Vox Day Responds About Gallo Screencap

The June 6 roundup included a quote from Tor Creative Director Irene Gallo’s Facebook page, tweeted by Vox Day:

The quote generated a flurry of response (11 examples mentioned in the June 7 roundup).

There also were questions raised in discussion at File 770 about evidence that Gallo’s comment must have been screencapped soon after it was made on May 11, with people wondering why it had just come to light now.

On behalf of File 770 readers I asked Vox Day “(1) how long did you hold this before posting, and (2) what is the sinister plotting, er, reason behind whatever delay there was, if any?”

He answered:

I’ve held onto this since I had the screencap, which as you correctly note was made several weeks ago. As for the “sinister plotting”, I have long been in the habit of never using all of my ammunition at once, or pointing-and-shrieking for its own sake. I am a patient man and I didn’t strike back at TNH, PNH, or even John Scalzi right away either.

So it does seem to have been timed for release just ahead of Nebula Awards weekend.

187 thoughts on “Vox Day Responds About Gallo Screencap

  1. Untrue. Vox tweeted a link to a post on a non-official SFWA account.

    I don’t believe that’s the view of the SFWA. The feed is set up by the SFWA for authors to use for promotional purposes.

  2. “Vox tweeted a link to a post on a non-official SFWA account.”

    He used a hashtag which meant his post was automatically disseminated to SFWA Authors. So he deliberately disseminated a link to an off-topic post containing a personal attack on Ms Jemisin to her peers. Which was deliberate and nasty trolling of the SFWA membership.

    And so he was booted.

    Are you guys going to rehash every single battle and every single act of trolling by Herr Teddy Boy because you are too lazy to google and you think we have the memories of goldfish? Because I should warn you, a lot of people in SFF are trained historians and we can research you lot into the damn ground.

  3. Lost Sailor wrote:

    “Asking a question is not reading your mind,”

    …contradicting her/his earlier comment

    “Be honest. Because we all already know the answer.”

    I took what you said at face value, that you thought you knew what my answer was going to be (with the implication that I was going to lie in that answer — nice to meet you for the first time, too).

    “And I note that at least you answered the question, though I doubt the veracity of your answer.”

    Is that so…?

    Unfortunately for yer cute little fecal-stirrin’ heart, I’m not going to take the flamebait. In fact, I’m shunning you, effective as soon as this posts.

    To quote the I’m-certain-he’s-much-smarter-than-you John McLaughlin, “Bye, bye!”

  4. @Ann Somerville

    Are you guys going to rehash every single battle and every single act of trolling by Herr Teddy Boy because you are too lazy to google and you think we have the memories of goldfish?

    Signs point to yes. For variety we also get to rehash everything Torgersen, Correia and the rest of the Puppies said, too. Yay.

  5. @ Lostsailoer, uh, no, you’ve misread my post. “Half-savage” might be used by a DAW publisher or staffer in an amusing way to describe a writer who did something silly or clumsy or funny.

    If used in a racist way–as, for example, Vox Day used the phrase when attacking novelist NK Jemisin (and using official SFWA media to promote his attack on another SFWA member)–the only possible explanation I can think of for a DAW employee’s social media posting such remark would indeed be an account hack. This is because I know the staff at DAW (it is, as I have indicated, a small company).

    Although I met her once, back when I was writing for Tor, I do not “know” Ms. Gallo. That said, she has never been known to issue racist slurs, and I see no reason to fret about her hypothetically doing so.

  6. P.S. First sentence above caveat: That is, if a DAW staffer ever used a phrase like “half-savage.” Which is doubt. That is YOUR hypothetical, not mine.

    My hypothetical is that DAW realizes now that Tor has made a $3.4 mill deal with Scalzi, DAW should OBVIOUSLY offer a multi-million dollar deal to ME. I find this a far more interesting hypothetical to explore than yours, go figure.

  7. @ Phil Sandifer

    I explored why “Vox Day” might be considered anti-semitic in an earlier comment, with references.

    http://file770.com/?p=22569&cpage=7#comment-263698

    In response to a further request from Rick Moen, I gave a further example of how Zionism might be compatible with anti-semitism.

    http://file770.com/?p=22569&cpage=5#comment-263510

    It’s worth noting that you don’t have to believe that Jews are inferior in order to be anti-semitic – you could just as well believe them to be superior (at least in certain ways), and thus a malign influence (or even a threat).

    Happy to discuss this further if you feel that my points are not strong enough to carry the charge.

  8. Laura Resnick: DAW realizes now that Tor has made a $3.4 mill deal with Scalzi, DAW should OBVIOUSLY offer a multi-million dollar deal to ME.

    I eagerly await the release of NYT Bestsellers-to-be Esther Diamond’s War and Silerianshirts.

  9. Cat: “In the meantime, the Puppies have 1) brought a great deal more attention to this supposedly scurrilous claim than it would otherwise have gotten and 2) demonstrated that–despite Brad’s brave words about Sads and Rabids being separate groups–when Vox Day dangles the doggy treat they all jump for it in one big pack.”

    That’s the only good thing to come out of this, honestly. Well, there’s also the sight of professional authors showing the entire world that they don’t understand how words work. That’s pretty fun, too.

    I suppose they’ll probably go back to pretending like they’re not the same in a week or so. It does seem like they didn’t think this through very well.

  10. @LostSailor

    “Who ever said that the sole purpose was to “hurt others”? ”

    You did. I quoted it. “it’s about the careful application of pain in a long campaign.”

    Or does “pain” have a different meaning on your planet?

  11. @Source decay

    On the bad side, it also shows how otherwise intelligent folk like Eric Flint suddenly turn blind if one of their friends is targeted.

    I was saddened by his one-sided attack on Ms. Gallo, while ignoring everything his friend Brad Torgersen has done and said.

  12. @Mart
    Please (re)examine your bias: Eric Flint didn’t “turn blind” he wrote something you disagree with. He didn’t “attack” Gallo, he criticized her and that’s a nontrivial difference. And when he comments on Gallo he is under no obligation to rehash everything he has said to/on Torgersen or make you and the internet party to their private conversations. For many reasons, the simplest one being that Torgersen isn’t the topic of his post.
    Gallo was wrong. As Flint explains nicely and at length. If you disagree, why not explain exactly where he is wrong?

  13. Actually mk41, the fact that Eric does take only one side to task for their public utterances means that the bias is Eric’s, not mine. And for someone who until now has been scrupulously neutral, that’s rather disappointing.

    And Gallo wasn’t wrong; as explained multiple times here already by other posters. At worst she was hyperbolic, but somehow that’s a deadly sin if it is engaged in by a non-Puppy.

  14. @Mart
    Please link to some of these multiple explanations. I was around, I followed the discussion, I am not aware of those. I do however not accept the notion of “hyperbole” as a licence to hurl insults and make widely inaccurate statements so maybe that’s were we disagree.
    As mentioned above, you yourself seem a bit prone to “hyperbole” with a strong slant. I encourage you again to reflect, what purpose that serves. If you have a case, it should be possible to make it without distortions. If you want to express your feelings, there are better and clearer ways.

    Also, please don’t change the topic like Torgersen is prone to do. Double down, put your back into it. What is factually wrong with Eric Flint’s argument? Why do you describe criticism as an “attack”, what purpose does that serve? How is Flint focussing on one issue in one post evidence of his “turning blind” or contrary to his “otherwise intelligent” behaviour?

  15. I admit to being very confused by LostSailor’s opinion of Christianity. He says he’s not a Christian, but that he understands what Christianity is “really about” better than the Christians posting here.

    I’ve encountered this before, but only from people who are *opposed* to Christianity, who think it’s historically a force for evil. (I’m not saying they’re right, necessarily, but many atheists, Jews, and pagans can make a case that Christianity has been bad for *them*.) But LostSailor seems to be a Rabid Puppy, a follower of Vox Day, who is vocally Christian. Is LostSailor approving of Vox Day’s Christianity, or saying that it’s wrong? I’m confused.

  16. Getting off Twitter and File770 for a week and it’s the same ol’ s***. Teddy says something dumb, most agree it’s dumb, some compound the stupidity (in this case Tor), and Teddy’s stooges immediately flood in attempting to use “logic” and poorly cribbed SJW tactics to support whatever Fearless Leader said.

  17. @Steven Schwartz: http://file770.com/?p=23024&cpage=1#comment-277987
    Do you have a link to that article? Or possible the name of the publication and a rough estimate of the date it was published on?

    @Laertas: http://file770.com/?p=23024&cpage=1#comment-278001
    Opinions and views change over time.

    For example let us have a look at the year 2006 and the topic of gay marriage in United States. A Princeton Survey Research Associates/Pew Research Center poll concluded: 39% of Americans support same-sex marriage, while 51% oppose it, and 10% were undecided.

    If I am not mistaken, the public opinion has changed since then. For example in 2015, a Human Rights Campaign poll found that 60% of Americans favour same-sex marriage, while 37% oppose. The same poll also found that 46% of respondents say they know a same-sex couple who have gotten married.

    I mean, if we look at the above poll results, we could estimate that 27.5% of those who were against gay marriage in 2006, were not anymore in 2015. If this is evidence of anything, it is of how people have changed their opinions and views in about nine years.

    So when it comes to decade old statements, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. I mean; what were the prevalent cultural attitudes of the time, what information was freely available to make your judgement on, and has the author of the statement changed his opinion?

    Thus you could indeed say that I am huffing and puffing, but my question back is nothing but: ‘Have you built a house of cards?’

    Not to mention that with the information available today, it should not be hard at all to shred the arguments and suggestions presented in that article published back in 2006. A good starting point would be the results of the War on Drugs in Mexico.

  18. This former Southern Baptist and lay preacher turned Quaker feels that LostSailor is amply demonstrating that he has no comprehension of either of those branches of my faith and its teachings, far less what our Savior himself taught. “Vile” is the least of the words that could attach to the behavior this lost soul feels is justified; and it is some consolation to me that Beale will one day have to answer to a far more wise and impartial Judge than anything he may face in this life (assuming the sources of his funds are ever properly traced by the relevant law enforcement agencies).

  19. @mk41

    You have been in plenty of threads where the ideas of VD cum suis were analysed and found to be close to fascist if not fascist and racist. That’s close enough for neo-Nazi for Gallo to be right, counting some hyperbole.

    Eric is taking her to task for intemperate words. As attacks go it is mild, but it is an attack.

    That reading plain English is hard for sealions I will give you.

    And I am not moving the goalposts, I am complaining at Eric’s hypocrisy for attacking Gallo for a single utterance while his friend Brad T. gets away scott-free. I find that disappointing. Disappointing mind you; nowhere am I saying that Eric is anathema, which you seem to imply given the vehemence of your reaction.

    Shorter: go away, sealion.

  20. so what’s the long term goal in this carefully crafted campaign of pain?

    Are you somehow going to cause *me* literal pain? Are you going to to put TOR out of business? Prevent John Scalzi from writing any more books? Prevent me from reading those books?

    Beale CAN’T EVEN SET FOOT IN THE UNITED STATES without going to prison. How is he going to take over the publishing industry?

    gah what a joke.

  21. @clif

    Beale CAN’T EVEN SET FOOT IN THE UNITED STATES without going to prison. How is he going to take over the publishing industry?

    Uh, you do realize that publishers exist outside the United States and there’s this thing called the Internet, right? Hmm. Perhaps you don’t.

    And pray tell for what notorious crime will Vox be clapped into irons and hauled off to prison the instant he next sets foot on U.S. soil?

    (This should be good…)

  22. @Paul:

    I’m well aware of Vox’s father’s case. But there are always telephones or in-person visits if the IRS wanted to talk to Vox, even in a foreign country. Can you point to any support for your contention that this is the reason Vox live in Italy? I’ve been an expat myself and it had nothing to do with being on the lam from Johnny Law. I am further unaware of any law that Vox has broken that would mean his instant arrest upon return to the United States, which was “clif”‘s rather excited assertion.

  23. I can’t speak for clif and his thought processes.

    As for me, however, I think there is a probability that the IRS thinks that Mr. Beale has some of his father’s untaxed money, and setting foot within reach of them WOULD not go well for him, or at least lead to uncomfortable questions.

    I could be completely wrong, and he stays far away from US soil for other reasons.

  24. If he’s wanted by the IRS for tax evasion (and I have no idea if he is or not), then he would stand a very good chance of getting arrested at the border when they scan his passport. Neither the IRS nor the US government in general is thrilled about tax evaders.

    If he’s renounced his citizenship to avoid paying US taxes, the situation is murkier. The US can however refuse him re-entry, and they certainly have in at least some cases.

    If he’s listened to his lawyers and done everything the IRS has asked him to do, then it shouldn’t be a problem for him to come into the US. I have to confess I don’t see him as the sort of man who listens well.

  25. Michael Eochaidh: “If he’s wanted by the IRS for tax evasion (and I have no idea if he is or not),”

    That being the case, why are you providing three paragraphs of baseless speculation about someone who isn’t a participant in the sf field much less the current Hugo controversy?

  26. I see your point–Vox Day’s tax/citizenship status is irrelevant–and I’ll stop feeding the ilk. But I think the guy does have something to do with the current Hugo situation…

  27. But there are always telephones or in-person visits if the IRS wanted to talk to Vox, even in a foreign country.

    Yes, because lacking in things like subpoena powers while overseas, I am certain that the IRS would be able to get Beale to sit down and chat with them if they wanted. And get him to produce records. And so on.

  28. @Paul Weimer: So, you’re comments on Beale’s legal status is based on nothing but rank speculation and your personal suppositions. Got it.

    I can’t speak for clif and his thought processes.

    Sure you can! You know how this works. You post several baseless allegations about Vox couched as speculation, and then folk like “clif” and “Aaron” run off with it making declarative statements that Vox faces certain arrest returning to the US. Others take that as face value, and another lie is born. It’s not Vox I support, it’s the lie I detest.

    @Michael Eochaidh is spinning the same web.

    @Mike Glyer: I think Vox is very much a participant in the SF field as both an author and publisher and is very much a participant in the current Hugo controversy, which is why you include him in your round-ups. These fellows are attempting to use Vox’s father’s crimes to tar him as well.

  29. One thing I noticed that seems to be overlooked is that when asked for proof of her labels, she answered with cat pictures. Comes across as arrogant.

  30. 1 L Loyd: One thing I noticed that seems to be overlooked is that when asked for proof of her labels, she answered with cat pictures. Comes across as arrogant.

    She’s entitled to respond to a swarm of trolls showing up to her personal Facebook page in any way she wishes. I thought her response was brilliant. She doesn’t owe those trolls anything — no matter how big their unjustified sense of entitlement is in thinking that she does owe them something.

  31. You post several baseless allegations about Vox couched as speculation, and then folk like “clif” and “Aaron” run off with it making declarative statements that Vox faces certain arrest returning to the US.

    You’re adorable. You’re an idiot who can’t actually read very well, but at least you’re an adorable idiot.

  32. @Aaron:

    You are correct I erroneously lumped you in with the hit-and-run “clif”. Mea culpa

    But, alas, your man-crush on me must remain unrequited. And, since there is no evidence that Vox is of any interest to the IRS, your comment is largely irrelevant.

Comments are closed.