Top 10 Posts for February 2019

News of Jon Del Arroz’ major legal setback in his suit against Worldcon 76 drew thousands of readers. The judge ruled that four of his five causes of action will not be considered further because they failed on legal or factual grounds.

Also, File 770’s roundup of writers’ reactions to the slate that put several nominees on this year’s Nebula ballot has been widely discussed, a controversy disturbingly reminiscent of the Sad/Rabid Puppies Hugo slates of several years ago.

Ironically, these stories overshadowed another pair of Top 10 posts involving the keeper of the Rabid Puppies himself, Vox Day, who abandoned his Twitter replacement platform after two days, and elsewhere ran afoul of Amazon again while trying to sell Castalia House’s parody of a Scalzi bestseller.

Here are February’s most-read posts according to Google Analytics.

  1. Court Rules Against Del Arroz on Four Issues in Lawsuit Against Worldcon 76, Allows Litigation to Continue on a Fifth
  2. Annie Bellet Criticizes 20Booksto50K Slate and Members of the Group Respond
  3. Pixel Scroll 2/1/19 You Scroll And Scroll The Daily Pixel, First None ‘ll Come, Then All The Ticks ‘ll
  4. Pixel Scroll 2/11/19 Pixels With The Scroll Numbers Filed Off
  5. Pixel Scroll 2/4/19 Like Pixels Through File 770, So Are The Scrolls Of Our Lives
  6. Amazon Terminates Vox Day’s Castalia House Account
  7. Pixel Scroll 2/5/19 Recycling Day: Leave Your Blue Bins On The Shoulders Of Orion Tomorrow
  8. 48 Hours Later Vox Day Pulls the Plug on SocialGalactic
  9. Pixel Scroll 2/12/19 Fans Scroll In, Where Pixels Fear To Tread
  10. Pixel Scroll 2/12/19 Fans Scroll In, Where Pixels Fear To Tread

SCROLL-FREE TOP 10

  1. Court Rules Against Del Arroz on Four Issues in Lawsuit Against Worldcon 76, Allows Litigation to Continue on a Fifth
  2. Annie Bellet Criticizes 20Booksto50K Slate and Members of the Group Respond
  3. Amazon Terminates Vox Day’s Castalia House Account
  4. 48 Hours Later Vox Day Pulls the Plug on SocialGalactic
  5. 2019 Hugo Awards Best Series Discussion
  6. 2018 Nebula Awards Nominees
  7. Amazon Reopens Castalia House’s KDP Account
  8. Where To Find The 2018 Nebula Finalists For Free Online
  9. 2018 Recommended SF/F List
  10. Liu Cixin Didn’t Quit His Day Job – and That’s the Problem

4 thoughts on “Top 10 Posts for February 2019

  1. I am Jonathan Brazee, and I worded the post that contained the 20Booksto50K Recommended Reading List. I am a writer as well as a retired Marine colonel. I mention that because I hold honor to be of vital importance, and I would not knowingly or purposely do something untoward or unethical.

    For background, the intention for the list was for visibility. I knew any indie title needed nominations from the membership at large to make the ballot. I wanted to have a diverse ballot with indie representation, but not to nominate or vote for something just because it was indie-written or by a member of the group. All I wanted was for the works on the list to be considered and judged on their own merits.

    In addition, the list was there to excite other group members about the Nebulas and SFWA itself, to show that striving for quality might be recognized.

    HOWEVER . . .

    I screwed up, and I take full responsibility for that.

    I am writing this both as an apology, because regardless of my intention, my actions have hurt people and organizations that I care about. But I also write this so that other people can understand the nuances of where my mistakes lay. There isn’t anything wrong with reading lists, but mine made mistakes.

    First: this specific post was not approved by anyone on the SFWA staff. The list grew out of a request for indie titles for consideration. I approached a SFWA staff member and discussed posting an indie reading list in the group. I was told it would be OK, but to steer clear of doing things that could be taken as encouraging a specific vote. And I think my first rendition of the list did that. Where I blew it was in the last rendition, where I took it further than the initial discussion and posts. No one on the SFWA staff vetted the specific post. No one said I could list the titles as I did. No one said I could write what I did about the Norton. That was my fault.

    Second, I should not have listed the titles in the order I did or included asterisks. It was an attempt to encourage the 20Booksto50k membership at large, not for the small number of 20Books SFWA members who had or were going to nominate. It was stupid of me, and by doing that, I broke a rule that things behind the SFWA forum wall remain there. Although it was not the intention, I can understand the perception that this was a way to ask people to nominate a certain manner.

    Third, I became too enthusiastic about a Norton candidate. Last year, two slots were left empty because only four had the minimum ten nominations. I wanted a full ballot, and when we had a book on the recommended reading list, I became too specific, writing that if ten people read the book, liked it enough to nominate it, and then did their nominations before the close, then it probably would get on the ballot.

    My intent was to be enthusiastic about indies and get visibility on their work, not just for members of 20Booksto50k. There should have been indie titles by writers not in the group on the list.

    I am supposed to be a writer, someone who understands the power of words. And I consider myself a smart individual. But the execution of my post, no matter the intent, was poor. When I write something that leaves the impression other than I intended, then that is on me.

    I love SFWA. I love 20Booksto50K. I love award season and reading for them. Joining SFWA has been a dream of mine since 1975, and 20Booksto50k had helped me, and countless others, become better at the business side of writing. I would never purposely do anything to harm either of them. I have worked hard to help SFWA in every way I can, and I have tried to help others not just within 20Books, but to all writers. I hope I can still be a positive force for both groups, but if I’ve wrecked that, then I accept the consequences of my mistakes.

    So, where does that leave us?

    First, none of the other nominees asked me to put their title on the list. I would ask that you don’t hold it against them.

    Second, 20Booksto50k was not directly involved with it. In this case, the group was a platform, nothing else.

    Third, while the concept for an indie recommendation list was discussed with a staff member, the end post was not vetted. I wish it had been, as it never would have been posted as is.

    Fourth, while I had what I consider the best of intentions, my unfortunate wording has cast a pall over the awards and caused ill feelings, something that has kept me awake at nights since this broke. I can’t turn back the clock, and I have nothing in my power to change what happened. But what I can do is to offer that my own nomination be removed from consideration for the award.

    If there is one thing I hope to convey is that nothing was done with ill intention. Naivete, yes, sloppiness yes, but no ill intention.

    Please don’t let my mistakes reflect badly on SFWA, the Nebula Awards, 20Booksto50k or on any of the other nominees.

  2. Items nine and ten on the scroll-ful list are the same.

    I’ll get myself a cup of tea.

  3. Hi Jonathan, I’m sure Mike will create a special post for this and will hold my comment until then. Think of mailing to make sure it is created?

    mikeglyer(a)cs.com.

  4. Pingback: Jonathan Brazee, SFWA Make Statements on Nebula Awards Issues | File 770

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.