For so many fine comments.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
File 770
Mike Glyer's news of science fiction fandom
For so many fine comments.
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
I’d appreciate it talk on nomination and voting process was kept to the MACII business meeting thread. I’m feeling a bit overwhelmed by how it’s derailing/taking over other discussions. It seems to be going around and around in circles. A woman feeling overwhelmed by men arguing on every single thread about a topic which keeps being jump started by a couple of guys. Thanks in advance.
A bunch of small/indie publishers have coordinated their available “Free” days on Amazon’s Kindle platform, and are offering free Kindle versions of their books (through Amazon) today and tomorrow (and yesterday, but unless one of y’all has a time machine, we can’t buy them yesterday).
Linked through here – http://selfpublishingroundtable.com/promo/scifi-fantasy-horror.html – click on the covers you’re interested in. It looks like it takes you to Amazon via the gateway page’s affiliate link.
(I know one of the participating authors, which is how I found out about this – it’s not my affiliate link and I gain no benefit for your clicks, here).
I think separate threads is a good idea and sorry. But ideally it would be a new one, the BM thread isn’t really right for it I think.
“Neffie” sounds like a creature you would find in a lake north of the arctic circle: “Hey, look ober dere! Is that neffie?” (Wipes nose on crusty sleeve.)
I have some doubts about the ‘Fandom Prime’ narrative, because it seems to run together fandom, and being interested in science fiction.
There was an interesting figure in one of the 1940 fanzines I read for the RetroHugos, which I can’t now trace because the site which was displaying them has removed them; the circulation of SF magazines at the time was quite impressive – five figures if I remember rightly. (Wikipedia sort of confirms this – 50,000 for Astounding in 1934.) Meanwhile, the Worldcon in 1940 had 128 attendees. Organised fandom was only a small fraction of those who read the stuff.
In the 60’s, Doctor Who and Star Trek were mainstream shows, in that a large proportion of the population of their home countries watched them, and some aspects of them, like Daleks or ‘beaming up’, were well-known cultural reference points. But being a fan of these things was not mainstream: ‘Trekkies’ were figures of fun.
Something similar is true of comics; the better-known superheroes are widely recognised cultural figures, but the ‘comic book guy’ is a stereotype.
Now clearly things have changed. SF no doubt has become more popular, and so has active fandom, keeping pace with it (though still a long way behind), and the internet means that the clear line between active fans and those who just read/watch the stuff has been eroded. But while science fiction itself isn’t a minority interest, I think conventions and the like still are, and to some extent still scorned by those who enjoy scorning things.
A tl;dr version of the research study Camestros shared:
Those robot babies used in sex ed may actually increase teen pregnancies
Mike Glyer said:
Yay for something that sounds like progress! (Boo that it’s another week or so.)
Reading between the lines (since nobody is giving much detail) it sounds like Mike contracted some sort of multiply drug resistant infection. Leave it to OGH to develop a “dystopian science fictional future” condition…
I finished reading The Obelisk Gate last night. It was awesome in all the ways that The Fifth Season was awesome. It has annoying holes in the worldbuilding where all of Jemisin’s work that I’ve read has annoying holes in the worldbuilding, but they continue to shrink.
@rcade
I don’t think that’s the number to be looking at. Fans have been frustrated when nomination lists come out loaded with grossly inappropriate things on them. 3SV gives them the option to immediately vote those off the island. I suspect the votes to eliminate really bad works would be as high or higher than the final no-award votes.
@Tasha
Who the hell do you think you are?
John A. Arkansawyer
? I mentioned one (two, maybe) of their terms, and countered with what I think they’re really doing.
This is exactly the same as making up CHORFS, SJWs, SJZs, Badthink, Wrongfan, and the rest of the alphabet abuse that constitutes rigorous argument in the kennels.
[additional sarcasm snipped]
I have to say, I groaned inside when I saw that that particular Groundhog’s Day endless argument was leaking over into new threads, too.
The sheep scroll up?
rcade, my response to your message #50 in this thread is over at the MACII Business 8/21 thread, per Tasha Turner’s request.
https://file770.com/?p=30405&cpage=9#comment-473543
@Greg: There’s no need to be rude about it.
@Tasha: Reading half of the first sentence is enough to tell you the topic of the comment, and no one is making you continue reading. I’ve been skimming most of the voting discussions (and skipping the really long ones) for several days now.
I think it’s our job to try to get along in the sad thread shortage that OGH’s indisposal causes. I don’t think that helps. I agree that “take it outside” doesn’t really work when there’s no good “outside”, but that means being nice to each other despite the crowding.
@Greg Hullender
A filer. Since OGH is sick and unable to make new threads for specific topics as he’d usually do I thought we could work things out among ourselves.
Tasha makes a good point. Moving that discussion to another thread is very reasonable. I’m sure there’s one that’s appropriate which could be resurrected.
@Kip W: I’m sorry to have singled you out that way. It wasn’t entirely fair.
My point is that “virtue signaling” is jargon and that “authenticity signaling” is, if not quite a neologism, certainly more than simple phrase-coining.
You could be right. I’m thinking about putting a qualifying stage ballot for 2015 online so people can try out 3SV. It wouldn’t get enough votes to be illustrative, of course, but it might help members kick the tires.
Tasha is making a reasonable request, and one that Filers have made about other topics in the past.
If making several topic posts would be helpful I can make them in a little while. Please suggest or oppose.
I’m in two minds. On the one hand I think there are several issues about the Hugo voting system and related matters, and having then all in one thread could be confusing. On the other hand, the issues do relate to one another, and I’m worried that the discussions are getting too isolated. For instance, there are people who think the purpose of 3SV is only to vote off what is offensive, and there are others who think its purpose is to vote off anything one considers a slate candidate, and I don’t think the main proponents of those views have ever actually come face to face.
I think we should accept the chaos of overlapping topics instead of creating work for Mike when he’s still not home. One blog post a day is fine.
The business meeting votes were less than a week ago and the anti-slate proposals are complex. Discussion helps people understand them.
Mike: How about a thread for people to post links to science / science fiction / general geeky articles of the type you usually include in the daily scroll?
I agree with both Tasha and Nancy Sauer (although Nancy’s came out rather abrupt). I’ve gotten cross-eyed from all the jargon and explaining over EPH (which would have probably led to me voting against–the rule of thumb being if I can’t understand it, I don’t need it.) So I tend to scroll, scroll, scroll. Tasha made what I thought was a very reasonable request–it’s getting hard to track the various threads. Especially considering they occur over several days.
And Mr. Glyer shouldn’t have to take time away from recuperating to ride herd.
Time to move on.
I think there should be two threads. I’m happy if the daily “comment” is for general water-cooler stuff and there is a separate “voting stuff” thread every 3 or 4 days until discussion there dies down. I propose that the canonical names for voting threads should be puns on “token”. Such as “Token ’bout a revolution”, “Token by the gay unicorn biker”, etc.
Petréa Mitchell: Reading The Obelisk Gate now; I’d be interested in discussing the holes, when I’ve finished.
It’s been noticed that the series has something in common with Seveneves; both, I think, have something, at a more abstract level, in common with The Cinder Spires, odd though that may seem. Has it struck people that the series also has something in common with the Three Body trilogy? (These Hugo people, always reading the same sort of thing, no sense of adventure….)
@Jameson Quinn,
I will blame you for the following: after all, you’re the one who reminded me of this horrible joke that will only make sense to a small audience, but which will still be topical:
… I’ll show myself out.
@Mike Glyer
Focus on getting well. We’ll be fine with a single thread per day. It’s not reasonable for someone to be able to kick people out of the main thread just because she’s not interested in their conversation.
@Mark
If it had been a request and not a demand, or if it hadn’t been delivered in such an insulting and entitled way, I might agree. Although examples I can think of from the past tended to be very specialized and self-contained.
@Greg,
I thought you overreacted. How is…
…a demand? To me, that’s a request.
@Greg Hullender,
I must admit that to me, @Tasha Turner’s message comes across as neither insulting nor entitled – to me it reads as a request, even as a humble one, from someone who wants to participate in the discussion but is finding it difficult, and is asking for some assistance:
“I’d appreciate i[f]” reads to me as a request; “I’m feeling a bit overwhelmed” followed by a longer description of the reason for the request, which to me reads quite sensible; and finally “Thanks in advance” expressing gratitude.
Would you care to share how that message comes across to you as a demand (rather than a request), demanding, insulting, or entitled – and perhaps which parts specifically? I’m genuinely interested, because my reading of that message evidently differs so radically from yours.
@Greg: Tasha was polite. Sure, you can read it in a snarky entitled voice, but obviously we have to give the benefit of the there. You were the one who jumped the rhetorical rails.
ETA: double ninja’d.
I also would prefer that the discussion about Hugo voting stay in one thread, if only because it’s easier to follow.
I don’t think making her request about gender was polite.
@Nickp: I also would like to read about the interactions of the Platonists and the space humans. But I doubt that book will get written.
I hope this email doesn’t need moderation.
I had little brothers; I didn’t need a robot baby to convince me I didn’t want a real one. Home Ec classes were still using eggs as baby substitutes when I was in high school. Watching kids carry those stupid eggs everywhere just made me really glad I wasn’t taking Home Ec.
Greg Hullender: I think I’m okay with virtue signalling, as long as I believe the signaler genuinely believes what he/she is saying.
But in those cases, it is then not “signalling”. It’s people saying or doing what they actually believe.
This is why the Puppies’ continual accusations that people outside their tiny tribe are always “virtue-signalling” is so offensive. What the Puppies are really doing when they use that phrase is insisting that the people to whom they’re referring don’t actually believe what they say they believe, that they don’t actually like the things they say they like, that they don’t actually care about the things that they say they care about — that they’re just saying or doing what they say or do as a way to try to gain inclusiveness in the mythical group of SJWs.
I am convinced that this is because this is what Puppies are doing. Pretty much everything they say or do is said or done as a way to gain inclusiveness as a Puppy (or whatever they want to call themselves).
They are therefore convinced that this is what everyone else is doing, too — just as people for whom everything is about money believe that money is the primary consideration for all other people, too; just as people for whom everything is political believe that everyone else operates the same way; just as dishonest people believe that everyone else is dishonest, too.
rcade: I don’t think making her request about gender was polite.
I thought it was pretty offensive to the women who are also partaking in the discussion about EPH, 3SV, and other nominating and voting issues.
@Greg
I think that a reply more in a spirit of explanation than accusation might have yielded a better response.
As I was supportive when e.g. Nick Mamatas requested that brackets not take over the current day’s thread because he thought they sounded like people yelling book titles into his inbox, and we shifted to running brackets a day behind, I feel it’s equitable to support this as well. Your mileage may vary.
Mike, I think that an e.g. Hugo Voting Minutiae thread for serious technical discussion would be reasonable. People who find a conversation in the chat thread getting into the weeds could opt to take it there. Or not.
@JJ. I think the Puppies generally believe what they say they believe. So strongly do they believe it, it is inconceivable to them that large numbers of people could really believe differently. A few sure, but not the majority of Worldcon voters – therefore they must be virtue signaling.
I think it’s that the phrase “virtue signalling” describes itself, more than anything else: It is an expression is especially valued within a particular group, and it appears to be used mainly to signal that the speaker is a “proper, right-thinking” member of that group. (Much like applying made-up labels, including perhaps particularly acronymized ones, to another group, etc.)
*shrugs*
I’d also support 2 threads; it’d be easier to follow.
However I feel Tasha’s gender comment was in bad taste. Why harp on outdated stereotypes? It’s not as if voting math is the sole purview of men, and I did see several women commenting in the BM thread.
@Greg Hullender, @rcade, @JJ:
The overall tone of @Tasha Turner’s message seemed, to me, a bit lost – and in that context she perhaps chose to use gender-specific words in a way that was unfortunate, but actually the same sentiment and reasoning applies even if you remove genders entirely from the message:
As I see it described, the issue is not the genders of those involved: it is that the same discussion keeps getting dragged into every new thread, by a few individuals but engrossing a larger group, to such an extent that that discussion proceeds to overwhelm other discussions on the same thread.
Tasha Turner and I have certainly disagreed in the past, including on matters of communication; but in this, I maintain that the message comes across to me as a request, and a perfectly reasonable one: to facilitate discussions on many topics, by putting the very voluminous discussion on a particular topic into its own, separate thread(s).
@rcade
I’m going to have to ask you about your gravatar…
Not sure how anyone can parse “I’d appreciate it if you would take your conversation elsewhere. Thanks in advance.” as anything other than a demand. It’s right up there with “I’d appreciate it if you kept your opinion to yourself.”
A polite request would have been “Is there some way we could move the voting-system discussion to another thread? I can’t participate in it, and it seems to be dominating the discussion. Or am I the only one who feels this way?”
The bit about making it a gender issue was, as I think JJ is pointing out, insulting to men and women alike.
This is a Wee Free Comment.
I’m OK with requests being made about where something should be discussed, but a comment in a five-day old thread has much less chance of being seen. Old threads become ghost towns here. For me, when a thread’s no longer in the front page Recent Comments sidebar I stop checking it. Maybe I should switch to reading here via email or RSS.
That was Pope Benedict in his red Saturno, but after a couple of minutes it creeped me out.
I assumed that the origin of the idea of “virtue signaling” is somehow tied into signalling theory in biology.
rcade: Did your gravatar just go from a smiley face to Pope Sidious wearing Gertie’s cowgirl hat from E.T.? (edit–only for a moment–now it is the moon.)
I felt the same way: I nominated The Just City for this year’s Hugo, liked The Philosopher Kings even though Apollo acted like an entitled ass in some parts (non-spoiler – the music contest was straight out of Greek mythology), but while I liked some scenes on the whole I found Necessity a chore to get through. I kept waiting for the First Encounter, ohg rirelguvat bs vagrerfg frrzrq gb unccra bss fperra. Vg jbhyq unir orra vagrerfgvat gb frr ubj gur Cyngbavnaf ernpgrq gb n uhzna pvivyvmngvba sbe jubz gurve vqrny bs rkpryyrapr jnf abg n znva zbgvingbe. V nyfb jnag gb xabj zber nobhg gur Fnryv naq ubj gurve svefg vagrenpgvbaf jvgu gur Cyngbavnaf jrag. Naq V’q yvxr gb xabj zber nobhg gur qvfpbagragrq sbyx nf jryy – nyy jr’er gbyq vf gung gurl frrz gb jnaqre sebz pvgl gb pvgl hagvy gurl svaq fbzrcynpr gurl yvxr.