Pixel Scroll 11/15 Scrolled Acquaintance

(1) John Green of the Vlog Brothers waves Nalo Hopkinson’s Midnight Robber at the camera and heartily endorses it to 2.6 million subscribers at the 2:00 mark in his “Pizzamas Day 4” video posted November 12.

Today Hopkinson’s book – originally published in 2001 — ranks 2,902 in Amazon’s Kindle eBooks>Science Fiction & Fantasy > Fantasy > Paranormal & Urban category. I wish I knew where it was ranked the day before for the sake of comparison.

(2) NPR interviewed Stan Lee about his new autobiography.

The man who dreamed up lots of backstories for Marvel characters has now put out his own origin story: A memoir, Amazing Fantastic Incredible, in comic book form. It begins with Lee as a boy, transported to other worlds through books by Arthur Conan Doyle, H.G. Wells and William Shakespeare. His real world was the Depression, a father mostly out of work and a dingy New York apartment with laundry hanging in the kitchen and a brick wall for a view. Lee says his mother doted on him; he remembers she’d just watch him read. “One of the best gifts I ever got — she bought me a little stand that I could keep on the table while I was eating, and I could put a book in the stand, and I could read while I was eating. I mean, I always had to be reading something,” he recalls.

Stan Lee memoir cover

(3) Discovery Times Square is hosting “Star Wars And The Power Of Costume: The Exhibition” which includes costumes from the forthcoming movie.

SW-SHOWCLIX-LOGO%20(1)Featuring 70 hand-crafted costumes from the first six blockbuster Star Wars films, this exhibition reveals the artists’ creative process—and uncovers the connection between character and costume. George Lucas imagined and created a fantastical world filled with dynamic characters who told the timeless story of the hero’s journey. The costumes shaped the identities of these now famous characters, from the menacing black mask of Darth Vader and the gilded suit of C-3PO, to the lavish royal gowns of Queen Amidala and a bikini worn by Princess Leia when enslaved by Jabba the Hutt. A special presentation for the showing at Discovery Times Square in New York will feature seven additional costumes from the highly anticipated film, Star Wars: The Force Awakens.

(4) James H. Burns denies that “love of the Three Stooges is a guy thing” at TV Party.

three-stooges-tuxedos

One night, in one of the popular Broadway joints, I’m having a couple of drinks with an actress I had recently met. A lovely, musicals-type gal….

And. somehow, I mention the Stooges. She tells me she LOVES the Stooges…

So, being a little devilish, as many of you know I can be, I say to her:

“Great…. What’s the only known defense for this…”

And I start doing a, slow-motion, split-finger, eyepoke. She INSTANTLY raises her hand, sideways, to her nose.

(5) Get the electronic Mythlore Plus Index for free – or at least that’s how it’s supposed to work. Order fulfillment goes through PayPal which won’t take a zero-price sale.

Available as a fully searchable digital file downloadable in PDF format, this newly, updated edition of the Mythlore Index covers issues 1-127 and has now been expanded to include all articles and reviews published in the Tolkien Journal, Mythcon Conference Proceedings, and Mythopoeic Press Essay Collections. Articles are indexed by author, title, and subject, and reviews by author and author of item reviewed. The index is illustrated with classic black and white artwork from early issues by Tim Kirk and Sarah Beach. This essential reference in mythopoeic studies will be updated after the publication of each Mythlore issue.

Add it to your cart and when you check out you’ll be sent a download link.

(6) Today In History

  • November 16, 2001:  First Harry Potter film opens

(7) Christopher M. Chupik, guided by his own reading experiences, says there is a tendency to shortchange the appeal of classic sf, in his guest post “Reflections of a Golden Age” on According To Hoyt.

My high-tech Kobo e-reader has a copy of Edmond Hamilton’s The Star Kings on it. Does it matter that I was reading this novel with a device more sophisticated than any of the computers contained within? Of course not.

One of the complaints made was that the younger generation can’t relate to “futures” where men still wear hats and they can make intelligent positronic robots but not personal computers. I say you’re not giving the younger generation enough credit. When I was reading Bradbury and Asimov, I was very aware that I was reading of future’s past. It doesn’t matter that Orwell’s 1984 is behind us (or is it?) any more than it matters that the Mars that Burroughs and Bradbury wrote about has no more foundation in reality than Middle-Earth.

It didn’t matter to me because I could see the things that hadn’t changed. Ultimately, the human experience remains consistent across the ages. Sure, superficial things like slang and fashions change with the decades…

Feel free to ignore the slur on this blog in the first paragraph; I did. (Almost.)

(8) Heritage Auctions is taking bids on a large selection of classic comics. At this writing, Superman #1 is going for $30,000.

(9) T. Campbell’s nominations for the“11 Weirdest Supergirl Stories” are posted on ScreenRant.

The Time She Was Superman’s Archenemy

No one seems to be quite sure where the Linda Danvers Supergirl is at this point (we last saw her in Hell, of all places), but not long after Supergirl‘s comic cancellation, a Supergirl from Krypton showed up (Superman/Batman #8, 2004) who was just straight-up the cousin of Superman. No angel powers, no shapeshifting, no unfortunate Luthor connections, no alternate-Earth shenanigans… just Kara Zor-El, the classic “Orginal Recipe” Supergirl from before things got messy. Except for the part where she might’ve been sent back to kill Superman.

(10) Lou Antonelli stopped doing the backstroke in the punchbowl long enough to post “You Heard It Here First” at This Way To Texas.

George R.R. Martin will be the next recipient of the Science Fiction Writers of America Grand Master Award (The Damon Knight Memorial Grand Master Award).

No, I do not have inside information, nor do I have a crystal ball. It’s simply a logical conclusion, especially if you know how the literary leaders of the science fiction community think.

Regardless of the merit of Martin’s literary output, he will get the award as a reward for helping trounce the dissident nominees for the Hugo awards this year (the so-called Sad Puppies). It’s not really any more complicated than that.

(11) In “A Forthcoming Speculative Fiction Anthology Asks Transgender Authors To Imagine New Worlds” at Bitch Media, Katherine Cross posed this question to Casey Plett and Cat Fitzpatrick.

On that note, what are your thoughts on the controversy around the Sad Puppies, the group who tried to rig the reader-voted Hugo Awards to favor “traditional” sci-fi works. It was clearly a powerful, angry, and organized reaction against the steady diversification of storytelling in sci-fi and spec-fic. What exactly is happening to this genre that’s so explosive and dangerous?

CP: White straight cis men are getting very upset because they feel they’re losing something when a more diverse set of stories is represented. On the one hand, they don’t have to worry—the share of representation of white straight cis male characters in sci-fi is maybe dropping from 98 percent to 95. But on the other hand, they’re right—they are losing some measure of dominance, and they should lose this. And I think acknowledging that challenges a fluffy teddy-bear idea of what an ally is—the idea that no one is going to lose anything. Being an ally requires giving shit up, which is what these people are not prepared to do.

CF: I think the throwing-the-toys-out-of-the-pram thing totally describes Brad Torgersen [sci-fi author and ringleader of the Sad Puppies]. I think Vox Day [another author, who organized an extreme offshoot of the Sad Puppies called the Rabid Puppies] is altogether a more sinister person, with really far-right politics and a desire to upset people to get attention. He’s a serious reactionary, traditionalist, religious, pseudofascist type—he even called leading spec-fic writer N.K. Jemisin an “uneducated half-savage” because she’s Black. And I think he saw Torgersen’s toy-throwing and said, “Here is a tool I can use to hurt people.”

I do fear that the way the story has been reported makes it seem as if spec-fic is going through growing pains that literary fiction outgrew long ago, as if lit-fic is more mature than spec-fic or sci-fi. Yet lit-fic has these same problems [with diversity and bigotry] and actually deals with them in a much less effective way. Part of it is that spec-fic is always concerned with community—you always have to invent the world from scratch, which entails obviously political choices. Traditional lit-fic straight white authors can say, “I’m just writing how the world is,” and even believe it, but if you’re a sci-fi writer who wants every book to be like Heinlein, you can’t escape the fact that you’re making this up, that your choice as a writer is meaningful and political.

CP: I think this stuff does get talked about in lit-fic—the VIDA Count revealed just how male the writing published by prestigious magazines was. That caused a big scandal. But it was still limited to writers. People in my mfa knew, but I think if you asked a person in a bookstore’s fiction section about the VIDA Count, they would have no idea what it was, whereas someone in the sci-fi section would probably know about Puppygate.

CF: Totally. On one hand, that relative openness laid them open to the whole Puppy thing, but on the other hand, it has meant much more engagement with the debate. And in the end the Puppies were voted down in the actual awards, even if that meant not awarding some categories. Which was kind of amazing. And it opened up a really important conversation and brought a lot of people together around it. I’m actually kind of happy about how the spec-fic or sci-fi community as a whole has handled this thing.

CP: I have a friend who said, “When stuff like this happens, it means you’re winning,” and I think they might be right in this case. It also opens up that question, “Who is focused on awards, and why?” I know awards can help sales, and it’s nice to be recognized, but I think it’s interesting these straight white cis guys are so focused on prestige. Whereas our feelings as editors about recognition are, “It’s nice, but it’s a byproduct.” We’re not interested in this writing being prestigious, we’re interested in it being interesting, first of all, to a trans audience—we want to be accountable to them.

(12) Steven Erikson’s guest post “Awards or Bust”, largely devoted to a critique of Stephen Jones’ defense of the WFA Lovecraft bust (on Facebook), concludes —

The time was long past due on getting rid of that bust.  And at the table at the banquet at the World Fantasy Awards, I made my applause loud and sustained.  And as for the Lovecraft pin I wear to conventions, indicating a past nomination, I’d love to see a new version.  In the meantime, however, I will continue to wear it, not in belligerent advocacy of H.P. Lovecraft, but to honour all past winners of the World Fantasy Award.

In my mind I can make that distinction.  That I have to lies at the heart of the problem with having Lovecraft as our symbol of merit.  To all future nominees and winners, you won’t have to face that awkward separation, and for that, you can thank that ‘vocal minority,’ who perhaps have not been vocal enough, and who are most certainly not a minority.  Not in this field, not in any other.

(13) Laura J. Mixon’s conclusion, after quoting one of Lovecraft’s racist statements in “Farewell to the Bigoted Bust”:

These are not simply a few hot-headed opinions popping out of the mouth (or the pen) of a young man, whose attitudes mellowed with age. They weren’t ill-considered Thingish thoughts that he reconsidered later. Nope. He remained hostile and entrenched in these views to the end of his life, despite the sustained efforts of his friends and family.

[Thanks to James H. Burns, Diana Pavlac Glyer, and John King Tarpinian for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day Will R.]

469 thoughts on “Pixel Scroll 11/15 Scrolled Acquaintance

  1. @lurkertype:

    MACII is going to need a robust weapons policy, and a serious commitment to peace-bonding everything, if not banning them outright. […] I hope they can afford metal detectors for the Hugos and Masquerade. […] Now we know that Puppies don’t follow civilian government rules, but as long as someone can spot the gun before they use it, it’ll be enough to get the cops to escort them off the premises. Fingers crossed.

    I think you overstate the danger by quite a margin. I attended the Puppy-heavy Libertycon for years*, and I don’t recall even a single incident that would justify that kind of reaction. MZW, for instance – he likes his guns and does a solid trade in sharp pointy things, but I’ve never seen him so much as hint at disobeying con policies where they’re concerned.

    * Yes, years – about a decade. They didn’t call themselves Puppies before this year, but it’s the same crowd.

  2. Brian Z.

    Late in his life, at the end of H. P. Lovecraft’s public readings, he would pull out a guitar and softly strum it while crooning his final paragraph.

    I can see Joshua Kronengold doing the same at next year’s Worldcon Business Meeting.

  3. Laura Resnick: BT and I are scant acquaintances who had relatively little FB contact, so I assume it was just a matter of his not wanting to stumble across my comments on FB. I am very critical of the Puppies and his role therein, and I gathered from the FB discussion among people he’d blocked that this was what most of us had in common.

    I think that you are underestimating the magnitude of BT’s amply-demonstrated Massive Insecurity — especially with respect to your gender and to the role that your father had, up to this point, played in his career. I love and respect your dad — but I hereby declare you nobody important.

    Be that as it may, your way of handling it — considering it a non-event — is totally the right one.

  4. lurkertype: MACII is going to need a robust weapons policy, and a serious commitment to peace-bonding everything, if not banning them outright. […] I hope they can afford metal detectors for the Hugos and Masquerade. […] Now we know that Puppies don’t follow civilian government rules, but as long as someone can spot the gun before they use it, it’ll be enough to get the cops to escort them off the premises. Fingers crossed.

    Rev. Bob: I think you overstate the danger by quite a margin. I attended the Puppy-heavy Libertycon for years, and I don’t recall even a single incident that would justify that kind of reaction.

    I don’t think lurkertype is making an overstatement. You are referring to a con where the Puppies are the majority default. Of course they are going to feel a lot more confident and self-secure in that environment.

    Put these massively insecure Puppies into an environment where they are well aware that they are a minority — and one which is looked upon without respect, or perhaps even with contempt — and you are looking at a totally different situation.

  5. JJ:

    I’m not going to argue against prudence, but remember that I know these people. Have for years. There is an important difference between online/remote stupidity and in-person behavior. I wouldn’t put it past them to get loud in an argument, but I would be very surprised if one of them even considered pulling a weapon.

    Offensive, yes. A deadly threat, no.

  6. Rev. Bob: Offensive, yes. A deadly threat, no.

    I sincerely hope you are right. Nevertheless, I hope that MACII will employ a strict weapons policy and field a well-trained security team. A lot of the Puppies seem to regard their weapon as their evidence of manhood, and have extremely poor impulse control and anger management skills.

  7. Mike Glyer on November 17, 2015 at 9:59 pm said:

    Meredith:

    …and it always makes me so glad that no-one can see the things I typed but then decided not to post.

    While I don’t enjoy your reputation, mine could certainly be worse than it is. About half the comments I start never get posted. There are the ones I draft on my Kindle in the heat of the moment, only to have it lock up and lose the comment. (I suspect divine intervention.) Then there are other comments I fully work out here on my PC, look at in their finished form, ask myself, “And your point is exactly WHAT?” and delete them….

    Iphinome on November 17, 2015 at 10:09 pm said:

    ‘If it feels good, don’t post it’ is the policy I try to follow.

    I can get riled up about things, so I try to think good and hard before I post anything. Even then I have to remind myself I’m talking to and about people.

    There was a time late last spring when the trolls were thick on the ground here. I kept extending courtesy to them because well, people are people and it might get through, and also because I did not want to join in the obnoxious habit of abusing dissenters.

    There were a number of surreal conversations last spring and summer on File 770 where an incoming person, hurling insults and venom, raged at imaginary opponents while regular posters here extended friendly greetings and asked about their favorite SF stories.

    I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, at least enough to give them time to calm down and talk. I don’t have infinite time or patience, but I try to at least give people a chance to behave. Not every upset person is a determined troll.

    That’s the sort of online behavior I prefer: friendly or at least polite discussion of people’s mutual interests without name-calling or wrath if one’s opinions are not shared. Interest and curiosity rather than insult and frenzy-whipping. New ideas to explore rather than endlessly hashing over the same-old same-old for comfort’s sake.

    I am not sure how Mike Glyer manages it, but I am really grateful for this civilized space on the internet. Straight SF news without much editorial slant and nontoxic comment sections. That’s a pretty remarkable achievement.

  8. Rev. Bob, if you go back to the 7/20 roundup, one of the items was Michael Z. Williamson threatening to assault and/or murder the person who got his Facebook account temporarily suspended, and subsequently reiterating that he was serious in his threat.

    Back about forty years ago, I sent a man to prison for doing almost exactly the same thing MZW did.

    18 USC 875 [c] would, I believe, be the pertinent law.

    (The old incident was during my Army service. I reported, and testified against, one of the other soldiers in my company after he said, in front of me and others, that he not only wanted to kill our company commander, but to set the captain’s wife and children on fire. And when we tried to get him to take the words back, he said “I’m serious. I mean it.” Once he said that word, I couldn’t treat it as a joke or try to ignore it. I HAD to report it.) (IIRC, after spending eight or nine months in the stockade awaiting court-martial, the fellow was sentenced to two years imprisonment, which was then converted to time served and an immediate dishonorable discharge.)

    Back then, Rev. Bob, you described MZW as: “In person, MZW’s the class clown with absolutely no boundaries.”

    Yeah, well, that class clown wrote “Seriously, if I can find out who it is from FB’s logs (got a lawyer working on it) I CAN afford air fare. Someone will experience pain.”

    When someone makes a threat, and then emphasizes that the threat is serious, that person is a thug and a criminal. When you use the word “seriously”, you can’t walk it back, you can’t say you were just joking.

    I have nothing but utter contempt for someone like MZW.

    Do you really want to be an apologist for your acquaintances’ criminal behavior, Rev. Bob?

  9. I’m taking a break from SFF and reading When Someone You Love Has a Chronic Illness by Tamara McClintock Greenberg.

    Okay, am I a horrible person for envisioning a book in the style of When you give a Mouse a Cookie?

  10. “”There is an important difference between online/remote stupidity and in-person behavior.””

    I disagree completely. A person is responsible and accountable for their own behavior online as well as offline. I am never swayed by arguments that are one of the many variations of, “I know he’s an asshole online, but he’s nice in person.” This is identical, IMO, to saying, “Yes, he’s a mean drunk, but he’s a nice guy when sober” of someone who keeps getting drunk. Either way, this is not a nice person, IMO, this is someone repeatedly exploiting the opportunity to behave badly without accountability, either because of alcohol impairment or because they’re hiding behind a computer screen.

    When someone habitually behaves nastily online and someone else says, “But he’s nice in person,” what I hear is, “He’s much more careful in circumstances where there are consequences for the kind of behavior he exercises online.” And I’ve got no interest in being around jerks online or off.

    I also think there is far LESS excuse, rather than more, for intemperate comments online than in person. Things do pop out of one’s mouth in the heat of the moment in person. But anything said online has to be typed out first–written down–formed into phosphor words and SENT. There is every opportunity in the world to THINK THROUGH what you’re saying and consider whether this is definitely what you want to say and how you want to engage with others. No excuse for not managing your words and your temper responsibly. (And I say this as a bad tempered person.)

  11. Given the comments I’ve already seen online (I think I saw the link here, and it was a Puppy discussion on the blog of someone named Knight or Knighton?), in which various Puppies/supporters were saying they intended to go armed-with-guns to MACII because they don’t feel safe in sf/f fandom (they seem to be extremely fearful people, much like VD), they talked about their carry-concealed permits, and they said that they would defend themselves with those weapons.

    Even if that talk is pure, unadulerated bullshit, mere bragging and preening to impress themselves and each other… These were nonetheless presented in public as seriously stated intentions, so I think MACII has to take it seriously and implement a specific and firmly applied weapons policy.

  12. Things do pop out of one’s mouth in the heat of the moment in person. But anything said online has to be typed out first – written down – formed into phosphor words and SENT.

    You make it sound like it’s easier to be circumspect in your behavior online than in person. I find the opposite true by a mile. In person there’s immediate social feedback to how you’re acting and the possibility of consequences when you take an aggressive or hostile posture. You can be in the middle of saying something and get a reaction that leads you to dial it down.

    Online, though, it’s much easier to let the id run free. By the time I decide I took something too far, it’s already out there and I might as well own it.

  13. (I think I saw the link here, and it was a Puppy discussion on the blog of someone named Knight or Knighton?)

    I don’t remember that discussion, but there’s an author named T.L. Knighton who blogs a lot about his Puppy sadfeels and gets all warm and creamy about guns.

  14. Mike Glyer on November 17, 2015 at 11:42 pm said:

    Brian Z.

    Late in his life, at the end of H. P. Lovecraft’s public readings, he would pull out a guitar and softly strum it while crooning his final paragraph.

    I can see Joshua Kronengold doing the same at next year’s Worldcon Business Meeting.

    So can I, but I more or less asked him to not play that trick again when I officially described it as a “funny-once.”

  15. Keven: when I officially described it as a “funny-once.”

    As Manny told Mike in TMisHM, I assume!

  16. Rev. Bob: There was a thread in the Sad Puppies 4 announcement page about taking along guns to the next Worldcon where I pointed out my discomfort with being at a con with live weapons — and was soundly sneered at for it. One person cited as reason for needing a gun that PNH had assaulted Lamplighter. When I pointed out that he had done her no physical harm, they clarified that they did indeed mean assault, as in purely verbally, and that this was clear evidence the SJWs were unhinged and who knew what would happen next time? It convinced me of something, alright.

    They also said that nothing had ever happened at Libertycon, and I quite believe them, but I also pointed out Libertycon has a weapons policy. (whether or not it’s enforced).

    Lord knows what they would have thought of the pictures of TNH in a firing range.

  17. @various: Puppies, weapons, MAC II, etc.

    I can only speak to my experience with the Puppies, but I can speak to that experience. It is mine, it is firsthand, and it started well before they acquired their present slavering horde of followers who expect certain behavior. One cannot properly examine their online facades without considering that audience.

    MZW’s a shock jock. He will literally say anything to get the reaction he’s after, and right now, the reaction he’s after is exactly what you’re giving him: fear and appalled horror. He’s establishing cred with the Puppy followers by making “the puppy-kickers” panic. I’m not trying to shield him and say “he’s really sweetness and light once you get to know him” – I’m saying he’s a paper tiger who isn’t even close to the threat he pretends to be. He plays up Big And Tough because it helps his brand, in selling both books and knives. Reacting as if he is big and tough plays directly into his hands. He isn’t, so don’t.

    Yes, I firmly support MAC II having and following a solid weapons policy – as I do every other convention. I said so from the start; prudence is good. However, I do not believe for one moment that the Puppy contingent will actually roll into MAC II with pistols on their hips. Oh, it plays well with the online audience who’ll never set foot in the con to learn differently, but it’s still playing to the base. They’re campaigning for loyal followers to sign up for Supporting Memberships to boost SP4, and acting as if they have any sense works against that.

    To those familiar with American politics, the Puppies’ behavior maps strongly to that of the Republican presidential candidates in primary season. Say the vilest, most shocking stuff you can, because the people whose support you want the most demand to hear it – and then, once the nomination is locked in, shift gears to look like Mr. Reasonable to get votes in the general election. It’s a well-worn pattern, they didn’t invent it, but they’re certainly canny enough to follow it.

    And I can see it, recognize it, and point it out. As a certain rabid canine would say, it’s all rhetoric. Recognize it as such, and you’re better able to defeat them at their actual game. One does not defeat the Wizard by talking to the giant head, but by pulling back the curtain. This is me, playing Toto.

  18. @Rev. Bob

    I’m not concerned about most of the Puppies – as you say, they’re playing to an audience (and I think I said earlier that it was easy to play the big man on the internet) – although there are very few that I’d want to interact with since becoming a target of big men on the internet holds little appeal. I am concerned about some things the Marmot* has said, which sound less boastful and more like an actual plan (if not a good one). Have you had many interactions with him, or people who know him well enough to speak to his overall non-violence?

    *Although, from other things he’s said he’s also one of the least likely to turn up.

  19. @Meredith:

    I’ve never encountered the Marmot outside his fiction, which was revolting enough. The closest I’ve come to him in person was hearing some people at Libertycon say that he oughta show up incognito for some ill-defined reason. As far as I know, though, we’ve never even been in the same state at the same time.

  20. MZW’s a shock jock. He will literally say anything to get the reaction he’s after, and right now, the reaction he’s after is exactly what you’re giving him: fear and appalled horror. He’s establishing cred with the Puppy followers by making “the puppy-kickers” panic. I’m not trying to shield him and say “he’s really sweetness and light once you get to know him” – I’m saying he’s a paper tiger who isn’t even close to the threat he pretends to be. He plays up Big And Tough because it helps his brand, in selling both books and knives. Reacting as if he is big and tough plays directly into his hands. He isn’t, so don’t.

    If he was threatening violence against women, no one would tell women that they were playing into his hands by taking his threats seriously and feeling uncomfortable about them.

    How is this so different? He said he was planning to buy a plane ticket, find someone who complained about him to Facebook and make that person “experience pain.”

    I’m not interested in separating the people who make real threats from the ones who don’t really mean it. There are countless examples of people whose threats didn’t seem serious until they carried one out. I covered too many domestic violence murder-suicides as a news reporter to ever say that someone “isn’t even close to the threat he pretends to be.”

  21. Rev. Bob:

    “MZW’s a shock jock. He will literally say anything to get the reaction he’s after, and right now, the reaction he’s after is exactly what you’re giving him: fear and appalled horror.”

    My problem with shock jocks is that it is not uncommon that they escalate their behaviour while being egged on by the crowds. Start with vile words, continue with abuse, then harassment and sometimes after that physical violence.

    We should not play this down.

  22. It’s plain stupid to be announcing on the internet your intention to conceal carry to a convention. Someone should be keeping a list of names. Personally I’d not permit those people to attend the con for safety reasons because it’s better to be safe than sorry.

    However I don’t see any con following my suggestion. So instead if those people register they should get an extra reminder of the weapons policy. When they go to register security should be called and all of their luggage as well as their person should be searched. If they are found to be in violation of the con weapons policy they should be banned on the spot. If they are in violation of state laws the cops should be called immediately.

    The con might want to have a cop onsite who has a copy of the threats to violate con/hotel/state weapons policies to help with handling situations as they arise. Maybe these guys are just shock jocks and speaking out of their ass but they need to learn there are consequences to their words/actions.

  23. Tasha: Conventions have no legal authority to search a person’s luggage, and only a very limited authority to search a person’s person.

    If a convention wanted a person’s luggage, room, or person searched, they’d need to convince a police officer of immediate reasonable cause, or that there was enough risk to justify getting a search warrant.

    Note: I am not a lawyer, nor have I ever run Security at a convention (though I have staffed Operations).

  24. Conventions have no legal authority to search a person’s luggage …

    True, but they could refuse to admit someone to the venue who doesn’t allow their bags to be searched.

  25. @Tasha: “if those people register they should get an extra reminder of the weapons policy. When they go to register security should be called and all of their luggage as well as their person should be searched. If they are found to be in violation of the con weapons policy they should be banned on the spot.”

    And that’s where we get into the sticky problem of overlapping but not identical policy domains.

    Convention policy is not hotel policy is not federal, state, or local law. Checking in with the hotel to get one’s room is different from checking in with con registration to get one’s badge. I have never, ever, not once, seen anyone carry their luggage to con registration, and a con volunteer’s demand to poke around in your suitcase should be met with firm refusal. Luggage goes in your room. The convention happens outside of it. Unless you’re hosting a room party, those two domains do not meet. Not ever.

    A few years ago, I attended a convention where a couple of people had been banned from attending. One of those people got a room at the same hotel for the same weekend and invited some of her friends – who were members of the convention – to that room for a small party. And there was nothing the convention could do about it. The hotel had empty rooms, and the con had no right to dictate whom the hotel could rent them to. The con couldn’t control what happened in there. Overlapping circles of friends, starkly different spheres of influence. Even if the con had decided to yank the badges of con members who attended that not-con room party, they could not force the hotel to evict them from their rooms.

    Furthermore, it is impossible for the contents of one’s luggage to violate a con’s weapon policy, as that policy governs how people carry items in con spaces. I have helped people carry dozens of firearms into their hotel room at a convention as a con volunteer because what they have in their room is irrelevant to the convention until and unless they either bring it from their room to the con spaces or use it to harass another member of the con. Yes, it can be frustrating – but that’s one of the headaches of running a convention. You have to remember not just where your authority starts, but where it ends.

  26. @rcade: “[Conventions] could refuse to admit someone to the venue who doesn’t allow their bags to be searched.”

    Strictly speaking – no, they couldn’t. The most the con can do is deny them access to those parts of the venue which are reserved for the exclusive use of the con at the time.

    In other words, if I were of a mind to do so – and I’m not – I could roll up to a con’s hotel with a duffel bag full of firearms and, so long as the hotel management did not object, sit in the lobby and spend a few hours disassembling, cleaning, and reassembling them. The con would be completely unable to do anything about it, because I wouldn’t be in their exclusive space. I would be in a space controlled by the venue but not by those renting it. (Now, if the hotel decided to impose those sanctions, that would be a different story – but the con would still have no part of it. It would be hotel personnel checking my bags and telling me to leave, not con personnel.)

    In other words, booking a room at a local restaurant for a private party does not give you any control over what happens in the rest of the restaurant.

  27. Conventions have no legal authority to search a person’s luggage, and only a very limited authority to search a person’s person.

    It depends. The con can’t just frisk you if they want, but it could refuse you entry to con spaces if you didn’t agree to a search before you entered them.

  28. @Rev Bob,

    To start with, please remember that I like you and I respect your opinions.

    Someone close to me has worked with MZW and respects him, although is unhappy with this past year’s developments.

    I really don’t agree with the statement “Reacting as if he is big and tough plays directly into his hands. He isn’t, so don’t.”

    This is not “the puppy-kickers panic” or any other cute playground nonsense the Puppies may giggle about.

    This is adults taking seriously the words of an adult man who has made threats agInst specific members of the community and when given a chance to back down, has reiterated those threats.

    It is the mature, responsible action to take those threats seriously and to take preventive action against them.

    MZW may well be just a big blowhard talking a macho game as part of his sales persona. But he is a grown-up. He should own his words.

    The problem is that macho posing provides cover for genuinely murderous people, and getting into the habit of laughing it off leads to tragedy.

    Threats need to be taken seriously. And, as airport security will tell you, just because someone is only making an arse of themselves is no reason not to take their implied threats with all the seriousness such threats require.

    Anyone who laughs at the cautiousness of people dealing with those who make death threats has shown their opinion to be irrelevant.

  29. rcade on November 18, 2015 at 11:34 am said:

    Conventions have no legal authority to search a person’s luggage …

    True, but they could refuse to admit someone to the venue who doesn’t allow their bags to be searched.

    Heck, grocery stores do that.

  30. Strictly speaking – no, they couldn’t. The most the con can do is deny them access to those parts of the venue which are reserved for the exclusive use of the con at the time.

    When I said “venue,” I meant the convention’s space, not the entire hotel or convention center in which it is being hosted. So we agree.

  31. @Peace:

    I have said some things in what I thought was clear and unambiguous language, but they keep getting ignored. Specifically:

    I’m not going to argue against prudence, but remember that I know these people.

    Yes, I firmly support MAC II having and following a solid weapons policy – as I do every other convention. I said so from the start; prudence is good. However, I do not believe for one moment that the Puppy contingent will actually roll into MAC II with pistols on their hips.

    There is a huge difference between online chatter and in-person action. At every turn, I have agreed that MAC II should take proper precautions (in-person action) while attempting to deny the Puppies the online reactions they clearly seek.

    What’s happening in this subthread? That’s what the Puppies want. We shouldn’t do that. None of us are on the MAC II comcon; this subthread is irrelevant jaw-jaw that has no impact on their operations. This isn’t “preventative action” or “making someone own his words” – this is an irrelevant conversation that has no measurable impact on what will happen at MAC II. All this thread does is give the Puppies and their followers stuff to laugh at: “look how scared they are of us!” That’s bad strategy. In this context, treating their chest-thumping as anything other than laughable idiocy is ill-advised, in the same way that one does not call into the Rush Limbaugh show to object to his statements and expect to have a positive effect. All it does is feed their rhetoric.

    If one truly wishes to affect what happens at MAC II, talking about it in a File 770 thread is not the answer. Those with attending memberships should instead contact the con directly and make their concerns clear. Money talks, and you’ve paid to attend, so let them know if you feel unsafe doing so. If they get enough such feedback, they will take proper precautions. They have no practical alternative.

  32. @Rev. Bob

    I’m uncomfortable with suggesting that people should not express concerns in a social space because of how someone else might react to it.

  33. All this thread does is give the Puppies and their followers stuff to laugh at: “look how scared they are of us!” That’s bad strategy. In this context, treating their chest-thumping as anything other than laughable idiocy is ill-advised, in the same way that one does not call into the Rush Limbaugh show to object to his statements and expect to have a positive effect. All it does is feed their rhetoric.

    You’re thinking too much about how our actions will be interpreted by the puppies. Too many of them are acting in bad faith when they talk about the Hugos and SF fandom. They’re going to go on their unhinged tirades regardless of what we say or do.

    I talk about what I want here without a concern about how it will be received by the people who demonize File 770. To do otherwise is to believe they’re able to fairly and rationally interpret the things we discuss, and thus far, they haven’t given me reason to have much faith in that premise. The version of File 770 in their heads is not one I recognize.

  34. Rev. Bob:

    “What’s happening in this subthread? That’s what the Puppies want. We shouldn’t do that.”

    Puppies will always say that what is happening is what they wanted. It is not relevant what they would want. What is relevant is how we react to other people behaviour. They might be trolls. They might be shock jocks. But they might also be something more.

    Language with threats should be not be shrugged away. It should not be accepted.

    We had a comedian who spoke like that in Sweden just a week ago. Within a few days the comedian had his books withdrawn from the three largest book stores. Three radio shows he participated in said they didn’t want anything to do with him. And a theatre removed all his writing from their latest play.

    I personally think a society will be better when we don’t accept speech like that. When it has consequences. When we don’t only say “that is how he is” and saying that it is only ” laughable idiocy”.

    No it is not. It is threats.

  35. on Watchmaker:
    I just looked in the catalog for the L.A. library system, and all the dead-tree copies (30 of them) are checked out, on hold, or in transit.

  36. “He’s much more careful in circumstances where there are consequences for the kind of behavior he exercises online.”

    I worked with a person who, on at least two occasions, bad-mouthed third parties to me. It was something that was reportable to HR, as against business conduct rules, but I didn’t – because the person had lied to HR in at least one similar case, and gotten away with it. (Not a nice person, no matter the public persona.) I wasn’t the only one who knew, but the ones who didn’t know were in charge.

  37. @Hampus: “We had a comedian who spoke like that in Sweden just a week ago. Within a few days the comedian had his books withdrawn from the three largest book stores. Three radio shows he participated in said they didn’t want anything to do with him. And a theatre removed all his writing from their latest play.”

    And I feel confident in saying that none of that happened because everyday people talked to each other about him. That sort of tangible reaction happens when people talk to the bookstores, to the radio stations, and to the theatre – to the people who actually govern access.

    If a bully pokes at you and you flinch, he gets what he wants. He has provoked a visible reaction. If you run away when he approaches, you’re giving him another cookie and continuing to encourage his behavior by rewarding it. On the other hand, if you quietly speak to the people who control the facility so that they either curtail his behavior or remove him, he is not only deprived of the public reaction he craves, but he is denied the ability to poke at other people to seek it from them. That’s how he loses.

    If I’m online and my cable connection goes out, I have a few choices in how I spend my spoons. I can call my friends and grouse to them about how much it sucks to be offline. That may make me feel better, but it doesn’t get me back online. I can fume in silence, or take up some other activity that I can do without the internet. Again, feels good, doesn’t fix. Or, alternately, I can call the cable company and report the problem. It may be a regional outage that will fix itself, or it may be something they need to become aware of so they can fix it, but that’s actually a way of using my spoons constructively… so that’s what I do.

    I am all for meaningful, useful action that results in the Puppies being unable to cause harm. I am against pointless chatter that rewards their boasting while doing nothing about whatever potential threat exists. Hence, as I stated from the start, I am in favor of the convention making sure they have and follow good policies, but I am also in favor of pointing out when the guy who looks like an impressive bully actually has a glass jaw and is not as serious a threat as he wants to appear to be. Both aspects of the situation matter.

  38. @Bruce:

    [sigh] And once again, zoom goes the point over someone’s head.

    If someone threatens your life, do you gossip to your friends or call the cops? Gossip all you want if you don’t take the threat seriously, but call the cops if you do.

    We’re gossiping. We shouldn’t be. If we see the threat as credible, we should be calling the cops (or, in this case, notifying MAC II – or both) so it can be neutralized, not wringing our hands about how horrible it is to have been threatened. Hand-wringing is not taking action. It is something one does instead of acting.

  39. @Rev. Bob:

    This is not a Puppy-controlled space.

    Our discussing Puppy matters here is not the equivalent of phoning in to Rush Limbaugh’s show.

    The equivalent of that would be going to Puppy-controlled spaces and trying to argue with them there.

    That strikes me as unproductive, just as directly engaging Rush Limbaugh would be.

    I don’t care if the Puppies laugh, I truly don’t.

    I will not let concern for how they *might* react color my behavior.

    They have shown themselves to be uninterested in anything but getting what they want, to the point of telling after the fact whoppers about what they wanted anyway.

    Their concerns are irrelevant because they do not speak or act honestly.

    I will not censor myself because of bullies.

  40. @ Amoxtli
    re: Watchmaker

    That’s an interesting interpretation of the book. My take is a bit different. It seemed like a much more nuanced story to me.

    V vagrecerggrq Tenpr’f ebyy irel qvssreragyl. Fur jnfa’g n ivyynva, fur jnf gelvat gb fnir Gunavry sebz fbzrbar fur gubhtug jnf na rivy znavchyngbe. Fur’f na rppragevp naq jrag bireobneq, ohg gung graqrapl va ure crefbanyvgl jnf cerggl jryy rfgnoyvfurq va gur obbx. Jurgure be abg Zbev VF whfg n frysvfu, rira rivy, znavchyngbe vfa’g znqr pbzcyrgryl pyrne va gur obbx, vzb. Gur irel ynfg cnentencu yrnirf gur jubyr dhrfgvba bcra.

    “Ng svefg Tenpr gubhtug vg jnf n jngpu, ohg vg jnf gbb fznyy. Ur syvpxrq vg vagb gur nve gb yrg gur yvtug pngpu vg. Vg jnf n urnil-qhgl obyg.” Fb Zbev znavchyngrq Tenpr’f sevraq’f genva gb trg Tenpr gb Wncna? Naq yrg ure xabj ur unq? Jnf fur evtug nobhg Zbev be abg? Naq gung’f jurer gur fgbel raqf.

    At least we can agree that Pulley is a viable Campbell candidate.

  41. @Rev.Bob:

    It seems to me we may be talking past each other here.

    I can see your point about meaningful action.

    It’s true that making formal protest (when the option exists) is probably more effective than chatter and complaints.

    However, it is only through chatter and complaints that many of us learn of the broken stairs in our communities.

    This is a place to bounce around ideas (So far as I can tell. Mike Glyer may correct me.).

    Some of those ideas involve information and brainstorming about problems and problematic people.

  42. I am really, really behind. Had some involuntary down time.

    @ Aaron

    I’m really sorry Torgersen has tried to get to you by using your children. I admire the way you’re handling it. Given time children grow up and usually figure out that their parents are 1) actual human beings with strengths and weaknesses and 2) smarter than they seemed when said children were younger.

  43. @Peace: “This is not a Puppy-controlled space. Our discussing Puppy matters here is not the equivalent of phoning in to Rush Limbaugh’s show.”

    True enough, as far as it goes, but I don’t think it goes far enough. We already know that the Puppies lurk here to gather recruitment material. Just as Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders must consider how their speeches can be twisted by Ted Cruz or Donald Trump (and vice versa!), we should be mindful of what ammunition we give the Puppies. This is not a Puppy-controlled space, but it is also not an inner sanctum. We aren’t phoning Rush Limbaugh, but we’re arguably calling Rachel Maddow and giving his views free air time on her show.

    @Peace (later): “It’s true that making formal protest (when the option exists) is probably more effective than chatter and complaints. However, it is only through chatter and complaints that many of us learn of the broken stairs in our communities. This is a place to bounce around ideas (So far as I can tell. Mike Glyer may correct me.). Some of those ideas involve information and brainstorming about problems and problematic people.”

    Very true. I am contributing the ideas that a) none of this is new information, b) we are all well aware of this broken stair, and c) it’s time to call a carpenter and fix the stair instead of continuously fretting that it is broken, because d) the people who broke it get rewarded when we complain but do not fix.

    In short: Everyone here is aware of the problem. We’ve been bouncing ideas long enough. Let’s do something instead.

  44. Rev. Bob: This is not an either-or. If my cable goes out, I can call the cable company AND grouse to my friends. In fact, I dare say most people would do just that.

    It is not practical for me to grouse to MACon, because I’m not going. (I addressed the puppies when I did because I thought it might be useful to give a reminder that not everyone comes from a gun culture, or an American perspective, and that there are practical reasons real guns are a bad idea in a space with toy weapons and alcohol. I addressed the topic here because direct experience of their attitude and a pointer to where it was said seemed relevant.)

    It may not even be much use at this moment for people who ARE going to do so, as the con has said they will have a weapons policy, it is forthcoming (thus no need to send messages demanding one) but it’s not published yet (thus nothing to critique.)

    But we can talk about our concerns to friends, and vent our frustrations. Ideally without being taken to task for doin’ it wrong.

  45. Rev. Bob:

    “And I feel confident in saying that none of that happened because everyday people talked to each other about him. That sort of tangible reaction happens when people talk to the bookstores, to the radio stations, and to the theatre – to the people who actually govern access.”

    And then you are very wrong. Because it wasn’t the first time the comedian acted like that. With no consequences. The difference this time was that people started to talk about it. And because of people talking about it, the book stores and radio stations were forced to act.

    That is how it works. By changing the social climate of what is acceptable and that doesn’t happen by keeping quiet, thinking of what people making threats might think.

  46. For that matter, in Sweden what MZW did would have been clearly illegal and alerting law enforcement about his posts would have bee the correct way to go TOGETHER with not stopping to talk about it. I have no idea how american law enforcement acts on stuff like this.

  47. Rev. Bob, the fellow I sent to prison for threatening to kill my Army CO and his family isn’t the only person I’ve sent to prison or jail. I’ve also called cops for things like death threats against me (another charming Army story), and the idiot neighbor who was showing off his new gun to friends on his front porch and thought it would be a good joke to point it at his neighbor carrying in groceries from their car and pull the trigger. And there have been incidents where I’ve come very, very close to calling the police, including some involving fandom.

    I have time constraints this afternoon. I may continue this conversation later.

Comments are closed.