Pixel Scroll 6/25/18 Don’t Forget To Pick Seven Pixels To Put Under Your Pillow So You’ll Dream Of Your One True Scroll

(1) WEATHER FROM ANOTHER PLANET. “NASA reveals stunning images of Jupiter taken by the Juno spacecraft”Yahoo! has the story.

The breathtaking images show swirling cloud belts and tumultuous vortices within Jupiter’s northern hemisphere.

Scientists said the photos allowed them to see the planet’s weather system in greater detail.

According to the space station, the brighter colours in the images represent clouds made up of ammonia and water, while the darker blue-green spirals represent cloud material “deeper in Jupiter’s atmosphere.”

(2) HOW TO MAKE MAGIC. Fantasy-Faction’s Aaron Miles advises writers about “Creating A Magic System”.

The naming of a thing gives you power over it. Sorcery is the will and the word. Cast fireball now and you won’t be able to again until tomorrow and have finished your revision.

Magic systems exist in scores of fantasy novels. Diverse in their rules, varying in complexity, they instruct us in how the magic of the world of the story works and in any rules that govern it. Some authors disdain them, preferring to keep their magical arts shrouded in mystery, while others will provide exhaustive explanation and runic charts in the back of the book. I’ve always believed that a good magic system can only enhance a book, serving to develop the world, engage the reader and open up the scope for storytelling. Clever use of such a system can create new plot opportunities, allow an author to foreshadow and enact hidden twists, not to mention being interesting creations in their own right.

A common stop on the road to worldbuilding, many authors love to craft their own systems with various casting protocols, methodologies and effects. It can be great fun to develop your own magic system but if the groundwork is poor it will quickly become difficult to manage or hard to understand for the reader. This article will cover the various aspects involved in creating a magic system and how to make it interesting and effective….

(3) BET AWARDS. Black Panther and its king won hardware at last night’s BET Awards, but another of the movie’s stars was responsible for a highlight of the evening:

[Jamie] Foxx brought “Black Panther” star Michael B. Jordan to the stage and asked him to recite the powerful line from the film, “Bury me in the ocean with my ancestors who jumped from ships, cause they knew death was better than bondage.”

Best Actor Award

  • Chadwick Boseman *WINNER

Best Movie Award

  • Black Panther *WINNER

(4) PUPPY ADJACENT. N.K. Jemisin’s Twitter thread on bigotry and artistic mediocrity begins here.

(5) NO LONGER THE WILDER AWARD. BBC reports “Laura Ingalls Wilder removed from book award over racist language”.

The US Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) has removed Laura Ingalls Wilder’s name from one of its awards over racist views and language.

The association had received complaints for years over the Little House on the Prairie author’s “anti-Native and anti-Black sentiments in her work”.

The ALSC board voted unanimously on Saturday to remove Wilder’s name from the children’s literature award.

The medal will be renamed as the Children’s Literature Legacy award.

(6) FANTASTIC POSTER. Yet another brilliant poster heralds Portugal’s Forum Fantastico, to be held from October 12 to 14 in Lisbon.

(7) WHAT TO CHARGE? Peter Grant’s comment at Mad Genius Club sheds new light on indie authors’ book pricing strategies.

Kindle Unlimited changes this equation dramatically, depending on the length of a book. I’ll be writing at greater length about this in a couple of weeks, but here’s a potted summary.

KU pays out just over $0.0045 for a single page read by a subscriber. If your book is (say) 100,000 words, that translates (in KENP, or KU equivalent pages, according to Amazon’s calculations) to about 360 pages. That means a KU “borrow” of your book will earn you about $1.62. If you sell that same book for $2.99 via Amazon, with a 70% royalty rate, you’ll earn about $2.00 after Amazon’s charge to download the book to the purchaser. In other words, a $2.99 price point is barely better, from an earnings perspective, than a KU “borrow”. It’s probably not economical. You’ll make more money pricing it at $3.99 or $4.99.

However, that brings up the question of what readers will pay. For a relatively unknown author, $2.99 might be all that most buyers are prepared to pay. For someone better know, $4.99 might be feasible. I’ve been charging that for my books for some years, and I’m getting sales at that level; but there’s also growing resistance even to that price from some readers. I’ve actually had e-mails saying that I’m being greedy to charge that much, and that I should price it much cheaper, otherwise they won’t spend their money on me – or they’ll use KU instead of buying the book. Even Amazon’s beta price recommendation service from KDP recommended, for my latest trilogy, that I price it at $2.99 per volume, to maximize sales income. Of course, it didn’t factor KU into that pricing equation.

I now take KU into my pricing calculations. If I won’t make much more per sale than I know I’ll earn on a KU “borrow”, it’s frankly not worth my while to sell the book at all! Why not just make it available in the subscription library?

(8) WHAT’S BREWING AT CAPE CANAVERAL? Galactic Journey’s Traveler popped back to the present long enough to inform beer drinkers about the Mercury program: “[June 25, 1963] It’s showtime!  (A musical and educational performance on the Mercury 7)”.

We’ve a special treat for you, today!  As you know, the Journey frequently presents at conventions and venues across the country.  Our last event was at the science-themed pub, The Wavelength Brewing Co.

Not only was a fine selection of craft beers on tap, but also the Young Traveler, performing a suite of current musical hits.  I followed things up with a half-hour presentation on the recently concluded Mercury program, discussing all of the flights and the folks who flew them.

 

(9) TRIVIAL TRIVIA

Max Brooks wrote The Zombie Survival Guide and World War Z.  His parents are Mel Brooks and Anne Bancroft.

(10) TODAY IN HISTORY

  • June 25, 1976 – The Omen premieres in North America.

(11) RINGO. As two departed Dragon Con staffers (Pixel Scroll 6/9/18 Item #3) anticipated, the con is inviting John Ringo as a guest. Ringo shared the news on Facebook along with a request:

My Letter of Agreement to Dragon Con has been sent in and the announcement will go out this week that I am, again, going to be a guest of the con.

Due to various ‘stuff’ the leadership of DCon already knows/suspects/has-been-informed there will be ‘push-back.’

I am hereby asking my fans to STAY OUT OF IT. Don’t respond on any page especially any DCon page. Let the (extremely professional) con management handle any response.

Rpt: STAY OUT.

DragonCon has handled far worse in their time and they’re not worried about this particular kerfuffle.

“Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.”

(12) HOWEY SHORT FICTION. Jana Nyman reviews Hugh Howey’s collection for Fantasy Literature: “Machine Learning: Thoughtful and thought-provoking stories”.

Odds are good that you’ve heard of Hugh Howey — whether you’ve read one of his novels or short stories, or even if you’re just aware of the runaway success of his SILO trilogy, which began with Wool. Machine Learning (2017) is the first collection of his short stories (and one novelette), most of which were published elsewhere in various times and places, and it’s an excellent display of his range, insight, and talent. Each story is followed up by a brief Afterword from Howey, giving him the opportunity to explain where the story came from and what his goals were in writing it. When necessary, I’ve marked stories that were previously reviewed at Fantasy Literature, so that you can compare/contrast my thoughts with those of our other reviewers.

“The Walk up Nameless Ridge,” previously reviewed by Kat Hooper. A mountain climber hopes to be the first to summit a frighteningly tall peak, thereby receiving the honor of having it named after him, which is something he cares about more than anything else in his life. Howey gets deep in this man’s head, examining what motivates him to keep going despite literal loss of limbs and the emotional and physical distance placed between him and his family….

(13) TAKEI V. TRUMP. George Takei compares his family’s internment during WWll to Trump’s family separation policy and says the situation on the Mexican border is much worse.  He shares a lot of background, offers a lot of insight, and sets the records straight on many counts. From CNN: “George Takei: Donald Trump’s immigration rhetoric is ‘grotesque'”

(14) REDEEMING MASS EFFECT ANDROMEDA. Future War Stories analyzes a controversial game: “FWS Video Game Review: MASS EFFECT ANDROMEDA”.

Among the icons of military science fiction are some legendary video game titles that have reinforced the fans and forged new ones. One of the most beloved was BioWare’s Mass Effect series that spanned across three primary games, a number of DLCs, books, and comics. It was a beloved universe for its fans that caused them to cosplay, wear N7 gear, and even tattoo themselves. When 3rd and final Mass Effect game was released in 2012, we fans wondered if this was indeed the end of the journey after the mishandling of the ending to the trilogy. Then came happy news of a new game that was a fresh start with new characters and a focus on exploration in a new setting. When 29th century centered game was released in March of 2017, there was understandable disappointment and many fans felt deeply betrayed by EA and BioWare. But it is worth the hate and loathing? I decided to embarked on the journey to the Andromeda galaxy to see if it was a betrayal of the heritage of the Mass Effect games or a merely misunderstood entry into the franchise.

The GOOD

There is much made about the broken nature of ME:A and its ugly or underwhelming graphics…but under all of the noise and press is a semi-solid game that does delivery a long, relatively enjoyable campaign that becoming more and more rare these days. Overall, the concept of the Andromeda Initiative expedition to the nearest galaxy is maybe something that has been seen in sci-fi, but it a great way to separate this new ME game from the previous titles…

(15) SOUNDTRACKS. Courtesy of Carl Slaughter:

  • Hobbit soundtrack

  • Lord of the Rings soundtrack

(16) NAZIS IN SPACE – NOT. Revell has taken off the shelves in Germany a model kit for the Haneubu II aircraft because it is convincing customers that the Nazis had camouflaged-covered flying saucers with zap guns. Gizmodo reports: “Flying Saucer Toy Recalled For Teaching Kids That Nazis Achieved Space Travel”. The model kit has been recalled because it promotes the idea that Nazis not only had the capability for space travel, but could use their saucer-type spacecraft to blast Allied aircraft. Quoting the article:

If you’ve ever watched the History Channel at 3AM, you know that the Nazis had a secret program during World War II to develop flying saucers. The Nazi’s UFO experiments never actually flew, but the model toy company Revell recently released a set in Germany that makes it look like one of the Nazi saucers actually worked. And historians are pissed….

The toy company has pulled the 69-part set, known as the Haunebu II, from store shelves. But you can still find plenty of the toys available for sale online. The Nazi UFO is even seen on the box blasting Allied planes out of the sky—a disgusting image to promote, to say the least….

“Unfortunately, our product description does not adequately express [that the Nazi saucer program was unsuccessful] and we apologize for it,” Revell said in a statement.

(17) WESTWORLD’S FALLOUT PROBLEM. BBC says “Westworld game hit by Bethesda legal claim”.

Game publisher Bethesda is suing Warner Brothers over a game based around the HBO series Westworld.

Bethesda alleges the Westworld game, released last week, is a “blatant rip-off” of its Fallout Shelter title.

Included in the legal challenge is Canadian developer Behaviour Interactive, which helped Bethesda develop Fallout Shelter in 2014….

The Westworld game gives players the job of managing the titular theme park and its robotic inhabitants.

The facility managed by the player can be expanded underground and includes many of the locations seen in the TV series.

Many reviews of the game mentioned its similarity to Bethesda’s Fallout Shelter, which gives players the job of managing and expanding an underground facility….

(18) TURING TESTER. The classic WWII device has a new home: “Codebreaking Bombe moves to computer museum”. (Chip Hitchcock suggests it’s another tourism opportunity for people willing to travel a distance before/after Dublin 2019.)

The UK’s National Museum of Computing has expanded its exhibits celebrating the UK’s wartime code-breakers and the machines used to crack German ciphers.

On Saturday it will open a gallery dedicated to the Bombe, which helped speed up the cracking of messages scrambled with the Enigma machine.

The Bombe was formerly on display at Bletchley Park next door to the museum.

A crowd-funding campaign raised £60,000 in four weeks to move the machine and create its new home.

… The initial design of the Bombe was drawn up by Alan Turing and later refined by Gordon Welchman. The gallery is being opened on the 106th anniversary of Turing’s birth.

(19) BIRD IS THE WORD. Scientists say “Bird family tree shaken by discovery of feathered fossil”.

The turacos, or banana-eaters, are today found only in Africa, living in forests and savannah.

A beautifully preserved fossil bird from 52 million years ago is shaking up the family tree of the exotic birds.

The fossil’s weird features suggests it is the earliest known living relative not just of the turacos, but of cuckoos and bustards (large long-legged birds).

And the fact the remains were unearthed in North America shows the distribution of different birds around the globe would have been very different in the past.

(20) GOOD TO THE LAST PROTON. Ars Technica says the retirement party will be happening soon: “Russia’s Proton rocket, which predates Apollo, will finally stop flying”. With over 400 launches under its figurative belt (and about an 89% success rate) the Proton rocket family is nearing retirement. Dating from tis first launch, the Proton will turn 56 in mid July. That means it predates the Saturn V used in the Apollo program by more than 2 years.

The Russian-manufactured Proton rocket has been flying into space since before humans landed on the Moon. First launched in 1965, the rocket was initially conceived of as a booster to fly two-person crews around the Moon, as the Soviet Union sought to beat NASA into deep space. Indeed, some of its earliest missions launched creatures, including two turtles, to the Moon and back.

But now, Russian officials confirm, the Proton rocket will finally reach its end. In an interview with a Russian publication, Roscosmos head Dmitry Rogozin said production of the Proton booster will cease as production shifts to the new Angara booster. (A translation of this article was provided to Ars by Robinson Mitchell, a former US Air Force Airborne Cryptologic Language Analyst). No new Proton contracts are likely to be signed.

…With a capacity of 22.8 tons to low-Earth orbit, it became a dominant player in the commercial market for heavier satellites.

It remained so during much of the 2000s, but as Ars has previously reported, the lack of technical oversight began manifesting itself in an increasing rate of failures. At the end of 2010, one Proton plunged into the ocean because too much propellant had been mistakenly loaded into its upper stage. In 2013, another vehicle performed a fiery dance seconds after liftoff because flight control sensors were hammered into the rocket’s compartment upside down.

…Whether the Angara booster can capture anything close to the Proton’s once highly profitable share of the global launch market remains highly uncertain.

(21) LIZARD WRASSLIN’. In this tweeted photo set, a T-Rex finds it’s no match for Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock (Dwayne Johnson)

[Thanks to Carl Slaughter, John King Tarpinian, Cat Eldridge, JJ, Mike Kennedy, Chip Hitchcock, Martin Morse Wooster, and Andrew Porter for some of these stories. Title credit goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day O. Westin.]

236 thoughts on “Pixel Scroll 6/25/18 Don’t Forget To Pick Seven Pixels To Put Under Your Pillow So You’ll Dream Of Your One True Scroll

  1. Rev. Bob: they dedicate one track to science programming including… the Mad Scientists Panel traditionally helmed by a NASA project manager

    You forgot to mention the Climate Change Denialism Panels. 😉

  2. @JJ:

    That would be because I have been informed that the previously-recurring (singular) denialism panel has been discontinued and was moved out of the science track prior to that.

  3. Rev. Bob: I have been informed that the previously-recurring (singular) denialism panel has been discontinued and was moved out of the science track prior to that.

    Progress! 😀

  4. There’s a wonderfully funny tragic science fantasy novel to be written about climate change science being wrong (science fantasy, right?) in a strong, well-run civilization, which throws all the science it has into keeping energy out of the climate cycle and ends up turning the planet into a frozen wasteland.

    You could even make it science fiction by having the bad climate science be questionable astrophysics instead. Some cloud of cosmic crap is headed toward the Earth and is going to warm everything up. We can reliably determine that from the effects of its leading edge. Nothing could go wrong with that.

    So some Fantastic guy builds a machine and turns the world into a frozen pop-tart. He’s got to do it in some timeline, right?

    “And that is true story of how ‘A Pail of Air’ came to pass.”

  5. There’s a wonderfully funny tragic science fantasy novel to be written about climate change science being wrong (science fantasy, right?)

    Niven, Pournelle and Flynn’s Fallen Angels, if you assume the satire was much, much, sneakier than it really was.

  6. @John A Arkansawyer:

    I recall a couple of stories from Analog with that kind of theme – one in which a couple of generals (US and USSR) decide to create a nuclear winter to counteract global warming (and overshoot), and one in which arboriculture is so dominant that global cooling is the threat, but short-sighted folks just won’t listen to the scientist who wants to burn off enough forest to save the world.

  7. @Rev. Bob: I emailed Mike who found it in spam, not moderation, and sent me the text for revision/reposting: something did happen when I was trying to edit it and the window ran out. Given that nobody else can see it, and that you were seeing a version that I did not have/remember, it strikes me as particularly pointless to try to argue with me about it. I’ll revise, repost, and then you can read (along with anyone else interested). I’ll probably break it up into several posts to avoid going over more than a few links.

  8. 1 of 3

    ETA: The original of this post ended up in spam (probably due to a combination of too many links and my trying to edit it when the time on the editing window ran out). Since Rev. Bob saw a version of it in his email and started discussing it, I asked Mike to send me the text of whatever came through for me to revise and post.

    I’m breaking it into three posts (to keep number of links per post down) and did some surface-level editing on the whole thing plus recreated (from memory) my paragraph where I mentioned briefly the impact Rev. Bob’s stories about LibertyCon had on me plus adding another paragraph about WisCon’s founding. I should add that I’d never heard of LibertyCon before he began talking about it, and nothing that he said, or anyone else has said about it, made me think it would be a con I’d be interested in attending.

    The major purpose of this post was to challenge Greg’s claim about how the fans at LibertyCon (where he spent 3.5 hours) were just like fans, and “we” should just find a way to come together. /ETA

    @Mike:

    I’ll skip for the moment the long history of politically-motivated schisms in fandom and ask you a simpler question: What did you think was happening in fandom, say five or ten years ago, that indicated a state of being together?

    Yeah, the history of conflicts is pretty clear, and why should we expect fandom to be any different than any other group of human beings?

    @Cora:

    However, I don’t want anything to do with the hardcore puppies who manipulated the Hugos and who personally attacked me and others and I can’t see that changing anytime soon, especially since some puppies continue to take pot shots at anybody they consider the enemy.

    1000% agreement with everything you say here! Add in the strong similarities between the tactics used by the hardcore Puppies (I still cannot believe that I have to cite groups called Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies in academic essays fer crying out loud) and between the neo-nazi/alt-right/gamergate/incels/men’s rights/breitbart/white supremacists of the internet as well, and yep, I consider bridges neither desirable nor possible.

    @Greg:

    What struck me most about LibertyCon was how much it was like any other con I’ve attended. The people look the same. They talk about the same things. The panels are on similar topics. The badges and ribbons look the same. All things considered, the differences are small. These people are Fans. We ought to be able to find a way to get along again.

    *Maybe* the people you saw/talked to at LibertyCon are typical of “Fans” but I’d like your definition of “Fan” in this context as well as what you mean by “we.” The people you saw at LibertyCon may be similar to the fans you’ve met at other cons you’ve attended, but that isn’t a “we” that includes, say, me.

    Have you attended WisCon?

    Disclaimer: my days as a Con Fan ended in the early 1990s about the same time as my membership in APA-Five mostly because I got tired of all the hassles from the white men who dominated the apa and the cons I was attending in the Seattle/Portland areas as I became more active and radical as a feminist and queer woman. While I’ve been active in online media fandom since 2003, specifically the fanfic communities, I haven’t tried to attend cons because I have to attend academic conferences–yes, I know, some cons have academic tracks but those do not ‘count’ in terms of elitist academic standards.

    If I were to attend a con, it would probably be WisCon because of my interests in feminist science fiction. I’d say WisCon seems to look and be very different from LibertyCon!

    Some Googling to show how different LibertyCon and WisCon look:

    LibertyCon Images Search Results

    WisCon Images Search Results

  9. 2 of 3

    ETA: I am not saying a random images search is an authoritative source on any event, but the distinct differences showing in the image searches is additional confirmation of what I already know: that the audience for WisCon is different than the audience for LibertyCon./ETA

    So are the recent GOH choices:

    LibertyCon GOH

    WisCon GOH

    ETA: Their programming shows different fannish interests/ETA:

    LibertyCon programming: this link leads to a schedule of events with a lot of typical fan events which similar to what I remember from the white male dominated cons from a few decades ago, from a fan culture that was not particularly happy/accepting of WisCon when it started with no mention at all of race, gender, sexual orientation, or class as part of the programming topic. Ooo, I see there’s one (!!!) whole panel on paranormal romance though, be still my beating heart, and wow, how gosh darned inclusive of them.

    Here are their general principles for programming: LibertyCon 101

    Panels/Programming

    Programming is essentially the section of the con that coordinates Panels & Events. A panel is usually an hour or so long and can be anything from “Military Tech and Science Fiction… Are we Catching Up?” to “Genetic Splicing for Fun and Profit” to “Unicorns… Beautiful and Magical, or Dark Impalers of Doom?!” Each panel will have one or more panelists, and will usually be an open conversation with the audience. In other words go to what you have an interest in and speak up! If you guys in the audience aren’t talking it’s going to be a pretty boring hour.

  10. 3/3

    I couldn’t find a WisCon program, but here is information on *one* of their programming tracks (the one that is of most interest to me): Academic Programming.

    The general principles for this track, including a link to the con’s “Statement of Principles,” are:

    WisCon has a track of academic programming, framed by the convention’s Statement of Principles, that is open to undergraduate, postgraduate, and independent scholars. One of the benefits of this track is that it strengthens the links between the wider feminist science fiction community, students and other scholars working on feminist science fiction, speculative fiction, fantasy and related fields. The track operates very much like a conventional academic conference, with presentations based on research. However, scholarly work on all aspects of feminist science fiction reaches an audience at WisCon that gives a kind of passionate and informed feedback that is rare at academic conferences. We very much encourage submissions from people who aren’t involved in formal academic work! Over the years, people have presented papers on fantasy, horror, speculative and science fiction literature, media, and fandom, examining issues of feminism, gender, sexuality, race, disability, and class amongst many others.

    I am aware WisCon has not always lived up to their principles and are working on improvement, proving that feminists are human beings not goddesses of perfection! Their 2018 theme addresses how they are trying to address issues of social justice.

    In 2018, for the first time, WisCon’s programming will have an overall theme: “What Does Justice Demand?” This question invites exploration of the meanings, histories, and cultures of “social justice,” a term that circulates through multiple on and offline spaces that WisCon’s members inhabit. Many talk about and endeavour to work within this framework, but how is social justice lived/embodied without becoming a buzzword? And how does this shape feminisms’ relationship to speculative genres (scifi, fantasy, horror, and beyond) both past and present? This is an opportunity both for work that deals specifically with social and political questions of justice as they relate to feminist science fiction and for work on the histories and cultures of social-justice-oriented fan communities. We encourage contributions that emphasize WisCon’s focus on how science fiction has played an important role in the exploration and creation of socially just futures: futures where people of all colors and backgrounds flourish, where women’s rights and women’s contributions are valued, where gender is not limited to one of two options, where no one is erased out of convenience, hidden discrimination, or outright bigotry.

    In addition to or as part of the convention’s theme, we especially welcome scholarship that engages with the work of our Guests of Honor, Tananarive Due and Saladin Ahmed. We encourage submissions from scholars in all fields, including interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary areas, and from amateur and independent scholars as well as graduate students, postdocs, and faculty.

    An incomplete list of possible subjects

    What Does Justice Demand? How is social justice lived/embodied? How does social justice shape feminism and genre work (scifi, fantasy, horror, and others) both past and present?

    Gender, sexuality, race, class, and disability in individual works of science fiction and fantasy, especially in the works of our Guests of Honor

    Feminist, queer, critical race, and critical disability analysis of science fiction and fantasy in media (film, television, music, video games, online culture)

    Speculative aspects of feminist and social justice movements

    Science fiction and feminist science and technology studies

    Race, colonialism, and speculative fiction; Afrofuturism and related cultural movements

    Fan cultures and communities

    Feminist pedagogy and speculative fiction in the classroom

    An incomplete list of possible formats

    15-minute paper presentations, with or without visual accompaniment

    Groups of presentations submitted together as panels

    Presentation of scholarly creative works, including digital scholarship

    Readings from recently published or forthcoming scholarly books

    Discussion-based panels and roundtables on scholarly research, teaching, or service

    Mentoring sessions on academic professional life: graduate study, the job market, tenure and promotion, publishing and presentation

    Screenings and discussions of short films or videos.

    So, seems to me WisCon exemplifies everything the “hardcore” Puppies disliked/loathed/feared/hated about SJWs and everything they wanted to exclude from “fandom.”

    ETA: In fact, the origin and history of WisCon shows that the more things change, the more they remain the same! As Jeanne Gomoll describes in her essay written for Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy (Greenwood 2009, edited by me who invited her to write this essay):

    The convention’s catalyst occurred not in Madison, but at one of the first conventions attended by most Madstf members: MidAmerican, the 1976 world science fiction conventions (Worldcon), held on Labor Day weekend in Kansas City, Missouri. The panel “Women and SF” and its aftermath deepened the commitment of Janus‘s editors to a feminist point of view and planted the seeds of the idea for WisCon. The panel was organized by SG critic and feminist Susan Wood, who had successfully lobbied a reluctant Worldcon committee to allow her to develop the session. In 1976, neither feminism nor women were generally considered important or interesting topics for serious panel discussions at science fiction conventions (291).

    / ETA

    I do not know whether the attendees at LibertyCon would agree with the more extreme Rapid hatred or not, or whether their stance would be more similar to the 1976 dudes who found women and/or feminist neither interesting nor important, but I have no desire to go find out especially after hearing Rev. Bob’s story about the con and his decision to stop attending over the past few years on File 770.
    I’m quite happy to let them do their thing without attacking them though, and I’m pretty sure that some of the people you named as meeting and enjoying hanging out with would not extend that same right to WisCon given their past actions.

  11. @Rev. Bob:

    OK, the edited post is now up, with the added paragraph where you were briefly mentioned as telling stories that left me disinclined to attend LibertyCon *even if* I decided to ever attend a con.

    I am baffled by all the huffing and puffing you’re doing about your authority on the con, and my complete misunderstanding of it, but whatever. Apparently I hit some very sore spot, but so did you.

    A few specific notes: you apparently equate “academic” and “science programming” (I think?).

    Meanwhile, I can testify that they dedicate one track to science programming (including the one annual panel I really miss, the Mad Scientists Panel, which I’ll get to in a minute), but the rest are typically determined by who the available pros are and what subjects are of interest.

    When I talk about academic tracks, I am talking about presentations given by people in academia (including students–graduate and undergraduate). These tracks are not limited to “science” or staffed by professional writers; in fact, the majority of people I know who present at fan cons on the academic tracks are in humanities and social sciences.

    I am sure you no way intend the slight that is implied by assuming academic = sciences, but given the extent to which university corporate management types slight humanities and social sciences for the STEM fields these days, be aware that sort of equation is likely to piss off a lot of us in humanities.

    Apparently I gave you the impression I thought that anybody is not an academic is “dumb,” and I am sorry for that impression. As I said a lot of cons these days have academic tracks which doesn’t mean just adding smart people but including those of us in academia who work with sff topics (including fandom). I suspect WisCon might have a heavier percentage of academics than some others, or that may be a factor that the people I mostly know are feminist sf academics.

    I was a faculty brat and grew up to become a professional student (I couldn’t get a paying job in the 1980s but could get TA-ships in graduate programs), so I know from experience how many stupid people work in academia. I haven’t the foggiest idea what gave you the idea that I think that cons who don’t run academic tracks have dumb people running them: if you could point it out, I might understand what I did better. But it may just be your own insecurities.

    You went on and on about programming, but nothing you say has anything to do with my preference for WisCon programming which is centered on feminist/critical race/social justice and sff issues rather than the same old, same old (which, as I said, I recognize from the 1970s). And that doesn’t mean I assume they are all “greybeards” (do you notice how your language implies what I pointed out–that it’s mostly men since few women have beards–and those who do are marked as differing from the default). Plus, conservative fans come in all ages as we’ve seen the past few years. (I’m 62 by the way, so think any implication that age=conservatism is a stereotype.).

    Telling me that the two cons are for different audiences is mansplaining to me the major point of my post: that in fact Greg’s “fans are all alike” isn’t true because there is a lot more diversity under the “sff fan” umbrella these days than when I was first active in fandom (1976-early 1990s). And I like that diversity, and I like what WisCon is doing, and DUH.

    You admit you know very little about WisCon; while I’ve not attended it (bad time of year for me since I often teach in our May Mini Mester) you might accept that I know a lot about it as a feminist sf expert (who was a feminist sf expert before I got the fucking union card that is the function of the Ph.D.).

    It’s nice you ran a more liberal and inclusive space–but that doesn’t change the fact that the con as a whole is less so, and not likely to change anytime soon, or that nothing you said here contributed in any way to change my view of LC. I don’t have to attend it for years to make an evaluation any more than I have to read an entire book or movie to decide it’s sexist and not something I’d enjoy.

  12. @robinareid:

    First and foremost – I am not trying to persuade you that LibertyCon is your kind of event that you should totally attend sometime. I don’t even recommend it to myself; why would I recommend it to you? Doesn’t stop me from being the closest thing this little community has to an expert on the event, though.

    What you said – and still say – that hits a sore spot with me is that you dismiss LibertyCon’s audience as Not Fans:

    Greg’s claim about how the fans at LibertyCon (where he spent 3.5 hours) were just like fans,

    “Just like,” as in “why, Mexicans are just like real people!” – followed by…

    in fact Greg’s “fans are all alike” isn’t true because there is a lot more diversity under the “sff fan” umbrella these days than when I was first active in fandom (1976-early 1990s).

    Greg didn’t say “fans are all alike” – in fact, what he did say was:

    What struck me most about LibertyCon was how much it was like any other con I’ve attended. The people look the same. They talk about the same things. The panels are on similar topics. The badges and ribbons look the same. All things considered, the differences are small. These people are Fans. We ought to be able to find a way to get along again.

    He said they’re fans, and that LibertyCon looked much like other cons. You take him to task for assessing the con based on 3.5 hours – I not only attended for multiple years, but I was an integral part of the event for most of them, and I still agree with his assessment. Are you going to disqualify me from rendering an opinion now?

    You admit you know very little about WisCon; while I’ve not attended it (bad time of year for me since I often teach in our May Mini Mester) you might accept that I know a lot about it as a feminist sf expert (who was a feminist sf expert before I got the fucking union card that is the function of the Ph.D.).

    Oh, right. I guess you are. Your opinion on WisCon is valid despite never having attended, but my “gee, WisCon sounds neat and I wish I could check it out sometime” opinion doesn’t count because I can’t afford to go, and Greg’s take on LibertyCon is invalid because he only spent 3.5 hours there. Yup, totally legit. Tell me, what is the minimum amount of time one must spend at an event before becoming allowed to form an opinion of it? Does that figure change with a bachelor’s degree, or only a doctorate?

    The reason I discussed some of LC’s fannish interests, such as perennial panel topics, was (1) to balance the extensive coverage you gave WisCon’s programming, and (2) to demonstrate that those who attend LC are indeed fans, exactly as Greg said they were. (Are you perhaps familiar with the concept of “corroborating evidence”?) To be quite blunt, I didn’t appreciate your snobbery on the subject: “oooh, WisCon has an academic track, what does LC have?” Well, for one thing, they have a dedicated science track. Pointing that out isn’t a “science = academic” equivalency, but a “WisCon has that dedicated track, LibertyCon has this dedicated track” comparison.

    Imagine that: both cons have a track dedicated to one of their core interests. Why, it’s almost like they’re structurally similar in some way…

    Believe it or not, like it or not, there are fans at LibertyCon. You do not get to exile them from fandom, no more than VD gets to gatekeep WisCon’s audience out of it. Fandom is big enough to contain whole groups, entire populations, that disagree with each other in whole or in part. Those groups should certainly avoid each other if they can’t be polite, but I could say the same of TERFs and trans women in the big group of feminists – lots of friction, to put it mildly, but they still share many of the same goals.

  13. @Rev. Bob–Yes, sure, there are fans at LibertyCon.

    They aren’t fans who want to welcome many of the Filers, at least if we don’t keep our mouths shut about views they don’t share, and that is something we’ve gotten directly from you and your description of your experiences there and your decision to stop attending.

    It’s not that Robin, or I, or, indeed, you, have decided that they’re not our kind. They have decided that we are not their kind.

    Unlike Robin, I have been to Wiscon. I haven’t been to LIbertyCon, but I feel pretty confident, based on available information including but not limited to what you’ve said, in saying that while they are both fannish events, they’re not run by the same segment of the fannish population, not run by the same kind of fans, and that LIbertyCon is not a place where I’d feel welcome or comfortable.

    And that Greg, as he reports, did–largely because he’s white and male and wasn’t there long enough to accidentally say something they wouldn’t like.

    It’s the home con of many of the people who think POC and LGBTQ and women who don’t fit in certain fairly narrow categories don’t belong. Not just at their con, but in fandom, which they think we are corrupting.

    Why exactly should I regard them as fans just like me, exactly?

  14. Rev Bob: in simple words. I am not saying LC cons are not fans. I am saying that not all fans are alike in the way Greg says they are. I saying they are a different branch of fandom. I am saying I am not part of Greg’s WE. So just chill out and stop trying to make them some sort of victims.

  15. Robinareid: I am not saying LC cons are not fans. I am saying that not all fans are alike in the way Greg says they are. I [am] saying they are a different branch of fandom. I am saying I am not part of Greg’s WE.

    Exactly.

    I absolutely agree that they are fans, and that they are entitled — and welcome, as far as I’m concerned — to do their fandom in any way they want, as long as that does not involve attempted sabotage and vilification of other peoples’ fandoms.

    I also absolutely agree that, based on their past behavior, I want nothing to do with a huge percentage of LibertyCon attendees, and do not see why I need to make any sort of effort at rapprochement with people who 1) have behaved so badly toward me and my fandoms in the past, 2) continue to behave badly toward me and my fandoms, 3) do not have the slightest remorse for, or intention of apologizing for, their past bad behavior, and 4) very clearly, with their continuing bad behavior, have no intention of allowing me to enjoy my fandoms unharassed and unvilified.

    Should any of them have a “coming to the light” epiphany and decide to rectify their past wrongs and stop their current wrongs, I might be willing to reconsider. But I don’t think it’s likely that they will ever put me in the position of having to do so.

  16. What Lis said.

    Also, I’m all for the LC type retreating to their own cons. I hope they have a swell time every year. As long as they let the rest of us enjoy our stuff in peace. They can sling all the right-wing jargon they want and be nice or “nice” to whoever’s there.

    Just because their ideas of what the social order ought to be is about 60 years behind consensus reality doesn’t mean everyone else — of all the other elses and everyones — has to stick to that narrow view.

    I also believe they really do like what they say they like, which isn’t a courtesy they extend to any not-them people.

  17. @robinareid: “Rev Bob: in simple words. I am not saying LC cons are not fans. I am saying that not all fans are alike in the way Greg says they are. I saying they are a different branch of fandom. I am saying I am not part of Greg’s WE. So just chill out and stop trying to make them some sort of victims.” (emphasis mine)

    Once again – Greg didn’t say “fans are all alike.” He said:

    What struck me most about LibertyCon was how much it was like any other con I’ve attended. The people look the same. They talk about the same things. The panels are on similar topics. The badges and ribbons look the same. All things considered, the differences are small. These people are Fans. We ought to be able to find a way to get along again.

    He said they’re fans, and that LibertyCon looked much like other cons. So did I. So, at last, have you.

    As for the “stop trying to make them some sort of victims” – there you go again, putting words in people’s mouths. I neither said nor intended any such thing, and fuck you very much for lying to say that I did. That’s right up there with this little gem of yours, which I was originally going to let slide:

    And that doesn’t mean I assume they are all “greybeards” (do you notice how your language implies what I pointed out–that it’s mostly men since few women have beards–and those who do are marked as differing from the default).

    Gee, let me think about that one.

    I am a writer. I am an editor. I choose my words very carefully.

    Yes, I damned sure noticed that. That’s exactly why I used the fucking word in the first place! Have you considered how colossally insulting it was for you to ask that fucking question, not to mention how appallingly condescending it was? What, do you think I’m incapable of nuance or something?

    @Lis: “They aren’t fans who want to welcome many of the Filers, at least if we don’t keep our mouths shut about views they don’t share, and that is something we’ve gotten directly from you and your description of your experiences there and your decision to stop attending.”

    Then you have correctly understood my opinion of them and the reasons behind my decision to stop attending.

    It may be a shock to some, but I can simultaneously be repulsed by someone’s opinions and acknowledge that we have some things in common. I have had engaging discussions about books and authors at LibertyCon. Sometimes they liked some of the same books I do, and sometimes they recommended things I wouldn’t touch with an eleven-foot pole… but the fact that we’ve had those discussions is enough for me to speak up when someone who doesn’t know them says they’re not fans. It is my duty to say, “no, that’s bullshit, they damned sure are.” The fact that some of them hate “SJWs” and would scorn my liberal politics does not change their status as fans one little bit.

    Why exactly should I regard them as fans just like me, exactly?

    Oh, for fuck’s sake.*

    Ask Robin. She’s the one pushing that line, not me. That “just like me” is her invention, falsely attributed to Greg, and I for damned sure never said it. I made rather a loud point of saying that they’re fans, yes, but NOT “just like me” (or you).

    @JJ:

    Your response to Robin pretty well sums up my own opinion of the matter. We may disagree on some minor details, like how large that “huge percentage” is, but we’re in pretty close agreement overall. The one other nit I would pick is with this line:

    [I] do not see why I need to make any sort of effort at rapprochement with [Puppy and/or LibertyCon fandom]

    I infer from those words that you believe someone has said you – or anyone else here – should make such an effort. Who said that? I didn’t, and I do not see anything like that in what Greg wrote about them. The closest I see in his words is “We ought to be able to find a way to get along again.” I take that as “it’s tragic that this schism exists,” not as calling on anyone (here or there) to start building bridges. I share that sentiment. The current state of affairs is a damned shame.

    Now, I would absolutely love it if the Puppy contingent had a mass come-to-Jesus moment, realized how thoroughly they’ve shat the bed, and began to look for ways to make amends. I don’t see that happening anytime soon, and the Pupocalypse has cost me some friendships** that I will probably never get back. Dammit, it is not wrong of me to mourn that loss!

    * Some readers may have noticed by this point that I have become rather exasperated. Some might even describe me as pissed off. They’d be right. Having someone put words in my mouth has that result, especially when my actual words are right there for all to see. Two of the three people I am responding to here have done precisely that, one of them multiple times. Yes, that pisses me off. If you want to respond to me, at least have the decency to respond to what I actually said.

    ** I was extremely disappointed by “Uncle Timmy’s” behavior at the first staff meeting after his zine was slated onto the ballot. He’s been in fandom for a long damned time. I had thought he had more respect for the Hugos as an institution than to not merely accept the nomination, but to actively celebrate and brag about it. I had thought him to be decent enough and honest enough to say, “no, I don’t want it that way.” I was wrong.

  18. Rev. Bob: I infer from those words that you believe someone has said you – or anyone else here – should make such an effort. Who said that? I didn’t, and I do not see anything like that in what Greg wrote about them.

    Oh, Greg has been serving up numerous arguments as to why Worldcon members should make conciliatory efforts toward Puppies.

    Greg Hullender: It is hard to do, but maybe it’s time to start trying to build some bridges. What struck me most about LibertyCon was how much it was like any other con I’ve attended. The people look the same. They talk about the same things. The panels are on similar topics. The badges and ribbons look the same. All things considered, the differences are small. These people are Fans. We ought to be able to find a way to get along again.

    This is the first slate-free WorldCon since 2013, so maybe it’s too early to forgive anyone for what happened. But it’s not too early to start talking about what it’ll take to put this behind us. We did win, after all.

    Greg Hullender: One can debate whether they really believe that, of course, but they sound sincere, and the fact they feel compelled to say it suggests there’s at least some basis for an eventual rapprochement. Or at least detente.

  19. @JJ:

    Y’know, that’s fair, at least to some extent. I do believe, though, that you perceive a one-sidedness that is not necessarily there. For example, to put your first citation in a fuller context, consider the paragraph directly above it:

    As fate would have it, I had a long chat with her [Toni Weisskopf] on the last morning of the con, when Eric and I (unable to attend any more sessions), joined their equivalent of WorldCon’s “Walk With the Stars.” She agreed with me that if Fandom is ever going to come back together, people are going to have to start forgiving each other, but she added that that’s easier to say than to do.

    It is hard to do, but maybe it’s time to start trying to build some bridges.

    That does not look at all to me like “the non-Pups need to do all the work.” That looks more like two members of opposing factions – two diplomats, perhaps – saying that it would take work from both sides for this rift to heal. I would agree with that position. I would also agree with Toni’s reported sentiment that it’s much easier to say that bridge-building should happen than to get anyone to actually start pouring foundations and buying lumber. Wishes are always easier than work.

    So I disagree that “maybe it’s time,” but I generally agree with the rest. If the Puppies ever do reach out, there are going to be an awful lot of “us” who will be tempted to react by taking the low road. To the extent that I think “we” should start thinking about building bridges, I would counsel considering what it would take for “us” to take such an outreach seriously… and, perhaps, from whom it would have to come. The issue of acceptable ambassadors might be a good first step; isn’t that typically how opposing nations begin the long process of détente?

    Of course, another good early step is seeing them as people rather than labels. Many of the Puppies are people to me. When I went to the store yesterday evening, I ran into someone I know from local fandom; he runs one of the smaller local cons. He asked if I’d missed getting a 2019 LibertyCon membership, and I replied that I wouldn’t say “missed” was quite the right word. Yes, I was in fact aware that they had already sold out.

    We’re not close friends, but we’re friendly. I do not let the fact that he attends LibertyCon, or that he leans conservative while I vote Democrat, get in the way of that. If I had the resources, I’d attend his con. I’m sure it has some Puppy fans in attendance, but as long as we can treat each other decently, that’s not a dealbreaker for me.

    One does have to start somewhere.

  20. Rev. Bob: So I disagree that “maybe it’s time,” but I generally agree with the rest. If the Puppies ever do reach out, there are going to be an awful lot of “us” who will be tempted to react by taking the low road.

    When my abusive ex reaches out to me for a reconciliation, me saying “no, thanks” is not me “taking the low road”. It’s me saying “I don’t owe you forgiveness or reconciliation, and I choose not to give it; I don’t owe you the opportunity to be in my life, and I choose not to give it” — and that is a perfectly valid, non “low road” choice.

    If the Puppies ever did reach out in an attempt at reconcilation, fans who say “no, thanks” are making a legitimate choice and should not be accused of “taking the low road” for doing so.

  21. @JJ:

    I should have been clearer. By “take the low road” I meant “humiliate them and make them grovel,” not a (ahem) civil “no, thanks.” There’s nothing low about the latter choice.

  22. The Puppies aren’t a co-ordinated enough group to be able to delegate someone to reach out, and certainly the rest of fandom isn’t. Any Puppies who wish to improve their reputations outside of Puppy spaces will have to do it as individuals to individuals, without expecting a unified response.

    I can’t say I’ve seen many signs of them wishing to do so, though. They seem quite happy sticking to their own spaces.

  23. The last thing I will say since I’m working on avoiding the way my autism and tendency toward SIWOTI interact and lead to me being obsessed with internet debates.

    I reject the fallacious argument that “both sides need to do X.”

    There were and are not two more or less culpable “sides” in this debate. The originating event was white men deciding they were being oppressed because they were not winning all the prizes that they think white men are owed in the completely objective Whiteman system of privilege.

    They saw the problem as white women, people of color, and people who are (Gender, Romantic, Sexual Minorities) increasingly publishing and wining prizes in sff. Let’s consider that a moment: the *problem* was that writers who are members of marginalized groups were succeeding despite the ways in which the system has historically been rigged.

    The white men decided they were victims and decided to solve the problem by declaring a Crusade against the “Social Justice Warriors” who were taking over fandom. They organized slates and mobilized voters. Their efforts were met by resistance including “no awards” and changes in the voting system.

    What they see as a problem, I see as an improvement in sff over the decades with the increasing publication of sff by white women, people of color, and people who are GRSM, and the resulting increase in excellent sff which wins prizes. I am happy to continue my history of avoiding the privileged white and mostly male spaces of con fandom to concentrate on reading, celebrating, and writing about sff by white women, people of color, and people who are GRSM.

    I am not saying that these white men [#not all white men] are not fans, or that they should be exiled to some lonely island, or that they should be treated badly although I do not accept their premise that calling them white men, pointing out their privilege, critiquing their arguments or, most heinous of all, ignoring them, is “treating them badly.” Nor do I accept their premise the codes of conduct and efforts to address harassment at cons are censorship or oppression.

  24. I think I should be respected as a person, and I think other people should also be respected. I think the opportunities I have access to, more people, all people, should have access to.

    I’m white. That’s not going to change. I’m male. That’s not going to change. I’m amazed at some of the things inside my head that have changed over the years, but that’s subjective, and nothing that should actually impress any of you.

    People feel free to come in here and drop rants about white men, and I can’t see spending a lot of time hosting a community that has no place for me in it.

  25. I’m white too, and I don’t feel like Robin’s most recent comment is aimed at me–because when I see a person of color winning an award, I don’t think “affirmative action” or “conspiracy,” I think “do/will I like this book?” and “more potentially cool stuff to read.”

    It seemed clear to me that Robin meant “some white men,” and “a group of people who thought that their work must be more deserving because they’re white men.” It also seems clear that she doesn’t mean you–as far as I can tell, you think of the Hugo nomination as an honor, not an entitlement, and if someone else wins you don’t respond by trying to tear things down.

    Those of us who agree that the opportunities we have access to because of our race, gender, middle-class background, or other aspects of privilege should be open to everyone should expect that people who don’t have those advantages will get angry sometimes. That anger, at having been excluded for so long, or at some of the hostile reactions to people saying “everyone should get these things,” is legitimate, even if it feels unfair because I’m trying to do the right thing.

    I don’t get the impression that anyone posting here is trying to create, or looking for, a community that has no place for white men. Yes, some people want to spend some time in groups/places without men, or without white people, or without straight people. None of those groups or spaces looks like it’s trying to take over fandom, or any other social space I’m in, let alone the larger world. A people of color meetup at a con is one social event or dinner out, the same way a File 770 get-together is, or the at-con dinners I went to for people I was in an apa with, ages ago.

  26. @OGH–You’re white. You’re male.

    And you’re not a Puppy. Like most of us here, you’re one of their targets.

    Because those things in your head have changed over the years, because you do respect people as individuals, not for their conformity to a world that didn’t really exist even in the 1950s.

    Because you don’t look at the Hugo nominations and wins by women, POC, and GSRM and cry out, “Oh noes! I’m being oppressed!”

    And those are the people we regard as threatening, annoying, or just boring: the ones who look at the evidence that white male privilege is no longer as overwhelming as it was, and feel oppressed.

    I.e., the Puppies and their ilk, not all or even most white male fans. Just the ones who have separated themselves out from the rest of us, and insist that they are the only real fans.

  27. The discussion has improved, but it’s also starting to ignore what I think is a very important point I made earlier. There are not two sides here. There are puppies, who united to slate. And there’s everyone else. Who do not form any sort of cohesive group. To paraphrase a comment often made about atheists: saying that not being a puppy is a “side” is like saying that not collecting coins is a hobby.

    One reason this is important is that while LC may have a lot of people who are sympathetic to the puppies’ tastes and political views, that does not necessarily mean they are sympathetic to the puppies attempt to subvert the award process with slates and blind voting.

    But the main reason it’s important is that there is no “us” to make peace with the puppies. We’re not-coin-collectors, not a unified group. So it’s up to individuals to decide their opinions for themselves.

  28. @Xtifr:

    I’ll have you know that I did not collect a 1943 steel penny just yesterday! 😀

  29. Hey, even WisCon is not a straight white male-free space! Not even on the concom. It’s not about excluding, it’s about including, and that’s also true for fandom as a whole. Don’t worry, Mike, there will always be a place for you.

  30. Not just a place. Without Mike none of us would even be on File770; there wouldn’t be a File770 to be on. Mike’s the sort of person who makes places for other fans.

  31. @Rev Bob: I didn’t mean to suggest that we’re literally not-coin-collectors. I mean, I’m fairly sure that SF-fandom-as-a-whole probably has a reasonable amount of overlap with numismatic-enthusiasm. But re-reading, I can see how my comment might have been interpreted as suggesting otherwise. 😀

  32. @Xtifr I’m fairly sure that SF-fandom-as-a-whole probably has a reasonable amount of overlap with numismatic-enthusiasm.
    The most prominent example is probably Walter Breen. Not necessarily the best example, though . . .

  33. @Xtifr:

    I was joking. It happens to be true that I have a few oddball coins, but since I don’t seek them out and in fact did not acquire any new ones yesterday (steel penny or otherwise), I took the opportunity to make a joke. “I participated in the not-coin-collecting hobby!” Humor! Look, a smiley!

  34. I believe what we all individually* want is a fandom free of being dominated by pushy, entitled, temper-tantrum’ing, immature man-baby SWM assholes.
    (Puppies for short).

    The sorts who believe SWM “christians”** are actually superior. Maybe a few of the “good” gays, token PoC, a few women allowed just so they can say “but some of our best friends!” (Not that they’ll really take to them; notice how fast all the support for Sad Pups idea/listicle went away once it fell to the women?)

    * because even Filers aren’t a bloc, much less all of fandom.

    ** I call ’em that b/c they don’t follow what Mary and Joseph’s itinerant preacher kid said, even though it’s written down in every language that’s written on the planet. He even simplified it down to 2 things for them!

  35. Rev. Bob: There’s nothing low about the latter choice.

    Indeed. I regard the Puppies as former colleagues in fandom who were extremely abusive to me and other fans — and who are still being abusive to me and other fans. Detente will be achieved if, and only when, they cease the abuse.

    I do not owe them forgiveness, I do not owe them rapprochement, I do not owe them conversation — and should any of them profess to have seen the light and changed, I do not owe them my belief that that is really true, or a willingness to engage with them again in any way. Should any of them appear at a convention I am attending, I will be thoroughly ignoring them — a reaction which I consider to be generous on my part — unless they behave badly, in which case I will be filing incident reports against them.

    Other fans are able to handle it however they wish. I am a me, not a we, and this is how I am choosing to respond to abusers.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.