Courageous left-wing media beats stuffing out of Straw Puppy

Speaking of Social Justice Zealots, it’s not shocking to see a woman like Amanda Marcotte jump on the anti-Puppy bandwagon. Salon is, after all, the publisher of such intellectual giants as Arthur Chu, who (you may recall) cast this author’s family in the unenviable role of human shields. With robust journalism like that, it’s small wonder why Salon Media Group’s stock has completely tanked over the past ten years. I know it’s a matter of rote gospel (for the Left) that the proles of the world must be led by the ear to the Truth, and if the proles aren’t having any, well it’s their own damned fault for being ignorant, racist, cisnormative scumbags — daring to have independent ideas. But there must come a time when even the Left starts to realize that the current progressive voice boxes are preaching an increasingly strident, tone-deaf, self-referential, closed-system mantra of fanatical gibberish that resonates only with the Pure Faith; and few people otherwise.

I know, I know, they do it because they believe humanity is locked into some kind of quasi-mystical destiny wherein all of our descendants will be ultra-progressive, and inhabit a period of such intellectual and political amazingness — according to whichever utopian vision the progressives are infatuated with this decade — that nobody will think twice about the total correctness and rightness of progressive thought. On any subject. Regarding any arena of human endeavor. Amanda Marcotte and her fellow travelers are the country’s most pure and perfect thinkers to have ever lived. The only thing holding us back from nirvana, are the dreaded, nasty, evil, barbaric conservatives. Since this destiny is irrevocable, there doesn’t have to be a dialogue. All Amanda and her cohort have to do is sneer, mock, and ridicule anyone and everyone they disagree with.

Regarding Sad Puppies specifically — the attempt by an actually diverse and occasionally chaotic collection of science fiction and fantasy readers and professionals, to prevent the Hugo awards from plunging into monocultural irrelevancy — I’ve given up expecting a fair hearing from the [lame]stream Left. Amy Wallace made it abundantly clear that she had zero interest in listening to or writing about anyone who didn’t flatter her pre-existing narrative: that Sad Puppies was just a tiny group of evil white racist misogynist males intent on keeping saintly pure and brilliant women, non-whites, and other designated Victims (note the caps v) out of the Hugo winners circle. Like almost every other left-wing outlet that’s approached the matter in the past 72 months, WIRED knew all the answers before it conducted even its first interview. The only job at hand was to make sure the Correct Narrative was adhered to and distributed. People who didn’t fit the narrative — like Sarah Hoyt, or Kate Paulk — were ignored. Their viewpoints didn’t matter, therefore they were not allowed to exist. The Narrative did not include them — the way Creationism has a hard time explaining dinosaur fossils — thus inconvenient women were expunged from the progressive record of Sad Puppies events.

I think Sad Puppies’ chief sin — other than existing — was to correctly point out that the Hugo awards (in this decade) were increasingly being used as a tool of affirmative action. I knew beforehand that pointing this out might ruffle a few feathers, but even I was not prepared for the absolute apoplexy that would ensue. Of all the many doctrines of progressivism, affirmative action seems to be one of the most sacrosanct. To question it is to speak the utmost heresy. Nevermind the fact that progressive media crowing (in the wake of the 2015 and 2016 Hugo ceremonies, as well as events like the related Nebula awards) pretty much proved the Puppy point 110% correct. The Hugos are being used for affirmative action: white progressive intellectuals congratulating themselves for being “diverse.” This is done by ensuring that demographics (in literature) matter more than the prose itself. Because nothing demonstrates that a genre is alive and healthy, more than screaming about how a significant percentage of the audience — and the authors — are a bunch of racist, sexist bigots, and isn’t it high time that all these racist and sexist evil-doers just get the hell out?

Oh, they’re getting out all right. To the point that SF/F literature is beginning to mirror the [lame]stream Left-wing media, in its closed-circle tone-deafness, and unwillingness to consider the fact that there are (in the immortal words of Larry Niven) minds which think as well as theirs, just differently.

Sooner or later the honest intellectuals on the Left are going to have to realize that “diversity” does not constitute a room packed with white progressives, who allow a few non-white progressives through the door, then they hoot and holler and hug themselves for being wonderful. Diversity that runs only skin deep — and then, only in like-minded token quantities — is not diversity. It’s as vanilla as vanilla can be. It’s like an amateur author believing that differentiating characters merely amounts to giving each of them a different hat. Diversity (indeed, actual liberalism proper) means not running scared at the first sign of someone who thinks or believes differently. Diversity means having a true spectrum of opinion. Diversity entails doing the uncomfortable chore of not running people out of the room, the instant they voice ideas you find uncomfortable or with which you don’t agree. In other words, DIVERSITY means scuttling today’s present trend toward closed-eye, closed-ear, safe-space monotone echo chambers.

Which is pretty much what the Hugos (and the Nebulas) have become. And Sad Puppies had the audacity to not just point it out — everybody already knew it — but to try to change things through direct action. Via grass-roots campaigning.

At which point all hell broke loose. The establishment hates nothing like it hates grass-roots disobedience. And for two years running, the establishment (with its media connections) has done everything in its power to vilify and slander everyone and anyone connected to Sad Puppies. We were not human beings. We were designated targets. Character assassination was the objective. Make the broader world believe Sad Puppies are evil, and voila, Sad Puppies magically get to be evil — even though we’re not. I suppose for individuals schooled in Alinsky tactics, the ends will always justify the means. But there must come a point when the invective reflects the reality. And where reality is concerned, we Sad Puppies do not match the horrible, nasty, downright heinous and garish portrait that’s been painted of us.

I think Ira Glass ran into this — the fact not matching the fiction — when he interviewed me in 2015. Whatever he thought I was going to be, at the start of the interview, I suspect his opinion was somewhat changed at the end of it. Enough for This American Life to largely skip over the Sad Puppies controversy. Because there just wasn’t enough “there” there, to justify focusing on Sad Puppies to the extent that other outlets had focused. And Ira is hardly the world’s most conservative chap. I am pretty sure he expected me — self-appointed spokesman of Sad Puppies 3 — to be an entirely different kind of person. But I wasn’t. To Ira’s credit, he didn’t join in pillorying the effigy of us that had been created. Because I didn’t fit the narrative, as it had been repeated to that point.

Nor does Larry Correia fit the narrative. Nor does Kate Paulk fit the narrative. Nor Sarah Hoyt. In fact, you will be hard-pressed to discover anyone in the Sad Puppies camp who fits the narrative — that we’re all hopelessly white, male, sexist, and racist.

Sad Puppies didn’t say we wanted to keep anyone out of the Hugos. We said we wanted the Hugos to be more intellectually diverse, less focused on fetishization of “marginalized” demographics, and that the award was either going to be determined on matters of merit, or it wasn’t much of an award at all.

Far from being the signifier of mind-blowing landmark fiction — as it was when authors such as Scott Card, Lois Bujold, or Vernor Vinge were winning — the Hugo (in this decade) has become the plaything of a very specific crop of connected authors and editors. One might refer to them as The Beautiful People — adept at ensuring they and their friends were routinely on the final ballot, thus routinely winning the trophy.

Naturally, when Sad Puppies stood up and posed a threat to that system, Sad Puppies was (of course) accused of merely being a cabal of friends — interested only in seeing themselves get awards.

In this way, the Beautiful People proved the truism: that individuals often assume others will act (or react) in the same ways those individuals would, in similar circumstances.

Quick fact: Larry Correia actually withdrew himself from Hugo consideration in 2015, and has since re-stated his lifetime recusal. As the 2012 triple-nominee (Hugo, Nebula, Campbell) I am standing with Larry on this. If there’s a worse way to get the establishment to honor you — than pissing off the establishment — I can’t think of it. Larry wasn’t interested in a Hugo for himself, and I am not interested in a Hugo for me either. Especially not after giants like Larry Elmore and Jerry Pournelle were ranked below NO AWARD for the 2016 season. Any collection of “fans” which can treat the masters of this field with such ignorant contempt, is not a collection of “fans” from whom I desire anything. Especially not a lump of metal or plastic.

So, here we are again: the [lame]stream Left’s media apparatus has bravely ridden onto the field, and hacked to pieces the little straw effigy of Sad Puppies. “Bad dog!” they scream from their establishment saddle. “Bad, bad dog! That ought to teach you!”

Yes, it takes true heroism to defeat a foe who not only cannot speak, nor bark, nor bite, but who is in fact not even real.

Even Neil Gaiman — a smart man, who should know better — couldn’t resist the urge to walk onto the grass and kick the straw head of the vanquished effigy. I suppose Neil felt it necessary, to demonstrate his fealty to the establishment? Or maybe Neil felt he genuinely disliked the Straw Puppy — now scattered and tattered.

Though it’s worth pointing out that Neil doesn’t actually know anyone who walks beneath the Sad Puppies banner. He could have easily chatted up Kate Paulk, who is both a true fan of the field, and a very nice woman. She was at the convention in Kansas City. I suspect Neil never consulted her? Nor have most of those who’ve made ritualistic swipes at the Straw Puppy.

I don’t know if there will be a Sad Puppies for 2017. The Beautiful People are changing the rules. Making it even tougher for a grass-roots rebellion to have any impact on the contents of the final Hugo ballot. If that somehow doesn’t satisfy them, they’ll make other moves — to insulate the award from the influence of “bad” people. My finger to the wind tells me that almost everyone who has devoted time, money, or attention to Sad Puppies, has turned his or her eye to the new Dragon Award — an attempt by the famous Dragon Con fan convention to create a bona fide fan-driven award that reflects the interests and enthusiasms of Dragon Con’s (routinely huge) constituency. As in all things, the Dragon will require active participation from a very wide and deep spectrum of people; lest it merely become the Hugos Lite. If I had to bet anything, I’d bet that Sad Puppies (future) will devote itself to the Dragon, or other similar accolades which are not actively being shuttered against the masses, in the way the Hugo is being shuttered.

The Hugos themselves? You can’t save a drowning man, if he slaps away the hands trying to pull him out of the water. My suspicion is that Worldcon attendance is going to bottom out around three thousand people, by the end of this decade. At which point the Hugos will be exclusively given out — among a very tight circle of like-minded souls — for the explicit purpose of making political and social commentary. We’re pretty much doing that already. Only, by 2020, the Beautiful People won’t even pretend otherwise. In their minds, they’ll forever be striving to defeat the Straw Puppy, menacing and terrible.

Advertisements

110 thoughts on “Courageous left-wing media beats stuffing out of Straw Puppy

  1. I honestly think it’s time to move on. That community has proven itself to be nothing but spiteful petty people not worthy of so much emotional investment. When the Puppies move on the screeching crazies will froth and turn on themselves because virtue signaling is what they sell.

  2. I suspect you are right Brad. I’ve given up bothering with the Hugos. It is a waste of money at this point paying the poll tax to participate and winning would just be embarrassing like winning a Golden Raspberry.

    They are dead and the Dragon Award will bury them even if the zombie staggers on for a few years.

    You are probably wrong about Worldcon bottoming out at 3000. If there is one thing that is certain about the SJZ’s, when there are no “enemies” in sight to be found they very quickly turn on each other. It wont take much of that for people to avoid the place for fear of being accused of whatever lunatic heresy they have come up with in the last 5 minutes.

  3. They proved beyond all doubt that the Hugos are being used primarily for virtue signalling when they concocted 3SV, which allows any candidate to be voted down in the second round — and such vote-downs are not to be done on “aesthetic” grounds. Well then, that only leaves personal and political grounds, doesn’t it!

    Wait til that gets used against one of their “own” … oh wait, that would indicate that someone has been ejected from the Safe Space. Never mind!!

  4. As part of their whitewashing virtue-signaling, apparently the narrative now is to say the reason why Moira Greyland’s story was below No Award is because she’s ‘anti-gay’, as opposed to exposing that there is a strong pro-pedophile, pro-pedophile apologist, victim blaming streak in the “Established Fandom” of which Worldcon is part. We’ve got a pedo apologist over at Larry’s comments trying to push that narrative.

    The comments from someone who was at MACII: http://monsterhunternation.com/2016/08/22/my-thoughts-on-the-2016-hugos/#comment-80808

    ‘Should have kept her mouth shut.” I mean, WOW. Props to DeTroyes to being able to stay civil.

  5. They can try but I think they will quickly discover there aren’t as many of them as they think and that without the ability to play gate keeper their power will be largely reduced.

    They can certainly try but I suspect it will be much harder than taking over the Hugos or Nebulas were.

  6. Let the Puppies demobilise. It looks as though the war for hearts and minds has been won.
    I won’t discourage newbies going to Worldcon but in good conscience I would warn them just to experience the thing and avoid the Hugo’s.
    As with most progressive movements, left in isolation they tend to factions and schisms.
    My hope for 2017, is that Worldcon will pass us by without notice.

  7. If there is another Sad Puppies gathering I will support it. However I am wondering what the point is to support World Con with my money,. That said I did walk into the 2016 Hugos wearing my Sad Puppies t shirt 😉 so if the Consensus is to nominate and vote again I will.

  8. The worst thing, as far as the Hugo crowd is concerned, is that the Diversity Tokens are starting to wake up to the fact that they are Diversity Tokens. Nnedi Okorafor recently said on Twitter that she wishes people would talk about her writing rather than her race.

    N K Jemisin wrote a lengthy opinion piece on feeling that she’s become the go-to “Inclusion Author”.

    Chuck Tingle managed to get some milage out of his nomination because he’s a genius marketer, but it’s clear that the Hugo crowd never saw him as anything more that something to annoy other people.

    I personally know a number of “Checkmark Authors” who want to be recognized on the value of their work rather than to fulfil someone’s diversity quota–and I’m one myself.

    When you win a seat at the table through talent and work, it’s yours. Being included for the sake of a political agenda is a precarious position–if you stop toeing the party line you’ll be replaced by another token, and the boys in charge won’t even notice there was a change.

  9. I was one of the people who argued last year that the Hugos could and should be salvaged.

    After this year, I say let it burn. Let the cabal of cannibalistic uber cunts eat themselves – as eventually they are bound to do when the pool of Victims becomes even smaller, and that tiny group turns on the past Victims to proclaim them the oppressors and cannibalize them as well.

    Pretty soon they’ll have no one left to eat. Meanwhile, those of us who just want good, entertaining, clever reading will continue to buy your books, Sarah’s books, Larry’s books, Mike’s books, etc. and exchange real value for real value – our hard earned money for your best effort!

    I’m proud to call you my friend.

  10. Now that Worldcon is actually expelling people for dissent, I think it’s time to give up on Worldcon entirely. And think about creating a substitute, if we can work out a way to protect it from takeover by SJZs.

  11. As commenters above have said – the Hugo and Worldcon are done. Oh, they’ll be staggering on for a good few years as an award and a convention … but it’ll be as an unthinking, reactionary zombie. Four years of Puppy efforts seem to have pretty definitively proved that a Hugo is just a pretty bauble that the insiders pass around to each other on the basis of political correctitude.

    The Dragon sounds much more fun – Dragoncon sounds way, way more fun.

  12. As i don’t follow SF assidously is Worldcon where the Hugo is awarded? Also i’m rather stunned about the pedophilia within Worldcon;forgive my ignorance as I’ve never participated;how can there be pedophilia? Do many kids come to Worldcon?

    Thanks for your help.

    Theonly award winng SF book I have is The Dispossessed which I enjoyed very much. I wanted to buy Scalzi’s Redshirts but when I read some extracts at the bookstore, I didn’t get it so I didn’t buy it.

    So I’ll have to check on the Net for recommrndations. I really don’t want to be hectored when I read I get enough by the govt

  13. It’s funny that in a piece entitled “Courageous left-wing media beats stuffing out of Straw Puppy”, Brad proceeds to demolish a straw Progressive in the first paragraph! Good one.

  14. Ryan, if you actually think that’s a straw progressive, you haven’t been paying attention to the words and activities of the real ones for the past four years. I’d prefer to think that you are lying through your teeth: it would actually be more honourable than being that wilfully ignorant.

  15. I am pretty sure Amanda Marcotte and Arthur Chu would both go the mat, to defend their progressive credentials. I mean, we’re talking about Salon authors here. Cutting-edge progressivism is their calling card. Both Chu and Marcotte have gone out of their way to make it clear that they regard “average American” as code for ignorant, as well as evil — a subclass of human being desperately in need of being “educated” to the Correct Ways, by whatever means necessary.

  16. Someone actually made a straw puppy? Was this made in support or by a Hugonaut planning on burning it in effigy?

  17. Neil Gaiman wasn’t actually there. Someone read his prepared speech. Maybe if he had been there, he would have toned it down some.

  18. “N K Jemisin wrote a lengthy opinion piece on feeling that she’s become the go-to “Inclusion Author”.

    As opposed to being known as a good writer?

  19. “Because nothing demonstrates that a genre is alive and healthy, more than screaming about how a significant percentage of the audience — and the authors — are a bunch of racist, sexist bigots, and isn’t it high time that all these racist and sexist evil-doers just get the hell out?”

    Or sit on a panel and bemoan the fact that *only* a third of the submission to your magazine are from women. _snort_ I guess that editor doesn’t realize that about 2/3 of the readership of SF is Male. Yes women do read SF (hi, I do) but we are not the majority readers – so yeah, most of the SF writers are most likely male. ((I had an idea for a bog post on this, just need to let it gel a bit))

    “I don’t know if there will be a Sad Puppies for 2017”

    I honesty hope so (No, I am not volunteering) I liked having a recommended reading list last year.  If Locus can put out a list, Live Journal can have a rec list (dating back several years) then I see no reason why we can’t have a list. Or baring that, join existing lists and start adding our recommendations based on what we thing is good story telling, not just check-box diversity.

    I may give one more year to the Hugos. Have not made up my mind yet.

  20. I’d actually take exception to the comment (acknowledging at the same time that it was presented as a point of comparison, rather than the point of the piece or even its paragraph) that “Creationism has a hard time explaining dinosaur fossils” because they don’t fit “the narrative.” In fact, the “Creationist” explanation for dinosaurs and other fossils is quite simple: the deceased organisms were drowned and buried by the Flood described in Genesis 6-9, and corroborated by its parallels in folklore worldwide. In fact, the “Creationists” of AiG and ICR alone have probably have published more original research on the subject of dinosaurs than any two other research institutions of comparable budget or size.

  21. What is especially galling is how almost very media outlet that reports on Sad Puppies will immediately rush out to interview . . . N K Jemisin and John Scalzi. Very rarely have they made any effort to speak with Larry, Brad, Sarah or Kate. The bias is obvious, to everybody but the Puppy-kickers.

  22. I can assure Ms. Jemisin that it’s content of her character — or lack thereof — that we’re judging her by.

  23. “She still thinking that the Sad Puppies are objecting to her because she’s Black”

    _sigh_

    I did not know that Octavia Butler was Black until I ran across that in an article. I do know that her story Blood Child has stuck with me for 20 years. I liked it when I read it back when it was published in the mags, I like it now.

    I did not know that David G. was gay, until a few years ago. I knew that I like Tribbles, but some of his other stuff was flat.

    I did know that Andre N. was a woman before I read her work – and was blown away.

    I don’t read someone because they are Z, or pass them by because they are Y. 90% of the time, I don’t know or care.

  24. It’s because the SJWs assume that we’re just like them: that we judge the quality of someone’s works by skin color/gender/orientation.

  25. What is especially galling is how almost very media outlet that reports on Sad Puppies will immediately rush out to interview . . . N K Jemisin and John Scalzi. Very rarely have they made any effort to speak with Larry, Brad, Sarah or Kate. The bias is obvious, to everybody but the Puppy-kickers.

    They don’t want to have to admit that we’re human beings. Talking to us might soften their resolve to hate us.

    Ira Glass discovered that the deranged, spooky Moth Man image of the Sad Puppies, was at least not reflected in the words and demeanor of the chief spokesperson of Sad Puppies 3. Again, there was not enough “there” there, to justify spending time pillorying us in the manner of an Amy Wallace or a Kameron Hurley.

    Per usual left-wing media rules of operation, the true partisans never interview their enemy when they can just create a caricature — garish and horrible and vile, to the exact extent required — then invent words to put in the mouths of that caricature, destroy the caricature, and at last sit back to bask in the warmth of the Jon Stewart cheering track — put on endless replay.

    Again, the narrative is that they are forever winning, the future is forever theirs, but the present is an interminably embattled landscape where horrible evil nasty people are endlessly oppressing the pure and the saintly — cough, Victims with a caps v — and yet the pure and the saintly are always valiantly winning at every turn!

    This is an ideology preached from the heights of establishment comfort, by people used to having the upper hand.

  26. It was exactly the same when the various Tea Parties started to make noise. All the usual media tools rushed out and … no, they didn’t call up whose who were Tea Party activists, whose names and contact information was readily available. Instead, they thumbed through their Golden Rolodexes and called some so-called political expert for some third-hand generalities and a bit of solemn chin-stroking.

  27. I did notice on Facebook that a few of the people who had been criticizing Truesdale before had changed their minds after hearing the recording.

    The lesson we get from here, and the Honey Badger expulsion is that recording yourself is the best defense.

  28. Reblogged this on The Arts Mechanical and commented:
    Is this the end of the Hugos? Probably. But at least the puppies tried. The puppies tried to play rules and make changes that have been needed for a long time. For that we were hit with every slam and insult in the Progressive lexicon. Then they wonder why the awards are going to be irrelevant.

  29. Well thanks to the doggy wars, I learned a lot about SFF and got to read things normally not on my radar. I read a lot of this year and last year (I just do the big one) and have to say it was really very good.

    From my perspective this started as a tantrum by LC because he:

    1. Couldn’t win an award.
    2. Is a bit crazy and people didn’t hang with him much at Worldcom.

    Turned out a few people of bad will could really do a number on the nomination process and that’s what they did. It was a great marketing ploy for a certain niche.

    The Fans stayed true however and now there are controls to help prevent that kind of shenanigans.

    So dudes – slate, don’t slate, vote on old time SF themes or against affirmative action or whatever drums you want to beat. The doggy wars are over. The Fans have won. The books were good. Pay your money and vote however you want. I am good with it.

  30. Thanks for the kind permission Iamzenu. So glad you stopped by because I was really worried about what to do next.

  31. What is so deliberately missed, of course, is that the “great marketing ploy” only works to the extent that people, a very large number of people, read the accounts and find they match their own experiences in the particulars. After all, who hasn’t sat in a panel (if they’ve gone to a con ever) and been subject to a tirade, calm or otherwise, about how you’re the problem with the world? Pretty much no one. So Larry says people were hostile and a *very large number of people* read that and think… yeah… that’s pretty normal. That happens all the time. Feels like shit. Brad writes about wrong-fans having wrong-fun and a very large number of people read that and think… yeah… that’s pretty normal. That happens all the time. Happens to me. Feels like shit.

    If Puppies cede the field is everything going to be suddenly sunlight and daisies ushering in the unopposed glory of gleaming portals welcoming the masses to science fiction fandom? Oh, hell no. Comfort for some is far from comfort for all. And we’ve seen demonstrated that fault finders will find fault with whatever people and lives they have available to them.

    They say to outrun a bear you only have to run faster than the slowest member of your party. This is a Bear. And there will ALWAYS be a slowest member of your party.

    Puppies go away and who is that going to be?

  32. The Pravda 770 gerbils are nothing if not consistent. I am sure the stalwart defenders of goodness and righteousness in the genre, are proud to have the Kirby/Xenu vote, as well as the Aaron Pound and Damien G. Walter vote. If ever there was an intellectual dream team you wanted to go to bat for your cause . . . 😉

  33. If Puppies cede the field, is everything going to be suddenly sunlight and daisies — ushering in the unopposed glory of gleaming portals welcoming the masses to science fiction fandom?

    The hilarious part is that Sad Puppies gave the ordinarily back-biting and knife-stabbing sectors of SF/F an excuse to communally rally against what they perceived to be an external enemy. If Sad Puppies disappears from active participation in the Hugo, the various mandarins of the field will go right back to quietly scheming against each other. Partisanship will continue to alienate the moderates. And the sum total of Worldcon participation will continue to shrink. I won’t be shocked if even my estimation (no more than 3,000 attendees by 2020) is too generous.

    Because you can slap a happy face sticker over a toxic waste label, and it won’t change the fact that it’s still toxic waste.

  34. Ryan, those leftists lump themselves in with Marcotte and Chu. Just read the comments to Marcotte’s article, if you can stomach them. Any Puppies or Puppy supporters are called misanthropes, cancerous, fascist thugs, and worse. Anyone challenging Marcotte’s assumptions and conclusions, even in the slightest way and using logical questions to do so, are ruthlessly and universally mocked. Not debated, not engaged to show where they’re wrong, just mocked and made to ridiculous.

  35. Comments:

    1. No need to cede the field. Pay your money and vote away.
    2. “I am sure the stalwart defenders of goodness and righteousness in the genre, are proud to have the Kirby/Xenu vote, as well as the Aaron Pound and Damien G. Walter vote. If ever there was an intellectual dream team you wanted to go to bat for your cause . . .”, said Brad. And your vote too. Go get em Tiger. It’s not lot a slate can’t still have an impact. It can. Just not as much. So I don’t really care. Or don’t slate. Fans will ultimately decide and that’s how it should be.

  36. From my perspective
    IOW, what the voices in your tiny overheated head tell you.

  37. BTW, declaring yourself “Fans” and declaring those whom you hate to not be “Fans” doesn’t mean you are “Fans” but then, I did point out your problem with believing whatever the voices in your tiny overheated head tell you, so I doubt you’ll ever understand that.

    Oh well.

  38. I am reminded of something that happened years ago.

    When Peyton Manning lost out in the Heisman vote to some Michigan player (too lazy to look him up) a sports commentator responded to the outrage in TN by calling the Vol fans trailer park trash. [Most of the outrage was to a comment about not letting another white southern quarterback win.] Not too long after that a t-shirt appeared showing Smokey (UT’s mascot) hiking his leg on the Heisman.

    Hmm. Puppies and the Hugo rocket?

  39. “BTW, declaring yourself “Fans” and declaring those whom you hate to not be “Fans” doesn’t mean you are “Fans””

    So Fans (capital F) is in context of Worldcon Fans. See, the way it works is the Fans vote and the awards are given based on those votes.

  40. Pingback: The Sad Puppy 3 meltdown over Hugo 2016 Continues | Camestros Felapton

  41. See, the way it works is the Fans vote and the awards are given based on those votes.

    Unless the ones voting are Puppies, then the voices in your head screech that they’re not “Fans” and must be excluded. Then you come here to make sure we unclean Pups know we’re not “Fans” in your eyes and so you’ll blindly support changing the rules in the hopes those unclean Pups are excluded.

    Oh well.

  42. In theory, sweetie. In theory. But we’ve seen the reality. Fans nominate and fans vote and then other fans do whatever they can to punish the bad fans who nominated the wrong way.

    What Puppies could do, really, is do a super secret slate… gawd… now that I think of it, that would be the next best thing for VD to do… super secret slate filled with Big Name approved authors… tell everyone that the list exists and that nominations are going to pour in but there won’t be any way for the forces of Right Thinking People to know which nominees ought to go below Noah Ward. Oh, the humanity! All the winners will have No Idea if they got voted in by Rabids until the big Post Hugo Reveal…

    Though really, I don’t know how it would be different to get an award because of Rabid shenanigans or get an award because a bunch of white virtue signalers want to prove how wonderful they are.

  43. Either Amanda or I will take up Sad Puppies V. We’re still discussing who is more overcommited. Here’s the thing: we’re not recommending you sign up to vote for the Hugos this time (the reason is the one I didn’t this year: WHY give money to people who hate us to the point they expel someone for expressing a very mild contrary opinion? Let them starve of money in their saferoom of a con, I say.)
    Instead we’ll have a list of “Books that Make Puppies Happy” collated the way this year’s list was. Read it and vote in whatever the hell awards you want. OR Just read it. After all, good books want to be read.

  44. BTW, I see Cameltoefloppy thinks this is a “meltdown” about the Hugos. I’m rolling my eyes so hard they’re going to fall off.
    No, oh, Camelid, this is us going “oh, well, fuck it then.” And shaking the Hugo dust from your sandals. Now you’re left with Vox. I hope you enjoy him. I KNOW he’ll enjoy you.

    Toodles.

  45. So SP states they want good books to win Hugos. The Clique says SP wants only White Patriarchal Males to be nominated, ergo the Chorfs think the only good books are written by White Patriarchal Males . . . What a bunch of racist S.O.Bs. (~_^)

  46. Celia Hayes, I’m not sure it was chins that were being stroked. Something a couple of feet or so further down, maybe… 😛

  47. @accordingtohoyt: I see it as a variation of the “you sound angry” thing from the Internet Arguing Checklist. They need us to be upset so they can sneer and dismiss… and I suspect the thought of us being upset and shattered cheers them up greatly. They’re the “caring” type, after all.

  48. “From my perspective this started as a tantrum by LC because he:

    1. Couldn’t win an award.
    2. Is a bit crazy and people didn’t hang with him much at Worldcom.”

    So that’s why Larry:

    1.) Turned down a nomination and recused himself going forwards?
    2.) Take a look at some pics of Larry on panels and at signings, and tell me again that people don’t hang out with him.

  49. “So SP states they want good books to win Hugos. The Clique says SP wants only White Patriarchal Males to be nominated, ergo the Chorfs think the only good books are written by White Patriarchal Males”

    I think we need some burn ointment. _weg_

  50. Iamzenu – could you POSSIBLY get any more condescending? You obviously don’t know Larry. You also don’t know, understand, or bothered to do research on the Sad Puppies background if you somehow distill it down to “Oh, LC started it because he’s bitter that no one likes him.” But you keep flogging that large bag of dreck. You seem comfortable in it, Tiger.

    And I guess it wouldn’t be a post mentioning Sad Puppies without Cameltoe Fellator coming over to make itself heard.

    This is hardly a “meltdown,” as Sarah said. Mostly people with any sense turning away from you and your ilk.

  51. accordingtohoyt on August 24, 2016 at 2:31 pm said:
    BTW, I see Cameltoefloppy thinks this is a “meltdown” about the Hugos. I’m rolling my eyes so hard they’re going to fall off.
    No, oh, Camelid, this is us going “oh, well, fuck it then.” And shaking the Hugo dust from your sandals. Now you’re left with Vox. I hope you enjoy him. I KNOW he’ll enjoy you.

    It reads like a meltdown Sarah. Yes, I get it is primarily to rally the troops for the Dragon Awards but it still comes over as histrionics.

    As for Vox, we’ll cope.

  52. Patrick Chester,
    They’re the type of unfortunate losers that, should they actually process that they did EXACTLY what we expected and that many of us (okay me) have been cackling for days at the extent of their PUBLIC dipshittery which again proves us right, they’d slit their wrists.
    So, hey, whatever gets them through the night.

  53. Jason,
    Bah, if Floppy Cameltoe didn’t want to be picked on, he shouldn’t– Wait, you’re right. I think not acting like a jerk is beyond his abilities. I’m sorry Jason. I’ll ignore him from now on.

  54. Sarah,

    I was just thinking he has obviously suffered a major brain injury.

    We shouldnt pick on the slow kid. Thats mean. We should react with understanding.

  55. I picked up a Supporting membership for 2017, so I could vote for DC. Likewise, snagged one for ’18 to vote for New Orleans. I’ll nom for both, but if the stuff I see on the ballot isn’t any good, then won’t vote.

  56. Christopher M. Chupik on August 24, 2016 at 4:08 pm said:
    It’s unfair to wage a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

    Ok, fair point – that was unfair of me.

  57. Oh, and speaking of the Dragon Awards, I found this gem over at Vile that made me laugh:

    “Jim Henley on August 24, 2016 at 3:34 am said:

    Re the Dragons, I tend to think some set of Puppies are the anonymous admins behind the award. Everything from the categories chosen to the lax security around voting to the indifferent efforts to promote the award and shepherd people through the process might as well have been designed to hijack the name of a large brand for narrow purposes. If that’s the case, everything that looks slapdash about the process is functional.”

    The truth is out there!

  58. I’m with Sarah. Certainly no one give Worldcon money when they disdain anyone who doesn’t eat their precious Narrative. OTOH I *do* want to hear what books Sarah, Larry, Brad and other rational, non-Narrative leaders recommend. I’ll get and read them!

  59. Only in the minds of a small few does a current Hugo award equal excellence in equivalent to the great writing of past authors.
    What they have now created is a straw Hugo, apparently. It’s equal in truth value to the infamous Nobel “Peace” prize– it’s handed out simply for achievement, but not the achievement actually celebrated.
    I used to think, long ago, that Fandom might actually be worth hanging out with. Over the past decades, I have come to the conclusion that they are small minded parochialists who pretend to be kings in their own little shrinking world. They and I have little to discuss, because they are one-trick ponies, making songs out of a few keys on the piano instead of all 88 keys.

  60. Henley paraphrased: “The Dragon awards? Those don’t mean anything – they let just anybody vote! *sniff*”

  61. Sarah is quite correct about Vox. He has a considerable and disiplined following don’t mind spending money just to screw with people they don’t like. Vox himself is student of 4th gen warfare. Since his goal is to watch it all burn (and make a ton of money from the ashes), he has nothing to lose. That’s why it was his group who got Butt Raptor (because love is real) nominated, not the sads. As Sarah said, have fun.

  62. Camestros, you talk of your wits. Show us your graveyards then. Show us the proof that you’re someone we should take seriously (I have seen no evidence yet). Let us see your works of accredited scholarship, and, seeing as you keep telling us writers how to do our jobs, your works of literature, that we may see your success and judge for ourselves that you’re not just a Damien Walter loudly calling those with some success incompetent and bad – while being a total failure as writer himself.

    Oh and I do not advocate using all the tempting alternatives to the pretentious name our bravely anonymous ‘hero’ has given himself. He can’t wait to go back to his tribe and shriek about the ‘vi’lince inherent in the system’ and cry out in glee ‘Help, help I’m being repressed.’

  63. “I don’t know if there will be a Sad Puppies for 2017. The Beautiful People are changing the rules. Making it even tougher for a grass-roots rebellion to have any impact on the contents of the final Hugo ballot.”

    At this point I couldn’t care less if they change the rules. Their actions over the last two years towards the participants has been clear enough. I don’t care to give them any of my money. I may check out how much their membership has changed, but I’ll not participate in their malignant contest.

  64. It sort of reminds me of the steroid years in major league baseball. We’ll all look back on this time and think to ourselves, WTF was going on with people that this was acceptable?

  65. Dave, Camelstroke Fappington once admitted that even *I* am a better writer than he….

    And hardly anybody reads me.

    That said, I think that as soon as the new Hugo Voting rules are in place, we should stand down, and let them be host by their own petard, as their calculation-intensive anti-popularity screen screws up their own choices. With no puppies to keep out, it will cannibalize their own.

  66. Yup, the problem with Affirmative Action quotas is that when someone gets a position everyone assumes it was gained by Affirmative Action rather than merit regardless of the reality.

  67. I wonder how the new rules will play out in practice. If there is a “disqualify” round who gets to decide on that? If it is a jury then whatever is chosen can be accused of being rejected for political reasons. If it is by a second round of voting the possibility for mischief is endless.

    It wont really matter anyway, the awards are irrelevant and they give it out to the token pet of the moment. It is hilarious watching N.K. Jesmin complain about being the token diversity hire.

  68. John Van Stry on August 24, 2016 at 12:00 am said:
    You made a typo:
    “Sooner or later the honest intellectuals on the Left”
    There aren’t any of those.

    -Yes, there are. I know a few. Don’t act like the extremist lefties and demonize everyone on the other side. They are not our teachers.

  69. davefreer on August 24, 2016 at 7:49 pm said:
    Camestros, you talk of your wits. Show us your graveyards then. Show us the proof that you’re someone we should take seriously (I have seen no evidence yet). Let us see your works of accredited scholarship, and, seeing as you keep telling us writers how to do our jobs

    I think you must be confusing me with Damien Walters. I don’t tell you how to do your job as a writer – you know far, far more about that than I do. That is why I read MGC because you have an interesting set of people with relevant experiences.

    I do talk about what I as a reader enjoy and appreciate and what I dont enjoy. Writers are free to ignore the opinions of readers – indeed they often SHOULD do so. But writers aren’t entitled to say readers shouldn’t HAVE opinions or express them.

    You don’t think of yourselves that way and you probably don’t percieve how often yourself or Larry or Brad are actually sounding indignant about readers thinking for themselves (Sarah H much less so).

    Now in terms of your reasoning and your number crunching, well yes – I will point out where I think you go wrong. And I don’t use arguments based on some magical authority I might have.

    I have no authority or at least what authority I could claim (beyond being a smartarse) I don’t claim. It’s why I like numbers and logic Dave.

  70. “Books that Make Puppies Happy”

    Is anyone going to cover a similar list for the shorter stuff? I don’t have time to read more than a few novels in a year, but can usually run though shorter stuff during lunch breaks.

  71. Please note: when he’s not concern-trolling on Puppy blog comments, Cameltoe D’Floppy is at his own blog saying things like this:

    “As for SP4, I think it conclusively proved that puppies will not follow a woman.”

  72. We’ll take nominations for short stuff, but most of us ALSO don’t have time to read it.
    As for Cameltoe D’FLoppy, this WOMAN did not renew her membership this year as she saw no point in sending good money after bad. The gender of the leader was, as is to most on our side, immaterial.
    Oh, and Monsieur D’ Floppy can cry at Vile 770 all he wants. I care as much for those opinions as I do for the opinions of gibbering idiots. (With apologies to gibbering idiots.) That these people are by and large of normal or more than normal IQ and choose to render themselves idiotic with virtue signaling only makes them more contemptible and pitiable.

  73. Puppies wouldn’t follow a woman? What?

    If so, Sarah, I must say that’s an impressive group of fake accounts I see commenting all over your site and Nikki’s. And I see those same accounts here on Brad’s site as well as Larry’s and John’s. The orchestration of that illusion is most impressive. I think you may have missed your calling and should go on Penn and Teller. 😉

    Good Night, will the projection and moronic assumptions never cease?

  74. Throughout 2013 and 2014, it seemed to me there might be a real opportunity to change the balance of recognition — even out the scale. I knew not everyone would be happy about it, if I got directly involved in 2015, but I assumed (hah, foolishly) that people would generally be grownups regarding a little shaking-up of the status quo. It never crossed my mind that the Puppy-kickers would react to the 2015 final ballot the way a spoiled, infantile 6 year old reacts to his mother not letting him have a toy from the toy aisle at the grocery store.

    The phrase “full-scale apoplectic conniption fit” only begins to paint the picture.

    It was a five-alarm house fire. The end of all things. Science fiction was going to be destroyed. The keepers and defenders of the status quo spared no expense — up to and including investing their business and career cachet — so as to reinforce the status quo.

    In the process, the keepers of the status quo signed a blood oath with a bunch of cultural marxists who aren’t nearly as interested in SF/F, as they are in moving in on and dominating yet another entertainment sphere — in the long march toward totalitarian transformation of our institutions.

    Granted, the nature of WSFS made it supremely easy for the cultural marxists to accomplish their takeover — there is a huge amount of familial and ideological overlap between WSFS and today’s elite breed of left-wing, identitarian political activist. Coopting the WSFS was as easy as putting ketchup on fries, or pepperoni on a cheese pizza. Now, WSFS is an owned commodity of cultural marxism, and the Hugo along with it.

    Again, you can’t save a drowning man who slaps away the hands trying to pull him from the water.

    I fully expect the #SocJus banners to fly loudly and proudly at all future Worldcon events. Hugo night will be a pageant of ideological sameness, celebrating “diversity” that is literally skin deep. The echo chamber will reverberate with joyful cries of self-admiration and self-approval.

    But will anyone outside the echo chamber even notice?

  75. Of all the many doctrines of progressivism, affirmative action seems to be one of the most sacrosanct

    I think abortion is their first and most holy sacrament. Affirmative Action is close behind at number 2…….

  76. Christopher M. Chupik on August 25, 2016 at 9:44 am said:

    Please note: when he’s not concern-trolling on Puppy blog comments, Cameltoe D’Floppy is at his own blog saying things like this:

    “As for SP4, I think it conclusively proved that puppies will not follow a woman.”

    Seriously Chris – lying about what people say is beneath you. That quote is not from me. Perhaps you can explain to people why you are pretending that it is.

  77. Sorry. It was Greg Hullender, a different File 770 regular, who wrote that particular calumny on Fappington’s blog. My apologies.

  78. Christopher M. Chupik on August 25, 2016 at 2:47 pm said:
    Sorry. It was Greg Hullender, a different File 770 regular, who wrote that particular calumny on Fappington’s blog. My apologies.

    Thank you.

  79. In the future I will endeavour to attribute idiocy to the correct idiot.

  80. Next time, don’t directly attribute the quote to him. Just say it’s from his blog, and add a “I see. Interesting.” to the end. That way, you can imply whatever you want. No need to be charitable or to actually offer any real offenses to be accused of so people can see where you’re stretching your opinions to fit your arguments. Let the vagueness be your friend.

    Like this:

    From camestrosfelapton’s blog:
    As for SP4, I think it conclusively proved that puppies will not follow a woman.

    I see. Interesting.

  81. I am not in a nice mood today. After multiple threads of camestrosfelapton being as uncharitable as possible with others over opinions, the gall of him demanding an apology just set me off. And it’s worse because he’s right, he didn’t say that, and honesty says a correction is in order. Somebody else did say it, on his blog, which makes it speech he published, and would make it easy to mistake for his own speech. He didn’t come out and apologize to us for what the person said about us that was obviously wrong, he came out and demanded an apology from you for making the mistake.

    The best way I can calm my irritation at having him do the same dishonest things over and over is by pointing out what tricks he uses and call out that I, for one, am not buying it.

  82. I’ve learned — these past 16 months — to expect almost nothing but dishonest interactivity from the Pravda 770 trolls who choose to come to these comments and engage in mischief of one kind or another. Their fingers are forever crossed behind their backs. They will cry crocodile tears and the merest proverbial scratch, yet attempt to leave long claw marks that bleed. One wonders if there is any person they esteem enough, that a little remonstration (from that person’s seat) might cow them?

  83. Pingback: Skepticlawyer » The Hugo awards and the decay of Western civilisation

  84. “I’ve learned — these past 16 months — to expect almost nothing but dishonest interactivity from the Pravda 770 trolls….” Well, for all his faults, Vox Day did get one thing very, very right: SJW’s always really DO lie. That is their modus operandi. Might as well tell a fish to stop swimming….

  85. Ok, Camelstump wants an apology? Great. 😀

    I apologize that camelstump is apparently a moron who is so fragile that she wants an apology.

  86. I think Mz. Hoyt summed up my feelings precisely, if less profanity-laden than the way I might have worded it… Absent the profanity, it sums up as: “Enjoy Vox and his Ilk, you vile, contemptible, disingenuous, slander-prone, despicable imbeciles. *I* eagerly anticipate his enjoyment of *you* at least. If I didn’t know he was already in Italy, with easy access to truly spectacular bottles without any help from me, I’d offer to ship him as many pallets of bottled Chianti as he thought his Rabid Puppies could imbibe. (I doubt they’d care about what vintage it was) They’ll need *something* to wash the fava beans and SJZ flesh down with, after all.”
    …or something along those lines. ~_^

  87. ” unwillingness to consider the fact that there are (in the immortal words of Larry Niven) minds which think as well as theirs, just differently.”

    If I am not mistaken, it was John W. Campbell Jr. who coined that phrase. Mr. Nive was just living up to it by inventing the aliens Campbell challenged his writers to write.

  88. “It’s funny that in a piece entitled “Courageous left-wing media beats stuffing out of Straw Puppy”, Brad proceeds to demolish a straw Progressive in the first paragraph! Good one.”

    SJW always lie
    When confronted, SJWs always double down
    SJWs always project, that is, accuse others of their own flaws.

    Note here that there is not one word of defense, merely an attack, a ‘tu quoque’, issued against Brad Torgersen. No hint of an apology for calling him a racist, etc.

  89. “From my perspective this started as a tantrum by LC because he: 1. Couldn’t win an award. 2. Is a bit crazy and people didn’t hang with him much at Worldcom.”

    Note how the SJW cannot formulate an argument. Even in an article whose title contains an argument against straw man arguments, he cannot help but make a straw man argument. No matter that our words an actions show repeatedly what our motives are, all the SJW can do is mock make-believe motives that they falsely attribute to us.

    Fool. If winning an award was LC’s motive, why did he recuse himself, now and forever, from winning one?

    SJWs have but three replies to any disagreement with the Narrative, no matter what the Narrative is, or what the facts say: 1. You’re rude 2. You’re insane 3. You’re bigoted.

  90. //John C Wright on August 30, 2016 at 8:56 am said:
    Note how the SJW cannot formulate an argument. Even in an article whose title contains an argument against straw man arguments, he cannot help but make a straw man argument. No matter that our words an actions show repeatedly what our motives are, all the SJW can do is mock make-believe motives that they falsely attribute to us.

    Fool. If winning an award was LC’s motive, why did he recuse himself, now and forever, from winning one?//

    He recused himself after being nominated for the second time (third attempt). Unless it is your contention that people’s feelings never change, your objection does not hold much water. Personally, I think the campaign that Larry started called “How to get Correia nominated for a Hugo” was, at least initially, a campaign to get Correia nominated for a Hugo and probably with some hope of winning one.

  91. “Note here that there is not one word of defense, merely an attack, a ‘tu quoque’, issued against Brad Torgersen. No hint of an apology for calling him a racist, etc.”

    Or for the false accusations of using his family as “human shields”, which is probably one of their most disgusting lies.

  92. Camel. Cupcake. I understand that “medical” marijuana makes you believe that your IQ has finally exceeded room temperature, but it doesn’t actually do that. It just tricks your singe brain cell into believing that it did.

    My name is Saber Alter, I’m not from the government and I’m here to help.

Comments are closed.