Dogs With A Blog 8/27

(1) Kate Paulk on Mad Genius Club “Yet Another Hugo Post”

I was going to mine the Intertubes for Nazi quotes that the Puppy-Kickers could have said if they’d been about Puppies or white men rather than Jews, but alas, even in translation Hitler and Goebbels are so much more articulate the comparison would be utterly unfair to the Puppy-Kickers (and remember, these are writers and editors – but the Nazis beat them on all fronts when it comes to articulating points of view. I suppose I should be relieved: pointing and shrieking tends to be rather less than effective as a means of converting the undecided).

Oh, and for those who are wondering? The reason I didn’t use quotes from Mao, Lenin, or Stalin was that an awful lot of Puppy-Kickers would be flattered to be compared to such luminaries of the world’s most lethal ideology.

So, let’s call them for what they are. Nasty, petty, bullying socialists who would fit in just as well with the Nazis as they would with their equally murderous Communist cousins. They even have a racial agenda, and while they’d deny it, they’re so US-centric it’s hilarious (as well as sad).

And what’s even sadder is this pathetic collection of power-hungry little Hitlers have destroyed what was once a genuinely respected award. Whether it can be resurrected by the Campaign to End Puppy-Related Sadness or not, I consider the cause to be worthy.

Anonymous (who else?) in a comment on fail-fandomanon

Oh, dear. I hope the popcorn harvest this year is bountiful; looks like we’ll need it.

Kate Paulk in a comment on “Yet Another Hugo Post”

It’s not Godwin’s law if the comparison is legitimate, Mr Brandt.

(2) Mark Judge on Acculturated – “Political Correctness Puts Science Fiction on Trial”

John C. Wright losing to “No Award” is like the Rolling Stones losing to “No Award” at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It’s a disgrace.

The blackballing of Wright brings to mind, yet again, the concept of punitive liberalism. The phrase was coined by James Piereson in his brilliant and groundbreaking book, Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism. Punitive liberalism, unlike classic liberalism—which was tolerant, thoughtful, and popular in America during most of the history of science fiction—is a product of post-1960s identity politics, is against free thought, against virile men of action (like the swashbucklers found in a lot of the Sad Puppies’ stories), against sexy ladies in pulp fiction (or anywhere else for that matter), against fun, and focused like a phaser on race, class, and gender.

It’s why John C. Wright, one of the best science fiction writers alive, is not sitting at home polishing his five Hugos.

(3) Sanford Begley on Otherwhere Gazette – “Congratulations to the winner”

The Hugo awards for 2015 are over. The clear winner is Vox “Machiavelli” Day. He pretty much got everything he wanted. He wanted Three Body Problem to win and it did. He wanted the Hugos to No Award everything and it mostly did. He wanted to help the SJWs in general and the powers behind the World Science Fiction Convention to look like screaming idiots and it happened. And he was given so much help that a casual observer has to wonder how many of the people he was destroying were secretly his minions.

Before I go into how thoroughly he won I would like to offer condolences to Laura Mixon, Guardians Of The Galaxy and the others who lost because of his machinations. Yes I said lost. You see, they will be forever tainted by the actions of the body bestowing the award. They will be the winners of the Year of the Asterisk. For those who don’t know it, a vanishingly small body by now, the asterisk is both a sign that they weren’t real winners and a symbol known in SF circles to represent the common asshole. The work they did was certainly deserving of being on the ballot, the way they won will forever brand them as not good enough to win honestly. And the fault lies not with them.  The fault lies in the machinations of a clique of mostly old, mostly white, mostly male morons who could not stand the idea that they were not the all powerful force they thought they were. Well, them and Vox Day.

(4) John Carlton on The Arts Mechanical – “Scalzi And Who’s A Jerk”

He [Scalzi] starts out saying that the puppies acted like jerks.  As if somehow the puppies created a world wide media smear campaign to smear the clique that ran world cons.  Or pressure authors to withdraw their nominations.  Or derided fans who nominated the “wrong books” as “wrong fans.”  The puppies did all that?  Actually no.  That was Scalzi and his friends.

His primary complaint is that the puppies created slate.  He’s all angry about that.  As if this was the first time that anybody had a campaign to nominate books.  As if He, himself had not campaigned to get his stuff nominated.  Or maybe it’s because he wasn’t this year.  Did he really think that he was ENTITLED to award nominations every year?  I guess so. Anyway, Lets look at his list and maybe get a grasp of the truth here.

(5) Tom Knighton – “What Puppies Want From Awards”

Awards should be indicative of quality.  We have maintained that the Hugos haven’t had that for a long time.

You want to know something though?  We can change that perception without anyone having to surrender.

This year, Three Body Problem won for best novel.  It wasn’t on any of the lists, but that was because none of us read it at that time.  However, a number of people on both sides of the divide read it and loved it.  It won not from just anti-puppy support, or puppy support, but from both camps loving the book.

Was that love universal?  No.  No book is universally loved, and 3BP has detractors.  Every book does.

But what matters is that this one book had enough support from two different groups that it won.  It’s proof that this world I dream of, where the good stories win regardless of anything else, can exist.

(6) Jay Swanson – “The Hugos as a Microcosm”

Hugos – How it Could Have Been

My real experience with the Hugos began last Saturday, even if I voted months beforehand (and only on like two things because I was too late to vote on most). So I’d like to address what I saw. I do think it was important, considering how everything had escalated, to send a message that said “It is not OK to hijack the Hugos.” That is a fair statement to make, and the “No Award” handed down as a result was not unfair. It was in how they were handed down that mattered.

It’s important to realize that real people were sitting in that auditorium, their hearts in their throats, their hopes burgeoning that maybe, just maybe, they would win something that night. It’s hard enough not winning an award. It’s doubly so when people applaud the fact that no one won it.

Rather than applaud (of which I’m guilty on a few counts), it would have been more appropriate had I simply nodded quietly in approval. In the same moment, it would have been good to reach out and offer comfort to one of the nominees if they had been nearby. Just to say, “Hey, I realize this sucks, but there’s always next year.”

(7) Jason Clark on Your Nerd Is Showing – “Kicking Puppies: The Promise of Sci-Fi vs. Anti-Inclusivity Brigade”

And then the No Awards began. This article is not a definite list of the winners. The Hugos have that themselves as well as many far more respected journalistic establishments. I’m only going to tell you the sweeping emotion that began to take me as I started sending messages to friends, colleagues, and acquaintances to tell them the results. I was taken by the solidarity of the thing. There were many tolerable candidates on the Sad Puppies slate, but still, the voters hold firm. They would not negotiate with what they felt were bigots or terrorists. They would not put up with the kind of people who would leave a stack of vile papers on the freebies table, hoping to insult as many groups as possible while referring to the SFWA as the “Socialist Fiction Writer’s of America.” Overall, five No Awards were announced that night, bringing the total of No Awards given in the history of the Hugos to five. The Sad Puppies were almost entirely shut out, with the singular exception of “Guardians of the Galaxy” winning long form presentation. It was a category completely full of Puppy nominees and yet, enough voters had intended to vote for it regardless, that it still won. It struck me, sitting there, as the Sad Puppies’ greatest loss. It was the one that proved that voting weren’t just there to spite them. They were protesting the Puppies’ methods and tactics, certainly. But they weren’t beyond voting for a option that they agreed with.

(8) CiaraCat Sci-Fi “Tell me about the good SFF you’ve read/watched in 2015!”

So, now that a record number of fans have shown up to prove that the group barking “You are a tiny clique trying to block us completely out of the Hugo Awards” were, in fact, the tiny clique who themselves were trying to block everybody else out of the awards…. Let’s move on to what new SFF has been coming out!

(9) Miles Schneiderman on YES! Magazine “Sci-Fi Fandom Declares Victory After Reactionary Nominees Lose Big at the Hugos”

Aside from Guardians, the Hugo voters took every opportunity to award nominees not supported by the Puppies. And despite a deck stacked against women and people of color, the voters rewarded both. Chinese author Cixin Liu’s The Three-Body Problem won for “Best Novel,” becoming the first translated novel ever to win a Hugo. The award in the “Best Graphic Story” category went to the first volume of Ms. Marvel, the comic book that features a teenage Muslim girl as its heroine. Julia Dillon won her second straight Hugo for “Best Professional Artist,” beating out four Puppy candidates. Meanwhile, Lightspeed Magazine beat two Puppy nominees for “Best Semiprozine,” and one of Lightspeed’s editors, Christie Yant, began her acceptance speech with a sardonic, “I’d like to thank the patriarchy.”

One of the most interesting winners was Laura J. Mixon, who won “Best Fan Writer” over four Puppies for her exposé on the notorious Internet troll known as Requires Hate. Mixon’s chances of victory had been uncertain, despite her exclusion from the Puppy slates, because Requires Hate turned out to be a left-leaning woman of color who had been nominated for the Campbell award in 2014. She earned her reputation by viciously attacking and bullying authors she perceived as misrepresenting her race and gender, and had been cited by the Puppies as a glaring example of leftist extremism. Mixon exposed and denounced her, and as a result, many anti-Puppy advocates were also anti-Mixon.

In her acceptance speech, Mixon stressed the importance of being inclusive, and while she didn’t explicitly call for the Puppies to be accepted into the fold, that sentiment could clearly be heard. She ended, however, by advocating for the powerless instead. “I stand with marginalized groups who seek merely to be seen as fully human,” Mixon said before leaving the stage. “Black lives matter.”

(10) Eric Offill on GonnaGeek – “World War Geek: Contemplating The Hugo Fiasco”

The Hugo organizers needed to listen to the dissent and try to answer the claims they are voicing. They need to create avenues of trust with those readers who feel marginalized because their taste in sci-fi isn’t trendy. Because whether they believe it or not, they can’t afford to lose these fans or the one these fans will generate. Larry Correia’s work (which I actually think is pretty good) matters. Orson Scott Card’s work matters. And if you don’t think that their voices aren’t trying to be silenced by the progressive side, ask yourself if Starship Troopers were written today, would it have even been nominated not to even mention win?

That said, the Puppies need to stop acting like victims of the establishment. Bear in mind while Sad and Rabid Puppies are two separate groups, the old adage still goes that if you lie down with dogs, you get fleas. You associate with unsavory individuals, align yourself with news outlets of disrepute, not only do you have to fight the battle you picked, but you have to fight the appearance of malice. You can’t proclaim to be taking the high ground and get into the mud with your opponents. If you truly are interested in being the voice of the marginalized, start acting like a reputable activist and you’ll find allies. Otherwise you’re letting your opponents paint you as a petulant child throwing a tantrum, and they could be right.

But neither side has an excuse for the “No Hugo” reaction. This is beyond embarrassing to EVERYONE. Whether you agree with the nominees or not, they are still nominees and DESERVE to compete for an award and not to be denied simply because the voters didn’t like the choices.

(11) George R.R. Martin on Not A Blog – “The Hugo Losers Party”

Not all the losers were there, to be sure. I had a pocket full of invitations throughout the con, as did Parris and my minions Raya and Jo and Tyler, but even so, we missed people. I never saw Mike Glyer, who I was especially eager to invite, since he had attended the first Hugo Losers Party in 1976, and had done such a great job of covering Puppygate in File 770. But we did get Liza and the LOCUS crew, and it was Charlie Brown and LOCUS who named that first party the best at Big Mac. I looked for Toni Weisskopf at the Hugo ceremony, but never found her. I saw John Joseph Adams at the ceremony, but he somehow escaped me during the picture-taking afterward, and my efforts to track him down at the KC bash came to naught. I never found Jo Walton, though I got messages that she was looking for me. There were others I missed as well… and some who were not invited. NO ASSHOLES, the invite warned. We had a small list, and no, I won’t tell you the names on it… but we wanted this party to be about joy and celebration and togetherness, not division, anger, and ugliness.

In that we succeeded. We had a great crowd. Old and young, fan and pro, male and female, gay and straight and trans, losers and winners, editors and publishers and artists and writers, all dancing and laughing and drinking and having fun. It wasn’t as crowded as that party in Denver, no, but there were probably more people; the Glover is a lot bigger than Rusty’s suite was.

And yes, a number of the guests were on the Puppy slates, and yes, the losers included people who lost to No Award, which has to be an especially hard way to lose. Maybe the party helped in some small way. I have to say, if there is any hope at all of reconciliation with the Sad Puppies, it is much more likely to be accomplished with drinks and dancing than by exchanging angry emails over the web.

(12) Lou Antonelli on This Way To Texas – George R.R. Martin Thinks I’m An Asshole”

I ran into George at the “official” reception, and asked him about a non-Hugo related subject, an article I did last spring regarding his donation of a rare first edition of “The Hobbit” to the Texas AQ&M University Library System. He essentially blew me off; I realize now he was only there to find his chums and hand them the private invites. Of course, I had no idea what he was up to. And of course, he didn’t stop to hand me an invite. But I mean, if you read his blog post – I hardly think I would have been happy there. In his blog post, at one point he says: “Some who were not invited. NO ASSHOLES, the invite warned. We had a small list, and no, I won’t tell you the names on it… but we wanted this party to be about joy and celebration and togetherness…” Jeez, George, I may not be the smartest kid in class, but it’s easy to tell my name was on your Asshole list. You know what? At least I didn’t forget my working class roots.

(13) George R.R. Martin on Not A Blog – “What’s It All About, Alfie?”

And this year, thanks to the slates, we had more losers than ever before. This year, indeed, we were all losers. Some lost the usual way, finishing behind an eventual winner. Others lost to No Award, an especially galling sort of defeat. (Which also created five losers in those five categories instead of four). Even the winners lost, since their victories will always bear as asterisk in the minds of some because they triumphed under such unusual circumstances, over a weakened field, or whatever. (I don’t necessarily endorse this viewpoint. I think some of this year’s winners deserve an exclamation point rather than an asterisk. But I have heard a fair amount of the asterisk talk even on Hugo night itself). The Hugos lost: five No Awards is an occasion for mourning, not cheers. The genre lost: I don’t buy that even bad press is good, and we sure got a lot of bad press this year. Fandom lost: division and discord poisoned our annual celebration of love for SF, and left wounds that will be a long time healing. The nominees who withdrew from the slates lost; they walked away from a Hugo nod, a painful thing to do, and were abused for that decision. The nominees who stayed on the ballot lost; they were abused for that decision too, and some, who were NOT Puppies and never asked to be slated, saw their Hugo chances destroyed by the Nuclear option. Some nominees managed to catch flak from both sides.

And there was another class of loser, less visible, but still very much a victim of the slates. Those writers who produced outstanding work in 2014, and who, in a normal year, would have almost certainly received Hugo nominations. Some might even have won rockets. But this was NOT a normal year, and the usual word-of-mouth buzz and fannish enthusiasm that generally carries a story to a place on the Hugo ballot could not and did not prevail against the slate-mongering of the Sad Puppies and the lockstep voting of the Rabids. These were the invisible losers of the 2015 Hugo season. Losing is a part of life, and certainly of the Hugos… but it is one thing to be beaten in a fair contest, and another to be shoved aside and denied the chance to compete.

It was for those ‘invisible losers’ that I decided to create the Alfies. If one accepts that the Hugo has value, these writers had suffered real harm thanks to the slates. There was no way I could hope to redress that… but I could make a gesture. In the door of my room in KC in 1976, Alfie Bester told us that winners can become losers. If so, losers can become winners too. I would give my own awards… and of course I’d name them after Alfie. So that’s how the Alfies came about.

(14) Patrick S. Tomlinson – “One Final Thought on the Hugos”

The whole SP/RP phenomenon is a microcosm of this inability to recognize and cope with shifting attitudes and preferences within the fandom community. They simply refuse to believe that the silent majority really has moved on to new things, so they concocted a narrative to explain their failures where some secret cabal is somehow stacking the deck against them. How this is accomplished, considering both the nomination and voting processes are done through public ballot, is never clearly explained.

And much like the Wisconsin voter fraud case above, the Puppy slate voting was a coordinated attack (although within the rules of the award at the time) meant to counterbalance the SJW conspiracy locking them out of the nomination process. But just like the WI case, there was no conspiracy. There was no attempt to lock them out. They just weren’t that popular among the people who follow, vote for, and attend the Hugos. They thought they’d awaken a sleeping populist dragon that would swoop down and defeat the small clique of elitists holding them back. But the beast they awoke turned on them instead.

That’s a tough pill for anyone to swallow, but the ensuing results should make it very clear where the sympathies of the actual silent majority of modern fandom lay. Now, the question is, will the SP/RP’s take the time to do some self-reflection and learn from this lesson, or will they double down and comfort themselves with even more extreme conspiracy theories? Only time will tell.

(15) George R.R. Martin on Not A Blog – “The Alfies”

Two more Alfies went to ANNIE BELLET and MARKO KLOOS. Added to the slates without their knowledge or consent, both of these talented young writers found themselves on this year’s Hugo ballot, Bellet for her short story “Goodnight Stars” and Kloos for his novel LINES OF DEPARTURE. It was the first Hugo nomination for both of them, something that every science fiction writer dreams of, a day to be remembered and cherished forever. And yet, when they discovered the nature of the slates and the block-voting that had placed them on the ballot, both Bellet and Kloos withdrew, turning down their nominations. I cannot imagine how difficult and painful a decision that must have been. Bellet’s story actually had more nominations than any other short story on the ballot, regardless of slate, which suggests that she might well have been nominated even without the ‘help’ of the Puppies. And it was Marko Kloos’ withdrawal that opened up a space on the ballot for Cixin Liu’s THREE-BODY PROBLEM, the eventual winner. They lost their shot at a Hugo (this year, at least — I think both of them will be back), but their courage and integrity earned them both an Alfie.

The last Alfie of the night had… surprise, surprise… nothing to do with the slates, the Sads, the Puppies, or any of that madness. I wanted to give a token of recognition to one of the giants of our field, a Hugo winner, Hugo loser (if you look only at the fiction categories, he has lost more Hugos than anyone, I believe), SFWA Grand Master, former Worldcon Guest of Honor, and Big Heart Award winner… the one and only Silverbob. The coolest Alfie of all (the half-lucite one that lights up) went to ROBERT SILVERBERG, the only man among us to have attended every Hugo Awards ceremony since 1953. There has never been a Hugo given out without Silverberg watching. Just think of that!

(16) CCTV – “Chinese sci-fi hit wins Hugo Awards for the first time”

Chinese sci-fi fans were ecstatic when they learned that the Hugo Awards, one of the most prestigious science-fiction awards in the world, went to a Chinese novel for the first time.

The Three-Body Problem, written by Chinese sci-fi novelist Liu Cixin, beat out four other finalists and was announced the winner of the 2015 Hugo Award for Best Novel in Seattle on Saturday night local time.

The book’s translator Ken Liu accepted the award on the author’s behalf.

As one of the key international awards for the sci-fi genre, the Hugo Awards have been recognizing the best science fiction or fantasy works published in English since 1953.

The Three-Body Problem is also the first Chinese sci-fi novel that has been translated to English. Ever since it was first serialized in a Chinese sci-fi magazine in 2006, The Three-Body Problem, now a complete trilogy, has captivated millions of people in China for its magnificent space philosophy, and was unanimously hailed by sci-fi fans as “China’s best sci-fi novel.” In 2014, the English version of the trilogy’s first book was published in the US.

The second book, The Dark Forest, is planned to hit stores this summer, and the finale, Death’s End, will be out in January 2016, according to the trilogy’s publisher Tor Books.

(17) Don’t show this to the Gallifrey One committee!

(18) Makes me feel better about my own copyediting —

‘As You Know’ Bob in a comment on File 770

Three days after losing “Best Editor” to “NO AWARD” ….Beale self-publishes a book with TWO Chapter Fives?

Is there anyone in the entire universe who continues to question the collective wisdom of the Hugo voters?

Now a bestseller:

John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Compariative Popularity Levels – Kindle Edition

by Theophilus Pratt (Author, Editor)

Just look at these glowing comments:

More Chapter 5s Than Some Books !

ByTechnoLadyon August 27, 2015

Brilliant and, in all modesty, possibly one of the great works of the 21st century. I especially liked the Chapter layout and how they were sequentialized. This groundbreaking tome once and for all settles the matter of the perfidious John Scalzi’s popularity! This book actually has THREE bonus Chapter Fives, unlike some other lesser works which give you barely two. This NEEDS to be nominated for a Best Editor award next year!

Even the object of the parody admires the product:

And John Scalzi responded to File 770 commenters’ request that he voice the audiobook by dangling this bait“Charity Drive for Con or Bust: An Audio Version of ‘John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular’ Read by Me”

Short version: To benefit Con or Bust, a charity which helps fans of color attend science fiction and fantasy conventions, I will make an audio version of John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Comparative Popularity Levels, a parody of an actual book by a certain obnoxious bigot who is obsessed with me, if $2,500 is raised for Con or Bust by 11:59pm (Eastern), Sunday, August 30, 2015. You can donate to Con or Bust here. To goose the giving, I will gift-match for the first $500 in donations.

(19) A tweet from a celebrity Hugo presenter.

(20) Bringer Tom on Metafilter

There was a period in my life when my fondest dream was to be a professional science fiction writer. All I can think now is that I dodged a huge fucking bullet when that didn’t work out.

(21) You can check out any time you like….

785 thoughts on “Dogs With A Blog 8/27

  1. Gravity Falls has an episode where Mabel’s pet pig Waddles becomes a super genius. He is then voiced by Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

    Beyond that, GF, alongside shows like Adventure Time and Steven Universe are part of a recent class of just shockingly good, smart and touching “kids” shows.

  2. @Mark Dennehy

    Honestly, if it hadn’t been for a few other things – the very strong opening, […], and a rather sneaky naval assault scene – I wouldn’t have voted it #1 in Best Novel.

    I had a very different response to the ‘naval assault’: the concept is certainly pretty clever & cinematically spectacular, but it was shoehorned in in such a hilariously unbelievable fashion that I almost threw the book across the room. In another context I wouldn’t have cared, but given how laboriously deliberate some of the mechanical stuff was described, you’d think he’d at least make a small attempt to address the logistical nightmare that’d be involved in installing & physically anchoring the device.

    The terminal & bios silliness, on the other hand, I decided to accept as tongue in cheek. Though yeah, it awfully ridiculous.

  3. “What We Do in the Shadows” is a funny and oddly touching mockumentary about four vampires in New Zealand having to come to grips with modern life and having friends. I enjoyed it tremendously.

    Sold. Downloading it from iTunes now 🙂

  4. @Rick One of the first and best pieces of advice I got as a young journalist was, “Never be scared to look like an idiot.” It’s amazing what you can learn when you admit you don’t know things. People are incredibly willing to share, for one thing.

    The older I get, the more aware I am of how little I know.

    Thanks for the link–I’ve heard that one of the 10,000 thing before and, um, didn’t realize it was from xkcd. 😉 So now I am one of that 10,000, too.

  5. “exposé”

    Does this man even EnglishFrench? He’s exposed nothing but his own lack of originality. Which isn’t exactly a shock to the rest of society.

  6. @Mike Gleyer

    I read her piece, and it sounded as though she was treated very badly. Then I read the e-mail that she linked to:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-XkKq2NGWUZV21ubUpYOVhtOHM/view

    From her blog post, it had sounded as though Antonelli had sent something directly to her. But from the e-mail thread, it just looks as though she insisted that Antonelli be excluded from the convention on the grounds that she personally didn’t want to be around him. When they told her that, no, they’d decided to give the man a chance, based on his apology and David’s acceptance, she then tried to make a harassment complaint (even though she was never targeted), thinking that would force them to do what she wanted. When they rejected that, she resigned, and now she’s trying to make them pay for defying her.

    Did I miss something?

  7. Mike Glyer on August 28, 2015 at 4:06 pm said:

    Jim Henley: Is being my own contributing editor kind of like self-publishing?

    If you keep on self-publishing, you’ll go blind!

  8. “Not cool, apology notwithstanding.”

    It’s a line from a movie, Tropic Thunder, but not one which bears repeating (the whole movie is apparently full of such ‘ironic’ humour)

    ETA: Sorry, snowcrash, I wasn’t trying to pile on you.

    Laertes, I’m reading this all rather later than the rest of you, sorry.

  9. I got the reference. I guess I didn’t see how that made it okay.

    In any event, this was settled some time back, and I don’t think there’s any value in rehashing it.

  10. Current Reading: I just finished the snippet of Luna: New Moon by Ian McDonald up on the Tor.com website. I’m hooked, and am trying to decide whether to get it in paper form or digital and read it on my computer. No Kindle for me, sadly. I haven’t replaced the one taken from my burglary last year.

  11. @Greg Hullender

    I’ve been trying to figure that one out, too. If she was harrassed, I want to support her, but someone who hasn’t actually done anything to her possibly existing in the same space sometimes isn’t really harassment.

    (I say that while also thinking they probably should have banned Antonelli, but the con didn’t really have a good option at that point.)

  12. @Amina “every other character is described as raising an eyebrow”

    Thankfully, not all of them are that demonstrative.

  13. Greg Hullender: As you have already discerned from those copied emails, there was more than one interpretaton of the risk represented by Antonelli’s letter to the Spokane PD and his FB post about Carrie Quinn.

    The narrow interpretation was that only David Gerrold was at risk. The broad interpretation was that anyone attending the con would be at risk of a potential police-related incident occurring.

    Based on their public statement about how things were handled, I think Sasquan concluded the Antonelli had violated their antiharassment policy. But there was disagreement about the consequences, with David Gerrold asking them not to boot Antonelli, and others wanting him barred from the con. I infer that Meg Frank thought attendees in general were at risk, herself included, that she advocated barring Antonelli, and resigned based on the discussion shown in the copied emails.

  14. @Greg 4:11 There were some serious discussions among conrunners (not just Sasquan committee, because this was hugely public) about how Antonelli’s report to the police could splash on the rest of the convention in the form of unwanted police attention, and how the impact wasn’t isolated to David Gerrold. And then the Carrie Cuinn semi-doxx happened.

    I can totally understand how people who weren’t actively targeted by Antonelli still felt he was an unreasonable risk. Based on his online activity the last few days, I’m having less faith in the sincerity or truthfulness of his apology.

  15. Current reading: Still reading the Tredana trilogy by Joyce Ballou Gregorian, now on the second book, Castledown. Slightly amusing anecdote — I contributed the book as a prop for a play I was attending (lot of audience participation in it), and the performer improvised the line:

    “Castledown — I haven’t read that. Well … nobody’s read that, actually.”

    All too true. 🙂

    Recently finished The Brides of Rollrock Island by Margo Lanagan. Liked it very much.

  16. Did I miss something?

    Yes. Trying to get the police to go after Sasquan and the Hugo ceremony targets everyone there. She’s not saying she was personally named, she’s saying Antonelli made (or tried to make) the whole con and specifically the awards ceremony unsafe, and thus everyone there is a target. Which includes her.

    This was an argument made by many people at the time. Gerrold wasn’t the only person affected.

    If you don’t think they’ve done anything untoward, then you don’t need to worry about dealing with them in the future. Many people do think Gerrold wasn’t the only one made unsafe, and will be glad to know this stuff in making their choices on how to proceed — there were already concerns that the Sasquan folks didn’t take harassment policies seriously, from earlier cons they’ve run, and this adds to the pile. Each person can judge for themselves how seriously they take any of this stuff.

    I flinch when I see a private e-mail with a comment preceded by “do not quote” that is then made public, unedited, but at the same time I think it’s worth knowing that this has happened. Something of a mess, but it’s not as simple as “Antonelli didn’t name her so she wasn’t harassed.” Antonelli named the con and the event, and everyone there had potential reason to feel unsafe. She definitely did, others didn’t.

  17. Ann Somerville on August 28, 2015 at 3:28 pm said:

    A snowflake, of course

    That has great potential! It appears that file770 handles emoji, so one could refer to people as a ❄️ instead of resorting to a full-on Hoyt crime.

    (The above was “& #x2744;& #xFE0F;”, without the spaces)

  18. the puzzle is why Searle chose to make it that rather than an Arabic Room or a Finnish Room or whatever.

    Character set size. Because it’s pictographic, it has a far larger “alphabet” (we’re stretching that term a bit here, “character set” is more appropriate) than any latin-alphabet-based languages. That reduces dramatically the chance of the person in the Chinese Room ever learning to read the symbols and thus start responding on their own instead of via the transfer tables.

    But really, that’s for the benefit of the reader who’s trying to visualise this in anthropomorphic terms; in actual real-world implementations, the character set size is irrelevant because CPUs don’t get bored and decide to learn new languages for fun…

  19. “… even in translation Hitler and Goebbels are so much more articulate the comparison would be utterly unfair to the Puppy-Kickers (and remember, these are writers and editors – but the Nazis beat them on all fronts when it comes to articulating points of view.”

    Tell me what you honor and I’ll tell you what you are.

  20. Based on his online activity the last few days, I’m having less faith in the sincerity or truthfulness of his apology.

    At least one part of it — the announcement that he’d be taking a 6-month sabbatical from social media — has clearly been shown to be untrue.

  21. @rick The restaurant closed a couple of years back, and the winery moved to Davenport. Randall’s been back making the funky stuff the last four or five years. (Currently drinking his sparkling Albarino…)

  22. Not sure whether it’s been spoken to in the subsequent 300 comments, but I can knock this one down:

    I saw George R.R. Martin declare that all Puppies were Rabid at his party, and hoped that his alternate awards would’t be needed in the future, and more or less cheered for fandom holding off the barbarians. You know, people like me.

    I was at the party, and as usual there is a tiny bit of truth in the wreckage of honesty on display.

    George did indeed talk at length in the lead up to his announcing the Alfies. Most of it was on the history of the Hugo rocket as a hood ornament and the early days of the Hugo Losers Party that, you know, he invented. When it came time to say something about why he went and dug up old hood ornaments to make awards out of, he did say that he hoped the awards would be the first and last Alfies given out–because he hoped that next year would be a normal Hugos with a fair ballot. He absolutely did not say “all Puppies are Rabid” or anything of the kind. And he did not “more or less” praise fandom for holding off barbarians. You can tell by the “more or less” that this part is complete bullshit.

    George Martin has advocated against No Award since day one of this mess. He was sad and hurt and astonished by the vitriol like we all have been, but he in no way presented the No Award result as a victory, (why would he, since he didn’t want No Award to take the night) nor the Alfies as the “real award” in any way. Rather, he emphasized that this was all his opinion and his party and his decision, his “grand and futile gesture.” His exact words were: “And yes, there are committee awards, but I am the committee.”

    There was no gloating, no joy taken in victory or defeat, no rubbing of hands and cackling. There was one person, who had to means to do so, doing something he thought was good and important for other people who might never get the opportunity to be applauded and hold a rocketship again. It was completely selfless and amazing. To turn that into what Burnside has said is, to be quite frank, fucking gross. Ken, if you were really there, you should have looked around a little more. That’s what it looks like when people care about something other than themselves and their own advancement.

    I am continually astonished that people can get so angry about a person holding a private party at his own expense and making trophies at his own expense and then giving them out, not to his friends, but to the very fair highest vote-getter outside the slate, while acknowledging that many people weren’t being recognized who might have been if all had been fair. Dude, people are allowed to do whatever they want if it doesn’t hurt anyone, and if the Puppies can cheat and laugh in the face of 80% of fandom while they do it, they can suck it up if they didn’t get an invite to drink on the dime of one of the guys they shit on.

    But I will say, even at the time, even that night when everything around us was beautiful and sparkling and people were laughing, I thought: the Puppies are going to shred us for this. For having a party. And that’s something I actually think about now, instead of just enjoying the company of good people, a few jokes, some food, and getting to meet Greg Bear for the first time. That’s the worst thing they’ve done. To make everything about them.

    I would like to delete Burnside’s totally warped and untrue analysis of the night and replace it with my favorite memory, the one I’ll take with me to every other con party I attend.

    While George spoke, several sparkling silver balloons drifted around the room (which looked very much like the Rocky Horror set, or the Clue House). While we listened to the history of the party and the award and the friendships born in science fiction, some unspoken agreement seemed to pass around those of us on the ground floor: those silver balloons would not touch the ground. One by one, writers and editors and artists stepped forward to gently bump the balloons back up toward the ceiling. No one said a word. No one made a big splashy deal of it. We just kept that silver flying, one by one by one. Smile, nudge, bump, and a spray of light as the chandeliers caught the glitter on the skin of the balloons.

    Like fandom always will, we just kept it going till the music started up again.

  23. “people ought to be appreciative of anyone who’s willing to cross the aisle ”

    We’ll just forget Buwaya’s blatant misogyny and racism because he’s willing to talk to Theodore Beale, then.

    Seriously, Will – WTF?

  24. there were already concerns that the Sasquan folks didn’t take harassment policies seriously

    While I personally agree with her, and having had nothing to do with the con organisation my opinion’s very low in value, there is a point that they might have felt that by ignoring Gerrold’s request to let it drop and banning Antonelli, they would have been taking a more active stance than being neutral would allow.

    Personally, I think that was a mistake if it was the intent because it was sacrificing the value of the con’s rule on harassment in order to maintain the appearance of neutrality in a row on the internet, when the substance of we’re-not-involved-in-this-kerfuffle would have been to have ignored that appearance completely and done what they would have done if this had happened out of the clear blue sky.

    But, like I said, my shoulder wasn’t at the wheel and I wasn’t running a con during a POTUS-declared state of emergency when the air was barely fit to breathe and a mass evacuation of the area wasn’t yet ruled out…

  25. @Kurt Busiek In the e-mail, they said that the Spokane PD was fully aware of Antonelli and of the issue in general, and that there was nothing to worry about.

    I represented GLBT employees at Microsoft to management for a seven-year period, and I think I have a very good idea of what real harassment looks like. I take a dim view of false harassment claims because they give ammunition to conservatives who constantly argue that there is no such thing as harassment and that people only claim harassment as a way to bully other people into doing things they don’t want to do. (This idea is at the heart of the Puppies’ use of SJW as an insult.) Based on what I just read, her posting is a gift to those people.

  26. I had a very different response to the ‘naval assault’: the concept is certainly pretty clever & cinematically spectacular, but it was shoehorned in in such a hilariously unbelievable fashion that I almost threw the book across the room.

    The logistics are certainly not even there, let alone brushed over – but at the same time, if I reacted that way everytime that popped up, I’d have thrown the entirity of the Known Space library across the room too.
    I let the visuals of that scene carry it in the end.

    But if The Periheperal had been on the ballot, I would have 1’d that over 3BP in a heartbeat 🙁

  27. @Mark:

    I’m on episode 4 right now, and my cuppa is brewing nicely. It’s a terribly slow start though.

    BTW, I really did write ‘cuppa’, was sandbagged by perfidious autocorrect, and didn’t catch it in time. You should see what it does to my Norwegian and my French (but there, I expect it).

    Anyway, you have some joys ahead, and a couple of ‘Gosh, that must be a first on general-audience television’ scenes in particular. (Spoiler-protection hereby applied to these comments for your protection, Friend Citizen.) Don’t expect the concluding episode to be a B5-style blowout. The resolution is OK but will do nothing like knocking your socks off.

    Since we have Person of Interest fans here, I’ll mention that the last-but-one season (season 3) closer, ‘Deus Ex Machina’, struck me as particularly good because it, and the entire subsequent direction of the plot, absolutely didn’t go where lesser writers would have taken it. Again, I won’t spoil it for those catching up, but: Bravo.

  28. In the e-mail, they said that the Spokane PD was fully aware of Antonelli and of the issue in general, and that there was nothing to worry about.

    Yes, and she was clearly concerned that, having failed on that front, Antonelli might try something else dangerous to the con and/or the ceremony.

    You don’t have to agree with her. But you asked if you missed something. I think the answer I gave you covers what you missed.

    I don’t really have any interest in arguing with you over whether you know better whether she should have felt unsafe or not. The fact remains that she didn’t, and she explains pretty clearly why she didn’t. Again, you don’t have to agree with her, but that doesn’t mean she’ll act on your judgment rather than hers.

  29. Meg Frank wrote

    Senior members of the Sasquan committee responded to a member reporting harassment and asking for help with guilt trips, denial, victim blaming, sarcasm and dismissal.

    This sounds all too much of a piece with what happened to David Newman-Stilles, where it was actually one of the people running Sasquan in 2015 who was abusive to him.

    I guess it’s a relief WorldCon is somewhere else next time, but it’s not much comfort for future Sasquan attendees.

  30. @Kurt Busiek

    At least one part of it — the announcement that he’d be taking a 6-month sabbatical from social media — has clearly been shown to be untrue.

    Maybe he borrowed one of VD’s minions as a shabbes goy to post to social media for him?

  31. I guess it’s a relief WorldCon is somewhere else next time, but it’s not much comfort for future Sasquan attendees.

    I thought Sasquan was a one-off. Are they planning to make it a regular con?

  32. SAVE YOURSELVES THE CORN IS WITHOUT MERCY AND HAS A VERY, VERY LONG LIST OF BOOK RECOMMENDATIONS

  33. Sasquan is a one-off. Every Worldcon is.

    Spokane’s annual convention is SpoCon and a somewhat but not entirely different group of people.

  34. Spokane’s annual convention is SpoCon and a somewhat but not entirely different group of people.

    Thanks for the correction, Andrew. I got my facts wrong.

  35. @Cassy B Re: “Welcome to Night Vale” category:
    ALL HAIL THE GLOWING CLOUD. THE GLOWING CLOUD THANKS YOU.

    People who haven’t yet encountered the wonder that is “Welcome to Night Vale”: It’s completely free on iTunes, the episodes are short (most are 25 minutes), and they’re great for commuting. One of the funniest, most imaginative, most profound radio theatre podcasts I’ve had the pleasure of listening to, and a legitimate grass-roots sensation that came out of nowhere thanks largely to its two writers (Joseph Fink and Jeffrey Cranor) and its stunning lead actor Cecil, who plays a local radio host named Cecil.

    The full set of episodes of Welcome to Night Vale this year (Jan 1 to present) qualifies as an ongoing story in Dramatic Work, Long-Form; I made an entry for it at http://hugonoms2015.wikia.com/wiki/Hugo_Nominees_2016. It’s radio drama/comedy, like the wonderful, underservingly No-Awarded “Don’t Crush That Dwarf, Hand Me the Pliers.”

    If there are single stand-out episodes of “Welcome to Night Vale” released this year, they qualify in the Dramatic Work, Short Form category as well.

  36. The logistics are certainly not even there, let alone brushed over – but at the same time, if I reacted that way everytime that popped up, I’d have thrown the entirity of the Known Space library across the room too.
    I let the visuals of that scene carry it in the end.

    Yeah, that’s completely fair. I was just really disappointed to realize at that point that the book wasn’t the one I’d hoped it was, and that some of the trade-offs that I’d imagined were part of the author-reader contract (flat characterization & awkward data-dumps accepted in exchange for a rigorous & thorough look at the implication of some cool, plausible near-future concepts) weren’t actually in effect.

    Amusingly enough, I bumped The Peripheral down my queue in order to get to 3BP before the voting cutoff, and with one thing or another haven’t pushed it back up again. Will have to do that soon.

  37. I so wanted to see Night Vale in BDP Short (the “Old Oak Doors” two-parter was brilliant). And “What We Do in the Shadows” is a riot.

  38. @SIW: you have to ask what the motto is? Do we have to reprint those 28 words of Rev. Bob? (Something something not repeat?)

  39. @NickPheas:

    I remember Hoyt inferring manual workers from a text where quite deliberately nothing was implied

    Unless it was a bad dream, I could swear that Hoyt inferred that effete-intellectuals-hate-manual-labourers bit solely from the phrases ‘five blustering men soaked in gin and malice’ and ‘seizing the pool cues’. Nothing else in Swirsky’s maudlin almost-a-story suggests manual workers at all, and the quoted phrases, which are a big stretch, were the sole basis of Hoyt’s tirade.

    Forgive me from pounding on a point I’ve alluded to here before, but it seems to me there’s been a great deal of overly-hasty assuming that people share one’s subtle and microculture-specific symbols. Why would gin be a marker for the proletariat? (I don’t drink the stuff, but if anything it makes me think of gin & tonics and the Rat Pack.) Don’t daytraders ever bluster? Never met a lawyer who’s also a shark at pocket billiards?

    I would have hoped Hoyt as a writer would know that readers bring a huge pile of (sometimes unpredictable) cultural baggage with them, that their readings will differ widely, and that assuming the author unambiguously implied what you inferred has a significant chance of failure.

  40. @Ann Somerville

    Actually, à propos the original topic, if you want to understand why the puppy dogs call us Nazis, the item you cited is well worth reading about.

    This sounds all too much of a piece with what happened to David Newman-Stilles, where it was actually one of the people running Sasquan in 2015 who was abusive to him.

    Now I never heard of any of this before, so I came to it with no preconceived notions. The essence of it seems to be (and correct me if I missed something) that at a different convention, a year or so before Sasquan, a handicapped man who uses a cane to walk set his coat down on a vendor’s table for a moment so he could get a glass of water. He reported that the vendor complained, and when he explained his situation, he/she said “I don’t care what your excuse is” and pushed his coat onto the floor. He complained about this to the folks running the convention. They investigated, but the vendor claimed he had spread his coat over most of his/her table without asking permission and denied saying “I don’t care what your excuse it” and even denied pushing the coat onto the floor. The other vendors backed this story up. In the face of that, the person from the convention who was responsible told him there was nothing she could do.

    He blogged about it in a general way, asking for names to be kept out of it. Others stepped up to support him, and they figured out all the names with no trouble. The poor woman who ended up taking the blame was the one from the convention trying to deal with a he-said, she-said problem–not the vendor. So someone agreed to host a discussion about it on Facebook to let both sides talk. It merits careful reading:

    https://www.facebook.com/michael.matheson.58/posts/541102092678045?pnref=story

    Notice a few things about this. First, the actual victim is anxious to calm things down–not stir them up. All of the real energy in the discussion is coming from people who aren’t directly involved. Second, the vendor isn’t the one “on trial” here; the subject of everyone’s anger is the convention organizer who told him she couldn’t do anything about his complaint.

    Now look at what happens when the woman tries to defend herself. She gets excoriated simply for trying to give her account of the events. The sheer unfairness of the whole thing is stunning. It creates the appearance that the other folks weren’t really interested in helping anyone–what turned their crank was the opportunity to hurt someone.

    This is precisely the narrative that right-wing conservative groups like the puppies try to use to discredit the whole idea of anti-harassment policies, and it is why they liken us to Nazis.

    Harassment is real. I’ve seen it. Blaming the victim is real–I’ve seen the police do it to a friend as he lay bleeding on the concrete. “You know homosexuality’s illegal in this state, right son?” I understand being angry. Believe me, I understand. And I understand the desire to make someone pay.

    But not all claims are real, and you cannot assume that people are guilty until proven innocent. That simply plays into the conservatives’ hands, and I would prefer to deny them support for their narrative. That narrative is a bigger threat than any single episode.

  41. Cat Valente –

    While George spoke, several sparkling silver balloons drifted around the room (which looked very much like the Rocky Horror set, or the Clue House). While we listened to the history of the party and the award and the friendships born in science fiction, some unspoken agreement seemed to pass around those of us on the ground floor: those silver balloons would not touch the ground. One by one, writers and editors and artists stepped forward to gently bump the balloons back up toward the ceiling. No one said a word. No one made a big splashy deal of it. We just kept that silver flying, one by one by one. Smile, nudge, bump, and a spray of light as the chandeliers caught the glitter on the skin of the balloons.

    Like fandom always will, we just kept it going till the music started up again

    That’s fantastic, thanks for sharing your impressions.

Comments are closed.