Origins Game Fair Drops Larry Correia as Guest

Larry Correia won’t be one of the guests when the Origins Game Fair takes place June 13-17 in Columbus, OH. Shortly after publicizing that Correia had been added to the lineup, John Ward, the event’s Executive Director, received so many negative social media comments (on Twitter, particularly) that he announced Correia’s invitation has been rescinded.

Ward wrote on Facebook:

I want to discuss our invitation to Larry Correia a guest at Origins. By all counts he is a very talented author.

Unfortunately, when he was recommended I was unaware of some personal views that are specifically unaligned with the philosophy of our show and the organization.

I want to thank those of you that brought this error to our attention. Origins is an inclusive and family friendly event. We focus on fun and gaming, not discourse and controversy.

I felt it necessary to recend [sic] his invitation to participate in the show. I apologize again to those of you that were looking forward to seeing him at Origins.

John Ward, Executive Director

Many of the critical tweets mentioned Correia’s history with Sad Puppies.

Correia subsequently responded on Facebook with a statement that begins:

So I’m no longer the writer guest of honor at origins. My invitation has been revoked. It was the usual nonsense. Right after I was announced as a guest some people started throwing a temper tantrum about my alleged racist/sexist/homophobic/whatever (of course, with zero proof or actual examples), and the guy in charge (John Ward) immediately folded. He didn’t even talk to me first. He just accepted the slander and gave me the boot in an email that talked about how “inclusive” they are….

His statement also says “none of these people can ever find any actual examples of me being sexist, racist, or homophobic.”


BEFORE AND AFTER:


787 thoughts on “Origins Game Fair Drops Larry Correia as Guest

  1. Sorry, Ctein. Would you like me to refrain in future?

    Back on rec.arts.sf.fandom, after a while it started being funny how reliably the “use your real name!” demands and the accusations of hiding behind pseudonyms would be addressed to either Aahz or Avedon Carol. I don’t think this is causally connected to the fact that people who were arguing with Patrick Nielsen Hayden often put their feet in their mouths by addressing him as “Mr. Hayden,” while the rest of us were calling him “Patrick.” (It was weird: they wouldn’t “Ms.” or “Mr.” me or Jo Walton or Joel Rosenberg, just Patrick.)

  2. Darren Garrison: Every comment containing the word “asshole” goes into moderation. If someone can’t think of anything else to say that doesn’t degrade the atmosphere of this place by namecalling other Filers, that comment might not see the light of day.

  3. Was it that short (4 hours) between invitation and rescinding his GOH invite? I though it was longer than that, hence my comment early on about the mess that such a yo-yo approach to the invitation was, even if I didn’t and don’t think Correia should have ever been considered as such.

  4. Paul, I certainly don’t guarantee that I’m right. Maybe someone will chime in with better facts.

    ETA: And someone did. Thanks, Bruce.

  5. Paul Weimer: You can find Correia publicly referencing his Origins GoHship on May 1 with a screencap of his program. So it’s been in the works for some time and he’d already been discussing it online.

    What you’re probably really interested in is the timelapse between when the complaints started (and why) and action was taken.

  6. Have to say, I don’t think I’ve seen anybody saying this was handled ideally, so I’m not sure why anyone wants us to defend that position.

  7. @Mike: Ah, okay, yeah, I should clarify. Four hours from an official post by Origins about their guests of honor to one announcing withdrawing the invitation for Correia. Want to be actually correct about this stuff.

  8. I would not have visited Origin either way, so I am one whose opinions can be safely ignored. What I can say is that I would not want to visit a con that makes Correia GoH, but I would not have a problem with one that has him as a guest.

    I.e, he has a lot of fans who wants to meet him anr I would nit want to block that. But I have absokutely no interest in going somewhere where he is celebrated.

    But again, I am not going to many cons and I think all cons should ignore my opinions if I hadn’t intended to go anyhow.

  9. Ctein, I’m impressed; I’ve only been a (Fan) GoH once, at a small local convention. And I had such a strong case of Imposter’s Syndrome that, honestly, if one day before the convention they’d called and said, “so sorry; there’s been a mistake, you’re not a Guest of Honor after all” I would not only not have been surprised, I’d have been just a tiny bit relieved. <wry grin>

    Don’t get me wrong; they were lovely people and I had a great time and (I hope) I gave them value for their invitation, but I certainly wouldn’t have considered it any kind of slap in the face to be dis-invited.

    Here in 5206 every attendee of a convention is a guest of honor…

  10. Dear Vicki,

    Oh no! That was what the VBG (Very Big Grin) was all about. That my name is my REAL name is not something I am trying to keep secret.

    I was just hoping David would step in the bear trap.

    Yer fine, dearie, don’t sweat it!

    ~~~~

    Dear Maximillian,

    I don’t think that correctly characterizes the conversation. Everyone agrees the mess Origins created for themselves by inviting Larry to begin with wasn’t ideal. But once that milk was spilt, a majority of us here think that they handled it just about as well as was possible.

    And some don’t, to be sure. But those of us who do have no trouble defending their actions, at the same time we pointed out at the very start of the conversation (repeatedly) that they were to blame for spilling the milk.

    But on mopping it up? They did okay.

    pax / Ctein

  11. Dear Cassy,

    I do hope you’ve gotten over the Imposter Syndrome because, as you discovered, “it’s good being king!” Or queen.

    Lest people read something into what you’re saying, I am nowhere as self-effacing as you. If a convention invited me as a guest of honor and then disinvited me, yes I would feel dissed, slapped. I would not be happy about it. What I wouldn’t do is assert that my feels should take any kind of priority over the attendees’s.

    What I did say is that nobody I personally know would feel dissed by being the next choice. In the handful of cases where I’ve got to hang out with a “second choice” at a convention, there was no sign whatsoever that they were anything besides very happy at being GoH and did not think of it as a second-place award.

    Of course, there is selection bias at work here — axiomatically, anyone I meet in that situation is someone who didn’t feel disrespected by being the “second choice.” No doubt there are some out there who would. I am pretty sure there are far more of us who wouldn’t.

    And, you know, even if not? That is not the point! The important “social contract” is the one between the concom and the attendees; that has to be paramount. Even if we GoH’s all felt diminished by being a “second choice,” too damn bad. The feels of the many outweigh the feels of the few.

    If my memory serves correctly (and so far today, it is been exceedingly faulty) this is how John Scalzi and I met. (Yes, the dreaded, evil Scalzi — honestly, his horns barely show. Though maybe more, as he gets balder. And, really, his touch doesn’t burn. Well okay, a little.) He was in a very last-minute call-in for a Minicon whose original author guest of honor had to cancel on very short notice.

    – pax \ Ctein
    [ Please excuse any word-salad. Dragon Dictate in training! ]
    ======================================
    — Ctein’s Online Gallery. http://ctein.com 
    — Digital Restorations. http://photo-repair.com 
    ======================================

  12. @ctein – I’m not communicating well today, that’s the second time I’ve read a response to a post of mine and said, “yes, that’s what I meant”. Sigh. Thank you for your patience.

    Or, wait, this is the Internet. There’s a conspiracy against me, isn’t there?!? You’re all in on it!

  13. @Maxiimillian: There’s a conspiracy against you to make you think you’re being conspired against.

  14. @Paul Weimer — I think the time was short from the official announcement to the revocation … but I am pretty sure there was more time behind the scenes. Otherwise how would he already be in their anthology?

  15. @Ctein

    But once that milk was spilt, a majority of us here think that they handled it just about as well as was possible.

    Have to disagree. They still have not given any specifics regarding what got him cancelled. I think that specific charges are required for anything like this.

  16. @DKDM: It’s always been about Larry Corriea. Just as the disinviting of John Ringo was about John Ringo, and Bolgeo was about Bolgeo, and whoever you’re talking about from Wiscon, too. These people aren’t getting disinvited as GOHs simply because they are right-wing conservatives. They’re getting disinvited because of things they’ve said and done and written that the conrunners at those cons, after reflection, agreed was sufficiently egregious to rescind the invitation.

  17. Dear rmhartman,

    I trust you understand that “a majority of us” does not mean “everybody?” So there’s no disagreement here.

    I don’t really have any idea what you mean by “specific charges.” They’ve been pretty clear that when they took a closer look at Larry, after they got a bunch of complaints, they concluded that he was, indeed a crap fit for their convention, and that they made a mistake inviting him.

    You don’t think that’s grounds for uninviting him. Most of us do. What is there to dispute?

    You should already know this if you’ve read the comments before you posted. if you want to argue your side, do read the preceding comments, because we are collectively running short of patience with people who ignore what’s already been covered and repeatedly hashed out. It is possible you will not be treated terribly kindly if you don’t.

    – pax \ Ctein
    [ Please excuse any word-salad. Dragon Dictate in training! ]
    ======================================
    — Ctein’s Online Gallery. http://ctein.com 
    — Digital Restorations. http://photo-repair.com 
    ======================================

  18. @Eric Ashley (though he seems to have gone off somewhere)

    Speaking strictly for myself, I agree that Scalzi , while talented and entertaining, is not highest in the genre. I see his greatest strengths as his humor, his compassion, and his skill at spinning a compelling plot, which makes up for some lack of depth in his characterization and description. But IMO, you can see him improve over time, and there’s no reason to believe he won’t continue to get better.

    BTW – you crafted responses to everyone but me – and after you asked specifically for my response regarding VD! Harrumph.

    Come to think of it, I wonder if perhaps Eric’s silence about that means that he looked up some of the things we said about VD, found more about stuff he said about Brievik and Malala Yousafzai, felt a little sick to his stomach and maybe even decided we had a bit of a point about VD. Hope springs eternal.

  19. rmhartman, from what Origins said, sponsors and exhibitors wrote them to protest Correia’s selection as GoH. If your sponsors and exhibitors pull out, you don’t have much of a convention left.

    This was clearly a case of heeding when the free market spoke. Pure capitalism.

  20. rmhartman: Origins doesn’t owe you any sort of explanation whatsoever. If they owe anyone an explanation, it’s Larry Correia. Quite frankly, for them to give people like you additional reasons to argue with them over the internet, is probably more of a lose-lose situation for them than giving the explanation they already gave.

    I don’t know who you are, or what your stake in this is (not that I’ve got any, I’ve never been to Origins, I wasn’t planning on attending it this year anyway), but I would be surprised if you’ve ever been to it or if you’re already registered for it for this year, and if you are actually registered, whether the announcement that LC was a GOH actually had any bearing on your decision to attend.

  21. David K.M. Klaus: Nobody cursing me for being honest in stating I haven’t seen Larry Correia’s weblog… This is what everyone cursing me

    Oh, please. No one has “cursed” at you. Being melodramatic like this is childish and ridiculous, and it further damages your credibility (on which you’ve already managed to do major hit points to yourself).

     
    David K.M. Klaus: Nobody has bothered to provide the URL of it. If someone provided it, I would be a hypocritical a$$hole if I didn’t read any of it myself. Since nobody has provided it, I can’t see why it’s wrong for me to regard any of those cursing me as hypocritical a$$holes for not writing the URL so I could read any of it myself.

    If even as simple an interface as Google is beyond your capabilities, then it’s probably not safe for you to be using the internet.

     
    David K.M. Klaus: the coward who spews venom not under his honest name but with the anonymous letters “JJ”

    Ask Zoe Quinn what happens when a horrible person with a total lack of integrity has your real name and contact details. Ask Anita Sarkeesian. Ask David Gerrold. Ask Aaron Pound. Ask Carrie Cuinn. Ask me about the 3 stalkers I’ve had in my lifetime. And then get back to me — a regular contributor of feature posts here at File 770, who converses with Mike Glyer on a daily basis — about why I should be forced to use my real name on this forum.

     
    David K.M. Klaus: My anger is at someone hiding behind a pseudonym while being a bully.

    Pointing out that you have no idea what you’re talking about, and that you need to behave like a responsible adult and educate yourself before offering an opinion, is not “bullying”, nor is it “venom”. You must have led a particularly coddled existence if you think someone telling you to behave like a responsible adult is “bullying”.

     
    David K. M. Klaus: When chiding me for not knowing things

    No one would have chided you for not knowing things, if you had not — repeatedly, and at great length — insisted on offering your uninformed opinions and impugning the veracity of the other commenters here.

    When I was growing up, I was taught that if I didn’t know what the hell I was talking about, I should keep my mouth shut and listen to the people who did know what they were talking about — and maybe learn something in the process. What is it about you, that you think yourself exempt from that? Why have you felt compelled to repeatedly express what you openly admit are ignorant opinions in this thread? Why do you feel that your uninformed opinions are so valuable that they must be posted?

    I get it. You’re a white guy who’s been in fandom for decades, and you expect people to hand you everything on a platter instead of having to make any effort yourself. You think that your opinions — regardless of how clueless and uniformed they are — are golden, and that everyone here needs to be given the gift of them. And it pisses you off when people point out that you’re being childish and ignorant and clueless and irresponsible, instead of according you the reverence and coddling which you are so certain that you deserve.

    My advice would be for you to take a deep breath, apologize to everyone here, go read all the links under the label The Compleat Litter of Puppy Roundup Titles at the top of File 770, and come back here posting the way that an intelligent, informed, responsible adult would do. You’d be surprised at how remarkably forgiving people here, including me, are willing to be when someone acknowledges their mistakes and turns over a new leaf.

    I’m not holding out much hope that you will avail yourself of that good advice, but I think it would be great if you did.

  22. For everyone’s information (ETA: regarding how long the GoH gig was in the works), and take this with a grain of Correia-said-it, from what Larry said on his blog, he already purchased plane tickets to get to the con – he was requesting a reimbursement.

    Larry Correia:

    EDIT TO ADD: Hey, John. You still owe me for the reimbursement for my plane tickets. You’d better get on that.

    Regarding Correia’s theoretical ultra right-wingedness, doe he seem far right to my fellow Filers? I’ve always had the impression that he’s center-Republican with Libertarian leanings. I frequently disagree with his politics, and I find him eye-rollingly suburban-Republican, but he rarely gets offensive, politically, from what I recall – it’s his (word that gets you stuck in moderation)-ish words and actions that make me wonder why anyone would want to be in the same room with him.

    Aside from VD and his blatant neo-fascism, the problem I have with most of the Primary Puppers (Hoyt, Freer, Torgersen, Correia, Green) and the Fido-come-latelies (JDA, Finn, Niemeier) is that they behave badly and don’t seem to have much empathy.

  23. Christian Brunschen on May 16, 2018 at 1:32 am said:
    @Red Wombat
    What was hopefully an anguished scene of wrenching emotional choices, suddenly invaded by weasels…
    Well, it wouldn’t be the first piece of writing that suffered from (accidental or otherwise) overuse of weasel words.

    @Red Wombat
    Not to worry.
    As we all know, things go better with stoats.

  24. jayn: I wonder if perhaps Eric’s silence about that means that he looked up some of the things we said about VD, found more about stuff he said about Brievik and Malala Yousafzai, felt a little sick to his stomach and maybe even decided we had a bit of a point about VD. Hope springs eternal.

    It would be nice, but he’s a regular commenter over at VD’s blog. He knows exactly what VD is like, and he’s fully on-board with that.

  25. Dear JJ,

    Oh YEAH!

    If David had stopped with “insulting and exceeds the bounds of acceptable behavior,” he’d have gotten an argument, but not much worse. When he decided to make his case by trotting out lies, he lost any claim to moral parity, let alone high ground.

    Yes, I call them lies, because after being repeatedly notified that his statements were counterfactual, instead of recanting he repeated them more emphatically and trotted out new anti-facts.

    That is not arguing in good faith.

    pax / Ctein

  26. Dear lauowolf,

    Oh no, everyone doesn’t know that. The Dreaded Scalzi would rather there were no weasels. He makes no secret of the fact that he prefers Stoats Zero.

    pax / Ctein

  27. I’m a little surprised that Correia paid his own airfare. I thought Origins was a big enough convention to pay for transit for their guests of honor. Of course, different conventions do things differently, and all that.

  28. Ctein wrote:
    .

    “David’s narrative at what went down with Wiscon (of let’s stop being coy, because he’s not going to let it lie) is false.

    “I could say ill-informed, but at this point his unwillingness to learn anything factual but simply invent “alternative facts” out of thin air to support his narrative, it makes me seriously doubt his good intentions.”

    .
    I was done talking about it and had no intention to discuss it further.

    If I am factually wrong, it is because I know only what I’ve read, that what I’ve said is based on what I read. I would be pleased to be corrected as to the facts, publicly or privately.

    I am not an “alternative facts” guy (a phrase I loathe as Orwellian Newspeak), I am a “the facts as I know and understand them from my very narrow window on what happened” guy. If I’m wrong, then please explain where I’m mistaken and I’ll shut up about what you say is an ill-informed understanding. Really, I will, whether you’re willing to regard me as evil or not. I would far prefer to be given correction rather than continue to be wrong about what I honestly believed had happened. Non-hostile, non-snarky, non-have-fun-at-my-expense, sincere correction, that’s all I ask.

    I have had good intentions from the beginning. I was concerned about more future public humiliations done to people out of bad intent. I have seen many fans in years past who were considered good people commit one-time acts which can be described as “evil”, people who were overtly affable or put on a front of grandmotherlyness who stabbed in the back and caused genuine pain to their targets, particularly in local club situations.

    I did not know until someone said it here that Origin’s sponsors and vendors were part of the upset, threatening to leave the convention and cause it to fail. That’s not internet mobbery, that’s a modern, everyday occurrence as sponsors boycott toxic television shows because of the hosts. I did not realize the level of external anger which had built here.

    Maybe I have been wrong about the whole thing from the beginning. I went by what Mike published, what I saw to be an act of bad intention and cowardice, and I jumped in my own anger. Obviously I have been wrong from the beginning, and I’ll say why:

    I honestly, utterly, mistakenly thought this link, http://file770.com/?page_id=22881 , “The Compleat Litter of Puppy Roundup Titles” referred to the list of puppy-name altered book titles Mike had asked for when he first began using them for scroll names, which I had seen before and was fine with. I had sent in several myself, although they don’t seem to have been funny enough to use.

    I know I look like a damned fool, but since I have no dunce cap, I have opened a separate browser and am going read all the weblogs I had declined to read in the past because I knew they were full of malice: Mr. Correia’s first, then Warrant Officer Torgersen’s, Ms Hoyt’s, Mr. Wright’s (which I had read part of before, the part where he wrote about how he regretted not punching Terry Pratchett in the face at LonCon), Mr. Antonio’s which I had read part of before, the part where after having a polite conversation with Teresa Nielsen Hayden in Spokane, he wrote about how the disability which required her to use a scooter occurred because of the evil in her heart.

    I am not a friend of these people, I have never been a friend of these people. I loathe these people. I realize nobody wants to believe me, but what appeared to me to be the continuation of a bad precedent and bad acts were my concern from the start, and I would have been just as angry and upset if it had occurred to Laura Mixon or John Scalzi, just to pick two names out of the good side hat. I was upset about the act, not who it happened to, with what I now realize was an incorrect understanding of the event, just as it was with the Archon incident, too.

    I expressed it badly from the start.

    I haven’t been to a convention since 1987, and I am disabled enough that I will never attend another. I can barely leave my house for physician and hospital appointments, something which I don’t like to admit because there definitely are people you and I both know or have known with the disorder-level of schadenfreud who would laugh at the idea of me being crippled, and I’m not writing of Lou Antonio here.

    But fandom was home to me, albeit a broken home, for a time and I don’t like things which hurt it.

    I overstated myself when I said schadenfreude approached mental illness. That’s incorrect. However I do believe that someday someone will wake up besides me and see it for the social behavior disorder it is. It’s sadism’s uncharacterized little sibling.

    Laughing at a slapstick pratfall or someone getting into an embarrassing situation in a sitcom is fine, that’s fiction. Laughing at someone’s real pain is a problem with hardware or software. That’s a conclusion to which I have come based on 57 years of observation and experience combined with a lot of reading professional works in the last thirty years which touched on the topic, and more recently about the topic as a topic as academia has begun to slightly notice it. The DSM has yet to catch up, although I have hopes the professional characterization will be in the DSM-6.

    I have never thought of “Ctein” as other than your name. It was obvious when I met you at SunCon that the name represented your real self, not a hiding of yourself.

    Online pseudonyms are fine, I have nothing against them. There are lots of reasons why they’re used, including simply “because I want to.” I used one in a forum once where I wanted what I wrote to be taken at face value, not prejudiced because I was the one saying it. I had no fights, I bullied nobody.

    I saw bullying back in the 1200 bps modem BBS days, on FIDOnet, WWIV, etc., then on to Usenet, to older platforms such as MySpace and LiveJournal and its clones, and on to the social media websites of today.

    Roughly ten or twelve or so years ago, two counties west of where I live, a 13-year-old girl was driven to hang herself by a 44-year-old woman pretending to be a boy middle-schooler, who literally bullied her to death. The woman wasn’t prosecuted locally, there was no state law which fit her crime.

    I’ve been aware of “JJ” for years, even exchanged comments a few times. I didn’t know she was a woman until someone mentioned it just today. I had no beef with her.

    She began in this thread calling me a liar, and every single comment she made to me had an insults in it, no exceptions. That’s bullying. And net-bullies almost always hide who they are.

    Perhaps she didn’t bully by intention, perhaps she was just being a jerk. That can happen, so my first judgment could be wrong. I just know how familiar it was.

  29. kathodus on May 16, 2018 at 7:42 pm
    Regarding Correia’s theoretical ultra right-wingedness, doe he seem far right to my fellow Filers? I’ve always had the impression that he’s center-Republican with Libertarian leanings. I frequently disagree with his politics, and I find him eye-rollingly suburban-Republican, but he rarely gets offensive, politically, from what I recall – it’s his (word that gets you stuck in moderation)-ish words and actions that make me wonder why anyone would want to be in the same room with him.

    That’s an interesting question.

    My current thinking around much of what he (or Hoyt) talk about politically is that there is their nominal position on a left-right axis but there are two other factors that need to be considered:
    1. The vehemence of their anti-left stance. They are far more anti-left and anti-liberal than their nominal political position.
    2. They believe many things about the world and people and society that are precursors to far-right beliefs. They take a different ideological stance but really aren’t very far from Vox Day on what they imagine the ‘facts’ of current politics are. Put another way, the consume largely uncritically far-right propaganda so long as it is not too overtly badged as such (John C Wright is better at articulating his differences in perspective from Vox than Larry, even though he is probably closer ideologically).

    It’s these two aspects that have made them easy marks for somebody like Vox. They have effectively already accepted many of the premises of Vox’s position and hence are easily manipulated by him. It’s also easy for the alt-right to recruit from their general orbit because they essentially propagandise for the alt-right while occasionally tut-tutting about the conclusions the alt-right adopt.

  30. The whole thing was not meant to be in italics. Somewhere I typoed my HTML, and couldn’t find it before I ran out of time. Sucks to be me.

  31. @Camestros – Well put. Yes, they are much more vehemently anti-Left than their apparent politics would suggest. Hoyt in particular seems almost pathological in her fear/hatred of liberalism.

  32. David K. M. Klaus: JJ… began in this thread calling me a liar, and every single comment she made to me had an insults in it, no exceptions. That’s bullying.

    Nope, I didn’t call you a liar in my first post addressed to you.

    I didn’t call you a liar in my second post to you, either. I did suggest that you educate yourself before posting further — a suggestion you ignored.

    Despite myself and numerous other commenters pointing out your lack of knowledge, you dug your heels in and doubled- and tripled-down, while calling into question the truthfulness of myself and other commenters here.

    Pretending that you have been bullied, when what actually happened is that you were being called out on your bad behavior, does not improve your current situation.

    Accepting accountability for your behavior, instead of trying to blame others, would be a good choice. I encourage you to give it a try.

  33. Bruce A::
    .

    I never once stated anyone was being bounced for being a “right-wing conservative.”

    I’m not one of them, godsdamnit. Something I tried to make clear but failed to do so, despite my strongest effort, or people just want to blame anyone who says anything about any of them which isn’t full of vitriol. I didn’t know that Larry Correia was the Tar Baby in the Briar Patch.
    .

    Ctein:


    Stop calling me a liar. I haven’t lied once here, and further, you are ignorant about what is in my heart. Read the humble pie letter I wrote above, and maybe apologize for mischaraterizing what I have written and calling me a filthy name, although I am starting to doubt your ethics where I never did before.

  34. @kathodus
    From a European POV, Correia, Hoyt, Freer et all have all crossed the line from “very conservative, but still part of the respectable political system” to “far right and no longer part of the respectable political spectrum”.

    Using German political terms, they’re more AfD, while Vox Day is full NDP, but the former party is just wearing a more polite mask than the latter.

  35. @Eric Ashley
    Count me as another person, who is not actually all that impressed by John Scalzi’s fiction. I did like Lock In and Redshirts was a lot of fun, if somewhat slight. However, I’m currently reading The Collapsing Empire for the Hugos and so far I am very underwhelmed, not to mention irritated by Scalzi’s habits of naming spaceships, planets, etc…

  36. Dear David,

    OK, let’s stand down. Another day, another fanspat.

    On the liar thing. You might or might not be aware that there’s quite an argument going on in journalistic circles over whether to call Trump’s “alternative facts” lies. There is no consensus– some major publications have decided that unless they know he knows what he is saying is false, it’s not a lie. Others have decided that, when he persists in stating things that are false, after being told (by people who would know) that they are false, it should be called a lie, even if he sincerely believes it.

    I don’t think there’s a clear majority in either camp. It’s a good, serious question.

    I’ve moved into the latter camp (used to be in the former). So, no I have no idea what’s in your heart, but when you persisted in saying things that were demonstrably false. I went with that word. I entirely accept your statement that it was not intentional on your part.

    Kiss and make up, now?

    pax / Ctein

  37. “Regarding Correia’s theoretical ultra right-wingedness, doe he seem far right to my fellow Filers?”

    Yes. He seems to be of the extreme far right. But I’m a swede. My baseline is not american.

  38. David K. M. Klaus: Stop calling me a liar. I haven’t lied once here

    Would it be easier for you to admit that you’ve made numerous untrue statements?

    You’ve said untrue things about Origins, about the people who complained to Origins, about Larry Correia, about Archon, about W______, and about me.

    It doesn’t matter whether you intentionally said false things — you still said them. You seem to feel that that not being aware of the actual facts is a Get-Out-Of-Jail-Free card for saying false things. Claiming ignorance — especially when continuing to say them after people had repeatedly pointed out to you that they were untrue — is not a valid excuse.

    It doesn’t matter whether they’re called lies, falsehoods, untrue statements, uninformed claims — that’s all just splitting hairs. You said them. You need to take responsibility for saying them.

  39. @Hampus: “Comments linked to an archive of [The Revenge of Hump Day] to show how easy it was to corroborate the existence of racist jokes.”

    I should point out that the archive was either taken down or made private not long thereafter. Although I cannot say with complete certainty, I’m rather confident that the timing was no coincidence.

    @Camestros: “The Sad Puppy logic of what others should be giving them mirrors the ‘incel’ argument.”

    For good reason; both groups are heads of the same hydra.

    @kathodus: “Regarding Correia’s theoretical ultra right-wingedness, doe he seem far right to my fellow Filers? I’ve always had the impression that he’s center-Republican with Libertarian leanings.”

    “Center right” has become a meaningless term in recent years, due to how quickly that target is moving. The GOP is hurtling rightward so fast that Nixon now qualifies as a lefty. (Remember, he signed into law the act which formed the EPA.)

    @Cassy B: “I’m a little surprised that Correia paid his own airfare. I thought Origins was a big enough convention to pay for transit for their guests of honor.”

    The “guest pays up front and gets reimbursed” model is hardly uncommon. Sometimes, for example, the con is willing to cover coach costs but it’s worth it to the guest to pay for an upgrade… or the guest has certain travel perks available which the con does not have access to.

    In this circumstance, if Correia can’t get a refund on his ticket(s), I think it’s reasonable and fair for Origins to reimburse him to the degree they originally would have.

  40. David K. M. Klaus:

    Thank you for your post. Can’t have been easy to write. And I absolutely believe you when you state that you don’t want anything to do with the puppy crowd. You made that clear from the beginning.

    Btw, the worst bully I remember from FidoNet used his own full name. That was the guy who always threatened to break the skullbone of people he didn’t like.

  41. JJ:
    .

    “I get it. You’re a white guy who’s been in fandom for decades, and you expect people to hand you everything on a platter instead of having to make any effort yourself. You think that your opinions — regardless of how clueless and uniformed they are — are golden, and that everyone here needs to be given the gift of them. And it pisses you off when people point out that you’re being childish and ignorant and clueless and irresponsible, instead of according you the reverence and coddling which you are so certain that you deserve.”

    .

    Only the first clause of the second sentence has truth in it. The rest is vicious trolling. You don’t know me, you’ve never known me. This is just a loquacious way of calling me a liar again.

    “I don’t like voting slates to cause a leaning in a vote where the personal vote is supposed to have meaning for the voter. I particularly dislike it when neo-fascists rig votes for a disruptive political agenda (and I do not mean Mr. Correia when I write this). I wish the whole Puppy kerfuffle, both kinds of Puppy, had never happened.”

    My first words on this. The only nice thing I said about a Puppy was a backhanded remark implying (and now I’m stating) that Mr. Correia did wrong, but he wasn’t a neo-fascist, Nazi wannabe like V__ D__. I expressed disapproval of the whole effort. Only one person has given any indication she read the actual words I wrote. To the best of my inference, you haven’t.


    “So you’ve also been living under a rock…or do you think it’s okay for someone to be as racist, sexist, and offensive as they want, as long as they don’t do it at conventions?”

    .
    I live in a house, where I am sufficiently disabled that I will never attend a convention again in what remains of my life.

    The second clause implies that I am racist, sexist, and in favor of people being offensive. It’s utterly false based on ignorance, and a lie in its implication.

  42. @David K. M. Klaus:

    I see you trying to correct some of your positions on this, and that’s good. It isn’t easy to acknowledge a mistake.

    I am sorry to hear of your health woes and hope that we have more discussions here on less contentious subjects.

    One thing, though — 1200 baud? You are a mere babe in the woods. I go all the way back to 300.

  43. David K. M. Klaus: Only the first clause of the second sentence has truth in it. The rest is vicious trolling. You don’t know me, you’ve never known me. This is just a loquacious way of calling me a liar again.

    Pointing out the truth is not “vicious trolling”. I don’t have to know you. All I have to do is judge you by your posts in this thread — and they paint a very, very poor picture of you. If you don’t like the picture that your posts paint of you, you have the ability to change that.

    I am sorry for your personal situation. But it is not an excuse for the way that you have repeatedly behaved in this thread.

     
    David K. M. Klaus: The second clause implies that I am racist, sexist, and in favor of people being offensive. It’s utterly false based on ignorance, and a lie in its implication.

    You said Correia hadn’t done anything wrong. I asked if you were familiar with his actions during the Puppy years. You said that you were. Ergo, the logical conclusion is that you didn’t see anything wrong with the racist, sexist, and offensive things that he said during the Puppy years.

    See, this is the problem with offering your opinions on things when you have no idea what you’re talking about, but keep insisting that you do. People will figure that you mean what you say.

  44. It’s possible there are people who still want to discuss the topic of this thread — so I am not going to close comments, but I am instituting a moratorium on replies to Mr. Klaus and his comments in response. That means further examples will go away.

  45. Rev. Bob: I should point out that the archive [of The Revenge of Hump Day] was either taken down or made private not long thereafter. Although I cannot say with complete certainty, I’m rather confident that the timing was no coincidence.

    It was taken down almost immediately after people started posting links to various editions of it on Facebook, in response to Bolgeo’s supporters denying that he published racist and sexist material.

    However, a few previous issues can still be found online.
    The Revenge of Hump Day, January 25, 2012
    The Revenge of Hump Day, March 20, 2013

  46. @OGH: “I am instituting a moratorium on replies to Mr. Klaus and his comments in response.”

    In that case, I’m glad I refreshed the page before pasting the lengthy reply I had prepared. I do hope you won’t mind me including one part of it below, because it’s a general statement which applies to the broader issue of newcomers demanding that the old hands do their research for them…

    -=-=-

    The reason so many of us give instructions on how to find info rather than providing the results directly is threefold. First, spoon-feeding people such basic info can come across as an insult: “you don’t think I can look for myself?” Second, it opens us up to charges of cherry-picking and manipulation of data: “what are you hiding by choosing this source over that one?” Third, our arguments and conclusions are designed not to rely on trust.

    I frequently implore people NOT to take my word for things, but to do their own research and see for themselves. That’s because A, I could be wrong, and B, when you find the information on your own, you know there’s no way for me to have manipulated the results.

    The “see for yourself” technique keeps us honest, and it provides a sharp contrast to those who insist that their followers take their word for everything. “Trust me on this” all too frequently translates to “don’t investigate on your own, because I’m trying to fool you.”

  47. I’d have to agree that it’s only fair for Origins to reimburse LC for out-of-pocket costs he incurred between the time he was offered the Guest of Honor and when they rescinded the offer.

  48. “Once upon a time, in a gloomy castle on a lonely hill, where there were thirteen clocks that wouldn’t go, there lived a cold, aggressive Duke, and his niece, the Princess Saralinda. She was warm in every wind and weather, but he was always cold. His hands were as cold as his smile and almost as cold as his heart. He wore gloves when he was asleep, and he wore gloves when he was awake, which made if difficult for him to pick up pins or coins or the kernels of nuts, or to tear the wings from nightingales. He was six feet four, and forty-six, and even colder than he thought he was. And then the weasels began.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *