204. Yep, but it’s only now that the ‘wrong people’ are doing slates, oh no, the rules must be changed now! It’s not okay when they do it! No to slates! No to campaigns!

    But okay when the Right People do so. (Pinky swear, for reals)

    Yama here provides a convenient example of this double standard practiced – and I should note that he’s quite accepted over at File 770, where he posts as one of his known pseudonyms, Alauda because he doesn’t like Vox Day / any puppies

    Upthread, he complains that Vox Day ‘posted a link’ to his friend’s public youtube video, found through Yama’s favorites, ‘in an attempt to humiliate her.’ That’s evilbadmean because Vox Day did it, and for Yama, this Emma girl is a ‘Human Being worthy of defending.’ (I actually guess that he’s in love with her.)

    I’ve got recorded examples of Yama taking the worst of my art and posting it in places in attempts to get people to laugh at it and make fun of me. He does it to art other people likes, and takes my quotes, removes context, and misrepresents them to people in places like Fundies Say The Dumbest Things, so that people will say the quote is full of ‘internalized misogyny’ or ‘bigotry’, or racist, or homophobic, and the usual list of social justice buzzwords for immediate dismissal – ergo, humiliate me and vindicate what Yama constantly slanders me with.

    That’s not evilbadmean for Yama to do because he has already put me in the box of “Not A Human” and thus, anyone who associates with me should disavow me or be Dehumanized as well.

    This is pretty much what happens to anyone who ‘escapes the plantation.’ We’re fair game, because they accuse us of being bigots, being racist, misogynistic, islamophobic, homophobic, brainwashed by the patriarchy cis-whatever scum neonazi demonspawn. Like that EW article that very quickly got spread all over the world. Like how Brad here is a white hateyhater who is a racist despite being in an interracial marriage of twenty years.

    Like how Larry Correia was slandered by Damien Walter at the Guardian, how people contacted his wife, ‘concerned’ because they had heard the slander that ‘he is a wife beating misogynistic maniac’ and they, good citizens all, wanted to help her escape.

    That was during Sad Puppies 2.

    We’re all ‘old white conservative misogynistic heterosexual cismen’ to these liars, the ‘acceptable target for hatred demographic’ – which is what James May keeps quoting, to not allow you puppykickers muddy the waters with your oh-but-we-just-want-to-help narratives, and expose the hate behind the honeyed words.

  205. “Since slate works tend to live or die together”

    This is wildly misleading, largely because there is no ADMITTED history of “slates” existing prior to this year. Nor has anyone really claimed slate-voting existed before, as opposed to whisper campaigns. On what historical basis could one conclude slate-members in Hugo voting “tend to live or die together”, and how would this actually affect whisper campaigns?

    What will happen in the latter case is: no change. The problem at hand has been people voting in lock-step, both to support (or attack) various works. Their motivations are based less on the works in question and more on who is friends (or enemies) with whom, or which political ideologies are presumably promoted by the works.

    Right now there is a lock-step movement pushing for “No Award” to be voted in all categories, just to spike the Hugos altogether — under this system, such movements would be affected not at all.

    Instead, what this does is DIFFUSE the votes from any given group which does NOT vote in lock-step. If most (or everyone) from Group “A” votes for Novel “One” in Category “Alpha”, while everyone else naturally begins splitting votes amongst Novels “Two”, “Three”, “Four” and “Five”, it’s Novel “One” which will tend to come out on top with an undiluted voting bloc. A small but focused minority can indeed be the “20% which blocks 80%” using this system.

    Thus, it’s my view this policy will encourage slate voting, and of exactly the sort which Sad Puppies’ most ardent critics insist they’d rather spike the Hugos over than allow to stain their glory.

  206. Shadow– Is that second picture of yours he posted inspired by a particular anime or book? Because I would totally watch/read the source for it.

  207. @Chrismouse – no, that’s my online avatar from back in the days when I was playing in the forum RPG Megatokyo: The Clans. I met my husband Rhys there; we were in the same clan, The Church of Miho. That’s the Shadowdancer character; which is why my displayed username is “Shadowdancer Duskstar / Cutelildrow.” – Those have been my constant usernames since I went online back in 1996, back in the days of the Slayers fanfiction mailing lists.

    Damn. Thats nearly twenty years ago now.

  208. “A kickstarter was, um, kickstarted to send to guy behind it to Sasquan.”

    I hope Kickstarter was not actually used, as that would be a violation of its Terms of Service and the funds can be seized on that basis. From the Kickstarter Rules:

    * Projects must create something to share with others.

    * Projects can’t fundraise for charity, offer financial incentives, or involve prohibited items.

  209. Basically the Making Light proposal runs on the same idea which created last year’s nominees: you don’t need collusion in an ideological echo chamber. At least I think that’s the logic involved. One thing’s for sure, they wouldn’t be doing it unless they thought it benefitted their project to cure all mankind with anti-patriarchy literature.

    “Kameron Hurley ‏@KameronHurley Jan 6 There’s no voice more damaging than that of a middle-aged white male who’s well-off and denies your existence.”

    Maybe the Hugos would be happier if we denied their existence, like gender, and willed them out of existence using poststructuralist chanting.

    “I do believe in gender, I do believe in gender, I do believe in gender…” – The Cowardly Lion in The Wizard of Gender.

    Here’s an example of how our feminist SJWs themselves think they should be ostracized:

    http://www.silviamoreno-garcia.com/blog/im-rejoining-sfwa/

    Of course that’s assuming you’re using a normal English dictionary with the word “racist” and not a poststructuralist it’s-whatever-we-say-at-the-time dictionary.

    Comments there from Brad on why he left the SFWA.

    SJWs have ginned up a fake race-gender war complete with a non-existent oppressed population of “PoC” and all women on Earth over something as innocuous as SF because they are weirdoes.

    “This weekend I was on an all-white panel on multiculturalism in SF, and we all agreed it was bullshit and apologized to our audience —- many of whom were people of colour…” – Madeline Ashby

    [That comment and the post from the blog of SFF author Silvia Moreno-Garcia titled “In Which I’m a Potty Mouth” from December 5, 2013 has since been deep-sixed]

    In some ways I’m sympathetic to WorldCon. If they ditch these people there very well be no such thing as WorldCon. The prank voters aren’t actually attending. That’s why I think the better course is to ignore their White Privilege Conference and let them be. It’s no longer a museum of literature but of opposing male whiteness. SJWs say we’ll burn WorldCon but SJWs themselves would abandon it if they didn’t get to play their saving-the-world-from-whitey game. The influx of money and interest from SP has probably bought WorldCon a few more years of existence. Let’s be honest: without SP the nominees would’ve been the same trend from last year, a trend into an irrelevant literature trying desperately to mimic current college campus trends of insanity and trigger warnings.

    “The demographic shifts faced by WorldCon’s largest customer segment are the same ones faced by the Republican Party. Let that sink in for a minute. Really let it marinate. These are the same people who cheered me when I talked about Canada’s healthcare plan, and applauded Mark Van Name when he blamed rape culture for America’s ills. They want to be progressive, but they’re being blindsided by the very same demographic shifts afflicting the most conservative elements of contemporary society, for exactly the same reason: they haven’t taken the issue seriously.” – Madeline Ashby on WorldCon’s demographic issues titled “Memento mori. (Or, how Worldcon’s youth problem will resolve.)”

    It’s all about the rocket ships and rape culture so be more serious about your SF.

    *

    University of San Francisco’s “White Privilege Resource Guide”:

    “Becoming aware of privilege should not be viewed as a burden or source of guilt, but rather, an opportunity to learn and be responsible so that we may work toward a more just and inclusive world.

    “What is White Privilege?
    Evolution of Whiteness
    Pushing Back Against Privilege: Examples of White Allyship
    Take Action: Tips, Training and Organization for White Allies.”

    I couldn’t write a more insane dystopia than that if I tried. It’s Orwell’s 1984 2.0.

  210. What I really dislike about their proposal is that it makes some nominations more equal than others, if you don’t use them all. The current system says you can nominate something once. You can’t put the same thing in all five slots and have it count five times. But under the new system, you can.

  211. I’d be disappointed if you SF writers out there weren’t using this stuff about riding a subway all day with a “burner” phone and praying there wouldn’t be reception and the stuff from the U of SF. It would make an great SF story about an insane America we already live in.

    People have been wondering what Heinlein would’ve made of SP. He’d already answered that question when he made a bomb shelter. Heinlein is the guy who wrote about the Crazy Years. He wasn’t unaware of trends even in his own day. In it’s higher expressions, SF has always been a canary-in-a-coal-mine warning literature. We don’t need to ask Heinlein. Heinlein and his generation were already asking us about the U of SF before it’s new guard even existed.

    Heinlein, Orwell and Bradbury asked “If This Goes On -.” There is nothing like that today in terms of true warning visions. What we have instead is the same conformist visions of a decrepit world of mega-corporations and blah, blah, blah. That is because a dystopia cannot satirize itself. How could that be possible? SJWs have no vision. They ARE Bradbury’s fireman, they ARE Winston Smith’s nemesis, they ARE Heinlein’s astonishingly corrupt charismatic leaders. The Fremen have become the Harkonnens using eternal principles of right and wrong. Using SJWs revolving door principles the Fremen are still the Fremen.

    It’s no surprise Frank Herbert dealt with that exact thing in his series. He had a questioning mind rooted in principle, not one trapped in identity. Paul became trapped in identity. We are not supposed to be. We can do better. Do you honestly think a student at the U of SF could ever write a dystopia? How does a colony of artists which indulges in Two-Minute Hate write a dystopia? SJWs don’t see it that way; I get that. They’re wrong. I get that too.

  212. @JamesMay:

    Darkness, sweet absence of light. Interrupted, one instant to the next, by flickers of the dying, ancient fluorescent tubes which backlight advertisements for products which ceased to exist a decade ago. The subway car is older than my mother would be, were she still alive. Between the sharp, acidic sprays of unwanted photons, I find myself huddling ever-deeper in its steel-and-aluminum womb.

    Rattling of tracks, thumping lightly yet rudely against the soles of my feet where I crouch, tucked into the unyielding rear-left corner, where the same vibration travels from floor to wall to spine, each time the car’s wheels meet the slight gap between each length of track. I measure time in vibrations, now, fearful of my only other means by which to pace it.

    Why won’t this celphone die?

    I didn’t recharge the battery last night. I’ve left it all on day. It won’t just die.

    I could turn it off… but then, my access to social media, my friends, my comrades… no, if one of them needs to contact me, how else but my phone? It’s… it’s been so long since any other way existed for me. Was there once something about a square sheet of blank paper and…?

    No, no, I must be misremembering. It was in my third semester at Yarborough, where I learned the true terrors of life, my Modern Miskatonic! The oppressive nature of phallic objects, the patriarchal nature of color schemes and power structures. Black lead encased, imprisoned, in a penis meant to spread its graphite (graphically) across a Pure White Field of pulped treeheart. My professor had broken my erstwhile student’s-kit across his knee and denounced me to the entire class, and I knew true and rightful shame for the first time in my life…

    Now, I knew only fear, and that this subway tunnel would eventually end. Seconds, minutes, days, did it matter how long? At that moment, I would be open once again to being flayed by hateful bigotry, and harassment, and everything vile in this world…

    …because my Timber account would update, just as quickly as my Faceplate.

    Faceplate was my haven. My world away, where my supporters and friends and maybe-but-not-quite enemies would take me in as surely and swiftly as the darkness I sought betwixt stuttering lampshades of oppression.

    Timber, I only stayed on because of Mom, who knew no other means to contact me except by — ugh — actually calling. A million knives up my left nostril, rather than that! We had nothing in common. But she was still my Mom. So there it was: besides Mom, were hordes of screaming, wailing, uncaring and hateful people. All my real friends said they were, and I can’t afford to lose any friends. If I do, I’ll have to hate them. Everyone says I have to.

    Everyone. I can’t go against anyone, because then I’m against everyone.

    Then the only people left for me will be the Timber Brigades, and how can I related to people I’ve never been able to afford to listen to in the first place? Kitty, the guy from Gender Studies 103, so nice and unthreatening and who would never rape me like every other guy at every college is just waiting to do. Kitty told me how they all hate anyone who’s genderqueer, he even talked to one of them over Snipe once! He knows the Truth, and it’s just what I’ve always been told.

    Maybe… maybe I should burn it all. All my accounts. Start fresh. OHGODNO, I CAN’T! No one would ever forgive me! There is a hot flush behind my eyes, I find myself fighting off the terror, have it almost under control, when…

    …when a speck of light appears at the end of the tunnel. Expanding, widening, rushing towards…

    PLEASE, LET THERE NOT BE RECEPTION!

  213. sounds like it was written by someone that desperately needs to learn that yes, they can put their cell phone down and walk away from it.

  214. Well, let’s see. I didn’t clarify that she has two Moms, so the reader has to infer that or assume I screwed up since her birth mother is dead… could have used a little expansion on a few themes here and there. Mostly, I left a LOT to be inferred, but it was running a bit long and I tend to be a wordy SOB as it is.

    Glad you liked it though! It was really meant to be half-parody (no one would really believe this stuff, right?) and half-reality (yes, I’ve met people who really believe this stuff). Didn’t want to be TOO hamfisted about it.

  215. Thus, it’s my view this policy will encourage slate voting, and of exactly the sort which Sad Puppies’ most ardent critics insist they’d rather spike the Hugos over than allow to stain their glory.

    Exactly. They’re not doing the basic step of “if we change the rules, how will voting patterns change?”, much less “if we change the rules, how can the rules be gamed?”. For any of these, you want to go to your Local Gaming Store on RPG night, and ask to speak to the powergamers or Munchkins; the locals will know who qualifies best. Give them the rules, and ask them to exploit the rules for personal gain as best as possible (bribes of pizza and soda may assist in getting cooperation). Without even doing that, my intuition will be that the Munchkin approach is to campaign for a slate of one entry in each category. All the proposed rules do is give more weight to people that vote for fewer works, whether or not those works are part of slates.

  216. “Kameron Hurley retweeted Maria Popova ‏@brainpicker 12h12 hours ago ‘The white male gaze counts on silence, in aggregate. This time, I spoke up.’ Please oh please support @monicabyrne13 http://buff.ly/1HO34Sy

    Oh, shit. Men again. They must be real jerks. If I ever meet one I’ll slap ’em upside the head.

    You don’t need a slate in a diving bell.

  217. That’s because we’ve read The Top 100 Things I’d Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord and assume anyone competent has.

    12. One of my advisors will be an average five-year-old child. Any flaws in my plan that he is able to spot will be corrected before implementation.

    Still, on the safe side, get the Munchkin to look it over after the Evil Five-year-old Adviser.

  218. Sorry, what was that about “white male gaze?” I’d been turning kittens to stone with my White Male Gaze and didn’t quite understand what Kameron Hurley meant by all that …

  219. He has this fondness for color schemes that look like feces that someone vomited upon.

    Do you need a new monitor?
    Because I’m pretty sure Drow’s art has the bad color scheme.

    Two different things but my friend once said this was my best work so far.

  220. Did you call it, or did you call it? “Hell, I’ll say outright the sunset landscape sketch was an attempt at speedpainting and the result was pretty bad, but I really liked the little airship I threw in so I posted it. Yama regularly bags on that picture as if it were the summa totalis of my artwork. There are pieces where the proportions are very very bad, but I liked something about it so up it goes.”

  221. Calbeck: If written in the 1990’s or earlier, that would actually have been science-fictional. It’s good parody of the SJW, anyway. I thought it was pretty damned funny.

  222. Rory’s sunset has energy and vitality to the composition. It’s drenched in light and shows an awesome vista. The figure viewing it could be improved.

    Your picture of that girl (or guy, you still are drawing your women too androgynously, and I think you need to carefully study the differences between male and female anatomy, and I’m not being dirty when I say that because I mean little things about bone structure and fat distribution) is the best thing I’ve ever seen from you. The skin tones are still a bit odd but that could be shadowing. The hands are posed strangely — is she holding something in the original?

  223. The worst “critics” are those whose intent is not criticism at all, but merely attacking a person in order to further unrelated goals.

  224. I like the ruined castle wall best, for several reasons:

    1) The color composition is striking, grays and greens in the foreground “backlit” by vibrantly energetic contrasts.

    2) It tells something of a story. People were here, now they’re gone, and nature continues apace, reclaiming the region in their absence.

    I wouldn’t be averse to having a print of that on my wall.

  225. Totally called it. I wonder at what point he’ll drag out my old Slayers fanfiction again and complain about the speech pattern of a thousand year old dragon? Because he’s totally proving me right over and over.

    Every post he makes in attempts to humiliate me, he shows the double standard I was talking about before, and yet he’ll complain about Vox linking that video.

  226. I like the moss and the wall texture in the second picture, though the wall edge is a little too smooth. The purple foliage provides a nice contrast, but I think the color is a bit too saturated. I’ve been browsing a lot of landscape images lately, and I find myself increasingly drawn to the ones that best make use of colors outside the usual green-brown-blue color palette. I wish I could draw that well.

    When anyone is trying to present a comparison between their work or product and a rival’s work or product, I always assume they are the going to be comparing their best to their rivals worst. I am very rarely pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong, and in this case I am not surprised at all.

  227. @Civilis

    If you only have one work per category on your slate, then you can only get one work per category on the ballot. I don’t think any of the proposals would actually discourage slates, but they all are geared toward preventing a slate from “sweeping” a category.

  228. @Civilis – Thank you, and yes. I was looking at autumn landscape photos myself when I was drawing the background, and I think I actually went back and darkened the purple-leaved tree. It’s a bit of a struggle, I’ll admit, because autumn has such a vibrantly bright riot of colors. I had to pick colors that would contrast against the character who would be in the foreground, since he has a described appearance that I felt would disappear in a green wood. I chose a purple-leafed tree to draw the eyes to the character.

  229. Clamps? Captain Ahab called. He said you were a wee bit too obsessed and you should tone it down.

    Oh sorry, were we supposed to laugh and make fun of Shadowdancer or something?

  230. If you only have one work per category on your slate, then you can only get one work per category on the ballot. I don’t think any of the proposals would actually discourage slates, but they all are geared toward preventing a slate from “sweeping” a category.

    I had considered that, but if the end goal is to disrupt the awards (for a noble or ignoble purpose), the nominations are just a means to an end. What you really want is to lock down the award winners: either my candidate wins, or no one does. I much more fear an organized campaign to pick a winner than an organized campaign to pick a bunch of nominees.

  231. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand see? Called it again.

    I wonder how much his head would explode if he found out that I co-authored the published versions of the Seda’s Diary series. Not the discarded feeler story that was put out on the forums to see if there was an interest in the series. Because I predict he’ll drag that out and rag on it next. Or make fun of Sparrowind anyway, because vowing never to read it hasn’t stopped him from going on a 300 comment rant at Jordan’s, yelling about how unoriginal he thought it is and such.

  232. Thank you, and yes. I was looking at autumn landscape photos myself when I was drawing the background, and I think I actually went back and darkened the purple-leaved tree. It’s a bit of a struggle, I’ll admit, because autumn has such a vibrantly bright riot of colors. I had to pick colors that would contrast against the character who would be in the foreground, since he has a described appearance that I felt would disappear in a green wood. I chose a purple-leafed tree to draw the eyes to the character.

    I was looking at the image from the standards of looking at landscapes, rather than backgrounds.
    I tend to use landscape images to set mood and setting for RPG campaigns, so I look heavily at the general flow of the terrain and the palette used. You don’t need or want to be that detail oriented when putting something together as a background; superfluous detail would only distract from the character you are trying to highlight. I think the purple foliage is a good choice to background a blue-tinted character.

  233. @Shadowdancer: Re: your artwork

    I thought your piece was great, but I was doing an objective analysis. The shoulder and hand issues ARE minor. I didn’t notice them until about the fourth or fifth back and forth looking for stages to critique. I mentioned them because I was being thorough. I’ve seen errors in professional art (which is why folk like Whelan make the Big Bucks.) so don’t take it as too crazy of a criticism. If it’s your first time in the style, I’m extremely impressed. I’m no where near as good as you, especially in the hand done stuff. 3D I’m decent.

  234. The cover for Outcast was actually a topic of discussion between myself and Aff (who writes under the pseudonym A.C. Extarian) – he originally wanted that I show the whole castle, and show the character at the same time. When I quizzed him about the terrain, the way he had it laid out didn’t work, and I’m constrained by the cover size, and have to consider how it’ll look as a print, and a thumbnail. I told him to leave it with me, and that’s what I came up with.

    Oh, and just to show I wasn’t solely focused on the digital medium – http://cutelildrow.deviantart.com/art/Duo-of-Mass-Destruction-199331647

  235. The problem with evaluating character portraits is that they generally require some background detail about the character to know if the portrait accomplishes the goal of providing a glimpse of the character. For your sketch of the duo, the male’s sly grin and aside glance at the viewer imply something of a trickster, while the female seems to be either infatuated with or intent on seducing the male. For the cover art, all I can do is think of it in RPG terms: fighter type, noble, experienced, good or leaning towards good. Fighter should be obvious: heavy armor with greatsword but no obvious holy symbols. Noble: he’s clean, with fancy bits on the armor. Experienced: looks confident and the sword is might fancy; could just be rich enough to have bought a legendary weapon. Good or goodish: the blueish / silverish palette, especially the gems on the sword. If the background had been a winter scene, the palette could signify association with winter, but with a neutral scene, it’s much more of a pure / noble color scheme. If he’s actually the really evil big bad, he’s doing an excellent job of hiding it.

  236. Dr Mauser: No you cannot list a nominee more than once under the proposal.
    3.8.4: If a nominee appears on a nomination ballot more than once in any one category, only one nomination shall be counted in that category.
    This remains unchanged.

    OTOH, I think it should be changed since the proposal chops up my vote into small pieces, counts them up, drops out the loser, then REALLOCATES my vote to the nominees that remain.

  237. @Civilis – close, especially with the female. We had roleplay story backgrounds for our MMO characters, and these two were Immy (TheImmortal) the Necromancer, and Katheren the dwarven Warsmith.

    From the description, because it’s easier than writing it all up –

    In roleplay, they’re a passionate, violent couple who, to say the least, have a mutual interest in destruction and seeing things bleed and burn. The players are, to say the least, delightfully fun and adorably insane. I love these two.

    They’re a very sensual couple in my art, because I can’t really envision Kath as sweet and innocent. I always draw her with a sultry expression, her eyes half lidded, sexy and alluring; descriptions you normally don’t attribute to Lineage II dwarves. I play on the fact that people probably misattribute that Immy is a pervert with a taste for young looking flesh, and his smirk says he’s well aware of the squick that most people would attribute to the relationship – and doesn’t give crap, especially as since he’s human, she’s significantly older than he is by at least a few decades, if not by a century. The way I draw them together leaves no doubt that they’re very much sexually involved, and enjoying it very, very much. They delight in the discomfort they cause and enjoy playing with that discomfort, like a cat playing with a dead mouse.

    I used to portray Immy as a wiseass, if somewhat innocent and idealistic… until Katheren corrupted him even more.

    Delightfully, hair-raisingly gruesome, aren’t they?

  238. From David Gerrold’s Facebook thread the other day, someone questioning Brad’s motives for not going to Worldcon:

    “Farrell McGovern I don’t know about the US, but in Canada, it is a crime to pretend to be a member of the Armed Forces of Canada. Is this puppy actually serving?”

    Wow, just wow.

  239. …oops. The touchpad on this ‘top clicked wrong.

    As for the cover art knight – yep, on all counts. I tend to think in RPG terms too.

    Good or goodish: the blueish / silverish palette, especially the gems on the sword. If the background had been a winter scene, the palette could signify association with winter, but with a neutral scene, it’s much more of a pure / noble color scheme.

    I hadn’t thought of that. That actually sounds cool! =D

  240. @Chris Chupik – Wow. What part of ‘being deployed’ do these numbwits not understand?

    I don’t really think they should be pretending to respect military servicemen anyway. The first thing they do is question that service.

  241. You know, the bit that’s on the Internet Argument Checklist that Larry Correia made up? The one where it says ‘skim until offended’? Yeah, they clearly just skim till they find something to get pissed off about and data dump the rest. If they read the above post, which I’m starting to doubt, they’d have seen this:

    It might be funny, except for the fact that the whole reason I am going overseas in the first place, is the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Most folks know them as ISIS, though the Arabic and Islamic nations partnering with NATO and other countries to fight ISIS, call those guys DAESH, which is derogatory towards ISIS/ISIL. DAESH are the charming folks who throw gay men to their deaths, from rooftops. And chop the heads off of innocent women and children.

  242. “Projection level: Motie launching laser.”

    That reminds me, I have to reread that this summer.

  243. Clamps has always been a card carrying member of the Cult of the Sentence despite his own tin-eared writing. While style will always be a consideration, as Tom Simon has said in his “Style is the Rocket”, it is never the sole consideration, and Clamps has been rekted elsewhere for his slavish adherance to style over substance.

    http://bondwine.com/2012/06/08/style-is-the-rocket/

    As for questioning Chief Torgersen’s service, it helps shore up my hypothesis that the Hugo crowd has made the awards more about the members than the genre. Sorry, he’s legally obligated by his master to be elsewhere, under pain of criminal penalty as opposed to the continued derision of the Right People for not being present at a ceremony.

  244. Hm, noticed how Clampsy/Yama/Graz ran away after I said thank you for buying the book; Bias?

    I wonder why. Was he really that embarrassed to let out he bought the book of someone he hates? Well, two people he hates. He hates Aff too.

  245. I hadn’t thought of that. That actually sounds cool! =D

    Not being able to illustrate, I tend to work with descriptive narration, whether as notes or made up on the spot. When I specify something out of the ordinary, it’s usually there for a reason, I had to choose to put it there. I have a knight from a noble background that’s not a particularly good person, and I specify that the armor in question is more of a darker ‘gunmetal’ color (and when I’ve been able to model the character in games, it looks particularly distinctive without falling into the ‘obviously evil black’ category). As far as detail colors go, you can notice what humans naturally react to; blue and green tend to be more calming than red, which we typically associate with alarms or danger. Take a look at the standard Star Wars lightsaber colors. As always, setting trumps general; while white and blue tend to seem more good, an evil cleric of the deity of Ice will use the same color scheme, and there’s nothing to say a clever individual with a sense of style will deliberately choose dissonant colors to throw people off; having the evil mage walking around in red and gold lead off with an ice attack can throw the characters off their game.

  246. Jordan,

    Markku works at Castalia House, Vox’s publishing company. I believe he was a big part of tracking down Clamps IRL, so Marston has some serious hate for him. Hehehe. 😀

  247. They’re not doing the basic step of “if we change the rules, how will voting patterns change?”, much less “if we change the rules, how can the rules be gamed?”.

    From what I saw on the Making Light thread, they did in fact have an expert in voting systems in on the discussion, someone equipped to answer exactly that question.

    The fatal flaw of the Making Light discussion is that they assume Sad Puppies was intended to sweep the Hugos and crown everyone else out, so that’s what they’re trying to defend against. But since we’re looking for broader participation, all these proposals are likely to do is weaken the effect of CHORF groupthink.

  248. People who are supporting this feminist movement that has sprung to popularity with amazing rapidity these last few years need to start understanding these so-called “feminists” are people with crippling and sociopathic mental health issues.

    No one does what these women (and some men) do who is not a severely damaged person. No one sits on Twitter all day, every day and for months at a time disparaging men and whites unless they’re nuts. I mean actually nuts with issues so severe they are unable to understand what it is they do.

    No one has 200,000 Tweets that attack whites for years in a row without missing a day who is not a vicious racist. No one uses terms like “cis-scum” who does not themselves hate men and heterosexuals. No one uses terms like “cis-white dudes” in a serious attempt to portray America as a society unless they are mentally addled. No one singles out an ethnic grouping or sex in an obsessive manner and portrays them in a negative light 100% of the time unless they are a bigoted and intolerant racist and supremacist. No one living a calm, peaceful and orderly life in which they are free to do whatever they want from one minute to the next but who also claims oppression is sane. No one recommends “jazz hands” instead of clapping who is in their right mind. No one goes feral at a bikini ad who is normal. No one uses a genre like SF in such an inappropriate manner unless they have obsessive mental health issues they bring into whatever arena they go to and can’t let go of. No one cries at a TV comedian routinely watched by millions unless they are crazy.

    If you don’t believe me, just look at what Mattress Girl has just done, and look at the wide support for her madness throughout the entire affair from feminists who cried “rape culture” and “male gaze” and lied and continue to lie to this day about rape statistics. Middle class male SFF authors have opened the door to this madness by never saying “no,” no matter how insane the mental breakdowns on Twitter or whining about being under surveillance just by having their hate speech quoted.

    Other SFF authors (through ignorance) have inadvertently recently provided even more cover fire which only emboldens this sick behavior. One of the most famous SFF authors had a chance to strike down someone so obviously sick as to call for a moratorium on reading all white male heterosexual authors. Instead, like the fool he is, he took selfies with what is no better than a KKK which hates him and will never consider him more than an “ally,” a kapo at the camp guarding the other inmates with the “male gaze.”

    Anyone who believes these women are oppressed are so naive as to be useless as human beings in a civilized society let alone artists.

    From the first clinically ill radical feminists like Kate Millet, Andrea Dworkin and Shulamith Firestone, they are people with traumatic grudges against the world around them.

    No well adjusted human being claims “The white male gaze counts on silence…” No normal human being sees their fellow humans – 3.5 billion of them – from such a hostile and paranoid point of view. You don’t even have to be a psychiatrist to understand what a person is saying who feels under the hostile scrutiny and “gaze” of all men on Earth, presumably 24/7 and everywhere they go. No “academic” uses terms like “toxic masculinity” unless they are batshit crazy. They are sick.

    It’s no surprise these sick people claim a special exemption for their hate speech via equally special secret knowledge into oppression no one else not oppressed can truly see. Anita Sarkeesian claims no women can be sexist, other morons make hashtags like #ImaginaryMisandry, still others say they can never be racists. It has the sick self-serving convenience particular to all meticulously constructed fantasies of pathological liars. Yet when these fools cry “social justice” all reason and judgment flees and society says “Oh, you poor little babies. We thought women’s equality and Jim Crow had been defeated.”

    This social justice movement in SFF is a movement that provides cover for hate speech on a daily basis. It is nothing more than a hate movement camouflaged in old oppression narratives that gulls incredibly stupid people. You will never reach these people; that’s because they are mentally ill, and the rest of them are proof a sucker is born every minute. These people openly wave about their “ableisms” like a flag and it’s time to take them and their medicated lives at their word. What in the fuck are some of you people using for judgment?

  249. @Civilis

    But the current dust-up is over slates to pick the nominees. This year, SP3 and/or RP got all five of their picks nominated in several categories. THAT’s what led to the collective freak-out. An organized campaign to pick the winners once the nominees are chosen would have to be pretty obvious in order to truly succeed, just because of the ranking system used on the ballot, and unless a majority went along with it, the voters could rank “No Award” above the beneficiary of the organized campaign.

  250. Frank, I disagree that the success of SP3 led to the freak out, if only because the presence of one or two SP2 nominees per category brought out the exact same reaction last year (sans rules change), including a No Award campaign.

  251. @frank

    4 nominations for 6 slots doesn’t prevent slates, it just prevents lazy slates.

    all you need to do is to suggest 6 items and have them displayed in a different order every time someone views the site. If 100 people nominating will lock up 4 slots with lazy slates, 150 people nominating will lock up all 6 slots with “4 – 6” nominating rules.

    I’m on record as suggesting that Kate suggest more items than nomination slots for SP4 and randomize the order anyway. Not that doing so will prevent accusations of vote stuffing (nothing will), but it lets more good books be recommended for the SP to read and avoids any accidental bias/advantage due to the order that they are listed.

  252. For anyone honestly wondering what we are referring to when we talk about SJW, here is a call to have publishers kill the writing careers of men by not publishing any men for a year (link to TPV instead of the original article to avoid giving them advertising revenue)

    http://www.thepassivevoice.com/06/2015/kamila-shamsie-lets-have-a-year-of-publishing-only-women/

    > It is clear that there is a gender bias in publishing houses and the world of books. Well, enough. > Why not try something radical? Make 2018 the Year of Publishing Women, in which no new titles should be by men.

  253. But the current dust-up is over slates to pick the nominees.

    I’m over-thinking things, as usual. Still, it seems too much a matter of addressing past threats rather than future ones.

  254. Well forget that! There are too many books by men that I am waiting to read for that sort of utter nonsense. These people have lost all contact with reality, haven’t they?

  255. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: the way you spot a con game is by what these goofy feminists never have an interest in pie-charting or discussing.

    Why don’t they care 100% of all people I’ve seen working in bitterly cold freezer warehouses are men? Why the lack of concern over virtually entirely male military cemeteries? What about nursing and teaching? Men hog the suicide rate at a 4 to 1 rate. Breast and prostate cancer are equally occurring; guess which gets more money and press? Does Delta Blues music need diversity?

    I myself don’t think of things in that in-group/out-group way which so typifies the bigotry and racism of gender feminists. But when you speak back to them in their own language it reveals what liars they are.

    If I were concerned about violence in Game of Thrones, I’d be concerned with violence, not prick up my ears every time a precious man is killed.

    Eff these people. Eff Kamila Shamsie and her “patriarchy.” Why wouldn’t this dumb broad see immorality only in men? Skiffy can bitch about smashing the cis-hetero patriarchy, but we know what a nut who talked about smashing the homosexual matriarchy would be – someone who’s demonizing all members of an entire group in their millions by pretending they constitute an ideology out to get you. That’s the same way anti-Semites work, and it’s the same way the KKK works. Everybody goes, the entire group.

    By contrast, normal people take out actual ideologies like the KKK, neo-Nazis and gender feminists, each of which are tiny fringe lunatic supremacist groups claiming to represent all whites or women. Eff all of them.

  256. For anyone honestly wondering what we are referring to when we talk about SJW, here is a call to have publishers kill the writing careers of men by not publishing any men for a year

    From a summary of the article on Ace of Spades, this excerpt: “We [the award committee] read what publishers submit to us” supports my contention that the problem could be blamed on publishers.

    Also, “So I asked the Booker administrators how many of the books submitted in the last five years have been written by women. The answer was, slightly under 40%.” I believe that only 40% of new college admissions are going to men, so by this logic. the obvious way to fix this issue is that we must spend a year where we don’t admit any women to college?

    Seriously, this is the logic of group identity politics: women as a group are not equally represented by publishers, so the obvious response is to punish individual male authors (and by extension, the readers that enjoy them).

  257. And again with the projection….
    Who actually sucks at writing, the people who sell their own books, or the ones who only manage to sell books by attacking them?

    The ones who are welcome guests because of the quality of their writing, or the ones that have to illegally circumvent multiple bans to do yet more reality-denying attacks on the people they supposedly feel are stalking them?

  258. @calbeck: I don’t think i’ve seen him go below ‘angry’. I’ve seen him go from angry to raging to frothing to apoplectic. He hasn’t quite keeled over from it yet from what I’ve seen but he keeps trying.

  259. And don’t forget, publishing itself is heavily female dominated. I saw one guy who talked about looking over a bunch of different sites to find agents and noticing it is like 9 to 1 women vs men. So if publishing is really sexist against female authors it isn’t mainly men’s fault, much less male authors.

    (Best numbers I have seen suggest that like 60% of the books published over all are written by women anyway, so I don’t know that the assertion is right anyway.)

  260. Well good luck with the deployment. If your luck hopefully you wil wind up working night shifts. Where I am at it’s already too hot and it’s oly going to get hotter.

  261. @davidelang

    I hadn’t even thought of using a randomization algorithm to “beat” the 4/6 proposal, but what you’re suggesting would probably work. I think the proposed rules changes are all a colossal waste of time. I’m hoping enough moderates show up to prevent any changes to the way it’s done.

  262. @Nathan

    Let me amend that. I think the intensity and breadth of the freak out are all due to the success of SP3/RP this year. I think Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen were both expecting blowback, but they weren’t expecting a wildly inaccurate (though ultimately corrected) article in Entertainment Weekly, and they weren’t expecting so much blowback that they’d have to state things like the fact that neither of them is Vox Day. And they weren’t expecting a spat with one of the most well-known fantasy authors on the planet, which led to an even bigger media storm.

  263. @ frank
    You don’t even need to do the randomization thing if you actually have a set of people who will vote exactly the way you tell them to. Just post three lists and tell people to vote for one if their name starts with one range of letters,…

    all that 4-6 means is that the votes need to be spread across all 6 instead of everyone voting for the same list. It requires more people yes, but is that bump enough to eliminate slates? When it’s taken less than 30 votes to get on the ballot in some categories in the past, and there are 10,000+ people who can nominate next year, changing 30 votes to 45 votes doesn’t make a lick of difference.

    The randomization thing will mean that if people are just voting for the things that were listed without reading them, and vote for the top things on the list (common practice), the votes will be spread across all the candidates.

  264. they weren’t expecting a wildly inaccurate (though ultimately corrected) article in Entertainment Weekly

    It’s worth recalling that it wasn’t just Entertainment Weekly; the same article was shopped to what, half a dozen media outlets on the same day? A coordinated and toxic media campaign. I think they were expecting lies and a temper tantrum, because that’s exactly what happened last year. I don’t actually think the outraged reaction this year is not because “SLATE!!!!!” – that is, because the list included up to five works in some categories – but because the Sad Puppy idea didn’t go away. Dissenters were supposed to be discouraged last year, and never raise their heads again, after their nominees were duly voted into last place (or No Awarded in one case).

    In fact, that’s what they’re supposed to do next year. Having all their nominees come in below No Award this year is, we are told, going to “Discourage the Puppies” and they will all go away sadly, having been taught that there is no place in the Hugo awards for their kind. That appears to be the main reason given for pushing the No Award strategy. I consider this most unlikely to work, but that does seem to be the line given.

  265. Who’s actually buying copies of Seda’s Diary? Nobody.

    Not only is this false, it’s foolish– since the book has not only sold, but been pirated and sold on the black market.

  266. “Having all their nominees come in below No Award this year is, we are told, going to “Discourage the Puppies” and they will all go away sadly, having been taught that there is no place in the Hugo awards for their kind.”

    Let’s see, number 6 of 5 from last year, Vox Day, came back with a vengeance this year. So, no I do not think that the Puppies will fade. I do expect next year to be nastier, though.

  267. How much effect does being a Tiptree Award winner have on book sales? They can go ahead and turn the Hugos into the Travelling Tiptree Annex Award, and Hugos will become that valuable.

  268. But you’re doing such a great job selling them, Clamps. By the way, when are you publishing your first work?

  269. Clamps, I find myself seriously wondering if you have a reading disability. That or you’re so consumed with hate that you can’t see the letters on the screen.

    Yeah, actually my money is still on the latter.

  270. She had a cramped set of bovine teeth arranged like the sails of clipper ships that used to run the old Saipan-Midway route. Her lips were as terse as the sexual advances of an old Cornish fishwife.

    Her ears were tetrahedrons on a squared off head with two c-clamps for eyes.

    Her nose was a pigeon. Her skin had the shimmer of old Maltese armor plate and the feel of frozen lard.

  271. *chuckles* Man, Graz is just a one-dude entertainment console. Gonna pop open this mead and get some roast pork going. Gonna be a great weekend.

  272. @Nathan – That essay on style is a great link. It captures and crystallizes a lot of things I’d been trying to put together for the last few weeks.

  273. Dealing with Clamps is like trying to punish a psychotic Chihuahua for peeing on the carpet. Loud, annoying, unable to actually hurt you and completely insane.

  274. But, something important to remember everyone: Yamamanama has been banned again at an IP level. If he comes back that means he’s using some way of faking his IP (like proxy, ip spoof, etc) to bypass that.

    That’s why his protestations will ring hollow.

  275. yes, and it also means that he is ‘circumventing system security measures in order to make use of system time, on a computer he has been forbidden to access’

  276. And of course he’ll run to the File 770 people and whine that he got banned for speaking ill of Vox.

    What a miserable wretch.

  277. IP is also one of the easiest blocks to circumvent; I have a spare router set up as a 3DS HomePass relay (‘cuz I’m a Wii Plaza junkie). All it takes is a compliant router firmware and a script, and it changes MAC and IP addresses every five minutes to connect to other HomePass users.

  278. Typical of him. What makes that especially hilarious is that many of us can identify him after one post. He never changes.

  279. Good thing he was dumb enough to admit in a public forum how he deliberately circumvents the security of sites he’s banned from.

  280. But Mauser is a Puppy, and everyone knows you can’t trust them. (eyeroll)

    The Stalker post and the Gamingforce article should be spread far and wide, wherever this troll spreads his venom.

    But it’s good that Clamps got into specific detail about exactly how he evades bans. And now that he has, that information could be passed on, say, to those bloggers he constantly plagues, so they can develop countermeasures against him.

  281. Problem being, the most cost-effective countermeasure is vigilance; everything else, up to and including browser fingerprinting or other tracking methods, is expensive, time consuming, trivial to circumvent, or a combination of the above.

  282. @Nathan

    I agree that next year will likely be nastier, regardless of the outcome of the Hugos. I don’t really have any good suggestions for making it better, either. I’m just sad that we can’t get most of the SF/F writers and fans together in one place for a con once a year.

  283. @Shadowdancer: FIrst, those sketch comics of tech support are gold! I haven’t had a good laugh like that in a while. I’m reasonably sure you and Aff have seen “Computer Stupidities” already, but just in case you haven’t: http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/.

    Second, thank you for sharing your art. Not being an artist myself, nor trained in art critique, I don’t think I’d care to try examining or analyzing your art or wossisname’s, so I’ll let it go with this: Your stuff has a a cheerful vitality to it. His stuff looks dreary and depressed. I realize that there is, in fact, great art that is dreary and depressed, but I’d rather look at the stuff that makes me feel upbeat. Yours wins.

    Last: Having read your explosion, I am making a note to myself to never, ever, EVER piss you off. Piss off the Chief? No problem; I can survive pissed-off chiefs, of both the enlisted and warrant varieties – been there, done that, got the t-shirt. But women… you play for KEEPS. 🙂

    @Christopher M. Chupik – thanks for the quote from whomever it was that implied the Chief was a fake. That person is correct that it is a crime (Criminal Code of Canada) in Canada, and having talked with some folks on the Stolen Valor website, it’s clear it’s a crime in the US. As well as being eminently mock-worthy, too. However, there’s a world of difference between someone like Frank Gervais (charged with impersonating a member of the Canadian Forces, on the basis of photographic evidence that made it clear he wasn’t due to the number of errors in his uniform), and Mr. Torgersen, about whom there is NO evidence he’s a faker, and quite a bit of evidence to the contrary; specifically, people who actually know him. I suspect, though, that this will not inconvenience those accusing him (not in so many words, but certainly in essence) of stolen valour.

  284. @William Underhill

    Thanks for that! I like hearing when people find that lazy, irregular comic funny =D I’m trying to set up the comic so I can post them on the main affsdiary.com site, so that I’ll have a more localized posting setup. =) Look for future posts there! (I actually have one waiting but I gotta fix it up a little.)

    I’m glad you like my art =) Here’s one I drew last year, when I had “Happy” stuck as a looping earworm.

    I also don’t blow up often. I find it too tiring to stay furious, but the needling petty stupid over the past few months… yeah no. The anti-pups work on the assumption that we’re around to answer their questions on demand, then doubt everything we say or do anyway. Fuck. That. Noise.

    Also, here’s proof where it’s Yama, under his LJ username asking Jordan to bypass the registration site for our forums so he can browse it by proxy (you can’t sign up for it with a proxy.)

  285. @viktor
    By my comment, I meant that if you vote one item, it counts 5 times as much because it doesn’t get divided. Effectively, it outweighs the votes of a person who votes 5 items.

  286. Clamps actually looks fairly normal compared a lot of SJWs like Mattress Girl, piggish feminists asking for men not to be published, men pretending to be women attacking men, not reviewing white men, and racists asking the world not to read white heterosexual males for one year.

    It must gall retards like Damien Walter to have 5,000 Twitter followers on a par with Vox Day after all the work Walter has put in shilling for a sociopathic hate movement. Now he has to watch Milo Yiannopoulos add a hundred followers a day to his almost 50,000 and probably can’t figure out Milo actually researches his articles rather than writing “cis, white and male” and figuratively arching his eyebrows while making up scare quotes along with Arthur Chu.

    Every week that goes by makes it increasingly obvious that our worst social justice warriors aren’t just man-haters and racists but mentally disturbed ones. Fronting for them you have happy-go-lucky writers of books about goblins and fanfic weaponized into millions of dollars lying about rape statistics and racial privilege as if they were pets of parrots asking “polyamorous want a cracka ass cracka?” Like Walter, none of them seem to realize how ruthlessly their careers have been used and then thrown aside by opportunists as anxious to signal-boost their sorrow as they are to never actually live among them, preferring white midwestern small town communities to the heady nobility of Baltimore or Nigeria.

    Although SFF has nothing as dramatic as rape fantasy videos and imaginary men created by women exposed as hoaxers and liars, it’s still amazing to me how many people out there don’t understand how many Twitter feeds in SFF are cries for help from some truly disturbed and obsessive people. The fact Mattress Girl can actually graduate from college shows insane people can actually write books, show up for work on time and then go on Twitter to compulsively let us all know how all men on Earth are cis-scum out to suppress their amazing writing about French Queer Theory zombies in space, racial revenge fantasies and bi-sexual nymphomaniac bounty hunters. Nothing says SF like going to the Nebulas and continuing selfies from WisCon with #UnrelatedAsians hashtags cuz white racism after a panel on gender and sexuality cuz rocket ships.

    Now that they’ve turned core SFF into a Tiptree mental asylum of oppressed gay feminists and affirmative action KKK, one wonders what they’ll do aside from selling stories to each other which metaphorically address the inadvisability of being a heterosexual ethnic European man. There is no impulse control in Mudville, or strike zones, or equal protection.

  287. I didn’t say he was sane. I said his lack of impulse control compared to people who daily murmur to themselves about whites and men is a relative thing. Even Yama doesn’t go on about “global whiteness” and “police your whiteness” like the post the lovely anti-racist K. Tempest Bradford just linked us to about being a good “ally” to a pack of yowling WisCon racists.

  288. Every time I view this video I think of Clamps and all the other sad little people like him.

  289. Hey, James May, I think you might need to reassess that bit about Yama’s impulse control. I mean, despite the bullshit they fret about puppies oh noes doxxing over at File 770, if Mike Glyer deletes our comments once or bans anyone, we don’t go back. They have Yama on their side, coming over here, evading bans again and again and again to harass me, and to drive me off of Brad Torgersen’s blog so he’ll ‘stop harassing’ the blog. Maybe.

  290. I am unsure if that is actually his writing. It might not be; it might be Paul Park’s, the author Yama has been getting the names Pieter de Graz / the Chevalier de Graz from. Google those pseudonyms and it turns up a google-readable sample of that person’s work.

    That’s who Yama is attempting to emulate, by the way, in terms of style, in the same way he seems to be trying to emulate Yoshitaka Amano’s artwork (but failing.)

  291. I foresee double standards. If Yama is allowed to dismiss my books based on samples and run a campaign of harassment almost 7 years long now, I won’t be allowed to do the same to his work or that of any author he upholds as good, because (insert excuse by Yama here), but in truth, it’s because I’m Asian, female, and refuse to behave in the way he thinks I should.

  292. There’s no doubt the kid’s nuts. He understands a thing is wrong on some level but can’t actually act on that to control his behavior. He can’t edit his racing thoughts. To him people are microphones he speaks into and when they speak back all he hears is his own words which he feels compelled to repeat over and over again. It is almost literally an echo chamber of insane fixation.

    It reminds me of the Twitter feeds I mentioned. For example, I can understand a woman SFF author wondering why there’s not more women in epic fantasy. I cannot understand that being reworded virtually every single day for weeks and then months on end and then a concluding convo where men may hate woman on some level but not dragons. I mean… the goddam editor of the Magazine of Fantasy and SF said that for crying out loud. What the hell chance do you think you have of having a story sold and who do you think he’s nominating for Hugos – literature? In what fantasy world do all men on Earth hate all women on Earth? I am so tired of hearing this nut factory mumble to each other about the patriarchy. And then they claim there’s no affirmative action even while they never shut up about it.

    These people are fucking crazy. I’d bet money anyone capable of writing “The white male gaze counts on silence” is on some fairly powerful meds.

    These fake “feminists” are amazing liars when it comes to concocting fantasies about oppression to back up their insanity. Dating from Simone de Beauvoir’s book The Second Sex, they’ve had 65 years to perfect their Foucauldian rhetoric which is superficially plausible enough to take in these idiot do-gooders who signal-boost their hokum and gripe about “feminism.” In the research I’ve done, the amount of gibberish they’ve come up with to explain how it’s actually the world that imagines its own fake heterosexuality by repeating the “illusion” to themselves is amazing. Even Anita Sarkeesian Tweets that crazy shit about “performance.” That’s the shit Sarkeesian has read and why she thinks what a human sees in video games will create an actual reality they “perform.” By an amazing coincidence it’s the same reality we’ve been “performing” since the dawn of civilization. Maybe that’s an illusion too.

    These are not feminists. “Feminism” is based on changing law and social customs analogous to law. It’s not based on gender “performativity,” Jacques Derrida, Judith Butler Queer Theory and poststructuralism. These are mentally disturbed sociopaths who’ve fixated on the idea men are at the bottom of all their shortcomings and European intellectual gibberish (which is at the core of Ancillary Justice) is their answer. I’m not surprised such people are so attracted to an ideology whose entire basis is the world is an illusion and anything is anything. Why be surprised Ann Leckie wrote a post about an allegorical restaurant where “white cis dudes” randomly punch intersectional darlings: PoC, gays and women?

    The number of these people who openly admit to ADHD, OCD, panic disorders, anxiety attacks, bi-polar depression and the meds that go along with that is amazing to me. Trigger warnings… duh!

  293. Like a lot of abusers, Clamps knows how to manipulate authority to get unwarranted sympathy. You know that scene in Dirty Harry where Scorpio pays a guy to beat him, so he can accuse Callahan of police brutality? Like that.

  294. And yet, I’m not allowed to have a different opinion or tastes, or styles. Yama seems to believe I exist to make things he likes. Why am I not allowed to make things I like? Or do things the way I want, or have different opinions, or tastes, or likes and dislikes, or adhere to different beliefs? I am Asian, Female and do not want to do things the way he likes, which offends him and he has stalked and harassed me no matter where I go on the Internet, because of it.

    I have found no reason for Yama’s behavior to make sense, except when seen in this context:

    in Yusuf Ali’s English translation of the Qur’an.[53] In other words when women behave properly they are to be treated kindly,
    … The Qur’an states:
    “Righteous women are therefore obedient, … And those you fear may be rebellious (nushuz) admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them.”[55]

    Why else would Yama think he has the right to demand anything of me? Note too, that he did not deny that this treatment of me stems from my being female, as he clearly has not seen women who he sees as ‘rebellious’ to his liking as worth treating kindly in any form. As I live in another country, this harassment and constant condemnation of my works, my looks, and me is the closest he can get to beating me for the sin of disagreeing with him.

  295. As I live in another country, this harassment and constant condemnation of my works, my looks, and me is the closest he can get to beating me for the sin of disagreeing with him.

    *imagines the result if he was dumb enough to actually try to assault Shadow in person*

    Guess he has some sanity. Women play for keeps. If he tried it on pretty much any of the US based women, he’d get a much quicker death.
    (Or maybe just cowardly– people like him are why the guys on the local SWAT team have already been warned about possible false calls, since about the time Patterico got SWATed. Vox’s legal action did make them take it a bit more seriously, too. Turns out we have good taste in neighbors, former Army range master next door.)

  296. The reason why I quoted that is because that is what is considered correct behavior, thus something that possibly explains Yama’s obsessive need to see me punished for my being ‘rebellious’ towards what he thinks is good and right. He does not see me as an equal human being, thus treats me as lesser, and not entitled to any rights he decides not to grant me. I do not know if Yama is Muslim, but the way he behaves is almost as if he has a religious need to see me humbled, beaten. Thus the constant denigration whenever he has the opportunity, as well as threats to my children in the past.

  297. No, Yama. It’s good expository prose. “Ancient,” “old” and “archaic” are not synonyms; they are words with related meanings. The tradition is “ancient,” meaning “very old.” It is so old that it is “archaic,” menaing “almost outdated.” This is well-written.

  298. Clamps projected with:
    You are so lost in your delusions and fantasies that you can no longer see reality.

    *rotfl*

  299. Yama, Rory’s writing passes the reality test, and yours doesn’t. Rory is able to make money from her writing, and you can’t. This implies that she is a better writer than are you.

    Of course, you do help by running an independent and unpaid advertising campaign for her. Thanks.

  300. Are we really surprised Yama has thrown his hat in the ring with a sociopathic ideology hiding behind “social justice?” It’s a perfect place for Yama’s insanity to look like the opposite. No doubt Yama is a “feminist.” No matter how nuts he acts he’s always right, at least in his mind.

    Equal rights feminism and goofy gender “feminism” have become inextricably mixed together in the minds of the American public, even though they have almost nothing to do with each other. The latter almost amounts to a phobia and even hatred of men, which shouldn’t be surprising considering this movement’s founders. Yama’s found a perfect hidey hole and it’s no surprise how welcome he is at SJW sites. He’s nuts – why wouldn’t he be?

    In real terms misusing the word “feminism” is how anti-Sad Puppies and anti-Gamergaters can get away with lying we are against “feminism” and therefore against equal rights for women – that Gamergate and Sad Puppies are “misogynists.” That is a lie. In this ideology, we are “misogynists” just for waking up via the all-encompassing patriarchy which enforces the “compulsory heterosexuality” quoted from both Judith Butler and Adrienne Rich and in fact is in the title of Rich’s most famous essay. Remember, Liz Bourke’s Tor.com column is named after a Rich quote and she pushed the Butlerian “performative” Ancillary Justice from day one and as hard as anyone. The idea the gay Bourke is an equal rights feminist is laughable to anyone who’s read that woman’s rhetoric. That’s been a dead issue for decades and pretty much everyone is on board with it other than a fringe.

    The truth is what we are actually against is being critiqued and attacked as “men” by this bizarre ideology and women like Leigh Alexander, Kameron Hurley, Laurie Penny, Randi Harper, Anita Sarkeesian, “Brianna” Wu, all of WisCon and a host of others. If someone can tell me how “transphobia” and the 40 yr. old MichFest lesbian music festival being shut down by men pretending to be women is “equal rights” feminism and not gender dysmorphic asshattery and how all that plus the racial intersectionalism now embraced by gender feminists is not central to the “social justice” crusade in SFF I will concede I am wrong.

    The SJW claim they are fighting for equal rights for women is a lie and it’s time we started loudly saying how and why it is a lie when they say that and then link us to Audre Lorde’s gay intersectionalist idiocy about the “gap of male ignorance.” And don’t forget, these people will also say pushing back against a lesbian supremacist fringe ideology to be anti-lesbian or “homophobia” – another lie. It’s the same lie behind the stupid title of the “Women Destroy Science Fiction” anthology. Just read the essays and look at the names. That’s no gals night out. That’s an ideology which claims to represent all women, but “women” are so tired of this trigger warning culture only 18% in America consider themselves “feminists,” a drop of 10% in 2 years.

    You can read about that and some of the fakery in this paragraph at the link:

    “Feminism is not about ending the tyranny of men, destroying masculinity or killing all men so women can rise to power. Rather, according to contemporary feminist bell hooks’ essay ‘Feminism Is For Everybody,’ feminism ‘is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation and oppression.’”

    http://depauliaonline.com/opinions/2015/04/12/feminism-continues-to-be-misunderstood/

    The commenters aren’t as big a suckers as the author of that post.

  301. This is slightly off-topic, but amusing. SF reviewer James Nicoll made a big noise after SP3 that he wasn’t going to review any more Baen because Toni Weisskopf allowed herself to be nominated twice in a row. No big loss, since Nicoll is anti-Baen at the best of times. Now he’s rather pointedly doing a review series called “Military Spec-Fic That Doesn’t Suck”. Which can’t include anything from Baen, of course. His most recent in that series was A Bertram Chandler’s The Big Black Mark.

    What he utterly fails to mention at any point in the review or comments, is that this book is currently back in print . . . from Baen. His anti-Baen bigotry is so great, so all-consuming, that he’s done his readers a disservice by not telling them where they can easily find the book he recommends.

  302. Wait a second. I distinctly recall Nick Mamatas telling me on facebook that he is legit a Marxist politically.

    Let me check.

    Yep. All the way back in Pat Cadigan’s monster facebook thread he told me he was Marxist, on March 28th.

    (Wow digging back that far is a pain in the butt, even with your own facebook stuff.)

    Either way, his little bit of creative silliness at best earns him ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ and ◔_◔

  303. So, if we really were Marxists, that would mean that Mamatas would like us, right? 😉

  304. Maybe, but then again, he’s attempting to insult us by insulting his own beliefs. That suggests either to hypocrisy or self-loathing, in a general sort of way, so perhaps he’d like us even less if we were Marxist.

    Honestly, I don’t really care to find out if either of those is true or neither.

  305. I’ve never been able to figure out anything Mamatas says other than he thinks a lot of himself and his nice judgments. He reminds me of Damien Walter: lots of words, nothing actually there. If Walter would get ideas from research and knowledge instead of coming up with some resentment and then reverse engineering nothing out of his head, he wouldn’t be fuming watching Milo take what Walter may feel is his place as the U.K.’s Oscar Wilde of journalism.

    “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 5 Just in case anyone was starting to believe the Sad Puppy claims that they aren’t homophobic.”

    There’s more SJW “logic.” Vox Day barks and we all become gay-hating homophobes. Great journalistic instincts there Walter.

    “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others'”

    Here’s more from Monica Byrne’s project Walter quoted:

    “That genre, like gender, is a construct of the past.”

    “That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    “I’m white. This doesn’t make me ‘objective.’ In a racist society, there’s no such thing as a neutral position. So here’s my subjective position as I understand it: being white means having profound privilege, and for me personally, I intend to use that privilege to redistribute power. I wrote more about that in The Atlantic. If you have any thoughts about this, I would love to hear them at @monicabyrne13 or monica@monicabyrne.org.”

    I can tell you my thoughts right now: f off.

    At some point, perhaps in his old age, Walter will realize the worst sex-hating racists are anti-Gamergaters, gender feminists and SJWs.

  306. “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others’”

    So, wait. He believes that some people’s work should be valued more because of the race and gender of the artist? How . . . bigoted.

  307. Irene Gallo of Tor, comparing Puppies to Nazis:

    That’s pretty damn offensive, but even more so on a day that we remember those who gave their lives fighting REAL Nazis.

  308. For those keeping score, Sad Puppies have been compared to: Nazis, Neo-Nazis, wife-beaters, child abusers, North Korea and Marxists.

    Over a literary award.

  309. So Damien’s argument is that the oppressed minority that is also the majority worldwide should have preferential treatment when it comes to publishing?

    How about the ones who write good stories get published, regardless of the incidentals of their genetics?

    Of course, his method or mine he still doesn’t get his (non-existent) book published, so that’s cool.

  310. Here’s the creative director of Tor Books and associate publisher of Tor.com Irene Gallo:

    “Irene Gallo ‏@IreneGallo Jun 1 ‘A lot of the history of literature has been the lie of a non-diverse world.”

    That links us to post at Tor.com about panelists at BookCon 2015 “SFF authors Kameron Hurley, Ken Liu, Nnedi Okorafor, and Daniel José Older.” I already feel hated. You get this:

    “Hurley (The Mirror Empire) recalled having a similar experience when she first read SFF, thinking ‘Wow, everyone’s lying to me’ about space being populated only with white men.”

    Actually that’s called “reality” and no it isn’t Jim Crow. Just reality. Notice how you have two falsehoods for the price of one, including the usual non-racialized demographic spike equals racist ideology. Can I help it Nigeria and Guatemala aren’t in space? That makes me Jim Crow, or a liar if I write that?

    “Irene Gallo retweeted Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong May 12 I’m so excited that my story, ‘A Fist of Permutations in Lightning & Wildflowers,’ will be on… tordotcom, edited by… MiriamAnneW, next year!”

    Gee, I wonder how a die-hard intersectionalist did that. Just a random slush pile, I’m sure.

    “Irene Gallo ‏@IreneGallo Apr 4 In which I start to practice typing ‘No Award’, the Hugo noms”

    Neo-Nazis, huh? I’ve been writing about the mainstreaming of hate speech by the SJW assery for a long time, and in return I’m usually called a “racist.” These people are so far out of their stupid gourds I can’t get over it. Hurley, Liu, Okorafor and Older are quote-cannons.

    Tor BOOKS, not just Tor.COM is crossing a line here. Why do you hire people who so obviously hate me just for getting out of bed in the morning? Why would I come to despise a publisher of SFF I love? Tor needs to start asking themselves some hard questions about whether they are a business or an SJW commune for gender feminist intersectionalism, cuz I’m sick of the ugly racist and sexual remarks all these people produce on a daily basis.

  311. You know, given how convinced they are that we’re the minority I hope they’re seated when the actual vote totals get released.

    ‘Course, I don’t necessarily think the puppies are the (often silent) majority either, I’m just betting that the puppy-kickers don’t have as many people willing to no award everything as they think.

  312. Heh, Nick Mamatas? Crossed swords with him a LONG time ago, when he tripped over his own definitions of what “anti-gay hate group” meant. He was bashing a group I was involved with as “homophobic”, I reminded him that most of its membership were gay or bisexual, and his response was… I kid you not:

    “The Nazis had gays in their ranks.”

    When I pointed out that, technically, someone COULD use this exchange to suggest he thought the Nazis (like the group I was with) were “gay-tolerant” or even “pro-gay”, he flipped out and ultimately sicced his lawyer on me.

    After I had a nice polite discussion with her, she went back to him — and he retracted his “homophobic” claim from the hit-piece he’d written. Still said he’d sue me if this ever came up again. He’s welcome to try.

    Meanwhile, HEY YAMA! If you need a couple hundred thousand words of fanfic to moan about, have MY LITTLE PONY CROSSED WITH FALLOUT NEW VEGAS! -XD

    https://www.fimfiction.net/story/679/fallout-equestria-new-pegas

  313. It’s a toss-up. Lots of Puppy-kickers loudly announcing their desire to No-Award stuff, but also a lot of new Hugo voters who seem willing to actually judge each nominee on a case-by-case basis.

  314. “That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    OK, I can’t even figure out what this means. Setting aside the “white male colonial gaze” (am I supposed to imagine that as like a basilisk’s gaze, so white colonial men turn people to stone by looking at them?) what does Byrne think “mainstream American art” is? In the days of the Internet there’s no such thing as a main stream of American art, just a host of minor streams splitting off, wandering in whatever direction pleases them, and occasionally remerging – like a river’s delta.

    If Byrne means the art that receives approval from the New York literati, the statement is nearly the reverse of the truth – to pass their sensibilities art is basically required to offend the “white colonial man” who lives in the rhetoric of vulgarized Marxism (and nowhere else.) But I can’t think of anything else she could possibly mean; the New York literati are the only people around who could ever have declared what the main stream of American art actually was.

    Is there, in fact, any more to this than “White male Americans are evil because they like art that sets off my phobias and will pay lots of money to look at it”?

  315. “That humanity is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, God. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.”

    Yep, it sounds just as “I dun gotta prove nuffin!” when you swap the subject matter.

  316. “Meredith on June 6, 2015 at 5:59 am said:… When you’re interested in talking to people instead of defeating the mythical SJWs, let me know.”

    I am amazed at the eagerness these people have to talk about a thing they know precisely zero about. Does this woman live in a cave?

  317. @James: who is she talking to? Aren’t the people she thinks we are exactly as mythical as she says SJWs are? Then again, I’m a unicorn. What do I know from mythology?

  318. The funny thing is that if I used Gallo’s logic but actual principles instead of SJW identity morality, then she’d be arguing Tor is a racialist gender supremacist enterprise vunderbarkamp. What a knothead.

  319. Well, Calbeck, look at how easily I come up with hateful quotes the SPLC would take a hard look at if you masked the actual sex and race of the targets and how little SJWs can find from so-called women-hating homophobic Nazis. This is exactly why D. Walter tried to crowdsource hate quotes from L. Correia and came up empty.

    If you masked race and sex and took samples from across the SFF core community, SJWs would lose a hate speech contest by a ratio of around 100 to 2. The fact they see it precisely the opposite way shows what stupid, ignorant and crazy liars SJWs are. They seem to have dictionaries where words float around like lifebuoys.

    The reality is just opposing goofy Mattress Girl-style gender feminism which stars Tor bloggers who use terms like “cis-scum” makes you a bigot. That’s a rabbit hole of stupid.

  320. Essentially, what that describes is “morality by consensus”. Here’s an excellent example of how moronic that is (and one they may be forced to agree with!):

    In the early Bible, there’s a point where the Hebrews are marching towards Canaan. They are described as committing flat-out genocide against more than fifty “walled towns”. In each case, God allegedly commanded the Hebrews to do it.

    So, I have asked diehard religious types: does this mean genocide isn’t always evil, OR did the priests of the day simply claim God told them this and no one questioned them? I was surprised to get a third answer: “Oh, God’s grace was in effect back then.”

    Meaning that since He hadn’t handed down the Ten Commandments, ANYTHING HE SAID TO DO WAS MORAL AT THAT PARTICULAR MOMENT.

    So these SJWs who can’t just say a given thing is good or evil on basis of the act, but only in terms of how they rationalize it from moment to moment? They’re using the same arguments as religious fundamentalist apologists for genocide.

  321. “Let’s run it on down. White males are most responsible for the destruction of human life and environment on the planet today. Yet who is controlling the supposed revolution to change all that? White males (yes, yes, even with their pasty fingers back in black and brown pies again). It just could make one a bit uneasy. It seems obvious that a legitimate revolution must be led by, made by those who have been most oppressed: black, brown, and white women–with men relating to that as best they can. A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant, or titillating; nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well). Goodbye to all that.” – Robin Morgan, “Goodbye to All That”, 1970

    Notice anything familiar there?

    Robin Morgan edited the seminal “Sisterhood Is Powerful (which) has been widely credited with helping to start the second wave feminist movement in the US, and was cited by the New York Public Library as ‘One of the 100 most influential Books of the 20th Century” – Wikipedia

    “Until the appearance of the brilliant anthology Sisterhood Is Powerful and Kate Millett’s extraordinary book Sexual Politics, women did not think of themselves as oppressed people. Most women, it must be admitted, still do not. But the women’s movement as a radical liberation movement in Amerika can be dated from the appearance of those two books.” – Andrea Dworkin in the introduction to her 1974 book Woman Hating.

    Is there any doubt where this cult gets their ideas from or what they are. “Equal rights” feminists? What a stinking lie. If you’re looking for an analogy to the philosophical space of a neo-Nazi you can just put the word “Jew” in there.

  322. “Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter Jun 4 ‘the majority of humankind is brown women, and those artists’ work will be privileged above all others’”

    Ok, just because this bugs me too much: ‘brown’ women may be a plurality of humankind, but they certainly aren’t a majority. For them to be a majority, there would have to be more ‘brown’ women than all men and white women combined. This is also assuming you’re lumping Asians in with the ‘brown’ category, which you’d have to because Asians in general are a majority of humankind. Given the history, whether Asians are a member of the perennial oppressed class tends to vary on what benefits the speaker today; certainly most universities don’t seem to think so when it comes to admissions.

    That’s pretty damn offensive, but even more so on a day that we remember those who gave their lives fighting REAL Nazis.

    It’s also pretty clear that she is grouping herself as a supporter of ‘Social Justice’, much to the consternation of those trying to distance themselves from the ‘Social Justice Warrior’ moniker.

    That ‘mainstream American art’ is almost exclusively created from within, and to serve, the white male colonial gaze. That is an established fact that requires no further proof or validation going forward.

    I like this claim that it’s an ‘established fact’; they won’t defend it, probably because they can’t.

  323. “Let’s run it on down. White males are most responsible for the destruction of human life and environment on the planet today. Yet who is controlling the supposed revolution to change all that? White males (yes, yes, even with their pasty fingers back in black and brown pies again). It just could make one a bit uneasy. It seems obvious that a legitimate revolution must be led by, made by those who have been most oppressed: black, brown, and white women–with men relating to that as best they can. A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant, or titillating; nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well). Goodbye to all that.” – Robin Morgan, “Goodbye to All That”, 1970

    Where to start with this one:

    First, it looks like Asians are white again. Either that or Ms. Morgan has not actually had to breathe Chinese smog and is generalizing.

    “A genuine Left doesn’t consider anyone’s suffering irrelevant” Sure it does when that suffering is the result of leftist policies.

    nor does it function as a microcosm of capitalist economy, with men competing for power and status at the top, and women doing all the work at the bottom (and functioning as objectified prizes or ‘coin’ as well).” Someone sounds like they need a few courses in Economics not taught by a Marxist.

  324. OH! THAT’S who Nick Mamatas is! The dick jumped in on the discussion I was having with another Puppy Kicker on Moshe Feder’s FB and started calling me stupid because the word “Slate” MUST mean that SP3 is Political.

    Janice Gelb’s logic about how you must recommend MORE than 5 to not be an evil slate is also mind-boggling.

  325. That word “reactionary” seems to really bother a lot of people. And yet, who is defending their Citadel from the encroaching hordes?

    Also, does Irene Gallo actually word for Tor-the-Publisher? OMG. Of course, most of us have known for decades that if you wanted a career in the industry you had to go deep undercover. Helpful pros would talk about this quite openly. Such a *small* community and they all talk to each other, you know? So if you wanted a career you had to be very *very* careful.

  326. Clarification: Gallo’s remark was made on May 11, not today.

    It’s STILL an appalling thing to say.

  327. Of course being called reactionaries bothers them–if they’re reactionaries, then they’re not progressives, and their whole identity is bound up in that.

  328. “Reactionary” merely means “anyone who is reacting”. It’s only an insult in terms of the concept of a “Glorious Revolution” (meant absolutely straight-faced with no sarcasm). Because of this, its literary baggage doesn’t allow for tolerance. One who is “reacting” in opposition to a “Glorious Revolution” is harmful to humanity and must therefore be neutralized.

    There’s no other reason or basis by which someone would or should use “reactionary” as an insult, and there’s no reason to use it except as a call-to-arms for like-minded people to shout down this threat to the Glorious Revolution (feel free to now add sarcasm to taste).

  329. What I find most surprising about this SJW movement is how much they seem to have read the same material. Even 45 years apart the sameness is rather stunning, even sometimes down to almost the exact same oddball sentences. And then there’s their equally odd vocabulary with “cis,” “privilege” and “patriarchy” which marks them right off the bat. I suppose they get a lot of it by talking to each other but it’s just weird how much like a cult it is. That’s not including the shared sheer hostility for whites and men. But the oddest thing of all is how a cult dedicated to opposing group defamation is actually so unaware that is exactly what the centerpiece of everything they say is. I just find that stunning.

    I really don’t know what to make of these shared lapses of judgment. What common denominator makes people so miseducated you wouldn’t dare bring them around polite company? Are they really the great unwashed – ill-bred but arrogant riffraff who just don’t know any better?

    Whenever I read K. Tempest Bradford, Daniel Jose Older, Kameron Hurley or John Scalzi and a ton of others I get the impression they were raised by cats. They lack any critical reasoning skills or awareness most people I meet take for granted. I’ve met people living in shanty towns in Rio or running a small store in Abu Simbel who are more sophisticated and have better breeding. I’ve met a ton of people from the Sudan and I’ve yet to meet even one as ill-bred as these folks. I have never met one person from the Sudan who talks smack about colonial whites.

    I know it sounds like I’m just being insulting but one just doesn’t run around publicly taking out entire ethnic groups or an entire sex as immoral. It just isn’t done. I personally have never met anyone in any part of the Third World I’ve been to so lacking in civilized manners. This entire cult talks about whites and men like neo-Nazis talk about Jews and the KKK talks about blacks.

  330. “their equally odd vocabulary with “cis,” “privilege” and “patriarchy” which marks them right off the bat”

    As opposed to “org”, “clear”, and “thetan”?

  331. Petru Groza says:
    June 6, 2015 at 8:23 am
    The fact that you’re a shit writer has nothing to do with your Asianness.

    Hey, look – Clampsy has a new alt.

  332. “You are so lost in your delusions and fantasies that you can no longer see reality.”
    Oh Marston, your projection is as strong as ever. You’re such a sad little gamma rabbit.

  333. “*imagines the result if he was dumb enough to actually try to assault Shadow in person*”

    Clamps wouldn’t dare do it himself, as he’s confined to a wheelchair. He’d have to somehow get someone to do it for him. That’d be a problem, considering that 1) he has no friends, 2) no job to speak of to pay for it.

    Yeah, that’s part of what made Vox actually pity him.

  334. The latest conspiracy theory from File 770:

    “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that the campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    The truth is out there . . .

  335. Even more projection from those folks… because that is how they would do it…

  336. Clamps is a stark example of how receptive a sociopath like him is to the generally sociopathic ideology SJWs have adopted for their own. I’ve never thought of this recent culture war in SFF as liberals vs. conservatives. To me it’s a culture of sociopathic resentment vs. people who basically live and let live and want to be left alone.

    Were SJWs true liberals they never in a thousand years would brag about a banhammer and disemvoweling. That is a thing conservatives do because they are not open to change and ending debate helps to prevent change. It was conservatives who enacted the Hayes Office film censorship codes in the ’30s and forced the comics industry to self-police itself with a comics code in the ’50s, not liberals. Liberals were bitterly opposed to that. The comic publisher most affected – E. C. Comics – fought tooth and nail to have a story published which featured a black man before the code was enacted, although that was not an issue with the code per se; it was the sex and violence. It was liberals who championed and ushered in the new era of ultra-sexual, in your face and violent pop culture.

    Look at what it is SJWs do: it’s not enough they are content to benefit from the wisdom of their own personal explorations via diversity, they insist that be culture wide and that you participate as well. By an amazing coincidence those diversity initiatives are only for white and male cultural expressions – no other. They are opposed to violence and sex in pop culture, unless it’s their own gender-fluid sex. Otherwise it’s “sexism.”

    The other thing SJWs do is another thing liberals are desperately against, and that is group defamation. I see SJWs as a culture of two people: one is paranoid, mentally ill, hateful, jealous, resentful, ill-bred and lazy. The the other is stupid, ignorant, unsophisticated, arrogant, naive but for all that fairly compassionate, hard working and wanting to do the right thing. It is the classic radical chic mau-mau/flak catcher scenario described by Tom Wolfe. Racists and their useful idiots.

    The anti-SJW isn’t really a conservative per se but conservatives push back the most because they are the most prominent targets of SJWs. The reason for that is they are seen as the bastion of homophobia, anti-women’s rights and racists that they see as having typified the fake Jim Crow/feminist movement SJWs have brought up from the ’50s. Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu are not progressive liberals but high-strung, paranoid, easily offended authoritarians in love with censorship who refuse debate. In other words the classic Nixon profile. Liberals in the ’60s loved open debate and were crucial in opening up talk shows and things like Meet the Press.

    The bottom line is SJW is today indistinguishable for an intersectional gender feminist, itself a sociopathic and suicidal lesbian ideology that can neither survive on its own or reproduce. In what world does a lesbian ideology side with Muslims and the Third World against the West and survive without the West? For all of intersectionalism’s talk of the wonderful non-Western Third World, it is the one place they would be brutally suppressed and which they come from but do not go to. The do-gooder liberals which embrace this sick movement is itself a suicide cult determined to import the very Third World which doesn’t work, is brutally unsophisticated and doesn’t particularly like us.

    The pure essence of political correctness is to not only pretend we couldn’t militarily defeat 20 Brazil’s but act on that. That is a suicide cult built on a guilt and shame of its own success and helped along by a pack of yowling feminist racists with congenital low self-esteem.

  337. So, the Nebula Awards are tonight. I expect at least one winner or presenter will make anti-Puppy remarks.

  338. “So, the Nebula Awards are tonight. I expect at least one winner or presenter will make anti-Puppy remarks.”

    If I were a betting man, I’d put everything I had on the Over.

  339. @Christopher

    The latest conspiracy theory from File 770:

    “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that the campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    Well, to provide a bit of context, it’s speculation arising from a sequence of details from Nick Mamatas, that the author cites here, but as it’s Mamatas – who in these circles is conceived to be slightly more reliable than John Scalzi, if I read the mood correctly – that may not be relevant.

    Personally, of more interest to me is the following quote from Michael Z Williamson in the same thread:

    Brad asked what I’d published that might be Hugo eligible, and I mentioned “Wisdom.”

    . Again, this seems to go against what the narrative here is (that SP3 was a set of recommendations, pooled from various sources in an open and democratic manner) and more in favour of the narrative from Correia’s post that I cited earlier (that this was assembled by a much smaller pool – either the ELoE or just Brad himself).

    Again, I’m aware that the general response here is along the lines of “asked and answered, so piss off”. Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

  340. “SocialInjusticeWorrier on June 6, 2015 at 6:13 pm said:
    “@snowcrash

    “The last I checked, Teddy Beale seemed to fit fairly comfortably into the neoNazi demographic, despite his efforts to squirm away from his previous activities and utterances. There may be a silent group of Puppies who disagree with the racism, homophobia and misogyny evident in some of their most vociferous self-proclaimed spokescritters, but they haven’t done much to shut down their reprehensible brethren.”

    If I don’t share their ideology how can i be their bretheren? Being mutually targeted by a pack of anti-male, anti-white goofball female supremacists, racists and their naive dustbuckets doesn’t make anyone my bretheren except to the extent we’re all told we listen to Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and are ourselves racists, homophobes and misogynists. “Bretheren” is in their fucking minds. What they mean is white, straight and male and not bowing down to asshole intersectionalists.

    *

    Here’s a bang your head against a wall statement that could be the outline of an Orwellian SF novel of a future society’s doublethink:

    “Chris Hensley on June 6, 2015 at 9:43 pm said:

    “‘I’m not going to personally opine on his views, but plenty of demonstrated misogynists have wives, mothers and sisters that think they are swell people. Plenty of overt racists have a friend who is a person of color. These things are not get-out-of-racism/sexism/misogyny-free cards.’

    “I agree with you. The problem is that Torgersen, and even Vox Day, don’t. From their own statements it is clear that they believe racism to be about knowing and willing animus towards people because they are a different race from you. From that definition, they have built quite the logical artifice.”

    Can anyone interpret that? So “cracka ass cracka” isn’t racism and being unaware and innocent and marrying black women is? Is this counter-instinctive racism-not-racism-racism? What human being could ever escape guilt from that black hole of stupid? Is this invisible privilege theory racism? What is “logical” in this world of dumb?

    *

    “Ann Somerville on June 6, 2015 at 11:32 pm said:
    ‘They would tell the rapist not to rape rather than provide women with the means to protect themselves’

    “Well yeah. Because trying to protect yourself from rape when rape is socially acceptable is impossible without excluding yourself entirely from society.”

    In what world has rape ever been socially acceptable outside of Genghis Khan? You don’t have to be a genius to figure out how people smeared as privileged misogynist homophobic racists for 3 years as an entire ethnic group by “anti-racists” become right wing neo-Nazis for pushing back. Heck, we were right wing Nazis just for waking up in the morning via Orwell’s dipshit privilege theory. You cannot escape SJW logic because anything is anything at any given time.

  341. “At this point, it seems quite reasonable to posit that campaign was about Brad Torgersen wanting various people to feel that they owed him a favor for getting them Hugo nominations, at least in some cases in exchange for future unspecified considerations. Quid pup quo, as it were.”

    Problem: every basis Mamatas has for suggesting this is equally applicable to Tor Books’ editorial staff and previous Hugo Awards. Indeed, that’s rather been the point to begin with for several years now — quid Tor quo, as it were.

    If Mamatas’ musings are basis for anyone on the other side of the fence to reach conclusions, then it serves only as moral justification for the same basis on this side, thus effectively condoning everything the Puppies have done to date.

    Thank you, Nicholas.

  342. @Snowcrash
    Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    and present you the evidence you are ‘requesting’ to ‘prove’ the honesty of Sad Puppies 3…

    That’s supposed to be a reasonable request?

    “Go fetch, Puppy!”

    Worse, whenever we’ve answered questions, our honesty has been doubted, the evidences dismissed or questioned, or ignored entirely, or a different set of demands and questions set for us. Goalpost moving each time. When the accusation of us puppies as racist / misogynist / blahblah evilist was proven to be wrong, your side retreated to the accusation that none of our chosen stories are worthy, mere plebian entertainment. Yet the tastes for that run similar to the Long Form presentation category, a category the Puppies didn’t have a lot of selections for. Answer one question, argue it to defeat, a different accusation crops up.

    You’ve already proven that no matter what we do, no matter what we say, no matter what proof we present, nothing will ever be good enough.

    Your side beats us over the head with Vox Day, but you have here in this thread alone, you have Yamamanama, who posts at File 770 as Alauda, posting here again and again bypassing Brad’s ban, as well as advising others at File 770 how to ‘prevent’ being ‘doxxed’ by using proxies and disposable emails – the method by which he bypasses the ban.

    You want us to ‘take responsibility’ for Vox Day but refuse to do the same to the ugly on your side, examples of which James May regularly quotes.

    We see very clearly the double standards you are applying, and it’s the Puppies being ‘unreasonable’?

    REALLY?

  343. Snowcrash we obviously see things with the white male colonial gaze you can’t see. There is no way to explain our unique vision.

    Plus we can peer into the fourth dimension. See: whiteness.

  344. “Because being a victim of people with bad intent definitely proves that you’re a loser.

    — P Nielsen Hayden (@pnh) June 7, 2015”

    The Hugos were a victim of their own stupidity in aligning themselves with a racist bigoted ideology that considers critiquing all white people in America and all men on Earth a valid criticism. That is the same criticism as the KKK uses. Go to KKK parties and don’t be surprised if your car’s tires are flat when you come out. People who party with dipshit racists who whine about “white dude parades,” “Anglophones” and the “white gaze” are in fact losers. We simply applied highlighter. These same uplifted uneducated morons were taking #NotYourAsian selfies at the Nebulas because whites mistake Asians for each other because whites are stupid racists.

    I sense more flat tires coming on. Give your boorish affirmative action “marginalized” who don’t know how to behave in an artistic movement more awards nominations and check your tire pressure. Meanwhile I’ll make sure I learn to be a good “ally” to “anti-racists” like K. Tempest Bradford, the unsophisticated lard sandwich at a sushi buffet.

    By the way, I’m not buying any more books from your company until it gets a dictionary with the words “racism” and “bigotry.” I’ll buy that. Until then… no.

  345. @Shadowdancer
    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    No.

    What I’ve said is that thus far, what I’ve seen (ie Larry’s post, and MZW’s comments) tends to supports the premise that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE. Additionally, I don’t see how Brad keeps calling it open, democratic, and transparent process from start to finish given that there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received.

    So I’m asking for someone, especially in a group that keeps reiterating that the question has been asked and answered – Show me. I’m not seeing what you’re seeing. I can’t find what you’ve all found. So please, show me.

    Like I said earlier, I’m keenly aware that many of us exist in our own bubbles of reinforcing media narratives and like-minded people, and as such our views become a little bit of an echo chamber. One of the reasons I’m here is to try and get that *other side*, because in my bubble the narrative seems to be “We keep asking Brad how exactly this was open and democratic, but he keeps refusing to provide any proof or details”,

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    Yes. And that’s why I think I’ve been unable to find it. But then, there are repeated claims – within this thread, and the prior fisking one – by people that this has been asked and answered . I’ve been told – again within this thread – that “five minutes on Google” will answer my questions. So suddenly when you tell me that it’s *really* hard to find those details, I have to admit to some level of surprise and disappointment. However, I’m hopeful that some of the others may find it easier. Or heck, that Brad himself may answer this, if he’s got the time or the inclination. If he doesn’t, it’s entirely his prerogative.

    You want us to ‘take responsibility’ for Vox Day but refuse to do the same to the ugly on your side, examples of which James May regularly quotes.

    On this, and much of the latter part of your post, you’re confusing me with someone else. Or many someone elses. I think I’m more than capable of getting into trouble with my own words, and would prefer not to have someone else’s positions mixed up with mine.

  346. “Ann Somerville on June 6, 2015 at 11:32 pm said:
    ‘They would tell the rapist not to rape rather than provide women with the means to protect themselves’”

    Did she seriously say that? or agree with someone saying that? When Larry taught how many women the concealed carry course?

  347. Yes, Shadowdancer, Vox saying unpopular things is bad evilthink, while Andrew telling them how to commit a felony is perfectly ok.

  348. The ditzy Somerville means men should be taught not to rape rather than teach women to protect themselves. First of all, men don’t rape, criminals do. Society already “teaches” not to commit crimes by jail time. Secondly, men don’t generally need the threat of prison sentences not to rape women anyway. They just don’t. Anyway, why would any of that preclude teaching women to protect themselves from criminals? Should I leave my windows open and doors unlocked out of stubbornness? Nothing these weirdoes say makes any sense unless you understand they have a grudge against men.

  349. You’ve already proven that no matter what we do, no matter what we say, no matter what proof we present, nothing will ever be good enough.

    Snowcrash demands specific proof from Sad Puppies while being willing to smear GamerGaters with no proof whatsoever. I think that about shows where his biases lie.

  350. Aaaaaaaaaaaaand Snowcrash proves my point. “Oh wah, you won’t do my research for me, IT IS SO HARD for you to take the time to acquiesce to my ‘reasonable’ request even when what you’re basically asking someone here to… do your research for you and take those hours, if not days, to go fetch like a puppy, because it ‘should be easy’.” (and the cute implication there is if we don’t, then we MUST be lying and making stuff up.)

    @Draven The lie that Larry Correia is a rape apologist, woman hating wife beater and homophobic asshole was a lie they spun during SP2. Larry outright said that he taught both women and gays the concealed carry course, and taught plenty of them self defence techniques and allowed them to practice with pretending that he was an aggressor, because they needed to learn what to do right, and he rather get hurt being punched or kicked than them being hurt for real. And that they would CELEBRATE successful instances of his students successfully defending themselves against being assaulted or being raped, or mugged, or such.

    Oh and the whole ‘Call up Mrs. Correia because we can get you to safety from your husband!!!’ yeah, the same Mrs. Correia who knows how to shoot too.

    That also came up when he openly agreed with that Miss America candidate for her saying that she believed that women should be responsible for their own protection and carry guns.

    Naturally, thinking that women are capable of protecting themselves or teaching them how was somehow being rape apologists to EVERYONE WHO AGREED. That was a long, stupid ass thread with the emotional hostage taker who beat everyone over the head with disagreeing with her as being a rape apologist.

    Oh and the whole ‘it’s rape if even if it’s not prosecutable as rape because consent was given.’ And a year later on, we have Mattress “fuck me in the ass” Girl and the Rolling Stone Rape Epidemic On Campus lie.

    Totally fine for these guys to cross lines and make unreasonable demands, and commit crimes, because GOODTHINK AND RIGHTFAN. Christ on a pogostick.

  351. I read most if not all of Larry’s posts before the notification system broke… I am aware.

  352. “She’s a brilliant essayist” – Tor Books creative director Irene Gallo on Kameron Hurley

    Hahahahahaha. Let that sink in real deep how any moron who uses illogic and tears apart history is “brilliant” as long as they go after the white colonial male gaze for a hobby.

    It is perfectly legitimate to describe someone as sharing a philosophical and intellectual space with a neo-Nazi. But first you have to do two things:

    A.) Have a definition in principle of what that is. To me that definition would be a member of an ethnic group or sex who is supremacist in regard to their in-group and engages in group defamation and demonization/dehumanization theories against another ethnic group or sex in a manner which is obsessive and ideologically organized.

    B.) Make a case for a person occupying that intellectual and philosophical space via quoted persistent rhetoric.

    Now, if you look around the core SFF landscape, it’s pretty clear if you dispense with all the bullshit and lying about “punching up” and power/privilege theories where only a certain race and sex can ever act like a neo-Nazi, there are plenty of candidates. Before you can get to any Sad or Rapid Puppy you have to address segregated rooms and anthologies, segregated reviews, racially and sexually boycotting convention panels, calls to not read or publish a race or sex and repeated racial slurs. No one on the SP side has repetitive theories how Three Body Problem is Asiansplaining and culturally appropriating Western SF. That is how SJWs operate, not us. In short, if SJWs aren’t lying they’re not awake. They are a cult of fuckery.

    Irene Gallo doesn’t know what the fucking hell she’s talking about because she has no principles whatsoever by which to understand jack shit; not a Constitution, law, equal protection or human rights.

    I can’t imagine ever boycotting an SFF publisher but I won’t be buying anything from Tor Books as long as that doxy women works there. I am sick of venues like Publisher’s Weekly employing fuck racist supremacists who say white men need to come with trigger warnings and then calling me an “internet-racist” when I object. Fuck these absurd people and their absurd intersectional cult of white-hatred and man-hatred. Go look up Heidelberg University 1933-5 and then tell me these shit-asses aren’t operating in the same way. That is not Godwin’s Law, that is an intellectual and philosophical space and attitude of intolerance and hatred based on race and sex.

    “The white male colonial gaze”? Really? What’s the Jewish gaze. Certainly if there is such a thing as white privilege where whites value themselves vs. other races then there is such a thing as Jewish privilege within SJW intersectional orthodoxy… in principle. But you’d first have to have principles to understand how dangerous intersectional rhetoric is. What SF writer or editor can actually produce SF literature who doesn’t grasp these things? All that will emerge is a politburo literature of “brilliant” bigots.

    Jews don’t buy books from neo-Nazi, blacks folks don’t buy books from the KKK and I don’t buy books from people who light me up for being white and male and then call me a neo-Nazi for objecting to that even while they’re promoting the very people lighting me up. Forget that con game. I’m not buying any shares. I’d no sooner read Kameron Hurley’s blatherings about my shortcomings as a white man than I would sandpaper my eyes.

  353. I’ve done this before and I’ll do it again.

    Transparent (definition): able to be seen through; easy to notice or understand; honest and open; not secretive

    How have we not been ‘honest and open’ about what we’re doing? We’re caught in a classic paradox. Because we’ve been upfront about what we’re doing, you know that something was done and then can complain that we haven’t been upfront enough. Meanwhile, because we can’t provide concrete proof of an intentionally secretive process (the backroom dealmaking) , you’re free to deny it has ever existed. Sad Puppies is certainly easy enough to notice.

    Democratic (definition): of, relating to, or favoring democracy; of or relating to one of the two major political parties in the United States evolving in the early 19th century from the anti-federalists and the Democratic-Republican party and associated in modern times with policies of broad social reform and internationalism; relating to, appealing to, or available to the broad masses of the people; favoring social equality; not snobbish

    A get-out-the-vote drive, which Sad Puppies is, is by it’s nature both favoring democracy and appealing to the broad masses of the people. By challenging the status quo, which we believe is held by a narrow range of gatekeepers, one can readily argue that Sad Puppies is also favoring social equality (as opposed to ‘social justice’).

    A reasonable neutral observer should be able to conclude that the Sad Puppies supporters honestly believe the campaign to be transparent and democratic.

  354. @Civilis – Always worth reposting again and again because clearly, people who won’t bother listening aren’t going to.

    http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/06/a-letter-to-the-smofs-moderates-and-fence-sitters-from-the-author-who-started-sad-puppies/

    And yeah, Snowcrash is happy to trash Gamergate and gamers with no proof whatsoever. REALLY shows where his biases are, and aGGros have been mostly crazy as hell and unreasonable beyond belief.

    As a female gamer, #NotYourShield #SodOffaGGros

    Your side has Brianna Wu, who single-handedly brought the attention of Gamergate to the Sad Puppies, which Daddy Warpig, Larry AND Vox failed to do. I saw the original retweets in the GamerGate hashtag, which I would browse through when idly reading, and they were pretty much “What’s Sad Puppies?”

    So yeah, that’s on you aGGros, not Sad Puppies, not Gamergate. All on you.

    And THAT post? 857 comments.

    I like how Snowcrash is completely unwilling to do the hard work of clicking through every single Sad Puppy related blog, facebook, twitter, and articles, starting from oh, maybe mid-December? – you know, click ‘next post’ or ‘next’ on every single one of those pages.

    The posts you can easily find on Google are starting points. Work your way from there if it really is that important that you get your answers.

  355. Oh and for all the statements that the EW article is ‘corrected’ …
    http://www.ew.com/article/2015/04/06/hugo-award-nominations-sad-puppies

    And I quote: Writer Philip Sandifer wrote on his blog Sunday, “The Hugo Awards have just been successfully hijacked by neofascists.” Sandifer’s post, which is worth reading in full, addresses what this disaster means for the sci-fi world:

    So they’re letting the negative slant stand. Really? Neo-Fascists? REALLY?

  356. And let’s not forget these three Tor.com bloggers:

    Alex (Daffy) MacFarlane uses terms for heterosexuals like “cis-scum” and “cis-peeeoooople.”

    I get lit up as a homophobe for objecting to that.

    Justin Landon has written SF is “a genre predicated on white cis men doing hero stuff.” When a Kickstarter had an all-white Table of Contents Landon remarked “All white. Really? And zero people of color. Just saying, there’s not going to be anything new here.”

    Imagine me writing Asians or blacks are racially boring or bring special qualities apart from whites… like stupidity.

    And here is the writing of the man-loving Liz Bourke which includes a quote from lover of all whites N. K. Jemisin:

    “‘Because the “fantasy” most EF (epic fantasy) delivers is of white male power & centrality, as much as dragons. That *is* conservatism, now.’ We can agree that conservative, here, is fundamentally concerned with not changing the present default cultural narratives of who gets to hold and use power, how, and why. For our genre, for our culture(s) in the US, UK, and Europe, that’s white (heterosexual) cisgendered men. Often persons who don’t fit these criteria who hold and use power anyway are portrayed as wrong, anomalous, wicked. (There are plenty of cultural narratives floating about concerning the moral and occasionally physical degeneracy of non-straight-white-men. Plenty.)”

    Again with this fuckery about white male power. It’s not just SP and RP who are neo-Nazis, the entire white male side of the Western world is a troop of neo-Nazis intent on withholding their fantasy literature from sub-human, immoral and degenerate gays, women and non-whites.

    All three used to leave sympathetic comments at Requires Hate’s viciously anti-white anti-male web site. Fuck all three.

    We’ve had enough Tor.

    We’ve had enough of this fuck supremacist intersectional gender feminist movement which lies about imaginary oppression in order to give themselves a free-fire zone to express their paranoid hatred of men and whites.

    You want a term for neo-Nazi? Try “intersectionalism.”

  357. (Blinks) What?
    Vox is bonkers, but he’s not a neofascist. One might be able to make the case for Kratman and Wright if you took some things they’ve said and written out of context. OTOH, we could make the case on that basis that Sandifer and crew are outright Stalinists, so that doesn’t help them at all.
    Correia’s libertarian, so is Hoyt, and Torgerson is…something or other, but I’m pretty sure he’s somewhere not in the authoritarian line.
    However, the people throwing that around are the same people who think the UKIP is fascist. So…yeah. I’m not impressed.

  358. http://www.nyrsf.com/2015/05/the-puppies-of-terror-editorial-nyrsf-320.html#more

    Some more libel:

    “This group, which I think of as Panzergroup Asshole, is reactionary, virulently anti-woman, and racist whenever it suits them. Their tactics include online harrassment in a variety of forms, identity theft, death threats, exposure private information, SWATting , and whatever else they can do without actually leaving their chairs. GamerGate is just one instance of PA, a cadre of PA wrapped in a protective layer of the clueless and the easily duped. The ideas are dumb; the threats are real and terrifying. And if there is one lesson that Panzergroup Asshole wants to convey, it is to live in terror at the possibility of attracting the attention of Panzergroup Asshole. They are terrorists—they want people, especially women, to be so afraid of drawing attention that they just sit silently.”

  359. And from the comments at File 770:

    “Not to mention the implications of all those deleted blog posts by fearless truth-teller Puppies Brad and Larry, who can’t imagine why anyone would find their claims of innocent ignorance of Teddy Beale’s views completely incredible. Not exactly the behavior of people with clean consciences, is it?”

    Bullcrap. What deleted blog posts? Prove it, CHORFs, or shut the hell up.

  360. Nebula nominee Kate Elliott: “So tempted to respond: You mean the good old days before racism and sexism were invented?”
    Bourke: “And good old boys didn’t need to worry about criticism. Well, bless their hearts.”
    Elliott: “Course they didn’t have to worry. They EARNED it.”
    Blogger Cora Buhlert: “And of course all the books worth reading just happened to be written by straight white cis men.”

    *

    “1. Natalie Luhrs ‏@eilatan Jul 16 SFF peeps, kindly look at this list and the archives and tell me if you see what I see, alley-cat vulgarity aside? …mystgalaxy.c.m/Reviews-Patrick
    2. Kate Elliott ‏@KateElliottSFF Jul 16 @eilatan that’s a trick question. RIght? 😉
    3. Liz Bourke ‏@hawkwing_lb Jul 16 @KateElliottSFF @eilatan @jennygadget So. Are we all seeing a BAG OF DICKS?
    4. Kate Elliott ‏@KateElliottSFF Jul 16 @hawkwing_lb @eilatan @jennygadget Diversity now means ‘lots of books by different men.’
    5. Ann Somerville ‏@ann_somerville Jul 16 @KateElliottSFF @CoraBuhlert @hawkwing_lb @eilatan @jennygadget do any of those authors even have a tan?”

    *

    “Johansen sets her story in a colonised world, but one which the narrative holds to have been empty before the settlers came. In a fictional world where whiteness is the default—so the narrative informs us—it’s impossible not to see this worldbuilding choice as a reflection of uninterrogated imperialist assumptions about race and history. Johansen’s fantasy world is a white, straight, cisgender one…” – from a review by Liz Bourke

    *

    No, I don’t see any common denominator resentments there that run daily and all year. I guess I missed all the comments about women, gays, Arabs and Latinos… because equality. When they Tweet “they” they really mean everyone on Earth and not the colonial white-gazing patriarchy. There’s no such thing as SJWs fighting the good fight against the patriarchy, whites and men. There’s no intersectional-worship squatting at the heart of virtually every institution in core SFF. 10,000 quotes are all taken out of context and everything’s my imagination cuz Rush Limbaugh. And at awards time they all vote for the best work cuz there’s no affirmative action they bitch about 24/7 in quote after quote.

    You don’t need a conspiracy in a diving bell with one anti-male anti-white brain cell.

    Just pretend they’re talking about black folks and then imagine they think of us as racist Nazis. Really? WHERE’S THE QUOTES? SJWs take one joke Brad made and ignore the torrent of mansplaining, whitesplaining, cis-dude bags of dicks cracka ass cracka sour dough-faced toxic masculinity.

    Gee, I wonder what a bag of womensplaining polyamorous c__t homo-toxic femininity would sound like Tweeted every day and then sat down on convention panels to discuss “diversity” and “inclusion” and oh here’s an award?

    Apparently Miss Gallo suffers from some analogy to disemvoweled-vision where she can only see words from certain people and others are all mixed up and can’t be read.

  361. Well, Brad does delete Clamps, and so does Larry, I think. (They aren’t referring to deleting Clamps’s posts, are they? Deleting Clamps as evidence of a bad conscience? Er… They’re talking about something else, right?)

  362. Always worth reposting again and again because clearly, people who won’t bother listening aren’t going to.

    I’m here because I believe there are people out there who will come to threads like this one without having preconceived notions who need to see this.

    Brad says “For God’s sake, if you’re going to have a cause, shut your flapping (digital) mouths and put your bodies where your talk is. Get involved. Do something measurable. Concrete. Pursuing a quantifiable objective.” In the past, I have, though nothing like what Brad has done. For me, this is what I can do right now.

  363. If you’re describing something in the present historical context as fascist, Nazi, or some variation thereof, I’m going to demand that you both explicitly define the term in both present and historical contexts and then relate the definition to the current situation directly. If you can’t do that, then you shouldn’t even be attempting to use those terms in a debate.

    “Not to mention the implications of all those deleted blog posts by fearless truth-teller Puppies Brad and Larry, who can’t imagine why anyone would find their claims of innocent ignorance of Teddy Beale’s views completely incredible. Not exactly the behavior of people with clean consciences, is it?”

    Likewise, I’m going to demand anyone referencing things Vox Day is alleged to have said provide both the quote from Vox Day and a link to the source so we have the full context.

  364. That and we aren’t claiming ‘innocent ignorance of his views’ we are saying we are not responsible for the personal views of others. I don’t frequent his blog because of those views and haven’t bought any of his books. Conversely, I haven’t bought or read Ancillary-whatever-it-is-this-year… for the same reason.

  365. Man, I wonder if they’re talking about all the Clamps posts that got deleted as “proof” that Brad is “hiding” something.

    That wretched little man is nothing but grief.

  366. By the by… according to Utah laws, Clamps has committed both ‘hacking’ and ‘cyberstalking’…. just sayin…

  367. “Can you see why I call him Janus Scalzi now?”

    That’s actually his middle name. First name: “Hugh”.

    Sorry, I couldn’t pass up a straight line like that.

  368. (Having read through the latest comments thread at File 770, I don’t think the person who said that was talking about Clamps; they seem to have been talking about posts by the authors, not comment posts. Although I’m not sure what “deleted posts” they mean.)

    (Now I’m off to take a shower.)

  369. If they ARE talking about Clamps being constantly deleted over here as ‘proof’ of ‘Brad hiding something’ then they obviously believe that Clamps isn’t a bad person, despite the behaviour he displays here, and the evidence of his behavior gathered over oh, seven years. That’s stuff that has NOTHING to do with Sad Puppies, or the Hugos, but everything to do with Clamps stalking and harassing people everywhere they go for their politics.

    Larry’s right. They’re TOTALLY welcome to him. Clearly they approve of his harassment because it’s done against the people they think should be harassed.

  370. Milo Yannopolous is “looking into” the Irene Gallo debacle. 🙂

  371. Brad did delete one post almost immediately after posting it about a month ago. Larry hasn’t deleted any of his old posts that I’ve seen, and I’ve been revisiting some of his older posts which relate to the current controversy.

    I guess the fevered search of Brad and Larry’s blog archives for incriminating evidence didn’t go so well. 🙂

  372. I know I’ve gotten the WordPress copies of blogs in my email a few times and the link to the “original blog” doesn’t work– it’s a WordPress thing, because it’s happened over a range of blogs and all you have to do to find the blog post…which you have a copy of, because subscriber email… is go check the main page.

    IIRC, usually the problem is that wordpress used their number-address, instead of the title-address. I say “usually” because once I figured out why I couldn’t find a recipe I really wanted to get clarification on, I didn’t care enough to check every single example. It’s wordpress.

  373. Sooo, pretty much, it’s ‘we can’t find it therefore they must have deleted it so we couldn’t find it now they have to prove it’s never been deleted so they have to find it go fetch Puppies!’

    And yeah, Foxfier. It’s WORDPRESS. Ye gods.

  374. Jonathan LaForce did a post on MGC calling for a Tor boycott. Now his Facebook page has been removed.

  375. @Civilis at 7.25 am – That’s a strange misreading of our prior conversation regarding GG. I thought we went up to a point where we agreed that there were no sources that the other would find convincing.

    And no need to do much investigation regarding my biases – I’ve been fairly clear that I’m not a fan of slates, and that I’m not a fan of GG either, to put both of those mildly. At no point have I ever tried to claim otherwise. They’re not views seen often here, but they are out there, and I feel no reason to hide that.

    @Shadowdancer at 7.25am – You know, it may be better if you based your response on my actual words, instead of your mental image of what my post was. Give it a try, it’s just there at 6.52am. As I said there, others – not you – in this thread have said that the information is easily found. So I’m hoping that those people may help out, and put an end to this altogether.

    @Civilis at 7.45 am – I’m not sure how dragging out dictionary definitions, and then saying that SP3 is meeting them – without actually addressing the countervailing evidence, or providing any proof – counts as proof of anything, other than some weird child of circular reasoning.

    In any event, how is something “open and democratic” when for all intents and purposes, it’s either a cabal (the ELoE. as per Larry’s post cited previously) or a single person (Brad, as per Michael Z Williamsons post at File770) deciding on who becomes a finalist? How, when there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received?

  376. Wow. Surely _that_ won’t backfire at all.

    It’s like they’re looking at all the stupid things the aGGros did and said “this time it’ll work.”

  377. @Snowcrash
    Let’s take it for granted that I’m then terrible and incompetent at research and that my google-fu is weak. Would it really be that harmful to SP3s aims for someone to provide me with specific links to those places that the questions have been asked and answered?

    Hmm. Let me see. You’re asking for someone here to do your research for you.

    Which is, go back to the posts of the start of the year, across several blogs and probably facebook posts, and go through the posts AND comment streams of those blogs moving forward in dates- bearing in mind that Sarah A. Hoyt’s and MHN’s blog posts can have comment streams of several hundred comments regularly… to give you the answers to your questions, taking probably several hours at minimum, to several days, to sift through thousands of replies and comments and posts…

    and present you the evidence you are ‘requesting’ to ‘prove’ the honesty of Sad Puppies 3…

    That’s supposed to be a reasonable request?

    “Go fetch, Puppy!”

    Snowcrash: Show me!

    Uh huh. Go on and pretend I’m imagining what you’re ‘requesting’ of us here as ‘reasonable.’

  378. “Do you have any documents that show when you quit beating your wife, Senator?”

  379. OK, Snowcrash, let me spell it out for you.

    You come in here and play nicely, but apparently your comments elsewhere indicate that you have no real concern about what we think on anything. Your biases are in place and you have no interest in learning where we come from on much of anything. So please, tell me why we should have to do the research for you? To find complete listings will take days, but a quick Google search will show you a fair glimpse of what happened.

    You’re going on about emails Brad got? Really?

    Plenty of folks on your side of the fence have admitted that the way things used to work was reaching out and shooting emails to all your friends and family and getting them to nominate something. How was that open or honest? I hate to break it to you, but that was a slate as well, just hidden so that no one can critique it.

    Where was your outrage on that?

  380. Oh, and this was mentioned somewhere…

    http://girlgeniusadventures.com/2014/01/29/a-tale-of-two-tors-be-warned-im-annoyed/

    TL:DR – TOR agreed to publish Girl Genius, the contract states the Foglios can’t publish competing product for five years… and don’t publish.

    I mention that we’ve been selling graphic novels fairly well for quite awhile, and that we’d cheerfully give them pointers. However, if they just can’t wrap their heads around it, which seems obvious since after three years they have yet to sell through the initial print run (We’d have done it in 16 months- and that’s with no advertising, which is a fair comparison, as they did no advertising either), then we’ll just sing a chorus of “So Long, It’s Been Good To Know You”, and then we’ll publish them ourselves, because if there’s one thing we know how to do, it’s publish and sell Girl Genius graphic novels.

    But we can’t. Because our contract with TOR says we can’t publish “a competing product” for five years. Okay, what can we do about this? But now, Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has apparently decided that we’re too much trouble.

    Silence.

    No, seriously. You don’t want the series. You can’t sell it. We’ll even buy the remainder sitting in your warehouse. Talk to me. Talk to my agent. Prove you’re not dead or fired.

    Silence.

    The only conclusion I can come to, is that Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has decided that he can ignore us. Eventually, we, like many other confusing things that he cannot make money from, will go away. It may take five years, but really, who cares?

    Personally, I think that the problem is that we’re this little studio alllll the way out on the west coast, and thus, easy to ignore. If you have stayed with me all through this screed, then I would like your help. Mr. Patrick Nielsen Hayden has a Facebook page. So does TOR Books. Here is his old e-mail address; pnh@panix.com (I say old, because as far as I can tell, it’s been deactivated). We very rarely ask our readership to do anything other than enjoy the strip and purchase the occasional book (Hey, TOR, your first lesson in marketing. And it’s Free!) But if some of you would write to let the folks at TOR know that we’d like to take our book and go home now, we’d appreciate it.

    direct quote from the post itself.

  381. you came back in here without decontaminating first?!?!?

    Oh, don’t worry – I spent ten minutes in the UV chamber before I came back in, and disposed of the Tyvek full-coverage bunny-suit. It’s just been hot here this weekend.

    😉

    Shadowdancer, that Girl Genius post was dated a while back… there’s a later post that seems to have better news. (Not that that’s any excuse for ignoring one’s house’s authors, but this doesn’t seem like it needs current action, just in case anyone was thinking of emailing The House of TOR.)

  382. i’ve mentioned many times that the crucial thing that makes an SJW is they have no idea what principle is. That’s why the term “SJW” is a sarcastic reference to their wrong-way anti-bigotry bigotry. Without principle, one can’t use metaphor or analogy or make even the simplest comparisons.

    “Meredith on June 7, 2015 at 11:50 am said:
    “‘Confused. Isn’t this the same crowd that said it would be wrong to boycott Orson Scott Card because Boycotts, that it’s wrong to no award anything automatically because it’s “puppy,” and that it’s wrong to hurt writers’ livelihoods based on perceived politics from their publishers and/or voters?’

    “Its funny how they only believe that when those things would hurt them, but once they think it might hurt someone they dislike, gosh, those things are righteous.

    “My ability to give them the benefit of the doubt just took a serious knock, and it was never very robust. Confirmation that any principled stance they took was self-serving is… Disheartening. I hope we see some Puppy statements disagreeing with the reaction so far.”

    *

    There, Meredith quotes another commenter and then agrees. The first problem is Scott wasn’t lying and making stuff up out of his head. He had a religious opinion and objection. We are not angry at Gallo simply because she is anti-Puppy and third, Gallo wasn’t merely expressing politics. She was making stuff up out of her head. Let’s remember that Gallo is on board with the intersectional ideological defamation of all men and whites. Defamation isn’t politics no matter how much you chant it. It is an analogy to a blood libel. Her mindless enthusiasm for Kameron Hurley’s factless assaults on men and whites via the book of Hurley’s essays Gallo was promoting is proof of that, calling Hurley “brilliant.”

    What Gallo said wasn’t political, it was the same citationless assertions we saw Hurley herself make at The Atlantic where she ludicrously and without proof asserted “many of the people block voting these (Hugo) awards are the same ones sending death threats to women and people of color,” by which she meant Gamergaters.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/04/the-culture-wars-come-to-sci-fi/390012/

    Equally ludicrously, Hurley quotes Abigail Nussbaum without mentioning Nussbaum openly admits to racially and sexually prioritizing her Hugo voting, NOT US. Got that? NOT US. They say we do what they openly admit to doing but it’s NOT US.

    “I need a manifesto for it to be clear that I want women, PoCs and progressive themes on the ballot?” – Abigail Nussbaum

    Let’s use principle and see what happens. “I need a manifesto to make it clear I want men and whites on the ballot?”

    We don’t do that. Nevertheless, that’s what gets us made into neo-Nazis while SJWs get a pass. A world without principle is a world of lunacy and that’s why we say SJWs always lie. They do. They have no principles.

    After talking about diversity Hurley writes “Some aren’t happy about that. For the last three years, Correia has led…” You get the picture. Factless and citationless. Innuendoes. There’s your “brilliant” essayist – a demagogue. That’s how we become right wing neo-Nazis. We oppose the entry of women, gays and non-whites on the mere word of intersectionalists like Hurley and many others. Meanwhile, a lesbian supremacist ideology based on the idea whites and men are morally and spiritually inferior somehow becomes the opposite of supremacy, but which is exactly what neo-Nazism and intersectionalism is. But no principle, no nothing.

    “There’s no such thing as sexism against men. That’s because sexism is prejudice + power. Men are the dominant gender with power in society.” – Anita Sarkeesian

    There’s not a chance in hell we have a principled argument which turns Hurley consistently and obsessively negative remarks about men and whites into the group defamation they so closely resemble. Again, Hurley never EVER makes her stunningly insightful mass takedowns in regard to gays, women or any non-whites. It is a white male territory exclusively. Why? Because in principle it would be racist and sexist to treat non-whites, gays and women like that, except Hurley’s loose grasp of principle takes her only so far and no further. There is no equal protection in the world of Scalzi, Hurley nor that of any intersectionalist. In its place they have race and sex; the right and wrong race and sex.

    Meredith’s comment is important because it is what we see from intersectionalism over and over again; these lapse of simple judgment about what is and isn’t racism for example. Had John Scalzi spent just one minute thinking of how “Jewish privilege” sounded, he may have never supported this whole bizarre cult. As always, in the case of Scalzi, you can always tell as much about an intersectionalist by what they never say as what they do say. No matter how true, no SJW will ever discuss black, Asian or Arab privilege in those respective societies with the same force they do white privilege. They will cry about a white Table of Contents the way they never would a black blues anthology music album. They will never call for diversity in any non-white, non-male entity anywhere in the world. SJWs have no principles.

    Principle is crucial in any society for communication. Like law it is the only way we have to take the measure of each other and attempt to ensure fair play. Principle is the rule by which games are played. No rules, no game.

  383. TOR dinked around with a book by a local author for 5 years (out this summer, finally). Maybe anyone entering into a publishing contract with them should insist on fines and penalties for the publisher to be paid out at intervals if they don’t manage to get the product on the shelf in a timely manner.

  384. Re: deleted posts.

    Brad deleted one just hours after he posted it and almost no one had commented on it, because some dumb thing happened (it could have been the Entertainment Weekly thing, but maybe something else) and he replaced it with something longer and more… crabby. So the implication that something was regretted and hidden is a LIE. And I don’t think that Larry has deleted any posts whatsoever.

    Puppy kickers lie. SJW lie. It’s what they do.

  385. Here’s more almost stunning idiocy:

    “Lori Coulson on June 7, 2015 at 10:55 am said:
    Irene Gallo holds up a generic villain’s cape, and now Mr. Torgerson is claiming said cape was cut to his measure? My eyebrow rises as I murmur: ‘Fascinating.’”

    Moral and mental retardation is indeed fascinating in America in the 21st century.

    “Extreme right-wing to Neo-Nazi groups, called the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies… they are unrepentantly racist, misogynist and homophobic.”

    That’s pretty “generic” all right. I thought Gallo was broadcasting pell-mell and could’ve meant almost anybody.

    Some moron read an aphorism and didn’t understand it.

  386. “Chris Hensley on June 7, 2015 at 9:47 am said:
    “‘I know SJW isn’t remotely as inflammatory as neo-Nazi.’

    “Both John C. Wright and Vox Day have been pretty liberal in equating to SJW’s to Nazis.”

    Whether through naivete or bad intent, SJW is in fact a term interchangeable with radical intersectional gender feminism. The social justice movement within core SFF is founded solely on the paranoid and hysterical goals and theories of radical intersectionalism regarding patriarchy, heterosexuality as a fake social construct and white privilege and supremacy and no other ideology. It constantly uses the radical feminist terms peculiar only to that movement.

    Only radical feminism originated and promotes the idea of “rape culture” the falseness of gender, lack of “agency” and “compulsory heterosexuality” as oppressions. Radical feminism has been the single greatest source in America of the concept of “white privilege” since 1970. Radical feminist Peggy McIntosh’s “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” is widely quoted in SJW circles and is a crucial influence.

    I regard intersectionalism as a racist, sexist supremacist cult, so the comparison to neo-Nazism or the KKK is apt. Anyone who uses or supports phrases like “The white male gaze counts on silence” is speaking a language analogous to anti-Semitism or white supremacy. I know of not one single SJW who criticizes such language. On the contrary, they support it one and all.

  387. I’m not sure how dragging out dictionary definitions, and then saying that SP3 is meeting them – without actually addressing the countervailing evidence, or providing any proof – counts as proof of anything, other than some weird child of circular reasoning.

    In any event, how is something “open and democratic” when for all intents and purposes, it’s either a cabal (the ELoE. as per Larry’s post cited previously) or a single person (Brad, as per Michael Z Williamsons post at File770) deciding on who becomes a finalist? How, when there were a source of nominations (ie, emails) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received?

    Where to begin with this? Read the definitions and tell me where I am not being accurately using them. Seriously, in an era when the president can get away with saying “This is the most transparent administration in history”, continuing to deny that we’re being very open about what we’re doing (ie, being transparent), and doing our best to mobilize people to vote (ie, being democratic) because we can’t be bothered to track down how each and every recommendation got on the recommendation list is asinine and deliberately obtuse. At worst, people deliberately chose to trust Brad’s recommendations, and in doing so they are responsible for the nominating ballots they submitted. How is that any different from any other democratic vote?

    That’s a strange misreading of our prior conversation regarding GG. I thought we went up to a point where we agreed that there were no sources that the other would find convincing.

    First, when someone mentioned the anecdotes of backroom dealmaking you demanded absolute proof (which, because it was conducted in an opaque fashion, we couldn’t provide). Then you stated that the main body of GamerGaters revel in dirty tactics, and when challenged, you provided links that indicated something happened, but not the source of what happened or that such behavior was ‘reveled in’ by any number of GamerGaters, so it’s hardly evidence, let alone proof. When challenged on this, you attempted to end the fight by declaring that you wouldn’t believe my sources and I wouldn’t believe yours. It’s obvious based on who you demand proof from and who you don’t that your bias is not merely because of slates; your bias is ideological, and having an ideological bias itself isn’t a crime, but it does mean that your judgement can’t be trusted to be fair.

  388. Both John C. Wright and Vox Day have been pretty liberal in equating to SJW’s to Nazis.

    As always, demand quotes. What people need to get into their heads is that language matters. From what I can tell, Messrs Beale and Wright are incredibly careful about what they say, not how someone may misinterpret what they say. Fascist and Nazi have specified meanings; if you use them and you aren’t careful about it, especially to describe an opponent, you normally end up looking like an idiot. It’s much more likely that someone was compared to a Nazi, not called a Nazi. There’s a big difference between me saying ‘John is a Nazi because he believes in eugenics’ and ‘like the Nazis, John believes in eugenics’. Comparing the modern day group identity socialist Progressives to Nazis is a lot more apt than saying they are Nazis.

  389. Typical: “You’re objecting because the accusation is true!”

    Alright. I therefore accuse all anti-Puppies of being alien mandroids from Planet X.

  390. “There is no word whose power to move is more implicitly trusted than ‘progressive’.” – Weaver, R.M. (1985). The ethics of rhetoric. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press: pg. 211, quoted in “’Nazi Gods’ and ‘Jewish Devils’: The Dehumanizing Rhetoric of Nazi Propaganda, Kelly M. Sutter, A Senior Honors Thesis Submitted to the Department of Communication of Boston College, May 2008

    “It is therefore evident through Weaver’s definition of god terms, that any rhetoric involving a greater truth, knowledge, or existence will ultimately have a greater persuasive strength than any other rhetoric.

    “Alternatively, there are also devil terms. Weaver (1985) explains that these terms serve as the adversary to God Terms, making them repulsive simply by their opposition:

    ‘There seems indeed to be some obscure psychic law which compels every nation in its national imagination, an enemy. Perhaps this is but a version of the tribal need for a scapegoat, or for something which will personify “the adversary”. If a nation did not have an enemy, an enemy would have to be invented to take care of those expressions of scorn and hatred to which peoples must give vent. When another political state is not available to receive the discharge of such emotions, then a class will be chosen, or a race, or a type, or a political fact in, and this will be held up to a practically standardized form of repudiation.’

    “By this definition, devils terms would include unprogressive, dishonest, and primitive. Furthermore, any rhetoric that uses devil terms would suggest a hindrance of progress and lack of truth.” – Kelly Sutter

  391. Latest drool from Salon is that they should retcon Magneto and make him African American.

    That’ll go over well.

  392. There are more posts about nebulae in space than the Nebula Awards today. What does that tell you?

  393. @snowcrash – “what I’ve seen (ie Larry’s post, and MZW’s comments) tends to supports the premise that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE”

    What have you seen which supports this? You do understand that we cannot (nor should be expected to, as a matter of basic logical fallacies) prove a negative?

    Now, on the flip side of that coin, Puppies HAVE alleged that Tor editors have selected and curated nominees for past Hugos, and THEY have presented support for their arguments. You might not consider their evidence fully damning, but at least they have some.

    Your argument? Has none.

  394. For those who say Puppies want a “return to bygone eras of conservative white supremacy” in their respective fields, I have to point out something that should be obvious.

    Forget Campbell, Asimov, Zelazny, Saberhagen, all those “old white dudes” you say should be left in the past. Let’s assume you’re absolutely correct on that point. The reality is, if Anne McCaffrey’s “Dragonriders of Pern” were published for the first time in today’s market, it would be attacked right off the bat for being “militantly fascistic”, “reactionary”, even “backwards-thinking”. One of the most successful and feminist science-fiction writers of all time would be thrown under the bus.

    Here is a recalcitrant Holder refusing to pay tithe to Benden Weyr, arguing that there’s been no need for dragonriders for most of a millenium. He’s ultimately threatened to comply by military force — FASCISM!

    Here is an abused young girl, fleeing from her abusers into a deadly and dangerous world, slashing her feet on sharp, rocky terrain — TORTURE PORN!

    Here is a strong Weyrwoman, who cannot succeed in her goals without using her sexual leverage in Weyr society — INSTITUTIONALIZED RAPE!

    Every important theme about military readiness against known threats, about individual courage, about finding love and humanity and hope even in the face of possible human extinction, these would all be missed by professional grievance-mongers. All of that would be squashed under a hundred reviews by people who barely read any of the books, but instead took cues from the outrage of their more dullardly (and yet somehow influential) friends.

    That would be something to make any puppy sad.

  395. Jewish people are PNG with SJWs; for whatever reason, the Upholders Of All That IS Right And Good are pro-Muslim (Treating women as chattels is *part of their culture*, and don’t you dare say anything against them…), which means Jewish people are ‘White’ for Oppression Point purposes.

    Therefore Black people are higher in the ‘Oppression Stack’ – Jews aren’t even on the board.

  396. @Orgell – Maybe that explains their interest in the games industry. They want to rewrite the rules for society so they can game it to advantage… in their view, equality is just a word for suckers.

  397. It’s interesting to read the comments at Glyer’s for the simple reason stupid is a thing which explains itself. They seem unaware that what kicked all this off was the sudden flood of attacks on whites and men by feminists and their helpers about 3 years ago when Twitter became incredibly popular and interacted with inflammatory blog posts to create a feeding frenzy of oppressions and trigger warnings. Naturally what must follow the discovery of a heretofore unknown Jim Crow in SF is to promote diversity for those locked out by straight white men for 100 years

    Those events are not some imaginary thing but a matter of record and the affirmative action quotes also a matter of record. Are we to believe after all that talk the fact all women except one have won the last 2 Nebulas at the same time by an amazing coincidence the SFWA started to produce increasing rhetoric like WisCon? How dumb and dishonest are these people? They stare straight at their own defamation, the results of their affirmative action, and their own AA quotes but somehow can’t put 2 and 2 together. Let’s see… hmmmm… we attack men, launch AA initiatives and women win awards. Hell, these are the morons giving carfare to PoC to attend conventions and have their own writing grants but that’s suddenly invisible.

    One thing these simpletons can’t figure out is that when you attack a certain group it is that group most likely to respond. Instead these fools see that as confirmation it is straight white men that oppose them. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy, the same kind Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu experience. They throw rocks only at squirrels and of course only squirrels are going to get angry, not a blue jay in the next tree. So that is considered confirmation squirrels are angry and not blue jays. In short, the attacks themselves create the demography in similar way to how Jim Crow created segregation and anti-Semitism created the Jewish Anti-Defamtion League.

    Then people like Kameron Hurley can go to The Atlantic and write white men oppose diversity when in fact it is the opposite that is true: the diversity movement attacked white men on the spurious claim SF is a white male conspiracy in action. There was never any rhetoric SJWs could show that was true in any ideological sense any more than it was true Field and Stream was purposefully white and male.

    That brings us to today, and SJWs can’t figure out why the women, gays and non-whites they never attack and in fact protect with loving arms are mostly on their side and not Sad Puppies. That is highlighted by the fact this movement was mostly created by a miniscule number of gay non-white women who came along, called themselves “”intersectionalists” and started to raise hell about white male privilege. By an amazing coincidence, one of the crucial founders of that movement no one knows by the name of Mary Ann Mohanraj was at the Nebulas handing out an award while her “sisters” were taking selfies and posting them with #UnrelatedAsians as a knock on whites the same way they had just done at Wiscon.

    Meanwhile, are there any white men self-identifying as white running around GenCon taking selfies and posting them with #UnrelatedWhites, or is the truth more like others identifying people as white and male and therefore racialist supremacists but who actually have no interest in such labels? Who was putting “white” and “male” in their rhetoric before these asshat feminists came in? But wait… our privilege and “centrality” made that unnecessary. We ruled and were content in our KKK.

    That also brings us to today and Irene Gallo remarking on a right wing neo-Nazi cult SJWs made up out of their heads 3 years ago and placed us in without the slightest bit of proof any such movement existed now or in the last 100 years of SF.

    I call all this “Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory,” where he attacks white men, white men get angry and then Scalzi writes this Orwellian sentence of self-fulfilling prophecy about “how to get across the ideas bound up in the word ‘privilege,’ in a way that your average straight white man will get, without freaking out about it?” That’s like saying “how can I get n-words to realize they’re n-words?”

    My answer is not to engage in group defamation using shit theories created by wacky gender feminists who have a hard on for white men in the first place. Gee, how can I shoot only squirrels and not have only squirrels get angry?

    Scholar of Orwell Scalzi later wrote “This annoyed many a straight white male…” Really? How the hell did that happen? Is that by an amazing coincidence the same annoyance Jews, blacks and Poles feel when you direct racial slurs at them? A mysterious mechanism; who can figure out Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory? I think it probably works something like Lovecraft’s ode to an N-word poem but that’s just a theory. So why wouldn’t blacks not want a World Fantasy Award bust of Lovecraft or I a Nebula?

    These are not the most sophisticated people we’ve seen enter the field of SFF. They should be hosting their awards in a dollar store or Dr. Who-themed bowling alley.

  398. @T.L. Knighton (& @calbeck) You come in here and play nicely, but apparently your comments elsewhere indicate that you have no real concern about what we think on anything. Your biases are in place and you have no interest in learning where we come from on much of anything.

    That makes *no* sense whatsoever. If I had no interest, why I am here again and again asking the same questions, but – with one or two exceptions – getting some very blatant dodges (ie, it’s suddenly too difficult to find; the meaning of open and democratic; the open refers to the fact that an announcement was made, not how the slae was assembled; etc)?

    Look, I’ve been fairly clear from the outset, here and elsewhere, that I’m not a fan of slates, and that as such I disagree with the approach taken by SP3. I’m very obviously someone who’s not part of the groupthink here, but I am here in good faith to try and get a broader perspective.

    You say that a quick Google search will show me a fair glimpse – fine. What is the search I should be running, that will answer my questions?

    I don’t see how Brad (and others) can call SP3 open / democratic / transparent from start to finish given that there were a source of nominations ( the emails you mentioned, which Shadowdancer was kind enough to provide a screencap for reference) where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received.

    Additionally, there are comments by both Larry Correia (“here is what the Evil League of Evil authors came up with in discussion”., and it was “put together by the ELoE being all strategic like”) and Michael Z Williamson here in File770 (“Brad asked what I’d published that might be Hugo eligible, and I mentioned “Wisdom.”). I’ve provided links to the citations earlier.

    Given that, that’s why I’m saying that from what I’ve seen thus far is that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE, and had very little correlation with recommendations outside that particular group.

    Look, I’m asking because I really do want to know what you’ve seen that I’m unable to find. If I “had no real concern”, I wouldn’t be here.

  399. That makes *no* sense whatsoever. If I had no interest, why I am here again and again asking the same questions, but – with one or two exceptions – getting some very blatant dodges (ie, it’s suddenly too difficult to find; the meaning of open and democratic; the open refers to the fact that an announcement was made, not how the slae was assembled; etc)?

    If you consider having to resort to dictionary definitions to explain what should be obvious to anyone approaching this without preconceptions a ‘dodge’, you’re never going to get the answers you want. And if you expect us to believe you can’t come up with another possible reason for you being here besides just ‘asking questions’, you must think we’re pretty naive.

    You’ve admitted you’re biased against Gamers (and so biased towards the Social Justice Activists) in the ‘Gamers vs Social Justice Activists’ controversy. Now we have another group, the Sad Puppies, somewhat allied with the Gamers, involved in another controversy where they are opposed to the Social Justice Activists. You show up in a Sad Puppy-heavy forum and repeatedly demand to your satisfaction that they prove what are ultimately subjective claims about their side of the debate. You also claim that the only reason you are against the Sad Puppies is their tactics and not because they are opposing the Social Justice Activists you have admitted that you are biased towards. It shouldn’t be hard for anyone to come up with plausible reasons for your behavior besides ‘just asking questions’ and to doubt your sincerity and reasonableness.

    To those people in the audience that are sincerely looking for answers, we have been upfront that Brad made a list of recommendations based on his personal favorites, conversations on this blog, on other blogs, and from other sources such as email. There was no attempt to document all the sources for his recommendations, but failure to do so does not make the process transparent to a reasonable observer, especially when compared to the backroom dealmaking documented in anecdotes from people familiar with the process in the past. The list that resulted was diverse except only in that it consisted of works that Brad found worthy, and we wouldn’t have it any other way; if he’s recommending works he didn’t find worthy, he’s not doing it right. The result is democratic in that he encouraged each of us to read his recommendations and then vote for works we enjoyed whether or not they were from his recommendations, which by and large people did.

  400. How about, ‘we were there, Brad mentioned them, we knew that there were emailed nomination suggestions. That’s proof enough.’

    You are adhering, stubbornly, to a single definition of democratic, while we are adhering to a different set. You’re tediously demanding ‘puppy go fetch so we can say good puppy, nice puppy, you don’t get kicked – oh wait, actually yes you do.’

    More than one of us remembers the mentions of the emailed suggestions. That’s not good enough for you. Frankly, I’m starting to suspect the real reason why you want the emails as proof, is so you know who those people are, versus the list of people who openly commented. And frankly, that’s probably one of the reasons why some folks emailed in, besides not having a WP/Gravatar etc account to comment with, or wanting to use one that your side can bitch at them for. For all your supposed fears of doxxing, outside of a furious Tom Kratman, who I feel was rightly enraged, can you honestly say there have been threats or doxxing from our side?

    Given that you believe outright that GamerGate is a hate group and you have shown that nothing will sway you from that position, why are we supposed to assauge your suspicions? You don’t think our word is good enough anyway. So why are we supposed to trust you?

    Hell, I’m freaking pissed off that what you took away from that screenshot is ‘oh see, Brad lied’ as opposed to ‘Brad never hid that there were people emailing in.’ You have shown, that way, that you are wholly incapable of seeing any of us in even a remotely forgiving light, since you’ve already got a bias against us as a group. You can’t even acknowledge that we were honest about it all, and the behavior your side has displayed gives good reason for people to want to participate without a name being attached for you lot to constantly question, doubt, slander, and beat on.

    So no, Puppy Will Not Fetch, at least this one won’t. You’re not willing to put in your own legwork, and the last time I responded, your response wasn’t in any way forgiving, or acknowledging of the things we HAVE been saying. Nope, instead, you saw it as reinforcing of your biases. You burned your own credibility and frankly I’m not interested any more in helping you out because you used what I did find to beat on Brad some more.

    I consider Brad a friend, and I will not let you use me to hurt my friends.

    Fuck you and your ‘blatant evasions.’ I was honestly trying to answer you and got stabbed and hurt Brad in the bargain. I should have known better than to try deal with someone from your side honestly, because you sure as hell fucking didn’t. It doesn’t matter what we say, or what we present. You’ll see it through your own perspective, and ignore us anyway. Hell, I’m sure all you’ll take away from this is ‘giving excuses.’

    And that’s the last I will address you, tedious, entitled concern troll.

  401. @snowcrash, following up Civilis – The process is, and was, as transparent as reasonably it needed to be. Honest to Christ, Mr. Torgersen’s not running the federal elections here. He was putting together a slate. He called openly for recommendations in various places and via various means, and he put together a recommendation list. “I think these are worth nominating”, he said. “Read them and if you agree, nominate them,” he said.

    From the increasingly strident tone of your posts, it sounds to me very much as though you’d like to know exactly who nominated what, and when, and via which medium? Do you demand the same of the electoral process for government? Do you demand to know who voted for which candidate, who voted in advanced polls, which ones are ex-pats voting, etc? Or do you accept that the scrutineers and the electoral commission (or whatever it’s called in your neck of the woods) are doing their jobs. without you personnally getting to examine each ballot?

    “The entitlement is strong in this one.”

  402. Correction. He was putting together a list. He called for recommendations, etc. I used the word ‘slate’ when I ought not to have. A ‘slate’ implies “No variations permitted”, which is not the case with Mr. Torgersen’s situation. I apologize for the incorrect usage.

  403. From the increasingly strident tone of your posts, it sounds to me very much as though you’d like to know exactly who nominated what, and when, and via which medium? Do you demand the same of the electoral process for government? Do you demand to know who voted for which candidate, who voted in advanced polls, which ones are ex-pats voting, etc? Or do you accept that the scrutineers and the electoral commission (or whatever it’s called in your neck of the woods) are doing their jobs. without you personnally getting to examine each ballot?

    Often in elections, I have no idea what the differences between the candidates for local offices (like school board members) are, so what I do is I read recommendations by people that know more about the candidates and issues addressed by those locals. Those recommendations are often compiled into a slate. Some recommendations I accept at face value, some I accept if they are communicated well, and some I will often vote opposite the recommendation. That’s the way democracy works, and in the US, at least, it’s a democratic process which is also transparent even if I don’t know how those recommendations are arrived at.

  404. What Snowcrash wants is us to spend our time hunting for every scrap of data possible, knowing that we’ve already said these discussions took place all over the internet, in hopes we’ll miss something all with an eye towards an “GOTCHA!” moment.

    He’s biased, and admittedly biased, which is fine. However, he’s also made it clear that he won’t use any gray matter he has between his ears and just google “Sad Puppies nominations” or similar strings.

    Whatever. I think he can be safely ignored as just another of those who pretends to be civil when there’s no other choice (like coming here), but gives it up where he doesn’t have to. Luckily, I’m no longer pretending to be civil to him and his ilk.

  405. @Civilis: “admitted you’re biased against Gamers”

    1. Gamergate is not the same is Gamers. 2. Admitted? I’ve never hidden that I don’t look upon GG as favourably as many of the people here do. Does that mean I’m biased against everyone else here, or that I just disagree with them? I leave that to you. Also, ask if you’re biased against me (or another non-Pup, say Eric Flint?) because of my views, or do you just disagree?

    @Shadowdancer (as well as @William Underhill): Frankly, I’m starting to suspect the real reason why you want the emails as proof, is so you know who those people are, versus the list of people who openly commented.

    Since people seem to not only conflating the words of others with mine, but also forgetting what I’ve already said, I guess I better repeat myself. Again. From my post here June 3, 2015 at 9:03 am: …there were a source of nominations where it’s not known what they recommended, or how many recommendations the final slate works received. (note, I’m not asking for names or details of who recommended what obvs – just something in line with what the data Hugos organizers release)

    @Shadowdancer: For all your supposed fears of doxxing, outside of a furious Tom Kratman, who I feel was rightly enraged, can you honestly say there have been threats or doxxing from our side?

    Lou Antonelli comes to mind. Or is his doxxing attempt (sending a threatening email as well as a phone call) excusable to you as he too was “rightly enraged”?

    Anyways, to drag this back onto my main point – as per my post at (June 8, 2015 at 7:13 am), Brad keeps on saying that SP3 was open and democratic / transparent from start to finish. According to commenters here, start to finish doesn’t actually cover how the slate was assembled, but that there was an announcement and that people were free to vote as they wished with regards to the slate.

    As such, based on what other like Larry Correia and Michael Z Williamson have said, and in the absence of countervailing evidence, it’s likely that SP3 was a list curated and selected by either Brad or the ELoE, and had very little correlation with recommendations outside that particular group.

  406. @TL Knighton: However, he’s also made it clear that he won’t use any gray matter he has between his ears and just google “Sad Puppies nominations” or similar strings.

    Tell you what TL. You try Googling that phrase, and tell me which one’s answer my queries? I’ve gone through the first 20, and none of them even come close to addressing them.

    I have to ask, what do you think my questions were?

  407. 1. Gamergate is not the same is Gamers. 2. Admitted? I’ve never hidden that I don’t look upon GG as favourably as many of the people here do. Does that mean I’m biased against everyone else here, or that I just disagree with them? I leave that to you. Also, ask if you’re biased against me (or another non-Pup, say Eric Flint?) because of my views, or do you just disagree?

    Yes, I’m biased in favor of those who’s primary motivation is to depoliticize Science Fiction in general and the Hugos in particular. I’m biased against those that seek to politicize the fun out of my hobbies, because I’m a gamer, and the Social Justice Activists are opposed to things I like, and have been so since long before GamerGate. I’ve been biased against Eric Flint for quite some time (well before Sad Puppies) for his political views, but I still recommend many of his books because I believe they are worthy of recommendation because I find them enjoyable; I can recognize and work to overcome my biases. I’m increasingly biased against you (the anonymous internet persona), because I have to repeat the same thing over and over: Sad Puppies may not meet your perfect standards of transparency and democracy because those are subjective terms, but based on the objective definitions, one cannot deny that Sad Puppies supporters honestly believe those criteria to be met. I do my best not to let my biases control my behavior and be patient and civil with everyone, but I am human and fallible. To be biased is to be human.

    One of the roots of the whole problem is that Social Justice Activism is fundamentally built on claims that they can overcome the effects of bias, so they need to deny their own natural biases to present themselves as the only ones able to provide a just solution to social issues.

    Justice (definition): the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments; the quality of being just, impartial, or fair.

  408. Snowcrash,

    It is not our job to prove innocence, it is your to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Since you apparently are trying to convict him, after all.

  409. It is not our job to prove innocence, it is your to prove guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt. Since you apparently are trying to convict him, after all.

    Unfortunately, this isn’t a court of law; he can and will continue to believe what he wants. But we’re not obligated in any way, shape, or form to meet his standards.

  410. Wow, Snowcrash, you tried really, really hard, didn’t you? First link ON THAT EXACT STRING brought up a post here. Scrolling down, and this link was there.

    https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    Not overly difficult. Or, you could have used any number of similar strings (you know, like I suggested) and found it directly. But no, you want to be spoon fed everything, despite your biases being clear enough for everyone to see that nothing we provide will be enough for you.

  411. SP3 hasn’t worked out as well as was hoped. Part of that was the slap-dash nature of how the nominees were assembled. Most of it was the lack of a mission statement of what SP is for and what it is against; something people on both sides can gather around and clearly debate, rather than this confusion which swerves from Marxists to radical feminism or even something as stupid as writing styles. Writing styles didn’t produce “no white men won an award” and “I don’t review white men” and “don’t read white men.”

    Pushing back against that is not conservatism or anything like it. Stop letting these people get away with that. If you’re going to get together and bomb a target at least let it be the same target for maximum effect and efficiency. Debating bullshit saps time and energy and the original point is buried in derailing and pedantry.

    I would point out something obvious: Marxists suffer under the theory of “rape culture.” Liberals suffer under the theory of “white privilege.” Leftists suffer under the theory of the “colonial male gaze” and “patriarchy.”

    You are not up against Marxists, liberals and Leftists and haven’t been these last several years. Claiming you are alienates people who are not your enemies and who suffer hate speech right alongside conservatives. It also confuses the debate. For example, almost no one at Glyer’s are what we call SJWs race-gender crusaders, yet they think we feel they all are. There’s no reason for that.

    My suggestion would be to write up two short mission statements about what SP4 is for and against and crowdsource changes to them the rest of the year so they are representative of the people doing the voting.

    Mine would look something like this:

    “We are for genre and art trumping all other considerations. We wish nothing to be dragged in from outside and made to be more central to the genre literature than itself. “Central” is the key word here, because of course SFF can deal with anything. That doesn’t mean an obsession with transportation or economics trumps the genre itself and replaces it.

    “We are against group defamation and hate speech based on race and sex and against the promotion of SFF literature on that basis.”

    Over the course of several months those would be altered by consensus.

    SJW definition: radical intersectional gender feminist or confirmed booster.

    Were those the mission statements of SP3, the stupidity at Glyer’s and many other places wouldn’t be happening. The focus would be on what created the SP movement, and that should be painfully obvious by now. STRAIGHT… WHITE… MALE.

    Everything else is a sideshow really. You can’t create SP4 out of a sideshow, which is what SP3 has devolved into, helped along by people like Glyer and Eric Flint who apparently never read Book Smugglers and the round tables about Queer Theory poststructuralist “agency” and white colonialism, a “Diverse Editor’s List” of clownish victimization or any of the other most ardent asshat feminists who created this whole stinking debacle from lit org presidents on down. Silence is golden, quotes suck, bullshitting about people listening to Rush Limbaugh and joining a neo-Nazi movement becomes reality. On the other hand, whatever you think of Glyer, Flint or Mamatas, they aren’t really part of the problem. They don’t use hate speech or generally signal-boost it. I think we know what we mean by “SJW,” but a lot of people on the outside aren’t clear about that.

    I’m not saying there aren’t other issues, but take away radical intersectional gender feminism and there is no SP movement. In any event, being on the same page as much as possible would avoid having to answer moronic questions asked over and over again. Just point to the mission statement. But terms like “far-left” and “far-right” have no place in this debate. They exist, but they are not central to the issue. It’s like arguing what kind of movies anti-semites and racists like. To Jews and blacks, it doesn’t matter.

    To limit SP4 to a solely artistic or political issue means you have no moral highground. Without that you got nothing. There is no subjective legitimacy there.

    Just remember this: the perfect intersection of gay, non-white and woman got a Nebula nod this year for a story written at a writing workshop and has another at Tor next year. No slush pile for her. Her identity is her art. Tor.com is intersectional affirmative action central, and so is the Nebulas. WorldCon hiccuped this year but is essentially the Tiptrees. Identity is art. Race is art, sex is art. What genre is that, Frankfurt am Main?

  412. “Tor Books ‏@torbooks 3h3 hours ago Happy Monday! We appreciate your comments & would like to remind you that the views of our employees do not reflect those of the publisher.”

    Who wrote that? Gallo. Hayden?

  413. As always, demand quotes. What people need to get into their heads is that language matters. From what I can tell, Messrs Beale and Wright are incredibly careful about what they say, not how someone may misinterpret what they say.

    Pyotr, quote exactly what happened, please. My suspicions are you’re referring to the well-documented case where Mr. Beale cited the SFWA directory to prove that someone was still a member.

  414. “Tor Books ‏@torbooks 3h3 hours ago Happy Monday! We appreciate your comments & would like to remind you that the views of our employees do not reflect those of the publisher.”

    Must have gotten an earful. Good.

  415. There was one incident in which he tracked down a woman who wrote a negative review and posted her address on his blog.

    Do you have any kind of a source or link from any side on this? I’m sick and tired of out-of-context allegations being thrown around.

    There are probably many more.

    Then you should have no problem presenting them as evidence.

  416. Oh look, Clamps has found another proxy and changed his IP again.

    Really, Marston, did you think we wouldn’t know it was you? The first things out of your mouth are “VOXXXXXX DAYYYYYYY!!!!!!!” and “SHADOWDANCERRRRRR ISSSSS EEEEEEVILLLLLLLLLL!!!!”

  417. Happy Monday, Tor! We appreciate your comment & would like to remind you that the views of your employees are indistinguishable from a mentally ill ideology which thinks the world has connived to oppress women since the first white supremacist misogynist discovered the chains of compulsory heterosexuality along the Tigris and Euphrates. We encourage you to implement a health plan which includes regular mental health check ups by an all-male team of white heterosexuals trained in logic and principle.

  418. “Let’s be fair, Vox Day is exceptionally fucked up.”

    Lets be fair, Vox didn’t make the rules others are playing by, he just uses them better than anyone else.

  419. It’s official: political correctness is killing authors… because they feel so guilty about being white males that they are starting to drop out of creating literature to “make way for PoCs and women”.

    Death of a poet, right here.

  420. Welcome to your local alley:

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 Use the #POCBet hashtag. Whoever is mistaken for the most other POC wins a prize. Also most ridiculous mixup gets a prize. #Nebulas #SFWA”

    “Alyssa Wong ‏@crashwong Jun 4 @tinytempest I would like to submit to the jury, being mistaken for @alayadj #POCBet”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 5 @john_chu the most important question is: which Chu is @crashwong? She must be a Chu because ASIAN. @alayadj”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 @crashwong @AndreaNLam @alayadj Clearly someone needs to run an emergency game of How To Tell POC Apart”

    “Shareef Jackson ‏@ShareefJackson Jun 4 @tinytempest lol I love the hashtag so much”

    “K Tempest Bradford ‏@tinytempest Jun 4 @ShareefJackson I forgot who came up w/ it, maybe @jhameia! We use it at WisCon.”

    “Shareef Jackson ‏@ShareefJackson Jun 4 @tinytempest @jhameia yeah that’s where I first saw it at the POC dinner at Wiscon”

    I have another game: can you tell what an actual racist supremacist looks like, Miss Gallo? We get treated like these people though we play no such idiotic low-rent games. Wake the fuck up.

  421. @snowcrash – I can’t speak to the democratic process of the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies slate-creation process, because as a #GamerGate member, I wasn’t involved in any part of the nomination process. Extremely few of us had heard of the Sad Puppies, and in order to maintain our focus on ethics in games journalism, we have a saying which most of us adhere to rather religiously:

    “We’re not your damn army.”

    We’ve had other people try to enlist #GamerGate to fight other battles for them, thinking we are exactly the “reactionary right-wing” group so many in the press have classified us as. We have never taken that bait.

    Not even now. What mobilized some of us to join WorldCon is simply this: YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE ACCUSED US OF RIGGING THE GODDAMN NOMINATIONS. All because one or two people who are opposed to you happened to be regulars in the #GamerGate hashtag on Twitter.

    You’re conspiracy nuts. But that’s not what bugged us. It’s that the same press which has been ignoring reality to lap up anything negative told about us took your bait and spread it around uncontested, making a bigger mess for us to clean up.

    You idiots shit in our backyard, and now some of us are here with the pooper-scoopers.

    Even so, none of those who have taken up the SP banner have done so apart from gamers who also happen to have deep interests in science-fiction and fantasy. What do you think informs so many of our games? Hell, before video games were such a huge industry, the young-adult section of my local library was my main haunt; it was where my core values found root and spread. I can’t speak for every other #GamerGater who now has a voting packet on their hard drive, but my concepts of honor, justice and courage come from novels like “Pride of Chanur”, “The White Dragon”, and even the Thieves’ World anthologies.

    The race and gender of the author has never mattered to me. Why should it? That’s stupid.

    So you guys wanted to pick a fight by siccing a press we were already fighting against us on a second front? That’s just fine. Our sleeves are rolled up and we are elbow-deep in graphic novels, short stories and epics.

    MAY THE BEST WORK WIN.

  422. So I checked Pyotr’s link, and yep, it’s out of context. While Beale DOES say he “posted her address” on his blog, the link he himself gives for that outing in fact states nothing but her name and the city she lives in. This is not even on the level of what one can find in the phone book.

    He also documents this person as being one of the Amazon trolls who likes to drag book scores down with faked “reviews”… you know, the sort Anne Rice recently took issue with, which dragged her peripherally into #GamerGate’s demesne since the person making the harassing attacks on her books ALSO happens to be a major organizer of harassment versus anyone she believes is connected to #GamerGate (which led her to name Kentucky Fried Chicken as one of the “biggest harassers on Twitter”).

    Pyotr stands in defense of trolls against even the slightest real-world identification by name and city. Can’t have that! After all, Jay and Silent Bob might show up at their door and punch them in the face for saying nasty things on the Internet!

    * For the humor-impaired, this last bit is a scene from “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back”, so if anyone wants to scream about encouraging real-world violence over Amazon spats, kindly direct it to Kevin Smith, who I’m sure will be delighted to address your concerns in the appropriate fashion.

  423. Oh, gad, not the attempt at redefining doxing to include clicking on someone’s handle and looking at the publicly available data there, again.

    I’m not sure if that’s stupider than the “Watching public youtube videos is stalking” claim, but it’s definitely an annoying cousin.

  424. “Oh, gad, not the attempt at redefining doxing to include clicking on someone’s handle and looking at the publicly available data there, again.

    I’m not sure if that’s stupider than the “Watching public youtube videos is stalking” claim, but it’s definitely an annoying cousin.”

    It’s Clamps. Rationality is not his strong suit. Or any suit of his.

  425. Hey look, it’s Faith-Based Allegations all over again. Yay! I’m sure we didn’t get enough of that in the Middle Ages. -:D

  426. Let’s be fair. Yamamanama aka Clamps is exceptionally fucked up creepily obsessed and has some of the most screwed up double standards on the planet.

    That’s why the Stalker Sticky and Spewdonym List need to be circulated far and wide to warn the whole Internet of how demented he is. It’s got proof, not faith-based allegations!

    Y’know, I wonder if Yama’d been hoping to court this Emma person and Vox torpeoed his chances of her ever considering to date him because she was made aware of Yama being a psychotic stalker.

  427. “Y’know, I wonder if Yama’d been hoping to court this Emma person and Vox torpeoed his chances of her ever considering to date him because she was made aware of Yama being a psychotic stalker.”

    Heh… that would certainly explain some of his mindless, white-hot rage. 😀

  428. Clamps once again shows he’s not really any nuttier than the goofball paranoid fem brigade which says looking at Twitter feeds is creepy stalking. If your feed isn’t private, that’s presumably because you want strangers reading your very interesting posts about the sandwich you just made and a storm coming in over the North Sea in between your racist posts bitching about men.

    Clamps, my advice is to take a writing class. Then, write an SF novel that was interesting in 1922. Then write a post about white privilege and signal boost it to all the nuthatches who fear patriarchy and the male gaze. You career is assured. A sex change wouldn’t hurt. Or going transblack.

  429. What would you know about friends, Marston? You certainly don’t have any here. Or anywhere, for that matter. How many bans from just this site in the last week? 2? 3? But please, keep circumventing them and digging your own hole all over again!

  430. *cracks up laughing* “Friendship” Clamps says. The guy who stated flat out that he thought that I’d ‘spread my legs for someone else’ when he found out that Aff was my housemate. Bahahahahahaha Yama’s the guy who believes that merely being housemates = a male who is a housemate of a female means that the male gets sexual rights to the female’s body.

    I find utterly hilarious too, the empty insinuation that I don’t have friends.

  431. We don’t have to skim to find you offensive, Marston. It’s right there in your first posts. Pretty much all of them, for that matter.

  432. By the way, note that link that Yama gave up there. That .de append is proof he’s using a proxy to evade the ban here. Google assigns what country it thinks you’re browsing from. Thus, if you’re in the US, you’ll see blogger.com or blogspot.com. If you’re from Italy, it’ll add .it. Since I’m from Australia, I’ll see .au

  433. Decent people, when they find out that a female is friends with a known serial stalker of women who makes threats against children and publicly brags about unlawful activity, will try to warn the person.

    This does involve contacting them.

    Doesn’t change that watching public youtube videos is not stalking, just because you dislike the results, Andrew.

    Neither is it harassment, to jump to the next stage of your DARVO attempts.

  434. We’ve hit six pages of posts in the Stalker Sticky today. Added ‘Pyotr’ to the list of pseudonyms Yama has used.

    https://forums.affsdiary.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=40&p=52#p52

    By the way, Yama himself has provided more proof that he’s Sunlight, by doing the exact same thing of insinuating that his enemies have no friends. Lots of weapons grade projection there.

    and there’s this reaction on finding out Aff lives with me:

  435. Hahahaha, oh God, you really went for deflection hard on that one. -XD

    “It’s not about me, it’s about you HITLER-LOVERS!” Oh man, I’m rolling here… time for another glass of this lovely cabernet sauvignon, to savor as you flop around like just another standard troll for my entertainment. Although you COULD try coming up with routines that aren’t as old as USENet, it’s nice to see such energy put into them.

  436. I didn’t write Britetown Races, Clamps. I sculpted it out of a massive block of butter using a chainsaw, which is normal procedure here in the undersea kingdom of Atlantis.

  437. Oh, I don’t know… I’ve got a masochism streak going this afternoon. Hey, Pyotr/Clamps/Yamallamadingdong, lay some of your writing on me. I bet a round twoit it won’t hold up.

  438. Meh, being a crappy writer or not doesn’t invalidate his views and claims.

    His views and claims do that all by themselves.

    *current soundtrack: the Beach Boys’, with “409”

  439. @T.L. Knighton: Wow, Snowcrash, you tried really, really hard, didn’t you? First link ON THAT EXACT STRING brought up a post here.

    https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/announcing-sad-puppies-3/

    TL, this is why I asked if you even knew what my question was. I’m aware of that post. In fact, I provided the same link, and a summary of the recommendation numbers from it in my very first post here, at June 1, 2015 at 9:00 am.

    The question I had at that time was – hey, Brad says SP3 is open and democratic, as well as transparent. but the number of recommendations from that thread don’t correspond to the final slate

    Shadowdancer was kind enough to point me to a quote by Brad where he noted that there were other sources – I know she regrets it or that I took it as an ah-ha! moment, but it was literally the first time I had seen it, and I’m grateful for the assist.

    However, my original question remained – how is SP3 is open and democratic, as well as transparent, given that there were some recommendations came through emails etc, where the (anonymised info of what ) numbers and what they recommended were not made visible. Additionally, how does this tally with what people like Larry or MZW have said (also cited earlier by me in this thread)?

  440. I think it’s more important to note that even bearing Snowcrash’s concerns in mind, this remains a matter of comparing a blemished apple to one already half-rotted. However, if Snowcrash is willing to assist in making Sad Puppies 4 even more open and democratic than it already is, that would be greatly appreciated by all involved.

    Except by people who hate Puppies, who will immediately denounce him and begin claiming all he does in relation to the matter is somehow related to the newest compilation of Vox Day’s Greatest Hits.

  441. FYI–the current set of posts at File 770 covers the Tor/Irene Gallo controversy and, more importantly, has the movie preview for “The Martian”, which looks pretty badass.

  442. Pingback: Puppies in Their Own Words