Picture of a TOR buyer

These are just two paperbacks, from my ever-expanding collection of same. Over the years I’ve bought hundreds of them, almost always new. Not that I am against used books, but I’ve always appreciated the feeling of a brand-new paperback in my hands — fresh off the store shelf. The book on the left is one of the first TOR books I ever purchased, when I was all of 18 years old. From a B. Dalton store. I don’t even think those exist anymore? That book’s been read and re-read several times. It’s also responsible — to a large degree — for inspiring me to become a writer. And not just any genre, either. Hard Science Fiction. The subgenre in which I’ve won three Analog magazine AnLab awards. So, the book on the right shouldn’t be a surprise. I bought it last weekend, while I was on pass. I really liked A Fire Upon The Deep and A Deepness In The Sky. Vinge is also Hard SF. I’m looking forward to taking a return trip through his Zones of Thought universe.

It would be a damned shame if someone thought I was just malware.

Don’t you think?

EDIT: Notable TOR author Jagi Lamplighter has been collecting readers’ photos demonstrating that they, the readers, are also not malware. I think this is a great little project Jagi’s got going. An image says so much more than words, in this particular context. Look at all those fans! Those are some serious readers who seriously love their Science Fiction & Fantasy. Hundreds, and even thousands of dollars in books. Folks, this is what makes the field live and breathe. Right here.

Advertisements

234 thoughts on “Picture of a TOR buyer

  1. I actually sent some emails in today- more about the rumors that it is being written off as bots than about the rest.

    One good thing about having a name like mine? Yeah. I can guarantee no one else in the world shares it with me. Pretty easy to prove I exist.

  2. I am not a bot. anyone claiming so can p.m. me for my address, knock on my door, and discuss the topic over a large, ice-cold gin & tonic.

    Otherwise, they can suck-start a cactus.

  3. I just did a quick scan of my tottering shelves of paperback fiction, and I have to admit – not knowing if I am sorry or not about this – but I have only a handful of Tor-logoed books, and the earliest in my collection go back to the late 1960s when I was spending birthday and allowance money at Vromans’ in Pasadena. There’s a ton of DAW, DelRay and Baen.

    So, I’m not sure they’ll miss me at all if I boycott them.

  4. VD fisked the “they must be bots” comment and concluded it’s a troll, and I think he’s right. But its function wasn’t to be true; its function was to invalidate customer complaints. Instead, it seems to have caused even more Tor customers to come out of the woodwork.

  5. So, apparently Irene Gallo should never work in this town again. Yet when anonymous people threaten that Brad Torgersen should never work in this town again, that’s beyond the pale.

    Got it.

  6. No Chris. That is not what everyone is saying.

    Just to be clear here. Yes, some of those offended by her comment are calling for her termination, but not all of those offended are calling for termination. Many of those offended by her Lies are demanding a honest apology AND a retraction of the Lies.

    Is that clear enough? A RETRACTION of the LIES *and* an apology that indicates that she understands that what she said was wrong and ill-considered.

    What she posted doesn’t come close to meeting those requirements, in my opinion.

  7. 😒

    Yes! Savage that straw man for saying those things no one has said!

    I hope she doesn’t lose her job. That isn’t my decision though, or yours. There is also a big difference, from a standpoint of employment, between disagreeing on the voting for a fraking fan voted award and labeling your bosses’ employees, customers, and competition as racist, sexist, homophobic, neo-nazis.

  8. Many of those offended by her Lies are demanding a honest apology AND a retraction of the Lies. So, you’re writing to her employer demanding that her employer undertake additional disciplinary action (specifically, force her to again apologize for and retract statements on her personal blog) and that’s somehow okay? What if Gallo says “no?” Will you be satisfied?

  9. That’s what free association is for. As stated, I am not calling for a boycott, and I have accepted the apology. Anyone who isn’t satisfied, however, has every right to spend their money elsewhere. It is there money, after all.

  10. How is her saying “I’m sorry your upset I called you a neo nazi” a proper apology?

    Honestly, if I say “Chris Gerrib can’t lick the windows on the short bus cause his helmets to big” the proper apology isn’t “Sorry I said you helmet was too big Chris.” Is it?

  11. A) No clue who that is.
    B) Even assuming the quote is accurate, in context, and indicative of this person’s views, do you really want to start casting each side by the worst person in it? Think hard before you answer.

  12. Eric – the issue here is that you are demanding her employer take action. The strongly implied threat is that “Gallo will never work in this town again” – a threat that when leveled by anonymous individuals against Sad Puppies was (we were told) A Fate Worse Than Death.

    In short – if you want to be taken as the Good Guys in this fight, act like it.

  13. Come on, that hand is clearly robotic.

    Actually I lie. It is in fact Peter Jackson’s.

  14. Mr. Gerrib, if you say in a public venue that a large number of your employer’s customers and a few of its suppliers are evil people deserving of contempt, you should expect to be fired, because the predictable reaction from those customers and suppliers – refusing to deal with your employer – is a direct threat to your employer’s revenue. Freedom of speech does not include the right to demand that no one be offended by what you say, or that those whom you have offended must endure your presence or make contracts with you.

  15. I know you have trouble grasping this, Chris, but most people on this side believe that yes, you can say what you want – BUT, you hold personal responsibility for what you say. Publicly making comments that disparage your own customers in a conversation that is designed to promote the work of your employer should be something you think about before posting.

  16. Yes, Chris, when an employee disparages your customers, you, as an employer, are expected to take corrective action.

  17. To expand on Mr. Brazier’s thought:

    When a company acts as the gatekeeper for the nature of novels it publishes, it may legitimately do so. When the staff of a company acts as gatekeepers based on their personal opinion and bias, they become defacto the opinion and bias of the company.

    If the two conditions are company policy, this is perfectly ok. When it is not company policy, it is not ok, and is certainly not in the interests of the company. This is the underlying nature of the issue, not that Ms. Gallo published a personal opinion on her facebook page.

    Further, for those calling for tolerance of this remark, let me point out to you that tolerance is a weapon of the other side, and it is used incrementally to destroy the cultural and other value systems that western civilizations are built upon. There is no tolerance in the mind of an SJW for feelbad and wrongthink, because to tolerate would indicate that those positions could be allowed to exist. By definition an SJW cannot tolerate.

  18. Yeah… that was a waste of my time. Still have no clue who he is, beyond apparently blaming Jews for the ‘genocide’ of the Romanovs. The topic of the post was apparently the Israeli government not recognizing the Armenian genocide.

    Let me explain.
    No, there is too much, let me sum up.

    A) That guy comes off as tin-foil hat brigade, judging by the couple of posts there. Can’t say for sure without a larger sample.

    B) Not even everyone there agreed with him. Didn’t read enough of the comments to know percentage, and I have no interest in doing so. because…

    C) That thread had zilch to do with Sad Puppies. Lots of people post at Vox’s site, apparently. I saw some numbers today that suggested his site has higher traffic than Scalzi’s blog or Larry’s. And? Chris Gerrib posts here frequently, and no one would confuse him for a puppy, and at least most of those posts relate to the Hugos in some way.

    D) This Linsday person (Is it a man or woman? Hard to tell with that name? NM doesn’t matter anyway) certainly comes across as anti-Semitic. Problem is that alone does not a Neo-Nazi make. Certainly isn’t a desirable trait, but no one seems to argue that Mel Gibson is a neo-Nazi because of his drunken rants. An A-hole, sure.

    E) Even if s/he does support SP that says nothing about the group as a whole. Actual neo-Nazis like stuff too. Does everything they like automatically become tainted? Not so much.

    F) If you want to be taken with anything but concealed disdain as a probable Troll, “Vox is a stalker” is not the way to start.

  19. – the issue here is that you are demanding her employer take action.

    Not so much. In general, I would be inclined to give even noisy loudmouthed bigots such as Ms Gallo the benefit of the doubt and simply tune out the inanity. I do believe in a society with free speech.

    In this case however, there is a certain sense of justice in seeing someone who approves of the tactics of the progressive hate mobs when those mobs have been whipped into a self righteous frenzy against individuals or businesses with “the wrong views” being subject to exactly their own set of principles. This seems to satisfy a deep human need for justice. I must admit I would feel the same way to see a slave master in a chain gang or a fiery Republican congressman subject to his own rules about picking up guys in airport bathrooms. Seeing Ms Gallo get what she prescribes for others would simply scratch the justice itch.

  20. Chris said: “So, you’re writing to her employer ”

    I haven’t decided what I am going to do.

    I know that her so post, buried in the middle of the comments, does not qualify as a proper apology in my eyes. I know that her initial response to being told she was wrong was immature and unprofessional. I firmly believe that she is not sorry for what she said. I also believe that she knows what she said was wrong, but does not care, she is too blinded by her own hate.

    How I act on those opinions has yet to be decided. Perhaps I will simply decide to cease buying any TOR books for the foreseeable future. Why bother the people in charge with the thoughts of a mere peon like myself.

    That is my right as the consumer. We are all entitled to consume what ever product we chose, even boycotting a producer because we do not like the actions of an employee.

  21. It’s certainly your right to boycott Tor. It’s my right to boycott Brad Torgersen.

    But if you call for a boycott of Tor, then you cannot complain if I call for a boycott of Torgersen. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

  22. That kinda depends on your reasoning for calling for a boycott of Brad.

    If it basically amounts to you think he gamed a fan voted award without even a money prize attached (so he could nominate others and not himself) you will come across as rather petty. Especially since no rules were broken.

    Her comments, on the other hand, involve the kind of accusations that can have impacts on people’s careers, especially if any kind of security clearance is involved.

  23. It also matters if you were in fact part of his audience to begin with.

    Were I to call for a boycott of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic it would be meaningless because I do not in fact form part of their customer base.

  24. It’s still a free country, sport. Do what you want, sauce away. No skin of mine. Pretty certain it’s no skin off Mr. Torgersens’ either.

  25. Gerrib: what the readers choose to do or say (about Gallo) is their own business. I just posted a photo of me buying a brand new TOR book. All I said is that it would be a shame if someone thought I was software.

  26. Hey Chris

    Just wrote three letters to Tor and MacMillan. None of them had anything to say about Gallo. What I’m objecting to right now is being called a ‘bot.

    You have a problem with that too?

  27. Hey Chris

    Why don’t you call a boycott of Brad? Then those of us that buy Tor books can boycott Tor without any sense of guilt.

    Besides, let’s be honest. SJB’s don’t buy Brad’s books.

  28. @Gerrib. Well, if Brad were to call me a “reverse racist, heterophobic, neo-Stalinist” because I happen to like the majority of Eric Flint’s work – yep, he’d get dropped from my purchase list. Especially if he doubled down by sending me “kitteh” pictures and then “apologizing” with “I’m sorry I hurt your feelings by noting that you are a reverse racist, heterophobic, neo-Stalinist.”

    When an employee of a company, while doing things to promote his or her company’s product, calls me names and suffers no real repercussions for same, I am forced to assume that the company agrees with them.

  29. Chris, I think we owe you a thank you. Up thread you admitted that Brad has received threats that he won’t “work in this town again.” Successfully shooting down one of GRRM’s talking points.

    Thank you

  30. David Gerrold being one of the most disagreeable. well, considering he’s been writing professionally since before I was born, apparently he’s doing something right.

  31. Up thread you admitted that Brad has received threats that he won’t “work in this town again.” No, I said that somebody who doesn’t actually hire writers made a statement on his personal blog. A statement that Torgersen misconstrued and argued loudly was out of bounds.

    Now Torgersen, with a wink and a nod, is perfectly okay with somebody else getting hounded out of a job. The hypocrisy is strong here.

  32. So is your contention that nothing merits a boycott or firing when it cones to a company’s public image?

    That seems to be what you’re saying by calling the above hypocrisy.

    The politics of a fan voted award (w/no broken rules) =\= calling your bosses’ customers racist sexist homophobic neo-Nazis.

  33. Chris, the projection is strong here. Torgerson did not do a wink and a nod. Saying so is disengenious, dishonest, and down right dastardly.

    I think you not only have a projection problem, you have a reading comprehension problem. And thanks again for ruining GRRM’s talking point.

  34. Why yes, Mr. Gerrib, you have the right to boycott anyone and anything you choose. Why do you suppose anyone would care if you boycotted Torgersen?

    You see, I’ve seen your name before. You don’t have a big group of followers who hang on your every word; you can’t claim with a straight face that Torgersen will sell many fewer copies of his books if you speak out against him. You’re just one more dude on the Internet. Moreover, anyone inclined to agree with you is already so angry with Torgersen because he ran Sad Puppies 3 that they wouldn’t have Torgersen’s books as a gift. There isn’t a blessed thing you can do to him with a boycott that those of your ilk haven’t already done.

    But go ahead and boycott Torgersen. Announce it to the world, and enjoy the aura of self-importance. The world will proceed without you.

  35. Now Torgersen, with a wink and a nod, is perfectly okay with somebody else getting hounded out of a job. The hypocrisy is strong here.

    Chris,
    I know you are very narrative driven but let’s point something out. YOUR SIDE has been getting people fired for things they say for 60 + year. Here is a convenient list of the body count https://handleshaus.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/bullied-and-badgered-pressured-and-purged/ .

    Now if you want to talk hypocrisy I think the sudden defense of Ms. Gallo by your side and the allegations that going after her employment is “dirty pool” and “out of bounds”.

    I am tired of playing by the rules of decency while your side does whatever it damn well pleases. I think it is time that your side starts receiving some of the punishment you so gleefully have been inflicting on our side for decades.

  36. Just so you know, last week on File 770, someone was posting what their new strategy for dealing with Sad Puppies was going to be. The idea is to expose Larry and Brad’s “hypocrisy”, causing the Puppy supporters to become disillusioned and fall away. Therefore, the endless, mechanical — some could even say robotic — attacks on Brad’s integrity here are meant to accomplish this task.

    I would like to thank that person for putting their battle strategy on a public forum, where anyone, even a Puppy supporter, could read it. 🙂

  37. I’ve tended to avoid File 770’s comments, mostly because it’s an echo-chamber of Puppy-kicking. But I am not surprised to learn that disingenuous trolling is the new “gotcha” method for exposing the heinousness and perfidy of the evil Torgersen-Correia alliance. Because nothing proves you’re a brave warrior for truth, like twisting a man’s words, and tone-deaf poking him with a stick, while your fingers are crossed behind your back. Puppy-kickers for righteousness in the Hugos! Puppy-kickers über alles! (*snort*)

  38. Those are some nice authors you got there…

    …shame if anyone got the idea they were disagreeable. Something might happen to them… they might break.

    – Scene from The Godfather V

  39. Gerrib: “So, apparently Irene Gallo should never work in this town again. ”

    1) “Fired from Tor” is not the same as “never work again”.

    2) Where were you when Malzberg, Resnick, and Rabe were hounded out of their gigs at the SFWA Bulletin? For calling someone a lady, no less. What planet do you live on where calling someone a lady is worse than calling them a Nazi?

    You know something, Gerrib? If you work at McDonald’s and post “Big Macs are poison” on your publicly viewable Facebook page, you’re going to get fired. If you work for the DNC and post “Obama sucks” on your Facebook page, you’re going to get fired. If you work for Dutch Boy paint and post “Dutch Boy paint is substandard. It flakes off within a month”, you’re going to get fired. Do we begin to see a trend here?

  40. People have never been consistent about what got Resnick and Malzberg fired. Was it calling a lady editor a lady editor? Was it calling liberal fascists liberal fascists for being, well, liberal fascists? Was it for noting that a beautiful woman was, well, beautiful? So much heinousness and dripping hatred to choose from! What’s a good progressive supposed to do?? Aw fuck it, just fire them both. Everybody knows they’re a couple of old white cisnormative hetero assholes. They deserve to be fired just for that alone. But don’t anybody dare touch Irene Gallo for calling the entire Puppy spectrum — from end to end — neo-nazis, sexists, and racists; while also promoting TOR product. How could anybody think Irene might actually deserve repercussions? That would be the WORST THING EVER!! Every employee has the right to insult the customer without being answerable to any sort of company ethics or conflict-of-interest code! (*bats eyelashes with moronic innocence*)

  41. Gerrib: “And all David Gerrold was saying was that it would be a shame if people decided not to work with disagreeable authors.”

    Do you not see that this is the problem? CAN Gallo work professionally with authors she believes are neo-nazi racist homophobes? Maybe she can. Maybe she just spouted that off and didn’t believe a word of it. Maybe the next time a book from Wright comes across her desk she’ll do the same level of professional work that he praised her publicly for by name. People would, very reasonably, like some reassurance. Tom Doherty offered reassurance. He explicitly said that Tor publishes authors with diverse ideologies. He said that Gallo’s words were her own and did not represent the company. This was an extremely mild, normal, corporate type statement… and people went farking NUTS.

    It does seem that Gallo’s supporters WANT Tor to have her opinion as policy. Certainly “common knowledge” has been that if you weren’t going to be on the down low at least until you got your foot in the door you’d never publish with Tor since the Haydens and others are so vocally political and exclusionary. Frankly, I was shocked that the top guy at Tor isn’t a flaming liberal. Who’d have ever thought?

    Wanting reassurance that if you got published by Tor (since we’re assured that Tor does not actually sort authors by ideologies) your book won’t be sabotaged by the art department is not unreasonable.

    If you still can’t see my point, imagine that I’m a black woman and the libelous statement was a racist one. “Oh, well, that’s her opinion I’m sure I’ll get professional treatment there,” is really NOT going to happen with nothing more than “well, everyone has a free speech right to their own opinion.”

  42. It’s probably better not to fire Gallo and make a martyr of her. I have no doubt she’d end up working at another publisher. Hell, some anti-Puppy editor would make a big production number of hiring her and praising her outspokenness.

  43. @ Mr. Chupik

    So the collective has their instructions, and have mindlessly come here to troll in exactly the same way. Figures.

  44. Brad: “People have never been consistent about what got Resnick and Malzberg fired.” It probably doesn’t even matter; all it takes is for someone to point at you and yell “Witch!”. That’s how they like it. It’s the same theory as Stalin holding all night drinking parties (mandatory, of course), then, at dawn, randomly pointing out a few people to be taken out and shot.

    “It’s probably better not to fire Gallo and make a martyr of her”

    Disagree. They’re already making her a martyr. They can’t screech any louder than they already are.

  45. Chupik @7.19pm

    Really? Would you care to point out the post? Because, I’ve seen some of the quotes and descriptions you bring up, and there sometimes seems to be a distinct gap between the actual item, and your narrative of it. Such us the fate of quoting on the Internet, and it’s why links are always useful.

    So, keeping in mind Brads prior comments about narrative vs reality, perhaps you can provide the link to the post in question so that we can all judge for ourselves, instead of perhaps jumping to conclusions over what may be a misunderstanding?

  46. Why fire her, when you can put her on the slush pile, and then announce a ‘New Author’s Fanfic’ contest?

    A quarterly contest.

  47. snowcrash:

    “I think it’s better to focus on the Puppy leaders’ hypocrisy, the difference between their own words and actions, in hopes of demonstrating to the “casual Puppies” that they’ve been sold a pig in a poke. The lead Puppies are likely beyond redemption, but their influence is only as large as their following. Expose the head Puppies’ hypocrisy, and maybe some of their adherents will drift away. If enough of them do, I really don’t care what the powerless figureheads have to say.”

    The comment was from the 8th or 9th and no, I am NOT digging through hundreds of comments to find who said it. But it was said.

  48. @Chupik

    That sounds like a comment by Standback,and personally, even from that extract, I think you’re being hyperbolic to attribute it to malicious intent.

    You’re missing quite a bit of context regardless, so I’ll try to dig out the full post later tonight (bit hard on my mobile). IIRC, Standback has been fairly critical about some of the more hyperbolic rhetoric himself and was asking people to tone it down. To portray it as giving marching orders is a bit harsh

    I’ll dig out a link later

  49. Probst: George still has my three questions screened. I don’t know why. Until or unless he unscreens my three questions, the exchange is incomplete. Chief among the three: does George concede that there are consumers who don’t know about nor care about Vox Day, who are still very offended by Irene Gallo’s comments? It was a yes, or no, question. Hopefully George says “yes” and we can proceed from there. If he says “no” then I don’t think there’s anything left to talk about. George will be denying the existence of the provably obvious.

  50. I would be pleased if he did answer you, Brad. But I don’t expect it.

    At one point during his first series of comments on Sad Puppies a couple of months ago, Larry and he exchanged comments on their own forums. George offered a debate.

    Of course, it wasn’t Larry that responded. Vox Day did, and accepted. George must have realized he stepped in it big, he declined. I believe he said something to the effect that he didn’t know that they had anything to debate.

    Now, I’ll grant you that Vox is probably scarier than you are to the typical prog. But it was very telling.

  51. Update: looks like George R. R. Martin is simply sending my recent replies (on his LiveJournal) to spam. Yeah, that’s one big reason I don’t play net nanny around here. Never let it be said that Brad R. Torgersen “wins” arguments with his control panel. I don’t usually agree with my detractors, but they at least get free space to say what they want. Save for Clamps. Clamps is crazy, and provably so. Everyone else can say whatever the hell they want. They just can’t be shocked when they get argued with; either by me, or by someone else. Because that’s how grownups talk to each other.

  52. As an educator (band director), I am prohibited by school board policy to comment on “social media”, Facebook, twitter, etc, concerning students, parents, or anything to do with schools. My opinion DOES NOT MATTER. I can, and would be fired for presenting anything on social media that has to do with schools. As it is, I am reluctant to even post personal stuff on Facebook. My friends marvel when I do actually post, and usually it is a fairly benign picture or saying that brings a chuckle.

    Lots of folks have been fired or forced to resign because they posted opinions on social media. In the last month, a principal in Miami was removed from his position because he posted a personal opinion about the mess that happened in McKinney. And over and over again I keep hearing the same thing: It’s not about your First Amendment rights, it’s about your responsibility to your employer not to do something that puts them in a bad light.

    Irene Gallo screwed up. She very PUBLICLY presented her own opinion. The problem is that she lumped authors from her own company in with her remarks. She presented her opinion, and the company has the right to discipline her for those remarks. Period. And it has been shown over and over again that employees can be disciplined for remarks like that

    Stand with her if you want, she still did something she SHOULD NOT have done. As for me, I will continue to buy TOR books, cause, DUH, David Weber’s Safehold series.

  53. Well, I don’t know if they are “marching orders”, but when I saw the repeated lines of attack here, it was the first thing that sprang to mind.

  54. Stand with her if you want, she still did something she SHOULD NOT have done. As for me, I will continue to buy TOR books, cause, DUH, David Weber’s Safehold series.

    Nicely said, sir. Nicely said.

  55. Those who like to claim we’re all lockstep automatons mindlessly following the orders of our leaders should note the variety of Puppy opinions on the issue of boycotting Tor.

  56. @Brad R. Torgersen

    He tends to unscreen comments in batches. It looks like I have one from earlier today that’s still in moderation. It’s possible that he’s sending your posts to spam, but it’s also possible that he’s been overwhelmed by the Internet explosion over the Games of Thrones finale and just hasn’t gotten to it yet. He’s occasionally thrown out my comments by mistake, and a second post is usually all it takes for him to go back and track it down. I’d wait a while, though. He doesn’t like talking about the show on his blog, and he’s probably getting all kinds of comments about the show, so I doubt he’s in a very good mood in terms of maintaining his blog right now.

  57. Christ Gerrib – just for the record, I’m one of those people calling for firings at Tor. If I, or anyone I personally know, had disparaged my coworkers, and my company’s customers in a public venue, whether I explicitly stated the views were my own or not, we would be fired. She didn’t apologize for her statements. She stands by them, as do several others. She merely apologized for hurting some feelings. I don’t NORMALLY do business with companies that allow their employees to publicly cast aspersions about me.

  58. Pingback: The Day the World Turned Pupside Down 6/15 | File 770

  59. I posted this response to his article on Eric Flint’s site.
    I’m posting it here as I have a newly found prejudice(Since Scalzi anyway) against openly liberal writers as I feel far to many of them are Censorship hacks who pretend otherwise.
    And since I took the time to write it and since it was for a comments section that should be respectful enough to the definition and importance of the word “Comment”
    I am going to paste it here so it wasn’t a complete waste of time.

    Oh there is certainly more to the sad(Puppy) truth then you care to give credit for. Why…well that would be on you to answer. Myself, I think writers shouldn’t auto exclude the possibilities of prejudice even if they are in the mirror, especially Fantasy writers.

    In fact it’s been my Tolerant Side that has come to understand that any half way intelligent person who can argue a case for more then a NY minute is at least half right in there assumptions. It’s the other half of the coin that they usually care not to acknowledge that makes it skewed. Any final analysis without the other side is as much a half lie as a half truth.

    Evidence(just a smidgeon but its the causal acceptance of it that shows scale of the intolerance)
    You see people like Kameron Hurley attack one of the nicest people ever in the field(and quite the SJW himself) Neil Gaiman as a Sexist just because he used quite the cleaver title “Trigger Warnings” as the title of his collection. Hurley insisting that the title had been claimed by feminist to point out the evil male patriarchy and Gaiman had no right to these “WORDS” should point out how lowly this field has sunken into PC Hell with people wanting to create Enemies of State because they have a differing opinion or do not take things as personal as they do.

    Gaiman aligned himself with a black racist who stated everyone should not buy books by white male authors for a year in the name of…diversity(course it’s easy for him to agree to this knowing his bank account and the food in his children’s mouth is free from this agenda’s prejudices)
    But it’s a mentality that is diseased but running freely out there and easily verifiable to any who question it. And it’s something that should scare the Willies out of you or any sane person against censorship and the right of the author to write.

    It doesn’t help that John Scalzi was the head of the SFWA and that Tor just made a big deal about giving him a big contract while knowing that they have been labeled as having a leftest agenda bias.(The NBA doesn’t get accused of Racism and then goes out and sells a team to Donald Sterling)

    It also doesn’t help when both Tor and Scalzi censor almost anyone with differing opinions on their sites(Words that has nothing to do with cussing or ____shaming)

    Nor does it help when Tor creates a Equality PC Panel and it has Hurley along with openly racist Daniel Jose Older and others with more then a few questionable actions that could be called bigoted yet there they are, all together looking down there noses at the field and choosing to pretend they are better.

    It doesn’t help that people make incredibly big accusations and do so knowing they are protected from being considered one of the bad guys/gals(because everyone knows who the demons already are and they are not the enlightened tolerant left wingers which make up the majority of the field)

    I know all this because I was one of them(Reader that is).

    Now after years of this crap I want to tell both sides to go F’ yourselfs.

    Signed
    A fan of good fiction, not bad politics

    P.S. A lot of biting the hand that feeds is going on, and my last sentence is precisely why it’s harmful..

    ….
    There is definitely part of the Mao/Don’t trust anyone over 30 type bigotry going on. It’s to easy to spot to turn a blind eye to it while pretending to be a writer looking for insight.

  60. @Snowcrash @Chupik:

    If that’s a direct quote, then I don’t *think* it’s mine. Might be something I wrote and forgot about, but it doesn’t sound like my basic stance.

    For the record, I’m *not* really interested in talking about who’s a hypocrite and to what extent. I *am* in favor of talking to “casual Puppies,” because I think the two camps aren’t really communicating with each other. But mostly what I want is to hear from them about the actual stories they enjoyed and how they’d like to see the Hugos work in the future.

    A substantive, constructive discussion isn’t “Let’s decide who’s right and who’s wrong”. It’s saying “I want to make the Hugo awards better in the following way.” And then people can respond, react, raise objections and suggestions and quibbles.

    I dunno; that sounds to me like a lot more fun than what we’ve been doing so far 😛

  61. People are forgetting Irene Gallo is not an aberration. If she were, I wouldn’t even care. Who cares about a one-off statement? That was not a one-off statement but part of a repeated pattern, and that pattern is part of an ideological paranoia. Are people forgetting about the GenCon is racist cuz lots of white people post?

    Try listening to the Tor Justin Landon podcast with N. K. Jemisin and Kate Elliot. All three have been repeated sources of idiot remarks about white people and the two gals didn’t disappoint. Liz Bourke is routinely hostile towards men and whites in her posts at Tor and Beth Meacham doesn’t hesitate to delete and ban to back her up.

    Imagine if all that hostility were about blacks or Jews and you begin to understand how hateful and just plain weird it is to do stuff like that.

    So GRRM wants us all to be nice and claims SP started the name-calling. My attitude is about the thousandth time I heard the term “white privilege” and then was linked to some feminist band with a song called “Mansplaining” the word “fuck” starts to bubble up in one’s throat pretty easily, especially when the people doing that stuff delete your responses as if you’re some child who doesn’t “get it.”

    There’s name-calling and then there’s flat out racial and sexual slurs from an ideology that has paper-thin rules for not using them as long as you’re not a white man. In this stupid ideology I can be a homophobe as easily as I can never be a heterophobe. What moron created that rule? Why should I have to listen to morons at 770 blather on about homophobic comments while they pretend Tor bloggers who use terms like “cis-scum” or award-winning SF authors using “cis white dude” in the sense they are clearly thought of as scum get completely ignored or are said to be out of context quotes? How out of context can 10,000 comments be that all sound like they came from the same parrot?

    Tor needs more than a firing, they need a house-cleaning and the SFWA, WorldCon and their daffy feminists have shown us how and why, they just didn’t include themselves. Well, consider us a reminder. This is SFF, not get whitey. We didn’t in any way start this and now that we’re responding in kind it’s suddenly wrong. Well that horse left the barn a long time ago. Stop with the racial and sexual slurs and you might find people don’t call you a racist man-hating fuck.

  62. @Standback sorry bout that, I’ll look for the actual quote later, it does sound familiar

  63. Just a heads up: the Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t monitor or quote fast-food menus or conversations about whether Dune is SF or fantasy. They monitor hate speech and they have a definition of what that is. You can’t be quoted if you don’t use hate speech. Once one actually has a definition of hate speech you can’t make a comment hate speech that’s not nor ignore one that is. It’s simply a matter of making that definition.

    That is the one thing SJWs not only refuse to do but to even discuss.

    A funny thing coming from an ideology which claims its social justice crusade in fundamentally built on fighting hate speech and racial and sexual defamation. Turn’s out “hate speech” under SJW rules is a straight white male-only water fountain.

    Can you say “con game”?

  64. When you send your emails don’t forget to point out that while Tor’s editors found time to play with themselves about white men, other editors came into Tor’s backyard and stole Harry, Katniss and Bella right out from under their big-brains. That easily cost Tor tens of millions of dollars. While an editor may have the skill to write “Didn’t need the user icon to know you’re white and male” or spot white privilege from 500 yards, they self-evidently don’t have the skill to do their jobs.

    Being an editor also involves being hooked up with the right people in the film and TV industry. It involves being able to spot and develop talent. That is not a thing that happens only during working hours but involves dinners and reaching out to writers. You can’t do that when you’re Capt Disemvowel hunting the Great White Male or on Facebook defending idiotic feminist racists. Forget the racist and sexist witchhunts, Tor should clean house for two decades of crass incompetence for allowing lightning bolt best-sellers and movie franchises slip through their fingers.

    Any fool can spot a best-seller on the best-sellers lists or read about how much money a movie took in. An editor’s job is to be on the secret and professional talent-hunting other side of that. Dead weight is dead weight. I’d imagine the words Katniss, Bella and Harry are curse words at Tor. They remind one of one’s own failures.

    Being an editor in the true sense of the term is a collaborative act of producing art, not crossing “T’s.” John Campbell didn’t just read slush, he was the manager of a team that produced art, and Campbell created that team. He wasn’t off in his spare time writing letters to Ladies Home Journal about staying the hell out of bass fishing.

    When your claim to fame is “developing” Scalzi or Kowal it’s pretty clear your hand isn’t exactly on the pulse of the nation. You’ll notice one common denominator about Harry, Katniss and Bella: there is no hatred of their audience.

    There is no stuff about girls are privileged morons who live a life of unconscious oppressive ease just as like the fantastically stupid and unrealistic body shapes of the Barbie dolls stupid stupid girls play with while poor black girl’s dolls don’t have afros.

  65. “A substantive, constructive discussion isn’t “Let’s decide who’s right and who’s wrong”. It’s saying “I want to make the Hugo awards better in the following way.” And then people can respond, react, raise objections and suggestions and quibbles.”

    Simple. Leave the nominating rules alone and expand the electorate by a factor of five through raising awareness of the award.

  66. @Chupik

    The only previous citation for that quote of yours from 8:42 pm is well, you, in a previous post in Brad’s comments, which I was also in. Nothing similar shows up in file770, even limiting to fairly unusual terms (ie “pig in a poke”). You sure it was File770?

  67. Here’s the list of names from Glyer’s last 5 roundups and which fit a pattern from the very beginning. Anyone notice what’s missing?

    Andrew Hickey, The G, Brad R. Torgersen, Dave Freer, Chris Van Trump, Cedar Sanderson, L. Jagi Lamplighter, Joe Vasicek, Peter Grant, Amanda S. Green, Keri Sperring, Natalie Luhrs, Maureen Eichner, Paul Weimer, Michael A. Rothman, RedWombat, Camestros Felapton, Spacefaring Kitten, Lis Carey, Steve Davidson

    Brad R. Torgersen, George R.R. Martin, MD Laclan, Scott Alexander, Peter Grant, Vox Day, John C. Wright, Sarah A. Hoyt, J. A. Micheline, Ray Blank, Spacefaring Kitten, Mark Ciocco, Lis Carey, Russell Blackford, Rebekah Golden, Bonnie McDaniel

    Matthew Foster, Gray Rinehart, Gary McGath, Allum Bokhari, Vox Day, Barry Deutsch, Adam-Troy Castro, A (W) Hendry, Tom Knighton, Eric Flint, George R.R. Martin, Lis Carey, Spacefaring Kitten, Russell Blackford and Ken Richards.

    David Gerrold, Tom Knighton, Rand Simberg, Phil Sandifer, Abi Sutherland, Doctor Science, Edward Trimnell, Jenn Armistead, Lela E. Buis, Peter Grant, Sarah A. Hoyt, Natalie Luhrs. Robert Sharp, Lis Carey and Lou J. Berger

    Adam Troy-Castero, Steven Saus, Jim C. Hines, Moshe Feder, Vox Day, Larry Correia, Greg Machlin, J. C. Carlton, Tom Knighton, K. Tempest Bradford, Brenna Clarke Gray, Saumya Arya Haas, Simon Bucher-Jones, Lela E. Buis, Sean Struck, Heather Allen and Tqwana Brown, Lou Antonelli, Eric Flint, Lis Carey, Ferrett Steinmetz, Martin Wisse, Peter Grant, Laura “Tegan” Gjovaag, James Schardt, Patrick May, Charlotte Ashley, and Kate Paulk

    Let’s include only the names of the people involved in the original race-gender-privilege social justice movement that caused all this in the first place:

    Keri Sperring, Natalie Luhrs, Paul Weimer, Jim Hines, K. Tempest Bradford.

    That’s it; Hines and Bradford are key figures. Only 2 of the 5 are writers, neither with core awards status; one less unknown than the other. The others are 3 nobodies from nowhere with virtually no institutional presence or clout, and all lumped into one roundup save Luhrs repeated in another. Though passionate feminists, the 3 are at the bottom rung of the movement. The 3 are the proles, the infantry. Only 1 of the five is an actual blogger who always writes posts (not links roundups) and regularly.

    I suspect Glyer’s doing this out of ignorance, but the effect is the same: a distorted view of real events. It’s like reading about Okinawa as the beginning of the Pacific War. The comments reflect the same thing: a lack of awareness of what caused this.

    That’s how you get ignorant quotes from “The G” about “finding the majority of victimization claims empirically bogus” when it comes to SP. In fact thousands of quotes are as empirical as it gets when presenting such a case. Who the hell is “The G”?

    But you may ask, “Isn’t the SP represented?” Yes they are, but they are an authorial presence and are responding as authors being attacked, not as a journalistic presence. I don’t know but I’m guessing they have other interests than in reading Jacques Derrida, Robin Morgan and Judith Butler. But that’s also a weakness.

    On the Gamergate side they were lucky to have actors who responded as journalists do and did research. They were not game developers. GG has Milo (an actual journalist) Sargon of Akkad, Mercedes Carrera and Liana Kerzner, among others.

    These people knew exactly what they were up against and went for the throat. Both Milo and Sargon attack feminists daily. It was slightly easier for them though. Anita Sarkeesian predates Gamergate by more than 2 years. Both Sarkeesian and her co-writer Jonathan McIntosh are extremely upfront about their ideology. You’re not seeing it through a hazy scrim of Scalzi, Gould and Hines which unintentionally acts as a smokescreen. The comments of those 3 only make sense with research. Ancillary Justice only makes sense with research, and people still don’t understand my remarks. Sarkeesian provides her own research, Leckie doesn’t – just the hostility about “cis white dudes” in her non-fiction remarks and the genderblind tip of the iceberg in her fiction.

    With Sarkeesian you are going directly to the source because Sarkeesian explains. With Kameron Hurley you just get the fear and hostility, not the ideology, which itself is revealing. Fear, supremacy and hostility precede the creation of radical feminism. It is the cart before the horse, an ideology retro-constructed with fake European intellectualism to reconcile a hatred already present as “anti-oppression.” And many have bought into that hook, line and sinker as “social justice.” I find the idea anyone thinks of N. K. Jemisin as representing social justice as mindboggling, yet they do. SJWs in fact look up to that woman, and Hurley and Leckie.

    The truth is you cannot attack an enemy where it isn’t. You can’t intercept an enemy if you don’t know which city it will attack. You can’t defend yourselves against liberals, Marxists, Leftists and what have you. You end up bombing everything, including neutrals and even friendlies. Flint is supposedly a Marxist – he’s not part of this problem, neither is GRRM. The fact they’re attacked by both sides shows as much. GRRM is fending off SP and feminists. The fact GRRM isn’t attacking feminists is for the same reason as what happened to Malzberg/Resnick: they never knew what hit them.

    GRRM is staying in his comfort zone – SFF – and attacking from that perspective. The problem is that zone has been redefined by what he still doesn’t understand as what is hitting him on the other side: feminists. They’re already inside the walls of his comfort zone and so GRRM is defending himself against SP while the SP movement is in principle defending him. Even the great success of GRRM and HBO can be swarmed and affect future projects, and feminists aren’t done with them yet.

  68. @Nathan: I agree that the nominating pool needs to grow; a popular award that gets nominees on the ballots on the strength of just a few dozen votes is very vulnerable to even minor biases and spikes of influence.

    Since encouraging more people to nominate is basically the same as encouraging people to read more in the genre, to be more invested and involved, the direction of getting more nominators is all win. And it looks like we are seeing a healthy uptick in nominations – from 483 in 2008 to 2122 this year is very respectable.

    My biggest concern with increasing the nominating pool, though, is that I think it’s difficult to bring new nominators aboard. I know that I’ve never been interested in nominating, because it’s pretty rare for me to have read much eligible material by the end of the nomination period. I read plenty in 2014, but I don’t think I read any novels published in 2014 – let alone one I’d plump for the Hugo. Let alone five. I subscribe to F&SF, and I love the heck out of it, but how many novellas does that realistically give me? Probably six in any given year? Is that going to be my whole range of choices?

    So I’ve already had the impression that the Hugos skew, not only to avid readers, but to avid readers who are very very current; who make an effort to at least sample a range of material right off the presses.

    It’s recently been put to me that there’s a lot of value in ignoring that impression. That if I’ve read one novel I loved, or one story, it’s worth nominating even just the one – because that’ll accumulate with everybody else’s nominations. That makes a lot of sense to me, and I think I’ll make the effort to nominate for 2015.

    But my concern with that is that the field is HUGE. If you have some hardcore devotees who read a wide range, it makes sense to me that some of them will converge on the same pieces. If we bring in a bunch of more casual fans, each one of them only voting for a small handful from their own favorite area of the genre, I’m worried that they’re less likely to cluster and converge.

    And under the current nomination system, that means if you get 1000 new nominating members, and they each nominate something different, the results will be exactly the same as they were before you got the new members.

    So I’m not really sure what to do about that. More members and more interest is a start, but I’m not sure it gets us as far as we’d like.

  69. “… being told that our much cherished awards were an affirmative action movement, and we weren’t REALLY creating anything worthwhile, it was all our glittery hoo-has and correct social justicey-ness…” – Red Wombat

    Thank you for that spot on analysis. In SJW-land, their attempts at satire are always a reflection of what they actually do. That’s why no SJW can write a 1984 or Fahrenheit 451 and why they self-evidently don’t produce such work. An SJW dystopia would be a utopia.

    Here’s another from Steve Davidson at Unaware Stories:

    http://amazingstoriesmag.com/2015/06/fandom-enters-the-mccarthy-era/

    That’s not satire. That’s confirmation.

    Milo sarcastically predicted “transblack” before it happened. That’s not only actual satire but reveals how satire is a mechanism for conveying truth. SJWs can’t do that. I’ve read their sad sack satires and they can’t do it. A movement that thinks men are heterosexual oppressors out of pre-history and the cure is “performative” chanting can’t satirize jack shit. SJWs ARE satire. Even The Onion has trouble keeping ahead of SJW reality.

  70. So basically, he’s not answering the question. He’s talking his way around it. Typical.

  71. @Nathan

    That’s pretty much what GRRM is advocating. He’s opposed to a rules change and has even asked Kate Paulk how the SP4 slate will be formed. He’s also opposed to the No Award nuclear option this year. My big fear about SP4 is that next year there will be “counter slates”, and the whole nominations process is just going to turn into one big arms race. I have no illusions about the current voting system being perfect, but I think it’s probably the best system possible. But I’m not keen on watching two (or more) groups scream at each other for the next several years. I keep hoping for a “Can’t we all just get along?” moment, but I don’t really see one happening.

  72. I’m fine with there being other slates. Dozens of them would be great. I don’t think that expecting us to ‘get along’ is exceptionally valid anymore, because ‘getting along’ is what got is to the point where we ended up doing this stuff in the first place.

  73. “Just write the best stories you can. The rest will take care of itself.” – GRRM

    Not at the Hugos, Nebulas and Tiptrees, George. To ride that donkey you have to abandon ship like Peter Hamilton did where he Tweets once a month in order to avoid the roving Eye of Sarkeesian. Otherwise you have to go transgender and transblack cuz that’s where the pre-ordained “wonderful” and “brilliant” is. It helps if you write Nebula nominated stories like “Wakulla Springs” and Hild. There’s no SFF but there is Jim Crow and lesbianism. If you sliced off the rape and dialed up the lesbianism there would be joy in Westeros. It’s still not too late to have Dany experience genderblindness or Jon Snow wake up gay. And given Tyrion’s sex-addiction I think if you isolate him as a rower on an all-male slave ship love will win out.

    But make sure you call the slaves something else, cuz it’s kinda triggery if you know what I mean. And make sure they’re white, cuz balance, George, balance. Plus if they were set free by a PoC woman that would earn rewards points you can cash in nowhere because of your privilege.

    The only thing I’ve learned from reading GRRM at his House without Calendars is we should all start his series with Book 4, cuz that’s when it all begins. It won’t make any more sense than GRRM’s stance on SP but being a neo-Nazi I am prone to following orders. Plus be nice.

  74. Man, I’d love to see GRRM starting out as an author in say, 2005. Today, suddenly the heavens would part and repeated attacks on his genderphobia, misogyny, privilege, white saviorism, colonial gaze, perpetuating colonial tropes, anti-PoC medieval world, rape-timer clock, racist Tolkienesque “easterlings,” patriarchal bias, squatting on the “marginalized,” excessive use of Eurocentrism, Orientalizing the “other,” lack of diversity and female “agency,” damsels in distress, “ableisms,” lack of reclamation of erased histories and post-colonial queer identity and general white, cis, straight, male, Anglophone, western experience would probably relegate his work to a dollar store if he stayed in core fandom.

  75. @Draven:

    I’m fine with there being other slates. Dozens of them would be great.

    Well, the problem with slates is, whichever slate has the largest following takes all.
    I think you’re saying you’d want dozens of slates so that you could pick the one you agreed with most, so you’d have a real choice. So that different factions could highlight different works, and whoever’s most attractive and persuasive will make the final ballot.

    Which is the reasoning behind recommendation lists and campaigning to begin with, I think.

    But if we’re talking about full slates, then I don’t think that’s going to lead to any kind of real choice.

    Let’s say you’ve got three slates, A, B, and C. You love A. B is OK. You absolutely hate C.
    But there’s a lot of buzz around slate C, and maybe the C faction has won the last year or so.
    So if you vote A, which you love, then C will probably win.
    But if you vote B, then maybe A and B together will be strong enough to overcome C.
    So you wind up voting for a bunch of OK stories that you don’t particularly like.
    …That kind of sucks :-/ And it doesn’t result in better books and stories being nominated. In fact, even when there’s widespread enthusiasm for a certain piece, nobody can guarantee that piece will be chosen for a slate, and nobody can guarantee it’ll be chosen for a strategically expedient slate – which winds up the same as not choosing it at all.

    Since slates reduce the nomination process to all-or-nothing if they’re widely adopted, I don’t think we’re ever going to see a dozen slates. You’ll see two or three, with maybe a few scrappy also-rans tagging along.

  76. snowcrash: Yes, the quote was from File 770. Yes, I guess I should have included the name of the person who posted it. This conversation is going in circles, slowly.

  77. julieapascal: “This was an extremely mild, normal, corporate type statement… and people went farking NUTS.

    It does seem that Gallo’s supporters WANT Tor to have her opinion as policy.”

    Exactly. Did they really expect that Doherty would come out and say “Oh yeah, we publish crap and the Sad Puppy Nazis can suck it!” in response? As I said before, they don’t see anything wrong with behaving like that.

    Fortunately, some people do see what’s wrong with that.

  78. Let’s say you’ve got three slates, A, B, and C. You love A. B is OK. You absolutely hate C.
    But there’s a lot of buzz around slate C, and maybe the C faction has won the last year or so.
    So if you vote A, which you love, then C will probably win. But if you vote B, then maybe A and B together will be strong enough to overcome C.

    Big question here: Is the winner supposed to be the most liked work to make it through the nomination process, or the least hated? When voting for the best work, why would you make your decision on which work you liked the least? I’m not fond of Dr. Who as a TV series, and I believe that Dr. Who winning year after year is indicative of a flaw in the process, but that doesn’t mean that any individual Hugo win by Dr. Who was unearned, nor would I cast my vote to deny Dr. Who a Hugo if it meant voting for a work I didn’t think was the best. That people consider voting based on who they think shouldn’t win rather than who they think should is indicative of a massive problem with the process.

    The other assumption here is that the recommendation slates are chosen strategically and politically, rather than on the basis of which books the recommender liked. What are the odds that the three people making recommendations chose completely different books to recommend? And why assume people vote strict slates? There have to be some people that tend to agree with the recommendations in Slate A that think work 1 on recommendation Slate B is better than work 5 on Slate A and vote accordingly.

  79. Let’s say you’ve got three slates, A, B, and C. You love A. B is OK. You absolutely hate C.
    But there’s a lot of buzz around slate C, and maybe the C faction has won the last year or so.
    So if you vote A, which you love, then C will probably win.
    But if you vote B, then maybe A and B together will be strong enough to overcome C.

    I wonder, Standback, why you think that one would be obligated to vote for a slate as a whole, rather than picking and choosing the works from each slate that one thinks are best.

    You know: some from slate A, some from slate B, some from slate C. It’s not as thought the slates are set menus from a restaurant.

  80. I have no illusions about the current voting system being perfect, but I think it’s probably the best system possible. But I’m not keen on watching two (or more) groups scream at each other for the next several years. I keep hoping for a “Can’t we all just get along?” moment, but I don’t really see one happening.

    In order to get to a “Can’t we all just get along?” moment, two questions need to be asked about each side: “What do you see happening if the other side wins?” and “What would you seek to gain from a compromise, and what would you be willing to offer to get it?”, and the answers need to address both the readers/consumers and authors/creators.

    For me, on the Sad Puppies side, the answer to the first question is a return to the pre-Puppies status quo, where I as a reader and consumer felt increasingly disconnected from what was presented as mainstream science fiction, where the Hugo was useless as to it’s intended purpose. By putting politics before quality, mainstream Science Fiction had almost completely lost me. I can’t speak for the authors on the Sad Puppies side, but feeling like their careers were at risk for having the wrong opinion and feeling that they were denied recognition because of their politics, not the quality of their work. The second question is a lot harder to answer, because any thing is better than the current situation and being on the outside I (and the Sad Puppies as a whole) don’t have much to offer. The best I can say is that increasing the quality as measured by the enjoyability of the works is the ultimate goal, and to that end I don’t expect books I enjoy to win every year, and that I intend to keep the politics of a work from being a bias in either direction as much as possible.

    I can’t answer for the Social Justice side. Based on their quotes, they seem to expect some fictional dystopian system where anything that is to the left of Reagan gets blacklisted and women are relegated to the Romance Novel kitchen. Given that from my perspective they have everything, any compromise involves them giving something up for no return other than to minimize the losses over a scenario where the Sad Puppies triumph in a contest of popularity and end up taking everything.

  81. @Civilis @Feather Blade:
    Well, I’m operating under the basic assumption that when we’re talking about “slates,” what we mean is “a list of nominations that a large group of voters ‘votes straight’ on,” or at very least “a list that a large group of voters rally around, and vote pretty much directly from it with only minor variations.”

    That’s how I’ve always understood the phrase “slate.” If you see a slate as simply a recommendation list – if you make the basic assumption that there’s no significant group of people voting “straight-ticket” out of support for the slate’s overall cause, rather than each of its individual candidates – then, yes, it’s just a recommendation list, and none of my A-B-C-ing need apply. Is that what you’re saying?

    Civilis, you wrote:

    Big question here: Is the winner supposed to be the most liked work to make it through the nomination process, or the least hated? When voting for the best work, why would you make your decision on which work you liked the least?

    I’m in full agreement with you – that’s exactly how I wouldn’t want voting to look.

    But I was writing with the straight-ticket definition of slates in mind. I think you’ll agree that in the case where straight-ticket slates become prevalent, the mere existence of successful straight-ticket slate C basically means it’s practically impossible to oppose slate C except with an equally popular counter-slate. In that case, if A is the weaker between slates A and B, then voting for A would basically be throwing your vote away. Voting B would mean a chance at getting in your second-favorite slate. Again – all this is if we’re talking about straight-ticket slates.

    You had some other points and questions as well, but I guess we should get the basic definitions straightened out first 🙂

  82. @standback, like you I’m usually not reading eligible stories in the eligibility period. Most of what I read has been recommended to me, and I don’t just read SF/F. Most of what I read is more than a couple of years old because of that.

  83. What I love about SJWs is how often they claim to be the portal through which all straight white males must go through before they can depict anything in their fiction or move about the social arena.

    Over in tech, insane feminist Shanley Kane literally claims any SWM must submit to her moral ethos before doing anything in tech. Plus there’s this today:

    “Shanley ‏@shanley Feb 6 I DO NOT WANT THE VCS to ‘invest’. i want them to hand over millions of dollars with no strings attached, no ownership and no influence.”

    Requires Hate claimed no white person could write about Thailand or E. Asia in general without taking into account her racially enhanced analysis. Even getting a minor historic detail wrong was “racist.”

    SJWs claim we must be careful with Sansa Stark and the Black Widow on screen. Men? Who cares?

    And I don’t know how many nutjob SJWs are giving “writing the other” advice for whites.

    What I love about that is these are the very people who claim SWM behave like that as a group. The only problem is there has never been an organized institutionalized ideology in SFF which addresses violence against men vs. women. There has never been a crowd of male Anita Sarkeesians in SFF constituting SFF’s consensus orthodoxy. You don’t see any white folks telling the “marginalized” to be careful about writing about whites or the West or accusing them of “cultural appropriation.” How do you not only get that racist and sexist but not be aware you are essentially warning about your own bigotry?

    SJWs are the creepiest and stupidest people who’ve ever entered SFF. Everything they say doesn’t stand even a few seconds of analysis. I love the way so many people at 770 are clapping over Martin’s remarks. They’re not necessarily SJWs but they’re basically clapping over Martin correctly stating we shouldn’t have invaded Okinawa out of nowhere. The problem is they are operating in an alternate world. 770’s clod-puller’s are as routinely unaware of what’s happening as are Flint and Martin. Of course that means nothing remotely like a solution is being offered because these folks are convinced that what they know is what there is to know. How they actually learn anything must be by random chance.

    PULL OUT OF OKINAWA SAD PUPPIES!!! WHAT CABAL OF PHANTOM AIRCRAFT CARRIERS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!! HAHAHAAH!

    We’re talking about 10,000 quotes with racist comments like “white privilege” you morons. You not having read those quotes is not the same thing as we haven’t. People like L. Resnick will wake up the day 2 lit-org presidents or even The Guardian or EW starts calling her a gentile-hater or the Unabomber cuz she pushed back against anti-Semitic remarks about “Jewish privilege.” I know that’s a complex thought but wake the fuck up. “First they came for…” – remember? Exactly how do you want me to decide next time – using the prejudice+power theory of Anita Sarkeesian? “First they came for…” invokes the idea of principle over identity. Right now SJWs are on the wrong side of that one. That’s no surprise since they’re fronting for a pack of yowling racist gender feminists.

    This is why we have SP. We are not bigots but pushing back against bigots and we have time-honored ways of defining that word, not racist merry-go-round definitions where whites are never wrong. SJWs don’t understand that language. So what? It’s only the language of your own Constitution and the basis of all law.

  84. That’s how I’ve always understood the phrase “slate.” If you see a slate as simply a recommendation list – if you make the basic assumption that there’s no significant group of people voting “straight-ticket” out of support for the slate’s overall cause, rather than each of its individual candidates – then, yes, it’s just a recommendation list, and none of my A-B-C-ing need apply. Is that what you’re saying?

    Are there some people that voted for works just because they were on the slate? Almost certainly. How many was it? We have no way of knowing. Based on feedback here, almost no one that claims to have been inspired by Brad’s recommendation list to register to vote voted straight slate.

    From my response in the previous thread: You can’t separate the people that voted because they seriously liked the books from people that voted because they recognized the name on the ballot (or whatever other reason people have for voting). Likewise, you can’t separate the people that vote in real world elections because they understand the issues and studied the candidates from those that vote for a political party or because they like the candidate’s wife’s hair. Trying to do so is unfair to all the voters.

    Someone in that thread also said this, specifically referring to allegations of back-room dealmaking pre-Sad Puppies: “Hugo nominations and voting is by secret ballot, so there is no reason to think voters were not expressing their true opinions” I don’t see that that has changed.

  85. Its interesting to note that 765 confirmed email writers wrote Tor and MacMillan telling them they weren’t bots. That’s over two thousand separate emails.

    That’s pretty small compared to some letter writing campaigns in the past, but this is spur of the moment, strictly online, with the word only having a day to get out.

    Confirmed numbers at Vox Popoli, third thread down.

  86. Civilis you will never have a solution to this until SJWs address their own ideology in an upfront manner using principles we can all agree on. Sitting with crossed elbows saying we are wrong when you don’t even have a definition of “wrong” and we are offering that solution – even if SJWs make it themselves as long as it’s for everyone – will not make us go away.

    All this talk of slates is as meaningless as talking about Martin Luther King’s shirt size. We already have a thing like law and rules; what is so mysterious about that process? Have you noticed anyone even giving an inch? Nope. That’s because SJWs have thrown rulers right out the window. What the hell’s an “inch”? No one knows anymore. No one knows that in a community of educated writers in a Constitutional human rights-based nation in the 21st century. That floors me. Apparently we are all monkeys now.

    This impasse will not end until someone goes out and fetches that ruler. “E plebneesta, dudebro.”

  87. Civilis you will never have a solution to this until SJWs address their own ideology in an upfront manner using principles we can all agree on. Sitting with crossed elbows saying we are wrong when you don’t even have a definition of “wrong” and we are offering that solution – even if SJWs make it themselves as long as it’s for everyone – will not make us go away.

    And part of that is making clear to the people here who are still open to persuasion what our case is. Further, neither side is monolithic. ‘People concerned about Social Justice’ is a group, meaning an aggregate collection of individuals with different beliefs, values, and opinions. We can talk about them as a group for discussion purposes, and it’s often useful to do so. It takes all kinds to make our crusade to make science fiction about enjoyment, not politics, a success. Please keep doing your part.

    Part of what I’m doing is to illustrate why a compromise isn’t possible, and it’s not because of anything from the Sad Puppy side. The Social Justice activists that come aren’t here to understand what we want, which is necessary for a compromise. They’re here to force us to defend our actions and justify their own actions. That’s why pressure on Ms. Gallo is beyond the pale, but the people the Social Justice warriors have pressured out of a job are never mentioned. They can’t or won’t defend their actions, so they attack.

  88. @Civilis:

    Are there some people that voted for works just because they were on the slate? Almost certainly. How many was it? We have no way of knowing.

    True. We’ll have a better guess after the awards, when we have actual nomination data. But even then, I don’t know how fine-grained our information will be, and certainly we won’t know each member’s motivation.

    But I’ll bring you back to the point that any substantial number of voters who are voting straight-ticket, or just clustering near enough to a single slate, are enough to have a major effect on the results. It doesn’t need to be all, or even most. The same is true of a “plain” recommendation list, if enough people vote straight-ticket on that. The moment a dominant bloc is established, they effectively have total control over the nomination results, unless (A) they’re opposed by a bigger bloc, or (B) there are enough non-bloc nominators to overcome the bloc vote sheerly by natural, uncoordinated clustering. (If the clustering is coordinated, then they’re an opposing bloc, and we’re back to (A)).

    And, honestly, this is true whatever the bloc’s motivation is. It doesn’t matter if it’s political partisanship, or fannish following, or so much “genetic drift” that the results are always a given, or because by incredible luck two hundred peoplejust happens to keep liking exactly the same thing. The moment the bloc is there, well, it’s there, and its control is pretty much absolute.

    Which brings me back to the original post I was responding to, with the ideal of dozens of slates.
    If @Draven’s intention was “dozens of recommendation lists,” then yes, I definitely want that! 🙂 As far as I’m concerned, recommendation lists are my favorite part of the Hugos – I love checking out what bloggers I like and critics I respect have to point out to me, and I’ve read a lot of fantastic stories that way I’d never have found on my own. Unsurprisingly, I usually find more to enjoy in the recommendation lists than in the actual Hugo nominees – because one is recommendations from people whose taste is pretty close to my taste, and the other is the processed result of a thousand nominations by people I don’t know from Adam. I am totally behind recommendation lists; I think there’s no better tool to get awesome material in front of readers.

    But if he means slates as in “established factions, each with a significant number of straight-ticket voters, and every year a different slate/faction will take the ballot” – well, setting aside the point that I’m not sure I agree that would be an improvement, I just don’t think it’s realistic. If there’s any bloc-establishing going on, then small factions will naturally lose out to the major ones, until there will be 2 or 3 of any significance. I have a hard time imagining it going any other way.

  89. -Standback

    More recommendation lists would be a good thing, since sometimes, readers may not be aware that a book they enjoyed and feel is Hugo worthy can be nominated or voted for. If I’d had the money to nominate I would have nominated Matthew Reilly’s The Great Zoo of China as my top pick for novels, as it is a book of similar type to the MCU entries into the dramatic presentation – long form.

  90. Standback, thank you for coming here and engaging without trolling. It’s good to see.

    I would like to foreground a statement you made, because I think it indicates a false assumption that may contribute to the conflict:
    encouraging more people to nominate is basically the same as encouraging people to read more in the genre […] If we bring in a bunch of more casual fans, each one of them only voting for a small handful from their own favorite area of the genre, I’m worried that they’re less likely to cluster and converge.

    The assumption here is that people other than those who traditionally have nominated and voted for the Hugos are “causal fans” who don’t read much SF. I’m not sure where you’re getting this idea, but I don’t believe it’s correct. I think the belief that there are two kinds of SF fans – “casual fans” who don’t know much about the genre, and “trufans” who go to cons regularly, participate in “fannish activities”, and vote on the Hugos – is dead wrong.

    I’ve been reading science fiction for almost half a century. I have never been to a con or participated in a “fannish activity” in my life. All I’ve done is read it and talk about it with other people. Does that make me a “casual fan” whose participation will damage the Hugos due to my supposed limited perspective? I don’t think this can be supported.

    Indeed, the con-goers group may very well have a more limited perspective themselves, if their primary interest is social and professional rather than literary. Additionally, in any group that small, insularity will rear its head, and certain works and subgenres will be fashionable and others won’t – and this will certainly affect what is nominated and what wins as long as that small group is doing the nominating and voting. Indeed, the fact – and I think it is a fact – that this has happened to the Hugos was the impetus for the Sad Puppies movement to begin with. SF fans with deep roots in the genre and wide exposure to it perceived that the awards were getting more and more out of sync with what they saw as high-quality SF.

    Does this sound reasonable?

  91. But I’ll bring you back to the point that any substantial number of voters who are voting straight-ticket, or just clustering near enough to a single slate, are enough to have a major effect on the results. It doesn’t need to be all, or even most. The same is true of a “plain” recommendation list, if enough people vote straight-ticket on that. The moment a dominant bloc is established, they effectively have total control over the nomination results, unless (A) they’re opposed by a bigger bloc, or (B) there are enough non-bloc nominators to overcome the bloc vote sheerly by natural, uncoordinated clustering. (If the clustering is coordinated, then they’re an opposing bloc, and we’re back to (A)).

    If the people nominating were sincerely committed to searching out recommendations (even slate recommendation slates), reading them with an open mind, nominating the ones they thought the best, reading the nominated works they missed in the nominations process with an open mind, then voting fairly and honestly, the presence or absence of recommendation slates would have no impact. If the people nominating are not sincerely committed to all that, the slates will have an impact, but the outcome will be messed up even without the slates. Slates make a political (in a non-ideological sense) contest worse, but if the vote for best work is a political contest, something’s already wrong.

    But if he means slates as in “established factions, each with a significant number of straight-ticket voters, and every year a different slate/faction will take the ballot” – well, setting aside the point that I’m not sure I agree that would be an improvement, I just don’t think it’s realistic. If there’s any bloc-establishing going on, then small factions will naturally lose out to the major ones, until there will be 2 or 3 of any significance. I have a hard time imagining it going any other way.

    I would generally agree with you but I see the problem as the factionalization, not the slates. If you come down to the final vote and say ‘I’m going to vote for this guy because I like his ideology even though another work was better’, you’re already doing it wrong.

  92. Stadback, if I could see one change in the rules it would be to expand eligibility for new work to two or possibly three years. Two for sure.

    I see no real useful purpose for any other changes because it’s impossible to force people not to talk to each other.

    You see competition between sides for the triumph of their own side… Will anti Puppies really hang so tightly to being anti Puppies? So far I admit that the “no award them all” faction seems to be. Meanwhile anyone who might be perceived as a sad puppy leader is encouraging everyone to vote for what they think is best which is probably going to be something not on Brads list.

    The campaign against puppy sadness next year will be run by Kate. Meaning that the final version of the list, in whatever form it takes and however it is compiled will be curated by her alone. People didn’t vote lock step with Brad or Larry… You think they’ll blindly follow Kate? Who the heck is Kate?

    A more likely scenario is one where competing factions try to out do each other at discovering some one new and those voting on nominations freely cross over. Unless you think your side will continue to refuse to fairly consider puppy noms.? For how long?

  93. “Correia’s original point has not been proven at all. Just the reverse.

    “What has been proven is that if you act like an asshole, people will treat you like an asshole. You can’t barge into the chess club, knock over all the boards, scatter the pieces, and expect to be given trophies and welcomed.” – GRRM

    Really? Tell that to N. K. (“racist as fuck”) Jemisin and her 4 Nebula nominations.

    I’m trying to imagine me going into rap culture, calling them a bunch of racists and winning Spirit Awards.

    Aliette de Bodard becomes five-time nominated, two-time winner of the Nebula Award and two-time nominee for the Hugo Award for being a gushing oil well of comments like “SFF is, alas, dominated by white westerners.”

    I guess George didn’t notice the guy who rhetorically asked at Salon if Game of Thrones is too white concluded that in “a culture rich in racist stereotypes and xenophobic fear-mongering,” expecting George “to remain entirely unstained by this is expecting a person to live underwater without getting wet.” Ahmed ends up with a Hugo and Nebula nod. Poor George, he’s still as stupid as Lovecraft who couldn’t help writing his ode to n-words cuz 1912.

    George has lost touch with the very award he claims such deep knowledge of. He’s defending a culture that has gone the way of the dodo.

    Until you deal with this new ideology you won’t change anything.

  94. @Civilis

    “What do you see happening if the other side wins?” This question presumes that everyone is on one “side” or the other. But I’ll give you my prediction for both “sides”. A pro-SP3 side “win” would have to be a sweep of all of the categories that have SP3 nominees. An anti-SP3 side “win” would be NONE of the SP3 nominees winning, with “No Award” taking all of the categories that only have SP3 (or RP) nominees. In either case, I would expect a fairly snarky victory dance by the winning side, and an even nastier nominations campaign next year. I don’t think that’s going to happen, though. I think that the SP3 nominees will win some categories but not others, and I think one or two categories will be “No Awarded”. In any case, I won’t be doing a snarky victory dance no matter what the outcome.

    “What would you seek to gain from a compromise, and what would you be willing to offer to get it?” My first WorldCon was last year, and I voted for the final nominees but didn’t participate in the nominations process. I didn’t get to the con for health reasons. I was not aware of SP2 or, in fact, any sort of organized campaign for any particular work. This year, I nominated a few things, and I think only a few of the long form dramatic presentations that I nominated made the final list. (I think The Bone Clocks was probably “too mainstream” for the Hugo, Red Rising was “too YA”, and The Martian turned out to be ineligible.) If I make it to the meeting, I’m going to oppose any changes to the rules regarding the nominations process. Beyond that, I’m not sure what exactly I have to offer anyone involved. I can offer a persuadable ear, but I’m only one person, and I don’t have a legion of voters that will follow my commands. I have no idea what a “compromise” would like at this point. More voices like Tom Doherty’s, I guess. Irene Gallo made an obnoxious and factually incorrect statement on her facebook page while promoting a Tor product, and Tom Doherty offered a very calm but firm statement distancing Tor from Gallo. He also gave a fairly clear rundown of the facts. (You can read his statement alone and get a pretty good idea of what’s going on with the Hugo nominations.) Gallo’s apology was a non-apology, so she did herself no favors. I don’t have a problem with a letter-writing campaign demanding something more substantial. I personally don’t think she should lose her job, but people have been fired for lesser offenses, and she really brought this on herself. I think that the “I am not a ‘bot” campaign is overkill–it was prompted by anonymous voices that supposedly belonged to Tor employees. Tor is obviously still working things out, and I’d suggest waiting to see what they do. A second campaign based on rumors about what people inside the company are saying is unlikely to change anyone’s mind.

  95. “What do you see happening if the other side wins?” This question presumes that everyone is on one “side” or the other. But I’ll give you my prediction for both “sides”. A pro-SP3 side “win” would have to be a sweep of all of the categories that have SP3 nominees. An anti-SP3 side “win” would be NONE of the SP3 nominees winning, with “No Award” taking all of the categories that only have SP3 (or RP) nominees. In either case, I would expect a fairly snarky victory dance by the winning side, and an even nastier nominations campaign next year. I don’t think that’s going to happen, though. I think that the SP3 nominees will win some categories but not others, and I think one or two categories will be “No Awarded”. In any case, I won’t be doing a snarky victory dance no matter what the outcome.

    I thank you for your in-depth answers. I also am of the opinion at this point the what we’re likely to see is a long, protracted fight, Right now of the three remotely possible scenarios: “fight continues”, “Sad Puppies give up” and “anti-Puppies give up”, “fight continues” is definitely the most likely result this year regardless of who wins the Hugos. I’m more interested in the outcome of the war, not the battle, so looking at the theoretical results of the other two scenarios. As one that seems to be independent, what do you think would be the long term results for Science Fiction if the Sad Puppies campaign wins an overwhelming victory? What do you think the results would be if the Sad Puppies campaign fails so badly no one participates next year?

  96. “ursulav
    Jun. 15th, 2015 11:26 pm (UTC)
    Re: Which way the venom flows
    Mr. Torgersen, I don’t think you know me. Up until this Puppy thing, I didn’t know you.

    “I’ve got a Hugo, as it happens. I won it in 2012, for Best Graphic Story. I’ve been a little afraid to talk about this now, because of some of your friends, but perhaps it’s time that I say something.

    “Can you understand why being told that our much cherished awards were an affirmative action movement, and we weren’t REALLY creating anything worthwhile, might not have inclined some of us kindly toward you?

    “From my point of view, ‘Torgersen’ went from a name on the Campbell ballot to a dude who had just insulted something I poured a decade of my life into. And then various other people on the Sad Puppy leadership began talking about Glittery Hoo-has, and…wow. Way to reduce a project that I sweated blood over, a project that I was very proud of, to a vagina joke.

    “Way to diminish something I worked damn hard on, to reduce it down to ‘Oh, well, 700+ pages for years of your life, that doesn’t matter, the only reason anybody could possibly be impressed with your stuff is because you’re a GIRL.’

    “Do you understand why that would upset me a little?”

    *

    “Want non-white, non-Eurocentric, fantasy that’s really fucking good?” – TheOtherTracy

    “Sofia Samatar ‏@SofiaSamatar 1h My list (which is already growing, & will have to be updated!) of #horror by non-western writers/writers of color …”

    “Retweeted by Foz Meadows Nnedi Okorafor, PhD ‏@Nnedi Feb 25 60 Black Women in Horror now on Smashwords (Free) …”

    “Retweeted by M J Locke A.C. Wise @ac_wise · Jul 11 My latest Women to Read post is at @sfsignal with @CarolineYoachim @erinmorgenstern @AlyxDellamonica & @mamohanraj …”

    “Dandy McFopperson @rosefox · 15h 15 hours ago @JonathanStrahan It was a really good year for queer and feminist SF/F.”

    “Rose Lemberg retweeted prezzey *Bogi Takács @bogiperson · Sep 29 just a reminder that i have a SF story with two #nonbinary #trans* protagonists :)… because yes.”

    “Rose Lemberg retweeted Daniel Fredriksson @thelovelymrfred · Sep 29 I’ve decided to start a book group celebrating queer, feminist and postcolonial SF/F. It shall be called @fabulations. RTs appreciated”

    “Bee Sriduangkaew ‏@bees_ja 6h Just cobbled this together quickly – a very incomplete list of queer SFF published in 2013 I liked! …”

    “Alex D MacFarlane ‏@foxvertebrae 7h I look forward to following it up with THE MAMMOTH BOOK OF SF STORIES BY WOMEN in 2014, which, trust me, is going to be fucking brilliant.”

    “D Franklin @D_Libris · Sep 6 Impact of my reading habits; 4 books by women in a row feels normal, 3 books by men feels weird, wrong, and abnormal. 2 by men just about ok”

    “Feminist FrequencyVerified account ‏@femfreq Really enjoyed the engaging mysteries set in compelling worlds full of people of colour found in Amanda Downum’s The Necromancer Chronicles.”

    “Aliette de Bodard retweeted Stefan Mohamed @stefmowords · 14h 14 hours ago HI TWITTER. Requesting recommendations for SF / fantasy / horror books from women / POC / LGBT writers please! TBR pile needs diversifying.”

    “Kameron Hurley retweeted Jenn Brissett @jennbrissett · 5h 5 hours ago 19 Science-Fiction And Fantasy Novels By Women Of Color You Must Read”

    “Justine Larbalestier retweeted BGD @BlackGirlDanger · 17h 17 hours ago Here for #DiversifyAgentCarter. My partner and I love the show and it needs PoC, especially WoC, for us to keep loving and supporting it!”

    “Kameron Hurley retweeted Sofia Samatar @SofiaSamatar · Dec 12 a handy how-to guide: How to Uphold White Supremacy by Focusing on Diversity and Inclusion by @kxra”

    “Mikki Kendall retweeted Marjorie Liu @marjoriemliu · 13h 13 hours ago VONA, the nation’s only multi-genre workshop for writers of color, is now open for applications”

    “Shveta Thakrar retweeted Foz Meadows @fozmeadows · 2h 2 hours ago Straight white male voices are the cultural default. Encouraging people to a) recognise this fact and b) step outside it is a positive thing”

    “Jessica Valenti retweeted Jazmine Hughes ‏@jazzedloon May 8 us again: here is the Writers of Color list. send it to friends, professors, Obama, but most of all, yr EDITORS”

    “Retweeted by Natalie Luhrs Beth Wodzinski ‏@bethwodzinski Feb 17 Today’s a great day to buy books by @maryrobinette and the other terrific women of SFF.”

    “Retweeted by P Nielsen Hayden Laurie Penny ‏@PennyRed Apr 3 Fans, say it ain’t so – every writer and every director in the upcoming Dr Who series is a man?”

    “Retweeted by Kate Elliott Léonicka @leonicka · Aug 26 Are there advocates for diversity in publishing/literature in #NewZealand and #Australia? I wanna connect!”

    “Retweeted by Kate Elliott Léonicka @leonicka · Aug 26 I want to reach the point where all editors and publishers at Frankfurt are seeking projects by marginalized writers.”

    “I was trying to de-white my reading list a little bit, and was searching for writers of color…” – SFF author Andrea Phillips

    “Malinda Lo @malindalo · May 1 #WeNeedDiverseBooks because only 10% of 2013 YA bestsellers were about characters of color”

    “Retweeted by Aliette de Bodard Tor Truslow @toritruslow · 14h SFF readers, check out @bees_ja’s timeline for recent series of tweets recommending stories featuring women & queer characters, good stuff.”

    “K Tempest Bradford retweeted Anna Hutchinson ‏@anna_verity 23h23 hours ago White dudely authors being white and dudely and gross, get out of my life.”

    “Saladin Ahmed ‏@saladinahmed 16h Here are ten of my favorite epic fantasy novels with ‘nonwestern’ settings”

    “Retweeted by Jaymee Goh Crossed Genres ‏@crossedgenres 5h We just backed @ceciliatan’s Best Bi Short Stories: Anthology of Bisexual Literary Fiction Two days left!”

  97. Hi everybody! Thanks for all the responses.

    It’s the end of the day for me and I only have a few minutes, so I’m only going to field one thing really quick –

    @jaed, I definitely wasn’t trying to say that those outside the core WorldCon community are casual fans. I was trying to describe a contrast – “avid readers who are very very current” on the one hand, and “more casual fans” on the other.

    “Avid readers who are very very current” is not your standard reader; it’s not your standard fan. It’s a very unusual reading pattern. It’s somebody devoting a ton of reading attention, not to well-reviewed books (it takes a while for reviews to filter through), not to established classics, but to keeping pace on the cutting edge. Again, just for the purpose of this illustration, the question isn’t “How many books have you read this year?” but rather “How many books have you read this year that were published in the past 12 months?” I don’t know about you, but I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of personal acquaintances of mine who might answer more than “two” to that question, and those just happen to be people for whom SF&F is part of their profession.

    It is not hard to be “more casual” than that level of current reading. I’d certainly count myself in the “more casual” camp, compared to that.

    Now, having established that –

    (A) I’m not saying everybody who nominates for the Hugos reads like that. I imagine plenty don’t.
    (B) Readers like that are valuable to the Hugos, because, well, they’re the ones with at least some familiarity with a wide range of the eligible material. They’re the ones who can compare and contrast across barriers. If the Hugos were a judged award, you’d want judges who’ve actually read a wide variety of material, so it makes a certain intuitive sense that an “ideal” Hugo voter would nominate in the same fashion, based on the same wealth of experience.
    (C) But they’re not the be-all-and-end-all of the Hugos, because the Hugo isn’t a judged award, and that isn’t it’s purpose. I would expect that “regular” fans who have saner reading preferences might have fewer nominations to contribute, because each one of them may have read less eligible material. But there should be a heck of a lot more of them, so it should balance out.
    (D) There are advantages and disadvantages to the prominence of the avid readers, their establishment as de-facto “experts.” They obviously affect the Hugo far more than the average voter, or a newcomer joining to vote. In some ways, this is good, because they’ve read widely and can give good advice to readers who share their tastes. In some ways, it re-centralizes the system around a smaller number of “experts,” and that can skew the field. Probably the best for the award and the field is to have a wide variety of these “experts,” many not only in number but also in difference of taste, and for the voting base not to cluster too strongly around any one focus. (Unfortunately, the variance between the “experts” and the clustering of the voters isn’t really under anybody’s control.)

    …ok, so that turned out not to be quick at all. I hope it was, at least, coherent 🙂
    That’ll be all from me for today, but I’ll be back in at some point tomorrow. See you then!

  98. GRRM’s tone sure has changed. Guess he needs his street cred back after Sansagate.

  99. Eventually George will figure out he’s a straight white male, although having 39 kabillion more rapes than R. E. Howard, Fritz Lieber, Tolkien, Burroughs, Moorcock, Jordan and possibly all fantasy prior to 2000 ever written isn’t exactly a gold star.

  100. I guess it’s official: he really doesn’t want to finish his series. Why else would he jumping back into a debate that cost him a month of writing the last time? Nobody but his biographer and a few SJW diehards will care about his Hugo opinion. People care if he FINISHES WHAT HE STARTED.

  101. “So I’m not really sure what to do about that. More members and more interest is a start, but I’m not sure it gets us as far as we’d like.”

    Maybe towards your aims, but the only outcome I’m interested in bringing about is a Hugo with enough of an electorate to live up to its claims of being a serious fan award. That’s it. Personally, I want to see 100k voters or more nominating. However, I’m willing to start small with 10k as an initial goal. After all, we have seen a 5x increase in the past five years, and at most one X brought about by the Puppies. However, to do that, you have to make the award matter, and, to be honest, that means getting the award out of the hands of the professionals who have organized a famine in a time of feast and into the hands of real fans.

  102. And by professional, I mean someone who draws a paycheck in trad or indie SFF pub. A real fan would be like an Olympic amateur, back when the Olympics had them. Unpaid by the industry, and a lover of the genre.

  103. @Standback

    I am far from the most fanatic reader I know. I generally buy everything that Baen publishes (via the montly bundle) and generally read them within a week or two. I’m a slow cheapskate as far as barfly’s go. I don’t buy the e-ARC releases (at $15 each) a month or so prior to the release date and finish them within hours of their release.

    Back when we had good bookstores around (B&N is rapidly dropping out of the category and isn’t convienient), I would go in every month or two and spend some serious money on books (I topped $500 a visit many times). I would only buy a few authors in hardcover, most of that was paperbacks.

    Reading like this requires that you always be on the lookout for new material.

    But I have never attended a book convention. and while i picked up a few issues of Analog or similar over the years, it’s probably less than a half dozen issues total. So I’m an ‘outsider’ as far as Woldcon goes.

    Expanding on your point D, even reading as much as I do, I’m not going to read everything. Nobody is. It’s impossible to read everything.

    So recommendations/slates are something that is needed. What works did people find interesting enough to recommend to others. The more people you have doing the recommending, the better.

  104. As opposed to people following the Locus ‘suggested reading list’ which is not no never in any way a slate, but has done the exact same thing as one for decades.

  105. @Civilis

    “As one that seems to be independent, what do you think would be the long term results for Science Fiction if the Sad Puppies campaign wins an overwhelming victory? What do you think the results would be if the Sad Puppies campaign fails so badly no one participates next year?”

    I’m honestly not sure it’s going to matter much either way. One of my big questions about the current set of nominees is, “Is there anyone who did something truly spectacular last year that got shut out of the Hugo ballot because of SP3 or RP?” The answer seems to be no. And I’m not sure how important the Hugo awards are in terms of changing the landscape, so to speak. Self-publishing lets people bypass the “gatekeepers” now, so anyone who can reach a fanbase can sell their work. I think that in the past, having an award or two would help you get a book deal. It probably still will, but if you don’t have any awards, I think you can start self-publishing and spread the word via social media. So in the grand scheme of things, I don’t think we’re going to be sitting around in 2035 talking about how much the Sad Puppies changed (or didn’t change) SF/F. It will obviously matter a lot to those who win (or don’t win) the awards, but I think SF/F as a genre will continue to keep humming along.

    The real damage, I think, is going to be to WorldCon. I wasn’t aware of all of the anger towards WorldCon before all of this started, and I just assumed that pretty much every SF/F author tried to make it there every year. As a fan, I found this idea to be exciting, because I could go to one con and see all of my favorite authors and get all of my books autographed. That’s obviously not the case, and I think it’s going to get worse over time. I think an overwhelming victory by either “side” is unlikely, but if it happens, I think the other “side” will simply not go to the con next year. If there’s a protracted battle over several years, I think a lot of people are going to start dropping out due to sheer exhaustion. And I don’t see any way out of this that doesn’t end up making the convention a lot worse for the fans.

  106. James May you are microaggressing against me with your use of Anglocentric units of measurement.

  107. @James May

    Larry Correia has been pretty open about the fact that he started the Sad Puppies out of spite. I think spite is a pretty good motivator, but GRRM point is that it doesn’t win you many friends.

  108. Even more double standards: The Sad Puppies slate was wrong because it had too many works listed to leave room for others, and also wrong because it didn’t list enough works to be more inclusive. OIC.

  109. Draven says:
    June 16, 2015 at 3:12 pm

    James May you are microaggressing against me with your use of Anglocentric units of measurement.
    Oh, for fucks’ sake…

  110. *gigglesnorts*

    If he’d used centimeters/meters, the complain would be about francocentric or terrocentric 😛

  111. Once someone asked me to hike up to the top of a mountain with him. I said how tall is it and he said between 9 and 10 thousand feet. I said, I dunno, that seems pretty high. He said it’s only 3 thousand meters. And I said no problem because racism.

  112. “SFF is, alas, dominated by white westerners.” Well, I don’t know about her, but I don’t really read stuff in languages I don’t understand. I couldn’t tell you what sort of SF/F is being put out in Spanish, let alone Arabic, Swahili, Pashto or Mandarin.

  113. @kamas716

    I haven’t read “The Three Body Problem” yet, but it’s translated from Mandarin. I’ve heard that Cixin Liu (the author) is like a rock star in China.

  114. Draven says:
    June 16, 2015 at 4:13 pm

    *gigglesnorts*

    If he’d used centimeters/meters, the complain would be about francocentric or terrocentric 😛
    So in other words, you’d have been a jackass no matter what. Good going.

  115. So you really have apparently never read anything i have posted, don’t understand humor or sarcasm, and don’t get the point. Noted.

  116. There are two types of countries on this planet. One type uses the metric system The other puts men on the moon…

    Or variations thereof…

  117. @Frank

    Now that it’s been translated I might get to read it. But, how big is the non-western SF/F market? How many good stories are we missing because they haven’t been translated? That’s not our fault. So, simply by default, we’re going to be reading stuff that is dominated by Western culture because that is our base

  118. @kamas716:

    Non-Western, hard to say, unless you include things like Japanese Manga/LNs.

    Non-English, that’s a whole different kettle of Samlon. Everything from the Witcher novels that formed the basis for the games of the same name, to the pulpy goodness of Perry Rhodan.

  119. Frank, “Larry Correia has been pretty open about the fact that he started the Sad Puppies out of spite.”

    And he was done with it. Read the stuff he wrote when he talked about Brad taking over this year. He was done. Didn’t care. He’d had his say and proved his points. But *Brad*, he explained, thought that the Hugos had value and were worth saving. Brad also wrote about his motivation for taking on Sad Puppies 3. No one has to guess about how either of them feel.

  120. Light novels would qualify under the translation rule, as long as the year of the official English publication counts for the cycle. For example for the 2016 Hugos: Log Horizon LN 1 would qualify for Novel; UQ Holder Vol 4; Log Horizon Vol 1; and SAO: Progressive 2 would qualify for Graphic Novel. (Log Horizon and SAO are listed under Sci-Fi, UQ Holder more Fantasy.)

  121. My Dad had a copy of Inter Ice Age 4 by Kobo Abe that I tried reading once when I was a teenager. I got about 30 pages in and put it back on the shelf. I had a hard time identifying with what was going on. Someday maybe I’ll try again

  122. I’m amused that an entire ethnic group seems to annoy de Bodard on such a regular basis. We have a name for that sort of thing in Normalland but in SJWLand they call it “social justice.”

    My advice to her is to leave France and move to Vietnam. There, she can create an SFF empire everyone around the world will crave to be a part of sans alas, alack or Anglophones. If you want a thing you have to make the ground floor, not come into my penthouse, claim squatter’s rights and expect me to apologize for a lot of whites, Western and English. I don’t run over to Vietnam and whine about a lot of Asian TV.

  123. Frank Probst says:
    June 16, 2015 at 4:00 pm

    @William Underhill

    I think he was being sarcastic.

    I think he was being a prat.

  124. @James May:

    Vietnam may not be the best place, what with it being a former French protectorate and all…

  125. “It is an award for LITERARY EXCELLENCE.” – GRRM

    Wrong, George. The Hugos is now an award for blundering feminist busybodies who think the world’s out to oppress them cuz they were kept out of the moon landing thing plus they were recently threatened with a normal comedian which threw one into a triggery fit cuz white dudes and normal do that.

    “But why I am bothering? I have explained all this before, as patiently as I could. I have cited all the facts, traced the history. It seems plain that neither logic nor facts will budge you. You have your story and you’re sticking to it.” – GRRM

    I’m pretty sure George has missed just a few insane feminist tumblrs promoting genderblind dimorphic lady astronauts erased from history by being rained on which were so Bill and Ted excellent I had to take No-Doz alertness pills to reach page 5.

  126. @ Orgell

    I think he knows that. I think you’ve just been introduced to James May’s sense of humor

  127. @Brad R. Torgersen

    GRRM sometimes freezes old threads, and that one had far more comments than most. That being said, his last response made it seem like he wasn’t interested in continuing the discussion any further.

  128. @ James May

    There’s a gentleman on the “Narrative” thread that has written three uber long posts. He’s begging for an answer.

    Do you keep your longer posts on file? Maybe a word file or something. I think that several of your uber long posts on extreme feminism and the intersectionism is just what that boy needs to read.

    If you haven’t got any stored, forget I asked.

  129. @James May

    I think both you and GRRM are wide of the mark here. The Hugos are fan awards. They’re not the SF/F version of the Nobel Prize for literature. They’re just what the fans voted for. And this year, the definition of “fan” has been pared down to its bare definition of “anyone who pays $40 for a WorldCon supporting membership”. The number of those memberships is continuing to climb, and no one on any side of the debate really knows what that means. It could all be from fans of SF/F who just found out that could vote for the Hugos. Or it could be the world’s entire population of radical feminists. Or it could be Vox Day’s personal army. Or it could be the Chinese government buying up memberships to ensure a win for “The Three Body Problem”. We won’t really have a good idea until awards night.

  130. I have to be honest, I would laugh so hard if it turned out all of the new voters were Chinese plants.

  131. All you people spending so much time and effort to ruin someone’s life. How charming of you all.

  132. @Terry, could you be more specific? I’m pretty sure the saying “Everything happens for a reason. Sometimes that reason is you’re stupid and make bad decisions” might be applicable if you are referring to Gallo

  133. @Frank Probst: ‘ And this year, the definition of “fan” has been pared down to its bare definition of “anyone who pays $40 for a WorldCon supporting membership” ‘

    You mean it hasn’t *always* been “anyone who pays for a WorldCon supporting membership”?

  134. @Anachronda

    Strictly speaking, that’s the bare definition. I think that in the past, virtually everyone who paid the fee was an SF/F fan. This year, I think it’s *POSSIBLE* that there might be a small group of people who paid the fee just so they could vote in favor of their own personal politics.

  135. @Jared Anjewierden

    Your sense of humor probably lines up with mine. And then encouraged by their success, next year’s Hugo ballot would be composed entirely of works written in Chinese.

  136. Terry says:
    June 16, 2015 at 10:25 pm

    All you people spending so much time and effort to ruin someone’s life. How charming of you all.

    You know what, I’d engage you, but others have spoken far more eloquently than I could, there’s a history of discussion here, and if you can’t be arsed to read it, sod off.

  137. It would be the hilarious third option ending of the story – two rivals (bitter and otherwise) duking it out for the prize, and then the guy no one even paid attention to swoops in and takes it all, leaving them blinking and wondering what the heck just happened.

  138. Standback: About slates, while we don’t have all the numbers, we do have High-low figures for the various categories. ISTR that Best novel, the low as around half the high. That to me indicates that we don’t have a lot of Straight Ticket voting going on. So things like the proposal the Making Light folks are bandying about are really a solution in search of a problem.

    I think you said something about people having to settle for voting something that isn’t their favorite. This is the sum-total of existence for the majority of Hugo voters. You nominate, almost nothing you nominate makes the ballot, so you comb through the ballot and see what you like out of that. “Damn, I must be the only person who nominated the remake of “My Mother, The Car”, but hmmm, I did like The Lego Movie, so I’ll vote for that in the final.”

    Now, I personally made a suggestion for a Hugo voting fix that would give guys like the MMTC fan above a LITTLE more say in what gets nominated, by adding a round of 25 before the round of five. (I think the link shows up on my name)

    I also suggested that Best Dramatic Presentation (Short form) be awarded by show, not episode. And that WorldCon build a permanent online voting website that can be used by each con in succession.

  139. I think the Hugos used to be a sort of Pulitzer Prize. It was easier to think that way because it was easier to keep track of a far smaller body of work being published. There was also no mainstream version of SF compared to the massive output today. Though fans enjoyed mainstream stuff they had a sort of disdain for it that reflected the disdain the mainstream had for genre SF. Generally speaking, those fans might like The Haunting of Hill House but for the real authentic deal they went to Lovecraft for their fix.

    There was a definite sense of “this is REAL genre” and “this is not.” Bewitched or Bell, Book and Candle might be fun for those fans but they also saw those made by people – mom and pop outsiders – who just didn’t “get it.” The Witches of Karres was more authentic and literate.

    The divider seemed to be eccentricity and subtlety. There’s a reason many old school SF stories were considered unfilmable as adaptations and it’s because mainstream audiences had more generic tastes. From the first Dune film to John Carter today you still see adaptations being wrecked because the filmmakers didn’t understand the source material or altered it for mainstream audiences. Look at the 3 Conan films. That’s not Howard.

    One had the sense the old genre was a sort of fine arts refuge from the mainstream which produced ’50s monsters films by the bushel but didn’t “get it.”

    Things are different today; the love for Buffy and Dr. Who shows that. Back in the day SF fans laughed at Dr. Who as an example of all that was wrong with rednecks trying to dabble in SF who didn’t “get it.” There’s been an increasingly massive influx of fans coming from the mainstream side and it’s all merged together now. That old artistic divide has now been replaced with an overt attempt to hijack SFF as a delivery mechanism for social justice on the one hand and as a mainstream entertainment sensibility on the other.

    That’s where things get weird and obscure with the very recent entry of this cultish SJW movement. This isn’t the place to explore that weirdness but I will tell you the more I research this movement to its fundamental origins the more I see Jacques Derrida staring back at me. His name and concerns pop up again and again and again. That leads me to believe there’s been some sea change in university education in America based on a poststructuralist view of social justice and fundamental view of how a new generation views the world. It explains why I keep running into these peculiar quotes by SJWs about how the individual means nothing in a world of vast currents of intersecting oppressions.

    You go to this radical feminist movement and you end up with Judith Butler and behind her Derrida. bell hooks has Derrida. Intersectionalist thought – Derrida. Sarkeesian: Derrida. Here’s a quote about Derrida by Dr. Biko Agozino which has nothing to do with SFF:

    “He extended the meaning of institutions beyond education, law, economy and religion to include phenomena such as language, ethnicity, gender, race and class in the sense that they too regulate human interactions in often oppressive ways.”

    Sound familiar? it does to me; it’s excuse notes for the teacher because, like white privilege, you can’t measure anything, and so – unlike actual Jim Crow laws – one can complain until the sun dies. It’s obvious intersectionality aside, that extension of the meaning of the concept of institution is how SJWs have dragged Jim Crow into the present. The following quote becomes self-explanatory as an anti-Derrida view:

    “… contemporary antiracist activists understand themselves to be employing the same tactics and pursuing the same ends as their predecessors in the period of high insurgency in the struggle against racial segregation.

    “This view, however, is mistaken. The postwar activism that reached its crescendo in the South as the ‘civil rights movement’ wasn’t a movement against a generic ‘racism;’ it was specifically and explicitly directed toward full citizenship rights for black Americans and against the system of racial segregation that defined a specific regime of explicitly racial subordination in the South.” – Adolph Reed

    Reed’s quote is exactly what SJWs do NOT want to hear. Derrida is loved by a new generation of social justice advocates even while some may have never heard of him. I personally think he’s one of the more destructive forces to have recently entered American thought and education and his name and ideas are stamped all over this moronic crusade in SFF. Despite his intellectualism, Derrida’s philosophies are an excuse factory for intersectional gripe and hokum.

    And, oh yes, his name is next to Michel Foucault’s and Simone de Beauvoir’s on the petition against age of consent laws in France in the ’70s. Surprise. The stinking irony there is Foulcault once wrote “sexuality will become a threat in all social relations…” “there are people for whom others’ sexuality may become a permanent danger.” Gee, really? Like “rape culture”? Foulcault is yet another name I see again and again associated with this bullshit movement and again one a lot of SJWs may not even know. That idea of mainstreaming where the origins get lost is the point, and also the main mechanism which drives hate speech – hate on one end, justice comes out the other.

    What Derrida has in common with intersectionalists is his constant carping about so-called narrow Eurocentric or Western modes of thought but without admitting they are the gold standard. Feminists and Derrida have in fact admitted that gold standard… with their feet, by maligning a culture they refuse to leave. It’s just more con game nonsense to shit on the West which never tells us what’s better than the West. That’s cuz the true answer is… nothing.

  140. I think the Hugos used to be a sort of Pulitzer Prize. It was easier to think that way because it was easier to keep track of a far smaller body of work being published. There was also no mainstream version of SF compared to the massive output today. Though fans enjoyed mainstream stuff they had a sort of disdain for it that reflected the disdain the mainstream had for genre SF. Generally speaking, those fans might like The Haunting of Hill House but for the real authentic deal they went to Lovecraft for their fix.

    As much as I don’t pay attention to the awards process itself, the Academy Awards still have a degree of respect for me (with the exception of the Documentary category). If I have two movies to choose from, I still consider ‘this one won an Oscar’ a plus. Not so with the recent Hugos.

  141. The question is whether GRRM is an ignorant fool or a complete liar. Given the facts, its one or the other.

  142. @Civilis

    All other things being equal, I’d probably choose the novel that won the Hugo, but I don’t really think all other things are ever really equal these days. If I’m looking at two different books in the bookstore, I can just take out my phone and go to amazon or goodreads and read as many reviews as it takes for me to decide which book is right for me.

  143. “Cora Buhlert ‏@CoraBuhlert · 3h3 hours ago Free Hanseatic City of Bremen, Germany
    @eilatan @SpacefaringK For such a fan-focussed publisher, Baen authors are surprisingly dismissive of mere fans, particular Wrongfans TM.”

    Judas Priest. WE are the “wrongfans”, Frau Buhlert.

  144. What on earth is she even talking about there?

    I’ve never had a bad experience talking with any Baen author, (and I think I’ve done so with double digits by this point, between online and in person) even when (as with Eric Flint) we agree on pretty much nothing. (Outside of books, anyway)

    I can say the same for most of the authors I’ve talked with, but not all.

  145. I just love that she hasn’t figured out that the Sad Puppies call *themselves* wrongfans as a joke.

    I guess the joke’s on her.

  146. Buhlert and Luhrs don’t exactly play with full decks. If you quote them and praise it it’s affirming their lived experience. If you call it bullshit it’s creepy stalking. In principle that means they veer from stalkers to life affirmation experts every time they retweet someone.

    I’m trying to imagine the FBI reaction to “stalking” a cult of racist female supremacists after being shown about 19 billion quotes wishing we’d all burn, racially segregated rooms, “white tears,” “white privilege,” destroying the Patriarchy, Western influence, binary gender in literature and the nuclear family. Throw in nutters who think an alliance of white men are scouring women and PoC from history and the FBI might think they’ve stumbled across a nest of mental cases and start monitoring them themselves, if not measuring them for straightjackets.

    “Cora Buhlert retweeted Brianna Wu ‏@Spacekatgal Jun 14 I think it says a lot about nerd culture that we demand spoiler warnings be respected, but openly deride trigger warnings.”

    No it doesn’t, it means mental cases with a fragile hold on reality are still outnumbered by sane people.

    Writing essays with Lovecraftian titles like “It’s Always Been Awful Under the Boot: On the Fatigue of Everyday Horror” while claiming people want to drag you behind a pick up truck doesn’t add up to a time-out for anyone quoting that stuff.

    Luhrs says people she doesn’t like contradict themselves all the time but then acts like her own blog is Twitter when it comes to giving examples.

    “Paul Weimer Republic ‏@PrinceJvstin 48m48 minutes ago Hey @LaResnick you are my hero of the day for that green mamba crack on Flint’s blog. :)” says the logic farm who wants to burn an imaginary cis hetero patriarchy to the ground and Tweets with StormfrontAsia Requires Hate because sanity and principle rule the Ministry of Social Justice.

    Why wouldn’t anyone respect such people?

  147. So they admit Scalzi is corrupt while claiming Brad wants to emulate Scalzi?

    Wes Chu is the guy who once wrote about the ignorance of white people mistaking one Asian for another being “racial micro-aggressions” “that felt like tiny stabs to my gut.”

    I meant John Chu.

  148. “Chuck Wendig ‏@ChuckWendig · 46m46 minutes ago
    So ha ha the Poopy Puppies want to do a boycott of Tor books and authors? Good luck, turds.”

    “Charlie Stross ‏@cstross · 42m42 minutes ago
    @ChuckWendig @eilatan So, from complaining about censorship they’ve escalated to … censorship via boycott? Nice try, dog-brains.”

    “John Scalzi ‏@scalzi · 31m31 minutes ago
    @mforbeck I don’t mind utter shitlords not purchasing my books. @ChuckWendig @wes_chu @cstross @eilatan”

    This is all from one freakin’ thread.

    Anti-Puppies: please remember these quotes the next time you complain about OUR lack of civility.

  149. “Larry Correia has been pretty open about the fact that he started the Sad Puppies out of spite”

    There goes Straw Man Larry again, the jerk.

  150. Hmm. Well, Wendig’s upcoming Star Wars novel was on my wish list. Not now.

    Think I’ll go buy KJA’s Star Wars trilogy instead. Or Paul S. Kemp’s Sith novel.

    People who disdain those who pay their bills might want to do a better job of hiding it.

  151. @Alex

    My statement about Larry was in direct response to a post by James May, who was in turn quoting something GRRM said on his blog. I didn’t bring it up. GRRM did. And James May brought it over here. And I responded to it. I know the thread is hard to track, but I was not intending to set Larry up as a straw man (which I thought I made clear in the rest of my post).

  152. “Paul Weimer Republic retweeted Liz Bourke ‏@hawkwing_lb 5h5 hours ago ICYMI: Sleeps With Monsters: How Do We Talk About Strong Female Characters? http://www.tor.com/2015/06/16/how-do-we-talk-about-strong-female-characters/ … via @tordotcom”

    Ummm…. compulsory heterosexuality?

    “Let’s talk about ‘Strong female characters.’ And ‘agency.’”

    Oh, yeah… poststructuralism. Ummm… yummy. Let the performative chant begin:

    “I do believe in equality, I do believe in equality, I do believe in equality…” – The Mansplainly Lion from The Wizard of Postmodernism.

  153. Definition of “utter shitlords” in The SJW Dictionary of Wacky Phrases:

    “Anyone who doesn’t act as a useful idiot puppet of a Trojan Horse to weaponize race-sex demonization theories created by a psycho-sexual cult of racist female supremacists. See: normal. See: Fall of Troy.”

  154. “Paul Weimer Republic ‏@PrinceJvstin Jun 16 I pray that Theodore Beale is not in Rome, and not in my presence, in November. I’d hate to wind up in an Italian Jail.”

    LOOK OUT VOX DAY! LEAVE ITALY! THE MURDEROUS PRINCE DOTH APPROACHETH! BEWARE THE IDES OF NOVEMBER!!!!!!

  155. Anti-Puppies: please remember these quotes the next time you complain about OUR lack of civility.

    Quotes (like those cited) are essentially a challenge: I dare you to make it hurt my wallet! They’re also a put-down: you were never good enough to give me your money anyway. This is part of the brain damage I’ve been talking about for a few years now, with the new moral zealotry. People who think that their positions on a thing are so righteous and perfect, that they can be colossal dicks to others, and they (the dicks) think it not only doesn’t matter, they’re laughing about it. Like it’s a joke. Because in their eyes, everyone who doesn’t think and believe as they do, is a joke. They are the perfect ones. Everybody else . . . is not.

  156. Of course, Peter Grant put it perfectly:

    They appear to be living in an echo chamber where they feed off each other, constantly repeating the same old lies like a stuck record. That’s the problem – what they’re repeating is, in many cases, simply not true, but they ignore that and carry right on saying it, as if repetition will somehow magically make it true. It won’t, of course.

  157. @Frank:

    “The Straw Larry is a jerk.” – Larry Correia

    People have been falsely trying to put words in Larry’s mouth for a long time, just like you. You’re not the first, you won’t be the last, and you’re far from the most creative of the liars.

  158. “Cora Buhlert ‏@CoraBuhlert · 3h3 hours ago  Free Hanseatic City of Bremen, Germany
    @Cecily_Kane @didic But for all his good intentions and socialist credentials, Flint is still a white straight American dude.”

    Thank you, Frau Buhlert, for stating your bigotry so succinctly.

  159. A little Public Safety note for people who wander about the internet and comment:

    It appears that the Disqus comment system (a common comment system for small-mid websites, allowing for single-sign-on and Twitter/Facebook integration) allows Silent Editing (no flags or edit timestamps) by Moderators of sites that use the system. So be careful where you comment; there are worse things than deletion or disemvoweling.

  160. Did you mean Jared B. Anjewierden? *g*

    And “Wes Chu is the guy who once wrote about the ignorance of white people mistaking one Asian for another being “racial micro-aggressions” “that felt like tiny stabs to my gut.” ”

    I get it brother. I feel the same stab whenever somebody mistakes a Norwegian for a Swede.

    On, wait, no I don’t.

  161. Frank, I get the exact opposite impression. All things being equal, the words “Hugo Award Winner” and “Tor Books” have come to suggest “book not worth the money.” And I am in now way alone in that impression.

  162. And not only that, she confirms my predictions and exactly what I told Flint. That’s no reflection of politics, that’s a sociopathic hatred of our skin and sex masquerading as social justice. This strain of feminists hate, and that’s all they do. There is no amount of squirming Flint can do to escape that sort of hate. And Scalzi boots sales into the gutter for that. What a dope. Eventually they’ll hamstring Scalzi too, and putting on a dress twice a year won’t help.

    And more American hatred. This is the woman who wonders why Americans arrogantly think SFF revolves around them when it’s convenient but otherwise says “we don’t want anything to do with your culture wars.” That level of retarded unawareness is common with SJWs.

  163. There actually are 3 Rebecca Anjewierdens, 2 Rachels (now Raychel and Rachel, and yes it was necessary) and like 3 Dirks. (living)

    Sill all related to me of course.

    (And to think, that is the short version of our last name. 😛 )

    Oh, and to be fair, my Grandmother would get angry at people mistaking her for German rather than Dutch.

  164. Rcocean says: The question is whether GRRM is an ignorant fool or a complete liar. Given the facts, its one or the other.

    To be fair, he could be simply a comfortable bourgeois who does not let uncomfortable realities intrude on his world.

  165. “Jenny Kristine ‏@jennygadget 3h3 hours ago I will admit I’m not an expert on this subject but since when is ‘epic of Gilgamesh’ about white people?”

    “Imperator Nataliosa ‏@eilatan 3h3 hours ago @jennygadget JENNY. EVERYTHING IS ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE.”

    “shaunduke ‏@shaunduke 3h3 hours ago @eilatan @jennygadget the answer: since white people said it was about white people. We are good at stealing other people’s narratives…”

    *

    And since SJWs never seem to run out of morons, there’s more idiots who don’t know what a straw man is other than to use them all the time:

    http://fantasy-faction.com/2015/breakfast-of-bullshit-futurephobia-the-hugos-and-the-invention-of-sfs-past

    In this episode of The Logic Snatchers, an SJW moron claims Nutty Nuggets means being against message fiction. But no, we’re not against Bradbury or Roddenberry or Frankenberry; we’re against third wave feminist jackassery and fuckery. We don’t like it, and it’s not central to SFF. It’s your dumbfuck obsession to put Andrea Dworkin in outer space. So you don’t have to tell us we secretly hate the SF we ourselves created and you didn’t. Golden Age SFF wasn’t feminist SFF. You morons hate it except when you like to drag it out from under the bed like a pox-ridden whore, dust it off and pretend you like it before you shove it back under the bed and declare it all racist and sexist.

  166. Here’s John Chu’s touching post about mistaken identity where he claims trauma at the expense of all white people on Earth… although in retrospect it could’ve been written by almost any SJW since they’re much alike.

    http://blog.johnchu.net/so-that-was-readercon

    I cried the same way I did when I saw a Mr. Moto Takes A Vacation and Charlie Chan at the Wax Museum double feature.

  167. @Alex

    Okay, here’s my exact quote: “Larry Correia has been pretty open about the fact that he started the Sad Puppies out of spite.”

    Here’s what Larry Correia said: “I fully admit, and am on record about starting this out of spite.”

    Here’s the link to where he said it on his blog:
    http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/06/a-letter-to-the-smofs-moderates-and-fence-sitters-from-the-author-who-started-sad-puppies/

    Here’s what you said about me: “People have been falsely trying to put words in Larry’s mouth for a long time, just like you. You’re not the first, you won’t be the last, and you’re far from the most creative of the liars.”

    Could you please tell me where I lied? I’ve tried to be as fair and open-minded as I can possibly be. I’m not putting words in Larry Correia’s mouth. It’s what he said. He’s been pretty clear about it. I think Brad Torgersen is much more idealistic in his intentions the Sad Puppies campaign, but Correia has been pretty clear his primary motivation: He did it for spite.

  168. @richard mcenroe

    I’ve honestly never paid attention to the publisher of any book I’ve read prior to this. I had no idea that Tor was so controversial until the Hugo ballot came out.

  169. I donno, Frank. Maybe it’s completely splitting hairs but “started this” and “doing this” aren’t the same. For one thing, “started” refers to a single point in time more than three years go.

  170. Frank @ 8:53

    So? Do you think you earned some kind of prize for a “gotcha”?

    As you stated, Larry’s been up front from the beginning. In case you haven’t noticed, he’s not that active right now.

    So, what’s the big deal? What did you just gain?

    Please, I want to understand what you think you just gained. Because I can’t see anything fun in what you just did. I’d hate to think I just saw something real petty.

  171. @Frank, before this month the only publisher I ever checked for Baen, and that was because not only have I never read a bad story coming from them, but they’ve built up quite a well of good will through their Baen Free Library and all the eBooks they released on CDs.

    Now, I have another publisher to check for simply because they’ve squandered all the good will they ever had and have continued to behave badly. Quite frankly, Betsy Wollheim has been doing a good job trying to keep pace with Tor on this as well. They may be next if she can’t shut her yap about DAWs customers.

  172. @ Frank @ 8:53 again

    I kinda suspect that you think your driving a wedge between the “leaders” and the “fans”. Problem is, most of us are libertarians, or lean that way. Even the conservatives amongst us, and the liberals amongst us. Meaning, none of us follow like sheep.

    Yeah, Larry’s a hero of the Sad Puppies. He led the fight for two years. His fisks are something of legend.

    But, there are a couple other folks coming along with their fisking skills. Amanda Green is pretty good. Tom Knighton is getting better at it. Sarah has her own style. I wouldn’t call what Brad does a fisking, but he gets the point across.

    Like I said, Larry is not that active right now. Your shots trying to separate him from his fans are wasted. In case you hadn’t noticed, the leaders in the letter campaign, and possibly the follow on are Peter Grant, and I don’t know, maybe Vox Day. Yeah, Vox Day, the boogieman.

    We don’t need no freaking leaders. Not established ones anyway. The leader this year, will probably get a rest next year. The longer the turkeys at file 770 come here and harass us, the more we learn, and the more ammo we have for next year.

    And you never know. Larry may feel renewed and decide to pick up the cudgel again, and smack SJB ass again.

    Separate the leaders from the puppy fans? New leaders are already rising.

  173. @Angus Trim

    My comment about Larry Correia was a direct response to James May’s link about a comment that GRRM made about him (Correia). I didn’t bring up Larry Correia. James May did. I’m not attacking Larry Correia. I’m not trying to drive a wedge between anybody. I just characterized (accurately, as I think my quotes demonstrate) what Larry Correia said. And Alex called me a liar for it. What I just gained was a direct refutation of being called a liar. I don’t think that’s petty at all. If you don’t want to engage in a discussion with me, that’s totally fine. But don’t call me a liar when I’m not one.

  174. @ Angus : a principle proponent of the snail mail + photo effort intended to illustrate to Tor managers that there wasn’t a bot farm pushing pro SP3 spam is Cedar Sanderson. That is where I read it first. However, antiSPs are busy howling ‘But Voxxxxx Dayyyyyy!’.

  175. Here is something I tried to post on SF SIGNAL but they had there censors on me, Probably because I called them out for using a racial slur against whites in a super casual way.
    Since I believe in Freedom of Speech as all real writers and Americans do, and I did not want to have wasted my time only to have the Modern Pinko Reds laugh at someone who has a Differing Opinion Ill place it here.

    Once again I’m wondering who is putting the comments on the links on this site…

    Tom Doherty… gets it wrong. Jessica Price…gets it right and so does Chuck Wendig.

    The personal quote of “Gets it wrong” is about a rep at Tor who doesn’t want it’s writers and readers to know they have chosen a side in a topic where no one side is completely right or wrong.
    Yet his tolerance of both here is called Wrong.(now that is INSENSITIVE & WRONG)

    And stating Jessica Price…gets it right and so does Chuck Wendig.
    when both have defended racists while pretending to be against it is ample proof of Hypocrisy.

    Wendig’s quote of…

    “I stand by Irene Gallo because she is a person who has the right to air her personal sentiments, regardless of whether or not we find them disagreeable”

    Is laughable as he stands behind one name/slur slinger but refuses to see the contradiction of wanting to silence the rage of a Rapid Pup like Vox Day.

    If this bias opinion continues to be placed on these links I might have to react the same way to this site. Since there is no name attached to these quotes, Then obviously this Opinion is speaking for everyone representing this site.

    And I for one(and Many Others) refuse to support a political bias when I’m just looking for my SF. I don’t mind opinions but leave the John Stewart -the funny, commentary off of the links.

    Signed
    A SF FAN

  176. Spite’s usually a partner of racial incitement. See: Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory.

    The truth is now that we’re giving return fire and sarcastically weaponizing their own insults SJWs just see that as even more confirmation we were racists homophobic misogynists all along.

    We’re actually being asked to believe the white male colonial gaze is like the Eye of Sauron which oppresses women and the marginalized and so go buy Women Destroy Science Fiction and don’t review white men. Compulsory heterosexuality will go away and SFF will be what it should’ve been when the Confederate spy Joanna Carter was flung to Mars, fell in love with Dejah Thoris and saved her from dimorphic transTharks and restored the Matriarchy of Helium.

    “ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@RaceGender 53m53 minutes ago @SJWDevilsAdvocate INORITE black broad TLDR entitlement”

    “@RaceGender ‏@GhostWritingRacist 48m48 minutes ago Most of it by black broads I think?”

    “SJWDevilsAdvocate ‏@SJWRacist 47m47 minutes ago @ScalzisSquirrelTheory Never underestimate an older black broad when an institution that benefits them is on the

  177. ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@SJWDevilsAdvocate Jun 14 AntiRacist retweeted MensRights Yep, still feel I made the right decision to stop watching GoT.

    AntiRacist added,
    MensRights @MensRights
    That finale of GoT was an endless parade of boys and men being humiliated and hurt. I mean, holy shit. Are they going for a world record?

  178. ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@ScalzisSquirrelTheory Jun 16 It’s more imperative than ever to put an end to black womanhood. by @JamilahLemieux

    ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@ScalzisSquirrelTheoryJun 16 Dolezal is a *great* example, also, of why black women’s claims of ageism trumping all are blatantly false and a cry for pity.

    ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@ScalzisSquirrelTheory Jun 16 ‘I can’t succeed because ageism!’ is no more than a black woman’s defense against acknowledging her own mediocrity.

    ScalzisSquirrelTheory ‏@ScalzisSquirrelTheoryJun 16 (Whatever I have to say about the Black Female Fragility problem has already been said – and said better – by white women, thank god.)

    *

    That’s Requires Hate, weaponized for your amusement, the insane woman Paul Weimer and Shaun Duke of the Hugo-nominated Skiffy and Fanty podcast Tweet with while they shed tears over Vox Day and even make vague threats about running into him in Italy. That’s because they’re principled adults living in 21st century America and can easily make simple comparisons.

    *

  179. Frank Probst: I’ve honestly never paid attention to the publisher of any book I’ve read prior to this. I had no idea that Tor was so controversial until the Hugo ballot came out.

    Truly, the unexamined life is not worth living. Can you seriously have read science fiction in any quantity, followed authors and subgenres and not learned what any serious fan learns, that there are definite editors and houses who publish more specifically for certain reader tastes than others?

    Such ingenuous naiveté is refreshing.

  180. @richard_mcenroe
    > Can you seriously have read science fiction in any quantity, followed authors and subgenres and not learned what any serious fan learns, that there are definite editors and houses who publish more specifically for certain reader tastes than others?

    Yes you can.

    you can read thousands of books, and not pay any attention to who the publisher or editor is. I did so for a couple decades, and even now, the only publisher I follow is Baen, and if they didn’t have the Baen Bar and Baenebooks store, I probably wouldn’t pay them attention as such.

    Going back and looking at my library, it turns out that I follow most of the Authors that Baen publishes, and have for years. But I did so without noticing that all these authors that I loved were published by Baen.

    I didn’t notice that Weber was published by multiple publishers until I was buying directly from Baen and wondered why I couldn’t find some of his titles there.

  181. In SFF, Baen’s one of the very few houses to become a brand. That is, people check what Baen is publishing next, as opposed to when the newest by X author comes out. Tor was trying to with Tor.com, but at the other pole from Baen. To be honest, in fantasy, they came pretty close. In science fiction, however, they failed.

  182. Baen bought a huge amount of goodwill with the Free CD promotions, and haven’t wasted any of it by attacking readers or authors.

  183. “Oh, and to be fair, my Grandmother would get angry at people mistaking her for German rather than Dutch.”

    Some might think that (e.g.) Norwegians couldn’t possibly be gravely insulted by being mistaken for Swedes.

    They’d be wrong. 🙂

  184. @richard mcenroe

    I was quite the innocent lamb until the current kerfuffle. My reading speed is practically glacial, so I only read about 5-10 books a year. If I break a dozen, it’s a good year, and I’ve been away from the SF/F genre for about 20 years. I came back when the first season of Game of Thrones aired. I ended up reading that whole series, and then a lot of Martin’s other work. I read a lot of YA for a while, and then started coming back to “adult” SF/F. My first WorldCon was going to be last year, but I had to miss it for health reasons, and I never heard anything about SP or SP2. Until this year’s Hugo noms were announced, I had never even heard of John Scalzi, Anita Sarkeesian, N K Jemisin, Larry Correia, Brad Torgersen, or Vox Day, so I think it’s fair to say that I was pretty ignorant of what was going on in the field of SF/F. I knew Tor and Baen were both SF/F publishers, but I didn’t associate either with any particular ideology or subtype of SF/F.

    When this years’ noms were announced, I did my best to understand SP3 and the Rabid Puppies. I started at GRRM’s site, then went to Larry Correia’s, then came here. I still read GRRM’s page, and I found File 770 because it was being talked about both by him and by people here. I was impressed enough with Larry Correia that I took the online version of his writing class, so I’ve spent about 8 hours watching him lecture about writing. I’ve never read any of his novels, but he said he thought his Grimnoir Chronicles were his best work, and Hard Magic looks like my type of story, so that’s on my list of things to read.

    I’ve tried and failed to understand Vox Day (and the Rabid Puppies). I came to the conclusion that he’s so connected to GamerGate that you can’t understand him without understanding GamerGate, and I’m just not willing to spend the time to understand GamerGate. Other people seem to rank him somewhere between a James Bond villain and a rich guy who just like to pick fights with people on the Internet. He may or may not be racist, misogynistic, homophobic, etc., but based on most of the quotes I’ve seen, there’s a lot of cherry-picking of what he’s actually said, and I think he sometimes deliberately says inflammatory things just to get a reaction out of people, so I have no idea what he actually believes. I evaluate anything that he says based on merit, but I don’t read his blog, and I haven’t bothered with Scalzi’s, either. I thought the Irene Gallo quote that he posted was clearly over the line, and I thought Gallo’s apology was a classic non-apology apology. I think Tom Doherty’s response was spot on. I don’t think Gallo should lose her job for it, but if she does, I won’t lose any sleep over it, because she got herself into this hole and then just kept digging. I think that the current “I am not a ‘bot!” letter writing campaign is a little silly, because it’s based on a few anonymous rumors about what’s going on at Tor, and it seems obvious that they’re still trying to figure out what to do about it. At this point, even Vox Day himself is saying let’s wait a little while and see what happens.

    As for what to do now, my plan is to evaluate the current crop of nominees with a blind eye as to whether or not they were on the SP3 or RP slates and rank them accordingly. I’m done with the dramatic presentations and am now working my way through the graphic novels. I gave non-puppy works the first slot in both dramatic presentations. The episode of Orphan Black was phenomenal, and I thought it was better overall than the GoT The Mountain and the Viper, even though that particular fight was one of my favorites of all time. (I thought Brienne versus the Hound was better, though, just for the sheer no-holds-barred violence of it.) I ranked Edge of Tomorrow as #1 in the long form category. Even though it was pretty much Groundhog Day as a MilSF story, it was very taut storytelling, and I loved every minute of it. I HATED Interstellar, because I thought the ending was ridiculous. If you’re going to do hard sci-fi, you can’t have an absurd fantasy ending. I had the same reaction to the Battlestar Galactica TV series. I’m reading Ms Marvel now. Other people have raved about it, but I’m finding the characters to be so cardboardish that I can see ranking it as #1 unless everything else is REALLY bad, and I doubt that’s the case. I’m looking forward to Rat Queens.

    As for this year’s WorldCon, I’m not sure if I’ll be able to go. If I do make it, I plan to sit through the rules meeting (God help me.) just to oppose any changes to the nominations process. I think the way it’s done right now is imperfect, but I don’t see any of the proposed changes as being better than what we’ve got.

    My big concern is for what happens next year. If it ends up being a Sad Puppies slate versus a Happy Kittens slate, and we wind up with a slate “arms race” for the nominations, I may just sit the whole thing out a pick a different con to spend my money on.

    So that’s me in a (very long) nutshell.

  185. @ clamps

    Who are these people from his blog? May is citing well known authors that ASPs actively support. You are quoting random people from Vox Popoli. I suppose in your mind everyone who posts on Vox Popoli represents SP/RP.

    Wait a minute…

    Don’t you post there? In fact you have such a desire to post there that you try and subvert bans. Are you a dedicated closet RP?

  186. No, but we’ll feel free to point out that we aren’t responsible for what people are saying in comments on a completely different blog associated with a completely different ‘puppies slate’. Unlike you, we don’t expect people to think and act in lockstep and send them off for reeducation when they don’t.

  187. Yandere, aren’t you banned here? Why are you trespassing? Why do you persist in committing felonies every time you post here? Why should we even listen to someone who persists in criminal behavior?

  188. We are not Vox Day.

    We are not his ‘followers’

    Go bother him.

    Oh right, he’ll file another legal complaint if you do, and that might result in you spending some time in a 5×10 room.

  189. ” I had no idea about Peter Grant’s backstory…” No reason you should have known about it. Do check out his blog and read what he’s written. I knew only that he was South African and had been a prison chaplain. That hardly touches on it.

    What I’ve noticed is that a large number of the authors I’m acquainted with, in a pretend internet sort of way, that are in this particular portion of fandom… like Mad Genius Club… are foreign. For lack of a better term. Sarah is an immigrant to America from Portugal. Kate is originally Australian. There’s Peter Grant. Dave Freer is also originally South African (he’s moved to a tiny Island back beyond Tasmania… I kid you not). All of those people have a broad and unique outlook. You know Shadowdancer is not American, but is from the Philippines and is now in Australia. Do look up her article as well.

    There’s a lot of talk in science fiction about how different demographics have important differences in what they have to offer the field… but a white man from South Africa like Peter Grant, is *identical* in experience to a white man like, oh, Scalzi… same-fricking-same because “white” and “man”. Is that even rational?

    No one seems to bother to find out anything about anyone, or *read any of their books*, before deciding all sorts of ridiculous things about them. “I believe in inclusiveness… that person over there criticized me… obviously they want to keep people out.”

  190. No Frank. It won’t be Happy Kittens. Happy Kittens don’t make puppies sad. Puppies play with kittens.

    No, its asps that might have a competing slate. Snakes make Sad Puppies sadder.

  191. @ clamps

    Nice try I know you rely on people not actually researching the things you say. Some of those quotes are mis-attributed to users that didn’t say them. The ones that were said were rejected pretty thoroughly by the rest of the people posting over there. It appears one “Josh” (not the same one as me) was very active in refuting the comments.

  192. “And that Josh will probably be stalked and doxxed.”

    Of course. You’re here in criminal defiance of your site ban.

  193. @ Clamps
    I am unaware of anyone being “stalked and Doxxed” by the people over there. I do know that they worked particularly hard to figure out who you were because you refused to leave them alone. Do you have evidence that they have done this to any other commenter over there?

    That’s a cute cartoon. Not sure how it is relevant to your accusation that any random person posting over there represents SP or even RP for that matter. By your logic you yourself are an RP supporter and pretty dedicated at it because you work around bans just to be able to post.

  194. By the way, Andrew, haven’t you been served with a clear, written warning to stop posting here?

    From: http://www.mass.gov/ago/about-the-attorney-generals-office/community-programs/cyber-crime-and-internet-safety/cyber-crimes/cyber-stalking.html

    Information for Victims

    If you are a victim of cyber stalking, it is important that you know the steps available to promote your safety, document the harassment, and initiate an end to the abuse. Victims who are teens or children should immediately tell their parents or another adult they trust about any harassment or threats. Adult victims should send a clear, written warning to the harasser to stop the contact or harassing behavior. It is important however to avoid getting into a “back-and-forth” exchange with the harasser. If at any time you feel your physical safety is in jeopardy you should contact your local police department for assistance.

    Documenting all communication with the offender and any organizations you contact for help in stopping the harassment may be of assistance should the harassment continue. Saved documentation can include all emails, postings, or other communications including log files from IM and chat clients in both electronic and hardcopy format that are not altered or edited in any way. You may want to explore whether you can block the offender through your email program or chat room. If the behavior continues, you may also file a complaint with your Internet service provider (ISP) and your harasser’s Internet service provider (ISP). Most ISP’s have a department that is available to speak with you.

    If the harassment continues, or if at any time you fear for your personal safety, contact your local police department. If the local police are unable to assist you, the Massachusetts State Police, your local District Attorney’s office, or the Attorney General’s may be able to provide assistance.

  195. @ Clamps

    So no, you don’t know of anyone else who has been Doxxed. You know of some people who were threatened with Doxxing.

  196. Gallo, Hayden, Feder, Bourke, Meacham.

    They all have to go.

    They compassionately and publicly support an ideology that is endemically hostile to my very existence. Promote SFF. If you’re compassionate about race-gender crusades then join some group somewhere and stop dragging your insane bullshit where it’s inappropriate and not wanted.

    Tor is a public, supposedly neutral, arena. If they want to be seen as anti-straight white male central then that is how they will be treated.

  197. “Black and Third World people are expected to educate white people as to our humanity. Women are expected to educate men. Lesbians and gay men are expected to educate the heterosexual world. The oppressors maintain their position and evade their responsibility for their own actions. There is a constant drain of energy which might be better used in redefining ourselves and devising realistic scenarios for altering the present and constructing the future.”
    ― Audre Lorde, Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches

    Thank you superior noble sparkly angel… may I have another?

  198. And that’s the woman quoted by two authors Scalzi promoted via educating us about white privilege and intersectionality.

    The more I read about their swinish icons the less surprised I am how much they hate us.

  199. “It is time we developed a more cogent and relevant psychology and philosophy of power relationships not yet considered in our institutional politics. It is time we gave attention to defining a theory of politics which treats of power relationships on the less formal than establishmentarian grounds of personal intercourse between members of well defined and coherent groups – races, castes, classes and sexes. It is precisely because such groups have no representation in formal political structures that their oppression is so entire and so continuous.” – gay radical feminist Kate Millet, Sexual Politics, 1968

    Does that sound familiar? It should. It is the single defining purposeful confusion between laws which oppress and mysterious systems which oppress which is at the basis of Scalzi’s post on white privilege and all of the bullshit we hear about in SFF. It is an Orwellian asshattery which abandons “defined” institutions in favor of “defining” that which cannot be defined yet Scalzi calls as obvious a “gravity.” When Millet talks about “The phantasy of the male victim,” she is literally throwing equal protection and legal rights out the door. Are we surprised SFF’s feminists so often laugh at the idea men or whites can be victims and spread hashtags about #ImaginaryMisandry? In law misandry is real, in gender feminism it cannot exist.

    “Feminist Frequency (Anita Sarkeesian) Verified account ‏@femfreq 6h6 hours ago 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.”

    In actual law, of course there is such a thing as sexism against men. But by the time you reach Millet’s 1968 quote about “the white man’s imperialist racism,” you’ve entered SFF in 2015.

    “radical lesbian feminists focus on the problem of heterosexuality as the pivotal core of women’s oppression… By the late 1970s black and Third World feminisms emerged as a critique of the white privilege inherent in feminist theory itself.” – The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World

    Now let’s look at a typical SJW like Cora Buhlert’s “you may also be interested in…” Twitter feed:

    N. K. Jemisin – “Heinlein was racist as *fuck*, and b) most of science fiction fandom was too.”
    @nkjemisin

    Ann Leckie – “white straight cis guy,” “white straight cis guys,” “non-white, non-cis, non-straight, non-guys,” “white straight cis guys,” “white straight cis guys,” “white, straight, cis dude”
    @ann_leckie

    Ken Liu – “‘authentic’ seems often to mean ‘what white people would approve'”
    @kyliu99

    Aliette de Bodard – “SFF is, alas, dominated by white westerners”
    @aliettedb

    Buhlert links us to this post on “toxic bigotry” which is not only a bunch of shit, but notice where this bigotry NEVER comes from. That’s right, as always, these idiots also segregate human bigotry and then call themselves anti-racists. They do that cuz they’re unaware Orwellian morons.

    http://www.angelahighland.com/2015/06/18/thoughts-on-toxic-bigotry/

    As usual, an SJW like Buhlert links us to a guy who has been a crucial part of a movement attacking white men he calls “calling out racism,” cuz Orwell:

    “Cora Buhlert retweeted Jim C. Hines ‏@jimchines 21h21 hours ago Calling out racism means some people will get mad and maybe call you a SJW. So what? We’ve seen what NOT calling out racism does…”

    Conclusion: fuck off.

    If these people are looking for an analogy to neo-Nazism they only have to look in their own mirrors, because in the history of mankind 10,000 explanations have never mysteriously always landed in the lap of one ethic or sexual group unless it was a racial supremacy. Once again Hines looks like the wrong-way dipshit he is. When has this moron ever actually found systemic racism is SFF? Answer: never.

  200. “Imperator Nataliosa (Natalie Luhrs) ‏@eilatan (Warning: gross racism) This is the kind of racist asshole that some people believe deserves a Hugo Award.”

    “Michael Z Williamson ‏@mzmadmike Jun 18 The Charleston: 9 shots Kahlua, one shot coconut cream, serve with a Colt 45 chaser. With help from Steve Coffman Too soon?”

    Natalie Luhrs quotes: “Man, so great seeing all these white dudes talking about how fucking awesome they are for standing up to G—-Gate.”

    “he’s older and white, do i even need to mention that?”

    “I fucking hate those DirectTV ads with women and children on wires looking for reassurance from white men.”

  201. Here’s an excellent insight into how feminists in SFF like Luhrs see themselves as transblack voices which take orders from their racist betters and retweet them:

    “Imperator Nataliosa (Natalie Luhrs) retweeted Zoé S.‏@ztsamudzi @Hey white feminists (and White Feminists)! I see you’re, once again, silent about sexualized racism…

    “Lakeyma Pennyamon
    He said, ‘you rape our women’ and this is would be a great opportunity for the supposed ‘intersectional’ white feminists to proclaim ‘Not In Our Names’ and begin a conversation about how whte womanhood and purity is frequently mobilized to justify violence against Black people – Black men in particular – but instead there’s crickets… Hmmm… I don’t feel particularly betrayed because I never had faith in the ability of white people to actually support what they proclaim to believe but it is almost farcical how navel-gazing mainstream white feminism is, especially when they expect women of color to come out and support their liberal-ass projects. You all raised hell about a Georgetown student being called a slut by Rush Limbaugh but when Black people are actually harmed by a dynamic propelled by your identity yall ain’t got shit to say.”

    Neither of those racist fucks smearing a murder onto all whites has any business calling anyone else racist and neither does Luhrs.

Comments are closed.