Missing Puppy Formation 4/15

Today there were major responses to a pair of Hugo nominees withdrawing their work from the ballot,  Marko Kloos and Annie Bellet, which raised the temperature of the discussion even higher.

John Scalzi comments on comparisons drawn between the eligibility of his 2006 novel and a 2013 John C. Wright story.  Sarah Hoyt turns an argument on its head. John Ringo forsees an enjoyable moment at the Hugo ceremony.

And Brad R. Torgersen posted a highly interesting, self-revelatory essay.

Bryan Thomas Schmidt on Facebook

When I hear one of my favorite writers, one of the most deserving of nominees, has dropped out of the Hugos because of the pressure, insults, and more she was subjected to by assholes who are angry and can’t blame those responsible but instead generalize and attack everyone, it makes me really disgusted. It also makes me more determined to keep my nomination and say this: the only thing tainting the awards this year is bad behavior by people who should have more maturity and class. Not bloc voting accusations or politics. But people unable to behave respectfully toward others. THAT stains our genre. It tars all of us. And I am soooooooo sick of it.


Vox Day on Vox Popoli

Annie Bellet withdraws – April 14

As to anyone feeling betrayed by this, don’t be. Leave them alone and respect their decision; do not criticize them for it. Regardless of why they chose to withdraw, that is their right and their choice, and it is neither a problem nor a concern of ours.

UPDATE: Marko Kloos wasn’t quite so judicious on Facebook, apparently. …

What is with these SF writers and their absolute preoccupation with all things excremental anyhow?


Larry Correia on Monster Hunter Nation

Well, this sucks. – April 14

Personally, I think this sucks. We were trying to get talented quality writers on the ballot who would normally be ignored. Neither of these share my politics. There are some amazing authors nominated for the first time, and I wish that people would just read the fucking books, but hell, who am I kidding? I’m tired of repeating myself. Some of the stuff I’ve seen go down over the last two weeks is so infuriating it would blow your mind.

For the 100th damned time, Vox wasn’t on SP3. He did his own thing. Now authors are being tried for guilt by association with somebody they never chose to associate with, and their nominations are somehow meaningless because the wrong person plugged their work.

That’s unfair bullshit and you all know it.


Sarah Hoyt on Mad Genius Club

“The Dogs You Lie Down With” – April 15

It occurred to me that no one, that I know (and he’d probably tell me, at least for the novelty) has gone to John C. Wright and said “You’re supported by Sarah A. Hoyt, a public and avowed supporter of same sex marriage, who has many gay characters in her books. Therefore, you too must be a public and avowed supporter of same sex marriage, you horrible man.”

Mind you, there are people who consider this position of mine more than they can swallow and who have told me so and told me they’d never read me again. That’s fine by me. I arrived at that decision on my own and by thought. (And I’m not in favor of activist stunts like taking down pizza parlors or forcing religions you don’t even belong to to marry you or to perform ceremonies forbidden by their beliefs. No, supporting SSM doesn’t mean supporting that. I reject guilt by association in all forms.) I’m a big girl and I can wear big girl pants. (As for the gay characters they just happen. It’s like I have a ton of stories by the sea, and no, that’s not where I grew up. Or why I’m infected with dragons. Not everything in art is under your strict control.)


Nerdvana Podcast

Show #146: Episode 38: “HugoGate 2015”, Part 1. The title pretty much says it all. We’re not here to discuss the nominees, we are here to talk about the controversy surrounding this years Hugo awards. Join hosts JC Arkham and Two-Buck Chuck as we welcome back guests Hugo awards winners Christopher J Garcia and Mo “The Thrill” Starkey along with special guest Hugo expert Kevin Standlee.


John Ringo on Facebook – April 15

Talking with Cedar Sanderson reminded me of something.

There are multiple nominees for every Hugo and Nebula which are publicly posted. A few years back, both the Hugo and Nebula committee started to give out small trinkets to all the nominees who didn’t win. Runner up awards if you will. ‘You’re such nice people and you really deserve SOMETHING.’

Lois Bujold has collected so many over the years that she has a whole necklace of the things.

I just realized that the Hugo committee is going to have to pass those out to Tom Kratman, Toni Weisskopf, Brad Torgersen, etcetera, EVEN IF THEY DON’T WIN A HUGO.

Or I suppose they can eliminate the practice.

But I really want to see their faces when they’re forced to give one to Tom Kratman.

Fortunately, the whole ceremony is generally live cast to DragonCon. So I don’t actually have to attend WorldCon thank God.




David Gerrold on Facebook – April 15

Fans don’t quit. Fans don’t give up. Fans are the kind of people who — if you give them lemons — come back with key lime pie and you’re left scratching your head, wondering how they did it.

So we will have a Hugo ceremony. It will be a celebration of our deserving nominees. It will be a celebration of excellence in the genre. It will be a celebration of our history and our traditions. It will be a celebration of us.

There will be some jokes. There will be some surprises. Some of the best people in the genre have stepped up to the plate — and we’re planning a celebration that will be joyous and fun. I intend that we will end up feeling proud that we haven’t lost our ability to be the greatest fans on Earth — and in space as well.

When we step back and take a larger look at our history, at our traditions, at ourselves and the scale of our dreams and the scale of our accomplishments — this year’s little kerfuffle is merely a momentary hiccup in a much bigger history.


John Brown

“What Vox Day Believes” – April 15

I asked Day if he’d mind answering a few questions.

He agreed.

What you will read below is our conversation, arranged for easy reading.

Why am I doing this?

Well, who doesn’t want to scoop the devil? But beyond that, I agree with George R. R. Martin: internet conversations that are not moderated to maintain a tone of respectful disagreement are a bane upon us all. Actually, Martin said they were part of the devil’s alimentary canal, but I didn’t want to confuse the topic.


Dave Gonzales on Geek.com

“Winter isn’t coming: Hugo Awards’ own GamerGate is delaying A Song of Ice and Fire” – April 15

George RR Martin has taken to his blog to talk about a scandal at the Hugo Awards this year, and if he’s blogging, he’s not finishing Winds of Winter, the next installment in his A Song of Ice and Fire series of novels that inspired HBO runaway hit Game of Thrones.

Martin is an avid blogger and a seemingly avid procrastinator that loves hanging out at comic book and sci-fi conventions. He was in the news this March when he announced he wasn’t going to San Diego Comic-Con this year so he could continue work on his next book. Sad news for fans attending the Con and devastating news for those waiting for the new book: this July marks four years since A Dance With Dragons, and he’s still going to be working?


Brad R. Torgersen

“Tribalism is as tribalism does” – April 14

I told George R. R. Martin I’d be writing this post — as a result of some of the polite dialogue we had at his LiveJournal page. His basic question to me was, “How can you, as a guy in an interracial marriage, put up with some of the racist and sexist stuff (a certain person) writes on his blog?” I thought this a valid question. How indeed? I didn’t have the space on LiveJournal to unpack all of my thoughts and feelings on the dread ism topic, so I thought I would do it here.


Rhiannon on Feminist Fiction

“Responding to the Hugos” – April 15

The key thing, in the end, is voting. If we want diverse creators and titles to be included in the Hugos, then we need to show up and have our voices heard. And not just as an act of protest, but as an act of engagement. Read the nominees, make a genuine evaluation of which ones we like the best, and vote for them because we truly believe they deserve to win. Sure, it’s not as dramatic as nuking the votes, and it makes a less headline-worthy point of “we matter too,” but it’s the way that “untraditional” sci-fi/fantasy fans should be able to engage with the Hugos, and the Sad Puppies don’t prevent us from doing that. If enough people who don’t fit the Sad Puppies idea of “real sci-fi/fantasy” feel inspired to vote, then diverse works will be included naturally. The Sad Puppies slate only worked because very few people actually contribute to the Hugo nominations. The best way to stop them, therefore, is to contribute. And no matter how much some people believe that must be a conspiracy, anyone with sense can easily see that it’s just honest diversity in action.


John Scalzi on Whatever

“The Latest Hugo Conspiracy Nonsense Involving Me” – April 15

In the wake of one of John C. Wright’s Hugo-nominated stories being disqualified for the ballot because it was previously published on his Web site, howls of bitter indignancy have arisen from the Puppy quarters, on the basis that Old Man’s War, a book I serialized here on Whatever in 2002, qualified for the Hugo ballot in 2006 (it did not win). The gist of the whining is that if my work can be thought of as previously unpublished, why not Mr. Wright’s? Also, this is further evidence that the Hugos are one big conspiracy apparently designed to promote the socially acceptable, i.e., me specifically, whilst putting down the true and pure sons of science fiction (i.e., the Puppies)…..

  1. Aside from my notification of the nomination, I had no contact with the Hugo Award committee of that year prior to the actual Worldcon, nor could I tell you off the top of my head who was on the committee. It doesn’t appear that anyone at the time was concerned about whether OMW being serialized here constituted publication. Simply put, it didn’t seem to be an issue, or at the very least, no one told me if it were. Again, if this was a conspiracy to get me on the ballot, it lacked one very important conspirator: Me.
  2. So why would OMW’s appearance on a Web site in 2002 not constitute publication, but Mr. Wright’s story’s appearance on a Web site in 2013 constitute publication? There could be many reasons, including conspiracy, but I think the more likely and rather pedestrian reason is that more than a decade separates 2002 and 2013. In that decade the publishing landscape has changed significantly. In 2002 there was no Kindle, no Nook, no tablet or smart phone; there was no significant and simple commerce channel for independent publication; and there was not, apparently, a widespread understanding that self-publishing, in whatever form, constituted formal publication for the purposes of the Hugo Awards. 2013 is not 2002; 2015, when Mr. Wright’s story was nominated, is not 2006, when OMW was nominated.


Frank Catalano on GeekWire

“As science fiction ascends its popular award — the Hugo — threatens to nosedive” – April 15

It’s not that campaigning is new to science-fiction and fantasy awards. I was the volunteer administrator of another prestigious science-fiction competition, the Nebula Awards, during its major controversy in the 1980s. When I called an author to congratulate her for taking best short story in the peer-voted honors, I was stunned to hear her say she wanted to withdraw the work – after winning.

Her reason was the campaigning by another finalist in the same category. I had the awkward task of notifying the board of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America of the winner’s desire to decline, establishing my unenviable role as the Miles Standish of the Nebulas in the process. (The writer was Lisa Tuttle, the work was “The Bone Flute,” and both remain worth reading.)

But the big difference between the Nebulas then, and the Hugos now, is that the Nebula campaigning didn’t affect the outcome of the vote. For the Hugos, bloc campaigning verging on manipulation dominates the ballot today. And if protest “No Award” votes overwhelm slate-propelled finalists, the Hugos also fail in 2015 because certainly something, somewhere was worthy of a Hugo this year.

That could be a sad thing for science fiction, as geek culture has become mainstream popular culture. The irony of this Hugo ballot is that, simultaneous to science fiction’s ascendance, we’ve seen a reduced reliance on “quality” gatekeepers such as awards. Fans can find recommendations of what’s worth reading, even more tightly tied to their tastes, with an online tap or click. Maybe, as once was said about academia, the battles are so fierce because the stakes are so small.


Daniel on Castalia House

“Hugo Awards: A History of Recommendation Lists” – April 15

Frank Wu’s analysis of the awards from 2001-2005 suggests otherwise: that not only was there tremendous overlap in the “competing” lists, but that the appearance of diversity was, in fact, an important element of bloc-list unity. Some of the discrepancy between Wu and Martin is in interpretation: where [George R.R.] Martin sees an issue of an individual body exerting “control” over the process, and the evidence of “independent” bodies diffusing that control, Wu boils it down to the practicalities: a clear harmony of recommendations by influencers effectively guides the Hugos.

In other words, with the exception of a single book out of 28, if your novel wasn’t on a campaign list…you simply weren’t nominated, and sure as shooting were not going to win. The recommendation blocs didn’t guarantee individuals made it to the final ballot, they guaranteed that outsiders were left off.


Steve Davidson on Amazing Stories

“Happy Fans” – April 15

Now, it’s time for some real speculation.

Why would someone knowingly allow an ineligible work to be nominated for an award?

Well, if I were a schemer who liked to play head games with people and I was also trying to make a political point about the organization that was responsible for administering that award, I might find it extremely funny to try and set them up in a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation, especially if I was trying to devalue the entire award process.

Here’s how that might work.

I get my pals together and create a voting slate (knowing that since such a thing had never been done before, or at the very least never been done on such a monumentally annoying scale before, that it stands a good chance of succeeding) and when the list of recommendations that my minions will slavishly vote for is finalized, I’d salt it with a couple of ineligible works.

Heads I Win:  for one reason or another, the ineligible works make it all the way through to the final ballot, the awards are handed out and:  “See!  We TOLD you the awards were poorly managed.  How long has this been going on?  This brings the validity of every single award given out for the past 60 years into question!  What a crock.  They’re totally valueless.”

Tails You Lose: the ineligible works are identified and removed from the ballot.  “See!  We TOLD you the fix was in.  The ONLY reason that this work was ruled ineligible is because of the author’s politics!  How long has this been going on?  This brings the validity of every single award given out for the past 60 years into question!  What a crock.  They’re totally valueless.”

191 thoughts on “Missing Puppy Formation 4/15

  1. ‘Larry Correia called in the troll squads of the gamergators.’

    Actually, I’m not sure he did. Not successfully. Not enough rape threats going around, for a start. Nobody connected to the Hugos has been doxxed or Swatted either, touch wood.

    ‘There are people out there on the interwebs who make Mr. Beale look, well, merely sexist’

    Maybe, but I think anyone who denies the existence of marital rape earns the distinction of being a notch or two above ‘merely.’

  2. Yes, by ultimate sexist I meant the the most sexist in Fandom. So we agree on that. And of course Gamergates lobbying frontman Milo Yiannopoulos, after communications with Correia, tipped his little rabid gators on to Vox. All this is in the open. And it was Vox that succeeded in getting his nominees choosen, not the sad puppies.

    And I disagree. I see a lot of the same tactics as used by gamergaters. Sockpuppet accounts, talkingpoints, selecting named enemies (Scalzi instead of Sarkeesian), etc. It looks remarkably alike.

  3. Comparing me to myself would be a dodge.

    “Hey boys, I found a racist.”

    “How do you know?”

    “He’s the only one in the room.”

    “We’re here.”

    “Ummm…. oh, yeah. Heh-heh. None of us have brown hair. He’s the only person in existence with brown hair.”

    “Gee, mebbe we should do a selfie.”

  4. @Nigel
    “No you don’t. Good lord that is some craven and naked special pleading”

    Not it really isn’t. He’s for freedom of all peoples. He’s against murder. He’s anti-eugenics. He’s also from a multi-cultural family. He believes that all humans (of all races) have dignity given by God. The box you want to put him in is a very small one and doesn’t even begin to describe his world view. I don’t agree with him on a great many things but I’ve found his detractors ill informed at best.

    @Milt Stevens,
    “Some of these people are mistaking a fashion for a conspiracy. ”

    No I’d say we are pretty clear that it is something fashion like. In fact the utter obliviousness to its existence reinforces the case for fashion.


    “Larry Correia called in the troll squads of the gamergators. And as they are sexist by nature, they gravitated towards the ultimate sexist, Vox Day.

    And now we have sexist trolls with no interest in Science Fiction”

    So much to unpack there:
    1.) Larry, a SF author, has non-fans as fans evidently
    2.) Larry’s fans are trolls (the de-humanization again)
    3.) They are sexist
    4.) They all agree with Vox Day
    5.) They are all members of Gamersgate
    6.) They have no interest in SF

    I know the whole logic thing is probably a bit much for what amounts to a trollish post, but
    1.) Is ridiculous
    2.) Also ridiculous as they seem to be professionals who get along just fine in real life
    3.) Are composed of women HORROR!
    4.) Have made clear that they don’t all agree with Vox Day but the agreeing with or not agreeing with is not material to the Hugo’s
    5.) Assuming gamers and SF/F fans have no crossover is ignorant at best
    6.) Why in God’s name would we go through the trouble of reading SF/F, as we have proven OVER and OVER again that we do if we didn’t care?

    STOP the dehumanizing. STOP acting like a bunch of jack boots.

    Speaking of which, if anyone reads the story about the world turning up-side down and doesn’t feel an intense disdain for the protagonist all the way through I’m not entirely sure what to think of their morals. Someone that would save a _goldfish_ over saving a a terrified woman from plunging to her death is not someone I want roaming around free in the world. And for God’s sake _get over her already_. How that can be better than Wright on his worst day is beyond me. The whole thing is some long winded suicide letter. It is if anything an apt description of the complete lack of hope that has consumed so much modern SF/F.

  5. ‘It looks remarkably alike.’

    Yeah, but they’re kinda standard libertarian culture war tactics, too, while the stuff the gators throw at women in particular has its own unique flavour of horrible. I mean, look at James May above. I have no idea what the hell he’s on about. Gators, whatever else you might say abut them, can usually deliver a vaguely coherent threat or insult six to seven times out of ten. ‘Comparing myself to myself would be a dodge.’ That’s just… what the heck is he trying to say there?

  6. “Yes, by ultimate sexist I meant the the most sexist in Fandom. ”

    Ultimate sexist in fandom nominated…women. Talks with…women. Is married…to a woman (I know there is the real rabid crowd that insists Spacebunny doesn’t exist…but well…they are crazy).

    Anti-SP’s…pledged to vote against a single jewish mother for associating with the wrong sorts of people…twice. Of course since she is associated with SP/RP she is also not a real fan despite running one of the biggest publishing houses in SF.

    More people that don’t exist/aren’t people.

    Go figure.

  7. ‘Not it really isn’t.’

    Yes he really is. (Really? Against murder? Did you have to check that? Did he wrestle with it for a while and then come out in a strong stand against it? Whoop-dee-doo. AND anti-eugenics and pro-freedom? Jaysus, he’ll drag us kickin’ an’ screamin’ into the eighteenth century yet.)

  8. “How that can be better than Wright on his worst day is beyond me.”

    Simple. He even explains it in the text: “At the end of the world, it’s every man for himself”.

    We don’t have to like the protagonist to understand him. We don’t have to be faced with a protagonist who never screws up badly — indeed, he clearly feels guilty about what he did later in the text, when he meets the woman’s daughter.

    It’s complexity of character, something that the two short examples of Mr. Wright’s fiction I read recently completely managed to avoid. The animals in “Parliament” were not complex figures — they were stock. Same for the people in “Yes, Virginia.” That the latter were stock figures in a traumatic situation doesn’t mean they weren’t stock.

    Apparently you didn’t get to the end, where the exploration of the unknown, and a hope for the future, no matter how weird it was going to be, were at the center of the story — which is *classically* SFnal.

    In the end, this all comes back, of course, to a matter of taste — you will never convince me, and I will (I suspect) never convince you, because our scales for judging SF are so different.

    Trying to eliminate either from the field as “not SF” is not helping matters.

  9. 1.) Larry, a SF author, has non-fans as fans evidently

    He didn’t say that, that’s your… completely incoherent paraphrase of a thing he didn’t say.

    2.) Larry’s fans are trolls (the de-humanization again)

    He was talking about Gamergaters. They are trolls. Trolls are human too. If you prick them do they not bleed? Don’t go pricking people, it’s just a saying. If some of Correia’s fans are Gamergaters that’s not to their credit.

    3.) They are sexist

    Oh my, yes.

    4.) They all agree with Vox Day

    He’s a proud Gamergater, so they are in accord over some things at least.

    5.) They are all members of Gamersgate

    Yes, when he said Correia invited Gamergaters, all the Gamergaters Correia invited were Gamergaters. I don’t think it worked, myself or Gamergater numbers were even more inflated than anyone suspected.

    6.) They have no interest in SF

    If they had to be invited along they certainly had no interest in the Hugos corner of SF. I do hope they enjoy Ancillary Sword, it may pique an interest.

    ‘STOP the dehumanizing’

    He didn’t say Gamergaters weren’t human, just that they’re horrible! Which they are!

  10. “Some of these people are mistaking a fashion for a conspiracy.”

    The Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t monitor fashions and nor is racial and sexual group defamation a cutesy trend like planking. What we are seeing in core SFF is the normalization of hate speech passed off as social justice. People like Anita Sarkeesian and the whole movement within SFF perfectly fit the definition of a cult of bigots. I shudder to think what the next fashionable trend will be if censor reviewing white men is considered “diversity” and “inclusion.”

    Invoking the ancient phrase “compared to what” reveals not baking cakes for gays rotates back to bigotry, and not a “fashion.”

    Hahahah. Nigel is confused by civilization.

    Hard is hard compared to what, Nigel. SOFT.


    Analogy and metaphor are completely unavailable to any SJW; they are identity-addicts who have no idea what a principle is. There is literally no right and wrong in their world. They have to be taken by the hand and walked through the simplest concepts and couldn’t make a simple comparison to save their lives. I’m not surprised they consider the most ruthless group defamation to be just a-okay if someone under 6 ft. tall does it and it turn into hate speech if a tall person does it. Extrapolating out SJW culture into a nation would mean chaos, civil war and a dictatorship, with them at the bottom.

  11. To agree with Nigel:

    “Sockpuppet accounts, talkingpoints, selecting named enemies (Scalzi instead of Sarkeesian), etc. It looks remarkably alike.”

    That part does. But that part has been going around for a *very* long time, in different fora, etc. What I’m not seeing is the kind of over-the-top harassment we’ve seen associated with Gamergate; no one (to my knowledge) has had to leave their home because of anonymous threats, no one has been SWATted, etc., etc., etc.

    I had a lengthy chat with two good friends of mine in fandom, and one thing it gave me (since they’ve been around it much longer than I) is a sense of perspective. These wars erupt in fandom. They cause uproar, upheaval, cons shatter, friendships shatter — and then we pick up and go on.

    It is, in fact, that survivability that annoys me most about Mr. Beale’s repeated “If you don’t do as we say now, we’ll blow up the awards until you do.” Whether it was media fans vs. book fans, supporters of A Big Name Figure vs. those who thought him an utter sleazeball, etc., we’ve moved past. Someone threatening to keep their particular culture war front and center? Hopefully, he can’t do it, and SF fandom will forge on, except for a few people who still shake their fists at each other across a Worldcon lobby or an internet forum.

  12. Ah! All now becomes clear!

    “Analogy and metaphor are completely unavailable to any SJW; they are identity-addicts who have no idea what a principle is. There is literally no right and wrong in their world.”

    Mr. May, let me reassure you; the SJWs you describe do not live under your bed, and will not attempt to eat you if you get up to get milk and cookies in the middle of the night.

    And that sort of SJW is just as real as the monster under your bed, or the boogeyman.

    If you want, I can repeat that twice more, and then you’ll know; it will be up to you to decide whether or not to softly and quietly vanish away.

    (Why, yes, I did study Reference-Loaded Sarcasm under Prof. Disch, why do you ask?)

  13. ‘Invoking the ancient phrase “compared to what” ‘

    It does sound like a catchphrase from a Kurt Vonnegut story, now that you mention it.

    ‘They have to be taken by the hand and walked through the simplest concepts and couldn’t make a simple comparison to save their lives.’

    I’ve no doubt that there’s ne’er a concept so simple you couldn’t turn it into word stew. I know this because I can compare your writings to literally every other post in this comment section.

  14. “The part where, if you and people around you don’t care about the awards, you make such a big deal about how people are voting for them or not. You arbitrarily declared an endpoint, as I said, and now want everyone to accept “You won.””

    Not at all. I’m merely offering a potential endpoint for this year’s Hugos that would also make next year’s Hugos more normal. You have absolutely no idea what I have in mind next. There is no endpoint for the cultural war in science fiction.

    “If you’re done, and you don’t care, then shut up about it and let other people do what they want. If you’ve won, and you don’t care, your money is away from the table, so why do you care about the ante?”

    I’m not done. I’ve barely gotten started.

    “I know you may believe in the bifurcation of SF, but many people do not; your continued efforts to push it in that direction are not appreciated.”

    It will happen regardless.

    “Apparently, what you want is for us to let you do what you want, not counter-organize against an organization, and sit down and shut up. You’re not going to get it.”

    (laughs) As I said, you have absolutely no idea what I want. Nor do I have any intention of telling you. This will take years to play out. Of course you will counter-organize. How else will you help me bifurcate SF?

    “You do not get to say ‘Here’s what I’m going to do; if you don’t do what I want, the consequences are entirely on you.””

    I’m happy to take responsibility for the consequences. I would just like the other side to make informed decisions, not merely react out of fear and outrage. Whatever those decisions might be. I’m genuinely fascinated that so many of you would genuinely rather blow up the awards than risk seeing one go to the likes of Jim Butcher or John C. Wright.

    Me, sure. I understand that. But them? That’s very interesting.

  15. Theo “This will take years to play out.”

    Ah, classic Theo. “Just wait twenty years and you’ll see I’m right. No way to disprove me now!!!”

    It’s amazing how you manage to keep your ilk given how wrong you’ve been after merely 10 years.

  16. Nigel, how old are you? This is a serious question. You’re statements about gg and internet culture wars make me think you’re at least 40, probably 50… Because you don’t understand a damn thing about what’s going on.

    Oh, and TNH “invited” gg into this whole mess.

  17. @Steve,
    “The animals in “Parliament” were not complex figures — they were stock. Same for the people in “Yes, Virginia.” ”

    It saddens me that much like Peter Jackson and his changing of Faramir you all have evidently never known genuinely good people. That’s why you view them as cliches that must be discarded.

    “no one (to my knowledge) has had to leave their home because of anonymous threats”

    No they’ve just been told that their books won’t be bought and at least two have renounced their nominations.

  18. The Southern Poverty Law Center doesn’t monitor fashions and nor is racial and sexual group defamation a cutesy trend like planking. What we are seeing in core SFF is the normalization of hate speech passed off as social justice. People like Anita Sarkeesian and the whole movement within SFF perfectly fit the definition of a cult of bigots. I shudder to think what the next fashionable trend will be if censor reviewing white men is considered “diversity” and “inclusion.”

    But what does any of this have to do with the conspiracy that has supposedly controlled the Hugos for years?

  19. When your defense of someone consists of “oh he isn’t the most racist person in fandom!”, you *have* lost the argument.

  20. I have never maintained there is a conspiracy at the Hugos. In the comment Mike deleted, there is massive evidence of public collusion to promote SFF according to race and sex while accusing people who do no such thing of doing that. The reason that constitutes massive evidence is I can produce hundreds just like it. On the other hand, I cannot produce one quote that promotes men, whites or heterosexual SFF from a supremacist or ideological standpoint.

    As for not being the worst racist, that is in fact precisely the point. It is semantic gibberish for the other side to ignore their own cult of sexual and racial defamation. “Compared to what” to an SJW is a Rubik’s Cube wrapped in a Gordian Knot and buried under the Sphinx. SJW morality works in precisely the opposite direction of a true moral ethos. Their ideology amounts to the institutionalization of lying.

  21. James: “there is massive evidence of public collusion to promote SFF according to race and sex”

    Are you saying that it requires a conspiracy for publishers to want to promote their wares to someone other than white males?

    If you have dramatic evidence and Mike won’t let it on here, blog it and just post a link here with a short comment for reference.

  22. “Are you saying that it requires a conspiracy for publishers to want to promote their wares to someone other than white males?”

    These are not publishers, they are writers and bloggers. It’s pretty obvious you are clueless this even exists. Start looking at the Twitter feeds of recent Hugo and Nebula nominees, including this year’s Nebula nominees. The bigotry and race/gender promotion is stunning. It’s pretty obvious what’s inside the stories comes in second place. The woman who resigned from the Hugos last year because of Jonathan Ross Tweeted this: “Just read Afrofuturism by Ytasha L Womack. Not sure it’s a good book but it is an important one. On my #HugoList it goes.” Trust me, there is a massive amount of quotes like that. It’s pretty obvious “important” equals “race.”

    Of course if there’s no “compared to what” they could be angelic social workers.

  23. “Mr. May, let me reassure you; the SJWs you describe do not live under your bed, ”

    And yet Vox Day seems to live in all of your heads.

    I posted this earlier but it was apparently too immoderately put, so I’ll try again — why was the presence of some random person with views you don’t like so horrifying that an endless war had to be started to chuck him out?

    And yes, I know his official crime: he got in a flame war with someone as racist as he is. That’s it. That’s what all this hair-pulling is about. That’s why fandom had to be destroyed, apparently. Are you all happy with how this has played out?

  24. James. So the shadowy cabal is a lot of probably leftist community members who tweet and blog their opinions. Hold the front page! This is real news.

    By the way, forgot to include the link to your blog post with all the evidence.

  25. Mr ThirteenthLetter,

    As I understand it Mr Beale’s official crime was misuse of organisation tools. He used a facility provided by the SFWA to send an open letter to all members that was an attack on another member. If he wanted to blog about it fine, but spamming the membership was considered out of line.

  26. James,

    Middle of the day where I am. I am wide awake and fresh as a daisy. But if it’s night where you are, please get some(from the way you are sounding) much needed rest.

    Don’t do that blog and link stuff I spoke about till (your) tomorrow. Sleep is much more important!

  27. Tintinaus: James has already posted the comment I deleted on Larry Correia’s blog. The boy did not let any grass grow under his feet, I can assure you.

  28. Thanks Mike, I checked it out. Unfortunately a lot of nothing.

    Damn, with Larry on his side I was hoping he would be able to blow this whole conspiracy wide open. It seems even Larry isn’t mighty enough to shield the truth from the reach of the Cabal.

    If anyone else here does want to see what James was on about, you can find it here: http://monsterhunternation.com/
    (I hope posting the link isn’t out of line Mike.)

  29. “I have an idea for a WorldCon panel. I’d call it ‘Compared to What?’, because frankly, this opacity is killing this community.”

    Because the one thing fandom and Worldcon (and its programing) have always lacked is sufficient introspection and internal debate.

    No, there is no staggering ignorance on display here whatsoever. None at all. Move along. Move along.

  30. I’m pretty amazed that anyone buys Teddy’s BS. Pretty telling that he can’t even keep a cohesive message from one comment to the other.

    “I don’t care at all!” vs. “I’ve got a multi year plan to deal with it”

  31. ‘Because you don’t understand a damn thing about what’s going on.’

    The categories of people who just don’t understaaaaaaaaaaahnd Gamergater culture is long indeed. Something something games journalism. We know internet culture well enough to spot a punchline when we see one.

  32. “‘What I have maintained is the winners of both last year’s Hugos and Nebulas are completely devoted to queer theory and intersectionalism’”

    Huh, weird, because I thought it was a fairly interesting MilSF about a battle weary ships AI deciding to take on a corrupted multi-part Augmented Intelligence that had lost it it’s ship.

    Go figure. You don’t think you’re projecting a little do you?

  33. rcade’s proposed amendment is a “should”. It does not require enforcement, because it cannot be enforced. It creates an expectation, and a moral obligation.

  34. “What as a fan really worries me is the politicization of fandom. I don’t think it’s normal that a conservative fan (or any other fan) should have to feel like an outsider, and I think it is a recent phenomenon very harmful for what, in my opinion, fandom should stand for. I think people should ask themselves whether this is what we really want. If we keep the way we are going, we’ll end up becoming two separate fandoms.”

    Something I think you are missing is this: “the personal is political”. History and explanation here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_personal_is_political

    Reading is a personal thing. What we read, what is available for us to read, what is promoted for us to read, is controlled by political processes. While many publishers are apolitical in that they want to publish what makes money, individual staff members, editors, agents, and so on can have certain political beliefs about what will make money.

    One thing we’ve seen is how beliefs about the sellability of women or people of color protagonists(or *gasp!* women of color!) affect what is published and how the cover and marketing are framed. YA authors have spoken out about pressures they’ve received from agents, publishers, editors to make these kinds of changes.

    Being exposed to non-white non-men is political, just as much as only seeing white men is political.

    Fandom has *always* been political. SFF has *always* been political.

    What has changed is that a group of people that normally weren’t catered to, are being catered to now.

    You will always be able to enjoy the books you enjoy. They will still sell. No one has a problem with that. People had a problem with those being the *majority* of books sold. Women are a majority on this planet. Surely women as protagonists should be a majority if picking gender was done randomly.

    But gender of protagonists is not chosen randomly. That is political.

Comments are closed.