Pixel Scroll 12/21 Rudolph the Scroll Nosed Reindeer

(1) SHE WAS ON WHAT KIND OF TRIP? The Mirror knows we can’t resist looking: “Woman ‘photobombed by alien’ during selfie on passenger jet on business trip”.

A woman has posted a selfie taken on a plane in which she claims she was photobombed – by an alien.

Olesya Podkorytov from the city of Kurgan in south-central Russia’s Kurgan Oblast region said she took the picture during the flight on a whim but when she posted it on social media friends pointed out something strange a few seats behind.

(2) BEFORE THERE WERE FOREHEAD CLOTHS. Movie bracket maven Hampus Eckerman pointed to this LA Times story, “’Young Frankenstein’ has new life on 40th anniversary”.

Director Mel Brooks spent a lot of money on white handkerchiefs while making his 1974 tour de farce, “Young Frankenstein.”

“I gave everybody in the crew a white handkerchief,” said the 88-year-old comedy legend during a recent phone interview. “I said, ‘When you feel like laughing, put this in your mouth.’ Every once in a while, I’d turn around and see a sea of white handkerchiefs, and I said, ‘I got a hit.'”

“Young Frankenstein” was more than a hit. It is a comic masterpiece.

(3) ‘TWAS CHITTY. Joined by Conan O’Brian, Dick Van Dyke and his a capella group, The Vantastix, sing the title song from his 1968 movie Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.

Van Dyke recently turned 90 but he can still belt out a tune.

(4) THE TRANSOM IS SHUT. Tor.com will no longer consider unsolicited short fiction submissions effective January 7, 2016 reports Locus Online.

(5) C. S. LEWIS. Matthew David Surridge is doing a read-through of C.S. Lewis works at Black Gate. The first two parts are —

“Wandering the Worlds of C.S. Lewis, Part I: Boxen”

I have read some, though far from all, of Lewis’ non-fiction; I intend to talk about it only insofar as I see a bearing on his fiction. I’m interested in seeing what images, tones, ideas, and approaches unite a fairly disparate corpus of writing. I want to see how Lewis’ approach to storytelling developed over his life, and how motifs and themes recurred in his work. I hope that by doing this I’ll better understand his individual books. At any rate, I’ll begin here with a look at Lewis’ published juvenilia…

“Wandering the Worlds of C.S. Lewis, Part II: Spirits in Bondage”

Today, I want to go through Lewis’ first book, a collection of lyric poems called Spirits in Bondage, published in 1919 when Lewis was still an atheist.

Yesterday I quoted Lewis’ judgement in his 1955 autobiography Surprised by Joy that the Boxen tales are novelistic and not poetic. If that’s so, what did the older Lewis think about the poetry he wrote in his youth? Did he find wonder and romance in the verse of Spirits in Bondage and Dymer? Hard to judge. Lewis doesn’t mention either volume in Surprised by Joy. Which strikes me as a little odd.

(6) CAREER GUIDANCE. David Gerrold responded on Facebook to Dr. Mauser (thought not actually by name). Between his very funny lines about being a so-called internet blowhard and his thoroughly serious rebuttal comes good advice for writers about dealing with controversy.

1) Never never never never never get into feuds. Whatever credibility you might have, you are automatically lending it to anyone you feud with because you are implying they are of equal validity, when most of the time they are not. People who enjoy feuds are automatically downgrading their credibility.

2) If you must respond, focus solely on the issue. Do not get into any personal remarks of any kind. Discuss issues only, not personalities. (This is because everyone has issues, not everyone has a personality.)

3) Never vilify a whole class or group of people — this generalization assumes that everyone in that class or group thinks and acts alike, that they are a monolithic army of clones. They are not. (I have stumbled here, more than once, and have now learned this lesson very well.)

And finally,

4) Always demand evidence.

(7) COMICS HUGO. George R.R. Martin has “More Hugo Ruminations” at Not A Blog.

I really don’t think we needed to add a Graphic Story category to the Hugo Awards. Comics have their own awards, the Eisners, they don’t need the Hugo too. Besides, most SF fans do not follow comics closely enough to make informed judgements in this area.

That being said, however, I have to concede that the fans did pretty damned well nominating in this category last year. SAGA was the only one of the finalists that I had actually heard of before Sasquan announced last year’s ballot… but I dutifully read all the others before I voted, and for the most part, I was impressed (okay, not by the Puppy nominee, which was several notches below the other four)… especially by MS. MARVEL, a whole new take on the character (actually a whole new character with an old name), a charming new addition to the Marvel universe, and the eventual winner.

So… I still don’t love Graphic Novel as a Hugo category, but it exists, and those who follow the field more closely than me should nominate Good Stuff here again, and maybe I’ll have more comic books to discover and delight in when the final ballot comes out.

Meanwhile, I do have one truly outstanding graphic novel to suggest… I am not totally disconnected from the world of comics, y’see… and that’s a book called THE SCULPTOR, by Scott McCloud….

(8) TOWERING TRAILER. The movie High-Rise is based on a J.G. Ballard novel.

(9) Today In History

Doctor Who fans may not be surprised to discover that those forceful characters the Daleks appear to be the only one of the Doctor’s enemies to have been given their own celebratory day. Dalek Day is held on 21st December each year. This date was chosen to commemorate the anniversary of the Daleks because they made their first TV appearance in Doctor Who on 21st December 1963. The official title of Dalek Day is the International Dalek Remembrance Day. There does not appear to be any regular organised celebrations each year to commemorate Dalek Day and it is unclear whether Dalek supporters meet or actually even dress up in Dalek costumes. Many of their fans appear to celebrate Dalek Day at home by having a Doctor Who marathon and watching again their favourite episodes with the Daleks battling against the Doctor.

  • December 21, 1937 — Walt Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the first full-length animated feature film, opened in Los Angeles.
  • December 21, 1984Don’t Open ‘Till Christmas opens slightly before Christmas.

(10) NO ROOM IN THE FUTURE FOR RANDY GARRETT. The Traveler at Galactic Journey reviews the January 1961 Analog in a manner that makes a reader wonder if this blog theme is a good fit for somebody who hates a prolific author for the most popular prozine of its time. Not because The Traveler ought to like something he doesn’t, but who’s going to want to hear about it every month?

Thus, it is too early to tell whether or not Analog is ever going to pull itself out of its literary doldrums.  I had such high hopes after December’s issue; January’s has dashed them.

It doesn’t help that Randall Garrett is still one of Campbell’s favorite writers.  I’m not sure if Garrett’s stories are lousy because Campbell tells Garrett what he should write, or if they’re lousy because Garrett writes what he knows Campbell will take.  Or maybe Garrett and Campbell independently share awful taste.  In any event, the long long lead novella, The Highest Treason, is a one-star drek-fest if ever there was one.

(11) TIX FOR RADIO PERFORMANCE OF WYNDHAM. Tickets are available to attend a live recording of John Wyndham’s The Kraken Wakes by BBC4 with the BBC Philharmonic. The event will be Friday, January 8, 2016 at MediaCityUK in Salford. Ticket applications are open until December 27.

Join the BBC Philharmonic and BBC Radio 4 for radio drama, The Kraken Wakes. This modern retelling of John Wyndham’s 1953 apocalyptic novel, is adapted by crime writer and dramatist Val McDermid and stars Tamsin Greig, Paul Higgins and Richard Harrington.

This is a rare chance to see a radio drama recorded for Radio 4 with a live orchestral accompaniment from the BBC Philharmonic.

Composer Alan Edward Williams has created a brand new orchestral score that will ‘play the part’ of the great sea monster during the performance.

The Kraken Wakes will be recorded as a live performance in two parts. The drama will then be broadcast later in the year on BBC Radio 4.

(12) CLASSIC RADIO SF. Open Culture helps you “Hear 6 Classic Philip K. Dick Stories Adapted as Vintage Radio Plays”.

As you can probably tell if you’ve interacted with any of his hard-core fans, the science fiction of Philip K. Dick has a way of getting into readers’ heads. What better way to adapt it, then, than in the medium of radio drama, with its direct route into the head through the ears? Science fiction in general provided radio drama with a good deal of bread-and-butter subject matter since pretty much its inception, and suitably so: its producers didn’t have to bother designing distant worlds, alien races and elaborately futuristic technologies when, with the right sound design, the listeners would design it all themselves in their imaginations.

From the series Mind Webs, which ran on Wisconsin public radio, “The Preserving Machine,” “Impostor,” and “The Builder.” From X Minus One, “Colony” and “The Defenders.”From Sci-Fi Radio, “Sales Pitch.”

(13) FRANCHISE SF. The Documentary, on BBC’s World Service, has posted its 56-minute feature “Homer, Hagrid and the Incredible Hulk”.

Ben Hammersley meets creators and fans to investigate how extended fictional universes, from Star Wars and Harry Potter to Game of Thrones, took over global culture. He examines the huge financial success of the world’s biggest franchises, and argues that their stories – the identity of Luke Skywalker’s father, for example – have become common cultural touchstones around the world.

To understand how these expansive fictional universes are created and maintained, Ben visits professor Dumbledore’s office to talk to Stuart Craig, production designer on the Harry Potter films. He goes to Los Angeles to meet Lauren Faust, creator of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic. And, he travels to San Diego Comic Con where he discusses a number of different universes with Marc Zicree, writer on numerous film and TV series, including Star Trek.

Ben also speaks to authors Robin Hobb and Warren Ellis, and to Axel Alonso and Ryan Penagos from Marvel. He hears from numerous fans, including Game of Thrones super-fans Linda Antonsson and Elio Garcia about the joys of fandom.

(14) NON-REALISTIC SF ART. Joachim Boaz’ “Adventures in Science Fiction Cover Art: Jack Gaughan’s Covers For Walker & Co. (1969-1970)” revisits covers of books I remember borrowing from the library when I was in high school.

Some famous novels are graced by his covers: James Blish’s A Case of Conscience (1958), Stanislaw Lem’s Solaris (1961), Silverberg’s Nightwings (1968), Ursula Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness (1969), and Norman Spinrad’s Bug Jack Barron (1969).

Stainless Steel Rat cover Gaughan

Titles in this art sequence without suitable images online: A Gift from Earth (1968), Re-Birth (1955), All Judgement Fled (1968), Trouble with Lichen (1960), The Midwich Cuckoos (1957).

(15) MAGIC NUMBER. Obviously I must mention something titled “Five for 2015: 5 TV Characters of the Year”, Jon Morgan’s post on Pornokitsch. Under discussion are Agent Carter, Phyrne Fisher, Jessica Jones, Kimmy Schmidt and Cat Grant.

(16) HE SLEIGHS ME. At Whatever, John Scalzi has an “Interview With Santa’s Reindeer Wrangler”.

Q: We could talk about that. I mean, the general violation of physics that goes on around the whole Santa’s sleigh thing.

A: Look, I don’t pretend to know the science of the flying sleigh thing, okay? That’s not my job. You can ask Santa’s physicists about it if you want.

Q: Santa has physicists on staff?

A: Of course he does. He’s one of the largest recruiters of physicists outside of NASA. What, you thought all this happened because of magic?

Q: Well, now that you mention it, yes. Yes, I did.

(17) MALCONTENT WARNING. Darth Santa…. Great production values for a video whose humor may leave you a little ill. Or laughing your ass off, depending on what meds you’ve taken today.

[Thanks to John King Tarpinian, Nigel, Martin Morse Wooster, and Andrew Porter for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day redheadedfemme.]

285 thoughts on “Pixel Scroll 12/21 Rudolph the Scroll Nosed Reindeer

  1. Dr. Mauser you seem confused. An apology should be made when one recognizes one has done wrong. One may or may not be forgiven. If the apology is not sincere (recognizing you have done wrong and need to change) than the apology is useless. Requiring others to accept your apology or behave differently because you apologized doesn’t indicate you’ve accepted you were wrong. Blaming a victim for your or someone else’s behavior is wrong and it’s not taking responsibility for your behavior. Teaching our children to take responsibility for their actions and words is one of the best things we can do to help them grow up to be a mensch – someone others want to be around and respect and emulate and whose friends don’t have to make excuses for.

    It seems you missed this final part of my response:

    Followed by an actual change in behavior which shows your sincerity and you recognize what you did was wrong. In some cases this requires getting help/counseling, taking a break from the Internet, changing friends, reading books, cutting back/out alcohol/drug use, self-help books, anger management classes, etc. Change is not easy. Sincere apologies frequently require accepting one has to change.

    Saying I’m sorry is a start not the end.

    Judaism has rules around forgiveness. It requires making actual amends and allows one to protect oneself from the person after forgiving them. So if someone keeps borrowing my tools & not returning them and ask for forgiveness, I may forgive them, but I shouldn’t loan them tools in the future because I don’t have to forget they aren’t trustworthy. I’m required to ask forgiveness if I’m the one borrowing the tools as I know it’s wrong to borrow and not return tools even though I know I might not be able to borrow tools from that person anymore.

  2. Dr. Mauser: I’m just pleading for people to stop being stupid to justify their partisan hate. It’s an uphill battle. Hate is WAY too much fun for some people here.

    What you are calling “partisan hate” is actually very legitimate human reaction to someone’s vile, despicable, and endangering behavior. That is not “being stupid”, nor is it being “partisan”. It is properly condemning unacceptable behavior.

    It would not matter what the political alignment of the perpetrator was, such actions would garner the same reaction. I point you to the reaction of non-Puppies to BS/RH’s horrendous behavior.

    Apparently you think Antonelli’s actions should be overlooked in the name of trying to make peace with the Puppies.

    You are wrong. Firstly, because overlooking such behavior is tantamount to condoning it.

    Secondly, because the Puppies have made it clear that the only sort of “peace” in which they are interested is for Worldcon members to give rockets to any sort of dreck they game onto the Hugo ballot.

    And if you’re really just so concerned “for people to stop being stupid to justify their partisan hate”, where are all your posts begging the Puppies to cease their partisan stupidity and hate? I welcome the links which you no doubt will be able to provide to all those posts.

     
    Dr. Mauser: Oh, and I didn’t blame Cuinn for Antonelli’s actions

    Yes, you did. And instead of apologizing for doing so, you are now doubling-down on that by saying she should have known Lou’s reputation (and thus, apparently, that he would doxx her if she declined to publish his story?).

    And you’re claiming that all the internet haters would have figured out who she was if he’d just said “I’ve had publication of a story cancelled because of my horrendous behavior”. Firstly, no, they wouldn’t. And secondly, why did he even mention this publicly? As you say, it’s clear he was complaining about his treatment. He bears responsibility for posting that, like a petulant 6-year-old who is upset that his bad behavior actually bears consequences.

  3. He did not post her e-mail

    Yes, he did.

    He didn’t post her e-mail address, but he did post her e-mail. People kind of conflate the two, so it’s worth specifying.

    He posted the e-mail she sent to him, and added information (her name and the magazine’s name, as I recall) that would allow people to easily find direct contact info. I’m not sure that’s such a horrible thing, since a magazine’s contact info is generally public, but the fact that he chose to publish private e-mail without permission and to add that information to it would make me think he was deliberately trying for that result if I didn’t think he was an idiot.

    I’m one of the people who was saying he was (mostly) harmless at the time, because he’s so inept at being a menace. That said, I don’t agree with your careful compartmenting of his stupidities so as to present things as if he apologized and uninvolved people just raged at him, as opposed to, say, that he did a number of stupid things, got reaction to them, apologized when he realized that he looked like an idiot and then kept doing stupid and offensive things. The people who didn’t instantly forgive him were people who either felt themselves to be part of the group he’d potentially endangered, and/or witnesses to his continued dishonesty and stupidity.

    My advice in this sort of situation is not to assume an apology clears the slate after you’ve done something stupid, so you can then whine and complain and get mad when you’re not treated as someone who never offended at all. It’s to apologize, realize you did something stupid, and hunker down and take your lumps with good grace. Try to do good work and let that speak for itself, and things will get put behind people on their schedule, not yours.

    But, well, so it goes.

  4. @Tasha: “I do notice unless specific request for YA/UF/PNR request here do seem to be met more frequently with books written by men.”

    Hunh. I won’t say all of my UF/PR reading is from female authors, because I can think of some notable exceptions, but I think most of it is. Of course, my 2012-2015 reading is an open book (heh) on Goodreads, if anyone cares to look.

    In light of one of your later posts, if you lived closer to me I would be inclined to give you a spare book. (Yes, they exist!) Because of a shipping hiccup, I have two signed copies of the first volume of Ménage à 3, with instructions from Giz to pass the second along to someone who’ll give it a good home.

  5. @Dr. Mauser: “Oh, and I didn’t blame Cuinn for Antonelli’s actions, I blame her for bandwagoning with all the rest of the hate, and wanting to be seen as doing the “right” thing, and acting to “Punish” Lou by breaking their contract. Entirely her decision. (And it’s not like she couldn’t have known Lou’s reputation beforehand).”

    Lemme make sure I understand every piece of this paragraph.

    1. Contacting an author by private channels that the author then makes public constitutes “wanting to be seen.”
    2. Said private contact constitutes “jumping on a bandwagon” and must be driven by hate, rather than any possible concern for the publication’s reputation.
    3. Rejecting his story unread due to his reputation would have been fine.
    4. Pulling his story after he worsens his reputation is not fine.

    Did I miss anything?

  6. Re: Apologies – and this is long sorry

    I admit to being somewhat curious about the originating impulse for this article ?

    When it was first linked here I was critical of it because it avoided any significant critique of Lou A actions, focusing rather on why people’s reactions to him were wrong; and did not cover why there was anger at his behavior.

    To me, this seemed like it was an exercise in revisionist history; especially with it being implicitly positioned in the article that Lou A came to this realization on his own.

    He did not, he was proud of his actions and boasted of doing so on video. It’s only after it became more widely known did he consider it wrong.

    The same happened with trying to get Aaron fired a month earlier. The same happened with posting the publisher’s information in a manner that would invite internet hate.

    Now I am told the point is that mistakes are never forgiven but that seems invalid, Lou A was allowed to go to the Con in spite of a very real risk of his being banned for violating the CoC. Mistake forgiven in spite of some real division among Con Runners.

    I feel the article is really advancing a point that actions should be forgotten and ignored once apologies are offered.

    It is possible to start new beginnings informed by the past but not beholden to it. Lou was allowed to go to the con. How has be been punished further since then ?

    If anything, the article does him a disservice by re-hashing everything over again as people add historical context.

    PS
    As to the asterisk, I think it was in a bit of poor taste but it was not intended to be a symbol for an *-hole. It was not done to punish Lou A, but I think it was done as a somewhat pointed joke about the kerfuffle to recognize it happened. So the focus on it seems strange to me with regards to Lou A specifically.

  7. Here’s the thing, Lou made his apology to David, and Lou’s apology met all those criteria you set out for an apology. And David accepted it. Why does everyone else have trouble with that? Is it that you don’t think David Gerrold can make the correct decision for himself?

    And that’s why Cuinn should have waited. “Oh no! Lou has done something bad to David, I must kick him out!”

    Gerrold: “Nah, it’s cool, I forgave him, I even told Sasquan not to ban him. It’s no big deal.”

    Cuinn: “Oh, perhaps I was hasty, but now I’m committed.”

    Now Lou did not tell people to attack Cuinn. Those assholes took it upon themselves, much like the folks who took it upon themselves to demand Sasquan go against their decision and Gerrold’s wishes. Internet Mobs are hard to direct. But every individual is responsible for his own actions. In that regard, the mob going after Cuinn isn’t much different than the mob going after Lou. But I’m sure they don’t see it that way, they never do. That’s part of the problem.

    Oh, and JJ, your point about the police attention being bad for the whole con is … well calling it tenuous is beyond charitable. Especially since those folks calling for Lou’s head were in a few cases asking for cops to be at the con following him around.

    And I have to wonder if none of the folks throwing stones here is completely innocent of doxing, or trying to get people fired. If you disapprove of that kind of behavior, the principled stance is the eschew it yourself. I get the sense that some folks principles are that it’s only bad if the other guy does it.

  8. @Dr. Mauser

    Unless you have some proof of the sort of bad behaviour you describe amongst the people here then I’ll thank you to hold your tongue when it comes to unfounded accusations. Assuming, in order to discredit those you disagree with, that they must be guilty of something does you no favours.

  9. As long as you’ve got “the sense,” Doc. That’s probably what allows you to put words into Cuinn’s mouth, too.

  10. Dr. Mauser, forgive me, but what on earth are you really trying to accomplish with this?

    Because I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times bringing up past failings, even wrapped with pleas for forgiveness, ends well. Mostly it just seems to remind everybody why they were pissed in the first place, particularly when they go to correct the view of things they see presented. It only serves to shunt him from “some asshole” back to “oh, THAT asshole” in the mental filing shelf. Unless you have some new revelation to add–he was a replicant, he was on drugs, he’s been dead for years and it’s an imposter, he has given all his money to the Peace Corps and joined a monastic order–it’s just dragging up old drama for….some reason.

    It betrays either a woeful lack of understanding of human nature or an agenda. And since I don’t know which it is, and since no one ever broke me of the habit of asking silly questions outright–what’s the agenda?

  11. @Dr. Mauser

    Thanks to Camestros for providing the link to the comment thread where this came up previously, and where you aired the first draft of your poorly thought out article:

    http://file770.com/?p=24256

    I would note that you have not actually addressed any of the responses there, and that you’ve actually not progressed your arguments beyond what they were then. You’re still alleging abusive posts by David Gerrold, while being unable to either provide them or to even confirm that there were any such posts as, as you yourself say, you’ve never seen his feed for ages. You keep insisting that there is an obligation to accept someone’s apology, when there is not. You keep assuming that an apology is a “get out of jail” card, when (as others have pointed out to you now and then) it is a start, not an end.

    At some point , if you have nothing new to add, perhaps it’s timeto let it go?

    And I have to wonder if none of the folks throwing stones here is completely innocent of doxing, or trying to get people fired…. I get the sense that some folks principles are that it’s only bad if the other guy does it.

    (i) This says far more about you, and the circles you swim in, than you realize.
    (ii) Oh I agree completely that there are some commenting here who seem to have very flexible standards. I can think of one who has gone through some tortured contortions when it comes to deciding what is and is not a good apology.

  12. Provide evidence anyone here has published someone’s real name on the internet while posting private e-mail discussion to people they knew would be incensed, possibly enough to start sending rude responses. Provide evidence Someone here has tried to get someone fired for rude words – not threats, not harassment, not legally actionable statements, just plain old rude words.

    Provide evidence Cuinn remotely had that train of thought – especially your magical assumption she remotely regretted the action *because of David Gerrold’s apology*, and not, as one plausible counter-example: “This man’s most recent example of poor behaviour is part of an ongoing pattern of poor behaviour that I really do not want to support, or be associated with.”

    Provide evidence that a man who apologizes to the key victim of his behaviour is afterwards someone other people need not view with distrust or avoid associating with (regardless of the key victim’s reply). Provide evidence that once that apology is made,indirectly affected witnesses never need to concern themselves about any part of his current reputation or his future behaviour.

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

  13. Mauser: Now you’re just inventing conversations. It could easily have gone:

    “Oh no! Lou has done something bad to David, I must kick him out!”

    Gerrold: “Nah, it’s cool, I forgave him, I even told Sasquan not to ban him. It’s no big deal.”

    “Oh, that’s okay, I guess, but I’d rather not damage this publication’s reputation by publishing someone so completely crazytown bananapants. Who knows what he might do next?! Maybe even set a horde of blithering idiots on some poor soul who rejects one of his stories!”

    Point being, Cuinn can make her own decisions without waiting for approval from anyone else. Her pulling Lou’s story likely had little to do with whether or not Gerrold was going to forgive him, and far more to do with the fact that the man is loony.

    Authors are personal brands, and Lou has historically been the crazy moron incapable of keeping his temper in check. Who wants to work with that?

  14. Dr. Mauser on December 22, 2015 at 9:48 pm said:

    Here’s the thing, Lou made his apology to David, and Lou’s apology met all those criteria you set out for an apology. And David accepted it. Why does everyone else have trouble with that?

    1. Because a fake police alert in theory impacts on everybody going to the convention.

    2. Reporting somebody to the police for being rude about the Puppy Campaign is somewhat threatening to EVERYBODY WHO HAS BEEN IN SOME SENSE RUDE ABOUT THE PUPPY CAMPAIGN.

    3. Although the kerfuffle had been quiet heated, the arguments had stayed within in some sorts of limits. Being clear that this kind of behavior is unacceptable is a message to ALL concerned i.e. to Puppy and Non-puppy alike. Don’t do freaky stuff like that. Don’t go and make a false police report about Brad or Larry or whoever. Not cool. Bad.

    4. People prefer not to be around other people who behave unpredictably and in ways that can be alarming.

    I don’t think any of those are odd or hard to grasp notions.

  15. And I have to wonder if none of the folks throwing stones here is completely innocent of doxing, or trying to get people fired. If you disapprove of that kind of behavior, the principled stance is the eschew it yourself. I get the sense that some folks principles are that it’s only bad if the other guy does it.

    Never doxxed that I’m aware of nor can I imagine doing it on purpose. That could get someone killed.

    Only people I’ve ever fired or tried to get fired were people who worked for me when I was a manager and played computer games instead of doing their job. I believe that was in my job description at the time. Well there was that super big entertainment TV guy who I tweeted about once that maybe he shouldn’t be allowed to continue with racist jokes on TV… I’m pretty sure an apology and his stopping using racist jokes would have been sufficient (acknowledge wrong & change behavior). I believe nothing came of it & life went back to normal & I don’t watch his show.

    Yep major hypocrite here. Done something wrong. Realized it was bad behavior and stopped. OMG call the SJW police and have me thrown out. 😉

  16. Now Lou did not tell people to attack Cuinn.

    Oh please! This is classic demagoguing. Since Bill O’Riley didn’t tell people directly to shoot Dr Tiller he could claim innocence even though he constantly referred to the man as “Dr Tiller the Baby Killer”. Lou is acting in a smaller scale but the behaviour is the same.

    If he says something that results in that person being targeted, he is responsible. It doesn’t matter his intent. He publicly aired his grievance and the harassment of Cuinn was the result.

  17. @tintinaus
    It really pains me you are bringing that tragedy into this debate. I wish you could have made that point in some other way.

  18. The police report about Gerrold was not the first time Antonelli used the threat of Authority against someone. It was the second – that we know of. He still boasts about the first occasion. If he apologised for it, I do not remember it, and even if he had then the boasting since would make a lie of that apology, as well as the repeat of the behaviour. Antonelli has twice used that tactic, as badly as it failed, against people who were, at most, rude about the Puppies. Why should anyone believe he would not try again against someone else who was rude about the Puppies? Once, swiftly apologised for and never repeated, can be forgiven. Twice is making a habit of it, especially when the boasts continue well after the fact. It will only be luck if he never manages to pick a target who would be truly vulnerable to such underhanded, sneaking tactics.

    Antonelli likes to try and recruit people, often under false pretences, to do his bullying for him. That speaks volumes about his character.

  19. And I have to wonder if none of the folks throwing stones here is completely innocent of doxing, or trying to get people fired.

    This makes me wonder what Dr. Mauser has been up to, that this behavior pops so readily to his mind as normal.

    Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Dr. Mauser’s response to being called on blaming Carrie Cuin for Lou’s behavior to turn around and blame Carrie Cuin *again* for not knowing Lou’s reputation?

  20. Here’s the thing, Lou made his apology to David, and Lou’s apology met all those criteria you set out for an apology. And David accepted it. Why does everyone else have trouble with that? Is it that you don’t think David Gerrold can make the correct decision for himself?

    One last thing: Gerrold can make whatever decisions he likes for himself. What Gerrold does not do, and does not want to do as far as I can tell, is make decisions for anyone else. Equally, no decision made by anyone else here could possibly, under any plausible circumstances, take Gerrold’s decision away from him. Why is this even a question?

  21. In this thread I’m mainly to discuss comics, sorry. Enough to deal with one apologist at a time.
    Dr M, perhaps it would help your argument to just spell out that Cuinn is both younger and female. That’s just obvious, don’t you think?

    I forgot Quantum Vibe, inside some RSS folders… it’s got recap comics, nice.
    Athena Wheatley, or, Warp & Weft, a graphic novel mostly plays in some colorful future.
    Der-Shing Helmer has two concurrent comics. The first is some years in with switches between several protagonists in a world that feels very real to me.

    The Meek, a fantasy story about world domination, and Mare Internum, a sci-fi survival comic about escaping from dark places. My work features a lot of the subjects I love: powerful women, gray moral areas, horror realism and of course, giant animals.

  22. @Petréa:

    Here are my potentially award-worthy anime recommendations for the first half of the year with links to legal online streams; I’ll have an updated list for the full year in my January 7th post.

    Those look really cool and really intriguing! Death Parade sounds particularly compelling (I like afterlife; I like dark!).

    I haven’t been giving much attention to TV and films; my focus (in interest and in time) has been mostly short fiction. But you’ve picqued my interest 🙂

  23. Dr. Mauser: Here’s the thing, Lou made his apology to David, and Lou’s apology met all those criteria you set out for an apology. And David accepted it. Why does everyone else have trouble with that? Is it that you don’t think David Gerrold can make the correct decision for himself?

    That a fairly large collection of people independently decided that David Gerrold was incompetent is pretty unlikely. What is far more likely is that a fairly large collection of people looked at Lou Antonelli’s actions and decided the man wore a pretty generously sized pair of crazy pants. His subsequent choices have not called that assessment into question.

    An apology can do a lot of things, particularly if it is sincere, but it isn’t an eraser.

  24. My current Graphic Story Hugo Noms are:
    Oglaf, an excellent and VERY NSFW comic with a truly delightful range of characters and situations. Usually the stories are very short, but some characters reappear over and over.
    Nimona, in the hope that it isn’t ineligible, because its a bucket of fun with some serious things to say about alienation, found families, and what makes something – or someone – a monster.
    The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage, which I only just gushed all over in the steampunk recs thread so I’ll spare everyone a repeat. Suffice to say I like it an awful lot.

    I’m still looking to fill out the last two places. I love comics but my budget doesn’t (and while close attention to Amazon ebook sales has helped with novels it hasn’t done much for comics) so I’m usually quite behind. I really like DORD and Darths and Droids so if nothing else presents itself I’ll probably go for those, but as much as I like them I can’t help but feel that I ought to find something better than DORD.

    @Petréa Mitchell

    I’d missed your anime comment – thanks! I’d like to have a chance at getting one or two into my nominations but my spoon levels are proving sadly inadequate for the task. Your list should help me a lot. 🙂

  25. For those not in the know: Derelict Orbital Reflector Devices – an answer to the question what we would (should) do when we find evidence of a super-civilization. Definitely 2015.

    I won’t link to it because spoilers (perhaps, not allowed to tell, just read it), but there’s some neat Nimona art around, which I’ve seen mostly on tumblr.
    Oh, and some fan fics I just found out.

  26. And Vattu, book 2, just finished its Kickstarter. I assume that will count for 2016.

    Vattu is a story following a member of a nomadic tribe caught in the midst of a massive clash of cultures.

    Last time I trailed off in book 1, but that was just me. The art and story are really special.

    Thanks for all the tips, you all!

  27. This’ll get lost in the excellent take-downs of Dr. Mauser’s ridiculous contortions and victim-blaming. Great responses by so many people! I’m in awe.

    Anyway:

    (17) MALCONTENT WARNING. ROFLMAO, that was pretty awesome!

    @lurkertype: I didn’t read the context, so apologies if this gut reaction is askew, but IMHO anyone not giving to the Salvation Army doesn’t make them a bad person. I have a deep hate for that annoying bell, and there are many other charities I prefer for various reasons.

    @RDF: (groan) 😉

    @sanddorn: I really like “Wilde Life” a lot – glad to see your link. Also, thanks for the “Alice Grove” link; I’m read the first several pages and I’m intrigued.

    @ULTRAGOTHA: No Hugo PIN here yet. ;-(

    @sanddorn: I backed Vattu book 2 (and book 1) and am a fan of this series and the creator’s work in general. 😀

  28. Shambles,

    Sorry that you were pained by my choice of comparison. I shall try to remember that in the future.

    Standback(and other anime lovers),

    This wasn’t the best year for anime, but if you want a nice innocent shoujo, Oremonogatori was probably the best this year. It isn’t SF or anything but a lovely watch.

    That being said, someone I follow just tweeted how much he liked AKB0048, which he just discovered. The SOB linked to a vid of the cast singing Dreams will be Reborn Again and Again so after I got over my sudden case of hayfever I felt the need for a rewatch. After all you can’t go wrong with Idol singers in space who wield microphones that double as light sabres!

  29. whether pseudonymous people own dogs.

    Was it decided that pseudonymous people have caninymous dogs? Because if it wasn’t, I don’t want to know.

  30. Being clear that this kind of behavior is unacceptable is a message to ALL concerned i.e. to Puppy and Non-puppy alike. Don’t do freaky stuff like that. Don’t go and make a false police report about Brad or Larry or whoever. Not cool. Bad.

    Written in flaming letters across the sky with fireworks in the shape of stern wagging fingers.

  31. Dr. Mauser on December 22, 2015 at 9:48 pm said:

    Now Lou did not tell people to attack Cuinn. Those assholes took it upon themselves, much like the folks who took it upon themselves to demand Sasquan go against their decision and Gerrold’s wishes. Internet Mobs are hard to direct. But every individual is responsible for his own actions. In that regard, the mob going after Cuinn isn’t much different than the mob going after Lou. But I’m sure they don’t see it that way, they never do. That’s part of the problem.

    Except for Lou Antonelli, apparently.

    And I have to wonder if none of the folks throwing stones here is completely innocent of doxing, or trying to get people fired. If you disapprove of that kind of behavior, the principled stance is the eschew it yourself. I get the sense that some folks principles are that it’s only bad if the other guy does it.

    Wow. You speak volumes about yourself here.

    How bleak the world must look to people who think that principled people do not exist.

    (I’m just going to go briefly back to that news story about the college students who found $40,000 in a thrift store couch and, when they found a name on a deposit slip, returned it all.)

    It seems to me that if one’s argument boils down to “I accuse you of probably doing something just as bad” one is admitting moral bankruptcy, and the total lack of an argument.

    Since you have, in your last paragraph, pretty much admitted that doxxing and getting people revenge-fired is heinous, I don’t see that there is anything more to say.

  32. Peace Is My Middle Name: How bleak the world must look to people who think that principled people do not exist.

    Actually, I think the world looks just fine to those people. The way that non-principled people convince themselves that they are not bad people is by telling themselves that everyone else is just as conscienceless and unprincipled as they are. They actually believe this, and therefore, what they say and do is not really wrong — because, they tell themselves, everyone else behaves just like that, too.

  33. @JJ: “because, they tell themselves, everyone else behaves just like that, too.”…or, as often, that everyone else is even worse, so that they’re secure in the position of the best people in the world. Or so I’ve often found.

  34. Bruce Baugh: or, as often, that everyone else is even worse, so that they’re secure in the position of the best people in the world. Or so I’ve often found.

    It has not escaped me that the Puppies have repeatedly attempted to justify their despicable actions by claiming “the SJWs did it first!” Because if this is true, then really, they’re just “honorable” people doing the same thing everyone else is doing.

    The fact that they’ve not been able to provide any evidence whatsoever of this, of course, does not make the slightest difference.

  35. @JJ

    if this is true, then really, they’re just “honorable” people doing the same thing everyone else is doing.

    I know this is the Puppies, but really, that makes no sense. If you consider certain behavior contemptible, why on earth would you want to emulate it? I would think you’d want to be better than that.

  36. @redheadedfemme:

    I think there is a ping-pong game of contradictions here, hopping from each statement to the other as it is disproven.

    “This behavior was not hurtful or malevolent.”

    “Okay, it was, but you do it too.”

    “Okay you don’t, but this is not malevolent anyway …”

    Repeat, endlessly.

  37. The thing about people’s behavior is to look for where the contradictions aren’t, where their behavior is consistent.

    Clearly the Puppies do not consider the act of doxxing contemptible, since they do it themselves with apparent gusto.

    Therefore their claim that it is contemptible is a smokescreen and not their true attitude. They only use that argument to attack others.

  38. *sigh*

    Why is bringing up Lou Antonelli even still a thing? Agitators gotta agitate.

    (To be clear, the agitator is Dr. Mauser. Everyone responding are the agitated.)

  39. @tintinaus
    thank you

    @peace
    it does seem strange – maybe the whole point wasn’t the coherence of the argument but to drag up the bad stuff that Lou did again so one can point and say ‘see ‘they’ never forgive’ at some level ?

    @redwombat
    like you I am curious why this was a good idea to do right now ? was there some active ‘mobbing’ going on with Lou A ? I honestly don’t think about him and I don’t think I have seen a lot of activity by Filer’s on the subject since WorldCon

    @gmarie
    maybe it is as simple as that

  40. @Shambles:

    Lou Antonelli has been totally off the File 770 radar since last summer, so far as I’ve noticed.

    I hadn’t spared any thought, good or bad, for him for months.

  41. Peace Is My Middle Name on December 23, 2015 at 7:19 am said:

    I hadn’t spared any thought, good or bad, for him for months.

    That might be the problem: the Puppies aren’t getting enough attention!

  42. @peace
    agreed. the only commentary I have seen since then as been a result of either Lou A portraying himself as victimized (which inevitably brings up the past accounting as people re-give the context) which has happened from time to time — which is often accompanied by Filer’s wishing *he* would let it go and that he is doing himself a disservice by re-litigating the past which only makes people reshuffle their mental shelves from an *hole to ‘oh THAT *hole’ as redwombat so aptly put it.

  43. Sorry I linked to the wrong page I was not thinking that you would need the 2015 years best reviews which will not be out for a few more days. But Sidonia no Kishi : Dai-kyuu Wakusei Seneki (Knights of Sidonia: War of the Ninth Planet) is still eligible.

  44. @Tasha Turner
    I know there were at least a couple of people who drove up from Buffalo for the Randall Monroe Thing Explainer book signing just two days after that. Then again, they admitted that it had probably been a bad idea, especially when the signing dragged on until about midnight.

    The Christmas party the next week was a rather smaller, more local affair, but hey, Erica Henderson who draws the Unbeatable Squirrel Girl was there.

Comments are closed.