DisCon III, the 2021 Worldcon, announced today in an “Update on Editor Guest of Honor” that Baen Books publisher Toni Weisskopf has been removed as one of the convention’s GoHs.
They published the following statement in explanation:
DisCon III condemns the violent and hostile content found within Baen Books’ forums. We also cannot condone the fact such content was enabled and allowed to ferment for so long. We want to make it clear abusive behavior is not, and will not be, tolerated at DisCon III. Such behavior goes entirely against our already established policies concerning inclusivity and creating a welcoming environment for our members, which can be found here: https://discon3.org/about/inclusion/.
We knew simply saying those words with no actions to back them up would be unacceptable. Too often, we have seen individuals and organizations say they are on the right side of issues yet do nothing to act on those words. We knew we had to take a hard look at our own position and take action based on our established policies.
As a result, after discussion with her, we have notified Toni Weisskopf we are removing her as a Guest of Honor for DisCon III.
We know this decision was not as quick as some of you would have wanted, and we understand your frustration. Our committee’s leadership was always in full agreement that there was a fundamental difference between the values Worldcon strives to uphold and the values allowed to be espoused on the forums-in-question.
In the entire eighty-plus year history of our community, no Worldcon has ever removed someone as a Guest of Honor. To remove a Guest of Honor was an unprecedented decision that needed discussion, consideration, and consensus. Those mechanisms sometimes do not move as fast as some would want, and we thank the community for its patience.
We also want to let everyone know that we are not planning on adding additional individuals to our Guest of Honor list.
We wish to thank you all for taking the time and energy to send us your feedback. Many of you have strong opinions on this issue, and we want everyone to know all your voices were heard and considered when rendering our decision. We will always welcome your feedback, questions, suggestions, and concerns, and we will continue to listen, reflect and act to ensure our members feel welcome at DisCon III.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Weisskopf is not being honored as Guest of Honor at an SFF convention. That’s it. It’s not a god-given right. It won’t hurt her career, and the only possible damage to Baen comes from the actual problems there – not whether or not she’s GoH. So get over it, Baen fanatics and violence-lovers!
The hand-wringing by RWNJs and their supposedly-left-wing apologists is absurd. The vitriol should be aimed at condemning the attacks, threats, et al. Sanford’s dealing with, rather than pearl-clutching about poor Weisskopf, who is just . . . not . . . being . . . a Worldcon GoH. You know, like most other editors aren’t honored as GoH at a Worldcon.
Good grief!
My goodness, that is disingenuous. On a forum where nothing is content-moderated, the extremist bully voices take over and every marginalized person is silenced. I believe this has been definitively proven on on the internet over the last twenty or so years.
And a privately owned site refusing to give people a free platform to broadcast their words is nothing like the same thing as censorship.
It is not necessary to give bullies and trolls voices. What they have to say is not inherently important. The words of the people they drive off the internet are not inherently unimportant.
We do not seem to lose much by refusing to give fascism and genocidal seditionists a free platform to say what they feel like. And our spaces are infinitely enriched by the diverse voices of the women, the PoCs, the LGBTQ+, the BAMEs, and all the other people the trolls and bullies rage at and fantasize about killing.
I would rather have a diverse space with many voices and no toleration of violent raging (even if it is labeled “jokes” or “fantasies”) than a a small, mean space that gloats about death and violence fantasies and drives anyone who does not conform away.
@PIMMM: ::cheering:: 🙂
Comparing important things that might be said to “kill enough of them that they can not arise for another 50 years” is goofy. I know free-speech absolutists like to play the card you’re playing any time an online political forum deletes a noxious comment, but the reality is that an anything-goes policy either kills a forum or turns it into the worst place in the world. It doesn’t become the Algonquin Round Table.
Baen’s Bar is content-moderated. It has rules people had to follow. It just lacked one for comments advocating violence or didn’t enforce it due to lax moderation.
Full disclosure: I am a Baen Books employee, but this is my own opinion and does not represent Baen in any way, shape, or form.
I hereby respectfully request that ALL SF and Fantasy conventions rescind and never again invite any user of Patreon to be a Guest at your conventions. Why?
Per the headline of the Jan 13, 2021 investigative report in the Rolling Stone:
“Patreon Claimed They Kicked Conspiracy Theorists Off. QAnon Still Flourishes:
The subscription site is allowing QAnon adherents to remain active, even as they promote false information that has led to recent real-world violence”
https://www.rollingstone.com/…/qanon-patreon…/
Discon III has clearly established that we will hold people responsible for the words of others, if those words are part of a social platform involved with their business. And I certainly won’t heed any claim that the users of Patreon were unaware of the seriousness of the platform shortcomings when it comes to monitoring the language of all its participants. I mean, Toni should be able to quote verbatim all 800,000+ posts currently on (the shut down) Baen’s Bar. Anyone making money from Patreon should be held responsible as well. In fact, perhaps we should go so far as to banning anyone who donated to the people on Patreon.
To be clear: Toni Weisskopf is being vilified for language posted by others on an archaic bit of social platform which was immediately shut down after it came to light that it required scrutiny. Anyone who is doing business with Patreon has and continues to profit from and contribute to QAnon adherents that has led to ACTUAL REAL-WORLD VIOLENCE, including the insurrection on January 6th. (according to Rolling Stone). I leave it to you to decide which is actually more offensive–oh wait, I won’t. I KNOW which one is more disgusting. So do you, if you’re being honest. (And yes, Jason Sanford’s piece was first published on Patreon. Thanks for asking.)
As Discon III said in their press release: “We knew simply saying those words with no actions to back them up would be unacceptable. Too often, we have seen individuals and organizations say they are on the right side of issues yet do nothing to act on those words. We knew we had to take a hard look at our own position and take action based on our established policies.”
EXACTLY. Back in October, Patreon said they were doing something about this, then did nothing. And yet all these SF/F professionals did nothing and continued to collect money via Patreon.
So, are you a bunch of hypocrites, or will you stand with me when it comes to purifying our genre of anyone who ever associated in any way with anyone who ever expressed an offensive thought?
Now, while it would be a simple matter to go to Patreon and just search the terms “science fiction” and “fantasy” to assemble our list of undesirables, some of them may quickly scramble and take down their Patreon pages. But we have established our purity test, and taking them down after the fact is NOT ENOUGH.
Lucky for you all, I already did the searches and saved the list of names. It contains many individuals, organizations and publications that I hold in high regard, including friends, colleagues, authors and artists with whom I’ve worked–and hope to work with again. We just can’t have their tainted presence as a Guest at our cons. Anyone who wants to see this list is welcome to ask me for it.
To paraphrase a former (and thankfully deceased) Senator from my home state:
“Science Fiction and Fantasy is infested with insurrectionists. I have here in my hand a list of 1350—a list of names that were made known to the Worldcon as being members of the Insurrection and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in Science Fiction and Fantasy.”
P.S. Yes, I was planting my tongue firmly in my cheek. I do NOT think we should ban everyone who uses or has used Patreon. It’s unfortunate, but in this day and age, I feel I have to say that. Of course, by Discon III’s standards, we must.
P.P.S. I’m still not abrogating Baen nor Weisskopf of their responsibility in regard to the underlying issue. Nor have I said word one about the veracity and seriousness of Sanford’s piece. I’m pointing out the absurdity of Discon III’s decision.
@PIMMN:
I agree that we should not give “fascism” and “genocidal seditionists” a free platform — but I suspect I very much disagree with you as to what a “fascist” or a “genocidal seditionist” looks like. For that matter, I think most of the “bullies” in fandom are on the left these days.
That’s why this kind of thing really irks me. In point of fact the local power structure in fandom is one where the left is ascendant over the right — not the other way around! The idea that we have to protect Worldcon attendees from the “oppression” of stupid comments on someone else’s unpopular old Internet forum is very questionable to me, especially when it lines up so neatly with the dominant political currents in fandom.
@John Adkins – Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t discussion of Mercedes Lackey actually a banned topic on the Baen Bar forums? I suspect that she may not be the best example for your argument in that case.
@bill
Baen is far from the only place for people to post their opinions, but let’s set that aside for the moment: If your, or anyone’s, opinion is that blocking topics on Baen’s bar means that those things won’t get said at all, it’s worth asking what things are important. Apparently, you and whoever is running things at Baen, think that nothing is lost if questions about Baen’s business practices are censored. What is being defended as “important” is right-wingers talking about murdering their political opponents and destroying cities because they don’t like the inhabitants’ the opinions.
@PIMMM
I don’t think you can have (long term) one or the other — I think you get both, or neither. And I’d rather have both.
Advocating for free speech even when it means tolerating speech you don’t agree with has been for the last 200 or so years a noble, admirable position. See, for example, the ACLU and the Skokie marchers, or the statement attributed to Voltaire “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”.
No one is talking about legally stopping anyone from saying anything at this point. No one is preventing speech.
What you are seeing is the consequences of such speech. Sure, the ACLU defended the rights of Nazi’s to march in Skokie, but they didn’t drive them to the rally and make signs or them to carry.
And everyone else was free to recoil away from the marching Nazis. if the march had been sponsored by a hardware store or something, everyone would have been fully justified in refusing to do business there and telling the owner he was not welcome at the local Chamber of Commerce.
If you want to be the digital publisher with a lot of violent rhetoric on your forums, that’s your choice. You’re just going to have to live with the consequences of that choice, and those consequences will likely include you being excluded from much of the rest of society.
@Vicki
No, what’s being defended is the right to say what other people don’t like. The violent speech on Baen’s Bar isn’t the goal, it’s a side effect.
Some of my political choices have been labeled “facist” and “white supremacist” on File770. I don’t ask OGH to remove this hate speech because he also tolerates my side pointing out the stupidity and hypocrisy of the left when it stupid and hypocritical.
If you think conservatives can’t be outspoken on politics without calling for people to be killed, you have a pretty low impression of conservatives.
@bill
What’s being defended as “important” manifestly IS right-wingers talking about murdering their political opponents, etc.
That’s what you’re defending, as you type.
You’re not defending the right to have opinions we disagree with, because that right is not in dispute. Had the comments gleefully speculating on how good the commenters would be at murdering us, and how delightful that would be, been promptly removed, and clearly and firmly forbidden, (the way talking about e.g. Mercedes Lackey was clearly and firmly forbidden) the rest of the forum could have chattered away in well deserved obscurity till everyone concerned wore their fingers to nubs for all we or the folks at DisCon could have cared. Even though most of what they said would have been stuff we would disagree with or dislike. When they’re not making excuses/laying plans to murder us, who cares?
@PIMMN Hear hear!
Nicole J LL: did you mean https://twitter.com/Yagathai/status/1362566358727340041?
My immediate reaction to hearing this was the opposite of my breaking the habit of swearing. I’ve already commented elsewhere and planned to post it here but upon arrival discovered that so many people have already spoken up that for now I’m going to quote a few instead.
Christian Brunschen
Also covering the time frame, which you and others mention:
2 days ago a report
1 day ago Toni closes Baen’s Bar for review
Discon III says it’s monitoring the situation.
Today: DisCon III calls her.
I have no idea of her response but “Hi, a lot has been going on lately . . . .” isn’t exactly the best way to start, even claim it was, a discussion. Take some time, remember that this is a person, not a name or position, and put yourself in her place. Start with the phone ringing. How would you react, the subject being publicly removed from one of the greatest honors?
@Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little
Someone on the DisCon III Board was talking about this, in public? Seriously, something that should be an internal discussion? I too would like to have links to it and will even join Twitter.
EDIT: While writing Mike V. provided the link. Thank you!
It doesn’t pretend anything. It’s a fact that fandom has become a battleground. It’s a fact that our world is politically divisive. That doesn’t mean every person in the community, it’s a general state of being.
@recade
Thank you for this!
I am utterly appalled by a Worldcon deciding to tell a Guest of Honor they no longer want her the day after she’s said that she’s going to take measures. Hearing from a lot of people about this? That’s the internet. But a Worldcon, of all things, crunching under that pressure so quickly?
@Robert Wood
Sanford established that Baen hasn’t regulated the speech of participants of Baen’s Bar. Those who regulate the speech of the participants are volunteer participants.
Etc.
FWIW I’m not involved with DisCon III nor party to any discussions. My politics are moderate, which means everyone hates me. And I love all sorts of SF – looking at my library people could make all sorts of assumptions about me.
I am utterly appalled by a Worldcon deciding to tell a Guest of Honor they no longer want her the day after she’s said that she’s going to take measures.
Except she didn’t.
Everyone keeps talking about how Toni said she is shutting down Baen’s Bar and will take corrective measures for the problems, but that’s not what she said. She said the exact opposite of that. Specifically, she said:
“[I]t has come to our attention that allegations about the Bar have been made elsewhere. We take these allegations seriously, and consequently have put the Bar on hiatus while we investigate. But we will not commit censorship of lawful speech.
It is not Baen Books’ policy to police the opinions of its readers, its authors, its artists, its editors, or indeed anyone else. This applies to posts at the Bar, or on social media, on their own websites, or indeed anywhere else. On the Bar, the publisher does not select what is allowed to be posted, and does not hijack an individual’s messages for their own purposes. Similarly, the posts do not represent the publisher’s opinion, except in a deep belief that free speech is worthy in and of itself.”
That’s not saying she’s going to take measures. That’s saying she’s not going to take measures and cloaking herself in “free speech” while doing so.
Elspseth, Sanford brought up two examples of Jim Baen as the owner declaring topics out of bounds and enforcing those decisions. Moderation may be primarily volunteer, but the ownership has played a role in moderation.
@bill
It doesn’t matter what you think. Evidence has demonstrated conclusively that on the internet you can EITHER moderate heavily against hate speech and have a diverse community that welcomes women, PoCs, LGBTQ+ people, BAME people, etc. OR you can have a place dominated by hate speech that drives everyone else away, leaving a barren monoculture of bad behavior and echo chambers.
There is no “both” to have. It is not possible to have an inclusive space where people are allowed to terrorize others. You can have either strong moderation, enforcement of civility, and inclusion, or you can have terror and bullying.
@bill
So if you decided to start talking on these boards about your lovingly detailed plans for mass killing of people you disagreed with, and Mike banned you, would that be a sign of his intolerance of “saying things other people don’t like” or sensible moderation?
Then again you refer to Tank Marmot as “Colonel” which I find rather shocking. I don’t think that anybody who has crossed path with the man can pay him the compliment of using his former rank and then go around pretending to be some sort of centrist.
Jim Minz, I think you should have stuck with your first impulse, that it was a mistake to make a statement on this.
I think it’s a bit precious of you to clutch your pearls about Patreon, there’s a difference between trying and failing to kick a group off a platform, and welcoming them, and defending them.
And for all the weasel words being deployed, about how calls to kill the enough of the libs and city people so they can’t rise again for decades is just people not liking speech, “welcoming” describes Bean’s attitude towards these maniacs. Sanford described how one corner of the Bar was Parler on meth; Weiskopf nukes the whole platform to avoid extirpating that toxic part, and then her defenders bemoan how her right to be a GoH has been taken from her.
I mean, I’m not surprised at this from the publishing house that brought out an edition of the Sixth Column with an afterward from Krattman in 2013. Y’all know your market, and it’s been too long since I had all the CoDominium books for me to be blinded by nostalgia.
@elsbeth
I think the reference was to this thread; you don’t have to join Twitter to read it. https://twitter.com/Yagathai/status/1362566358727340041
If that was, in fact, the thread being referenced, no one was revealing anything private. People were demanding an immediate response from Discon, and someone familiar with the way Worldcon works was explaining why there was no way an organization like Worldcon could turn around an important, consequential decision in a matter of hours.
He explained that Worldcon is run by geographically dispersed volunteers, with a con chair whose primary job is to make sure volunteers don’t strangle one another, and thus giving a mini-course on the general dynamics of how any such organization makes decisions. Nothing private was revealed.
I’m tempted to point out that seeing ambiguous facts (someone from Worldcon was talking about the situation) and coming to the most damning possible interpretation (they were leaking private internal conversations) is an error we ALL commit, and when tempers are high it’s one that we should guard against more than usual.
@ Jim Minz: you are making a false equivalence between Weisskopf, who runs Baen and under whose leadership the Bar is run, and authors who use a platform which has allowed terrible people access. A more accurate equivalence would be between the owners of Patreon and Weisskopf. On the other side of things, people who use Patreon might be more usefully compared to authors published by Baen, and Discon has made no moves against said authors, nor are they likely to. People are upset with some Baen authors defending the Bar, especially authors who, by their own accounts, abandoned it years ago and have no knowledge of its current content, but that’s being upset with people for the words they actually chose to say, not for being associated with Baen.
@Anna Feruglio Dal Dan —
I have never met Col. Kratman and I find some of the beliefs he has expressed to be abhorrent, but an old saying goes “Salute the rank, not the man”. (Technically I suppose I should perhaps call him LTC Kratman? I’m not up on what would be most proper etiquette-wise in this context.)
I am not sure what respecting the man’s rank has to do with my politics, though. His politics are, as far as I can tell, very far to my right.
Yes; it was my twitter thread. I’m certainly not on the Discon board, just a low-level volunteer in a division that doesn’t contain guest liason duties, and I have no insights into or secret knowledge of any of the interactions with Toni Weisskopf. I know only what the public also knows. This is only my personal opinion, not representative of anyone else, &c &c.
But as someone that knows a thing or two about conventions, I have got to believe that, given all of the imperatives involved and the optics of removing Toni, Discon would have at least considered giving Toni a chance to clean house, kick out the worst of the Bar malcontents in a token purge, shift blame in a plausible if not totally believable way (“these bad people were all new arrivals, refugees from Parler, and don’t represent our users”, or “affection and long acquaintance caused me to overlook the foibles of a few people I’ve had a long, positive relationship with, like that one uncle that you love but occasionally says bad things at thanksgiving dinner. I should have been paying closer attention, mea culpa.”) and put a few basic content moderation policies in place. Then Discon could have cheerfully said look, she made an effort to be good, so we will keep her on.
I have also got to believe that Discon would have considered letting her save face by allowing her to decline the GoH spot. She could write a letter citing the fact that she doesn’t want to make things tougher for fandom in an already very tough year, maybe make some self-serving allusions to being a free speech champion, I hope to see you again soon after the pandemic, blah blah blah. This would earn her many martyr points with her sales demographic, and allow both parties to retire with a technically undefeated record. Still a rough ride, but nowhere near as rough as what’s going to happen now.
The optics in having to 86 a GoH, which I describe on Twitter as being roughly akin to shooting a dolphin in the head, are so bad that I have to think that Discon would have tried to convince Toni to work with them on almost any other even vaguely plausible option before the convention management settled on cutting her.
Maybe I’m wrong, and maybe Discon was the intransigent, unreasonable party, but that seems implausible given the known facts and cultural and economic imperatives here.
@ Mike V.
Here is a quote from Toni Weisskopf’s response to James Sanford:
It is not Baen Books’ policy to police the opinions of its readers, its authors, its artists, its editors, or indeed anyone else. This applies to posts at the Bar, or on social media, on their own websites, or indeed anywhere else. On the Bar, the publisher does not select what is allowed to be posted, and does not hijack an individual’s messages for their own purposes.
Does this sound like she’s going to moderate for extreme violent speech? No. She isn’t going to do a damn thing. So why give Toni the benefit of the doubt?
@Rob It certainly sounds like she’s planning on doing jack squat to moderate the content on her boards, I agree. Hence my assumptions about which party was the intransigent one given the givens.
@Jim Minz: Greetings, long time no see, and sorry you are going through this. But I’m not buying the argument. Writers who publish with Baen Books are not being disinvited. Neither should writers who use Patreon. The only guest disinvited is Weisskopf. She didn’t create the toxic mess in Baen’s Bar, but she didn’t handle it well. Angry and defensive does not make a good party guest.
Mike V – That was the twitter thread I am remembering! Thank you for the link, and thank you for posting the thread in the first place. I appreciate your perspective.
And apologies for my sloppiness in referring to your role within DisConIII. I should not have gone off faulty memory for that.
#
@Jim Minz would like us to believe that TW acted the moment she heard about unacceptable violent rhetoric at Baen’s Bar! TW would like us to think that, too, as she has stated that “there were no user complaints.”
And, you know, you can believe that if you like, but it’s not a good look. If TW was completely ignorant of the violent rhetoric 1. pushed in part by one of the moderators 2. on a forum which she more or less owns, such that she is responsible for the moderation thereof (and the appointment of such moderators as the aforementioned Neo Nazi), then 3. that’s pretty damn irresponsible of her. No one that negligent, or that incurious about what goes on in a space that they are responsible, should be responsible for such a space.
But I don’t believe for a moment that she was ignorant of it. I also don’t believe her actions in putting the forum on hiatus had anything to do with anything more moral than PR / damage control.
@Jim Minz
A closer equivalence to Patreon users would be if, say, Eric Flint had lost GoH. Toni Weisskopf is an owner, not a user; Patreon leadership is the equivalent to her, not the users. Making an argument based on false equivalence is unlikely to sway many minds.
I do have a question, though, if you stick around: In your opinion, what materials would be best to provide to voters outside the industry when they’re asked to judge the work of longform editors?
@bill
I’ve seen this argument a lot, that to have any speech we must allow terrible speech. I have never seen evidence that it works that way and, as a gamer and nigh-on lifelong internet denizen, plenty of examples of the opposite. It seems more article of faith than reasoned position based on evidence.
And irrelevant in the case of a forum which does actually ban discussion of plenty of things. They don’t allow absolute free speech. Therefore, what they allow, and the moderators they choose to enforce it, are choices they’ve made. The rest of us are perfectly capable of looking at those choices and drawing conclusions from that.
I have great admiration for Toni, think she’s given a huge chunk of her life to fandom and SF in general. Sadly, the fact is the way fandom has grown and changed called into question some of Baens choice, and they ultimately fall about Toni’s shoulders. We live in different times, and sometimes that puts a harsh light on some of our heroes. In the past, we’ve moved Heaven and Earth to block the light from them; this is no longer the case, and that is for the good. I know she loves fandom every bit as much as I do, and I’d hoped she’d see that this would be a damage point and step back. The con made the right choice, the one I’d wish they wouldn’t have to make.
@Mark V – I also very much appreciate your follow-up thread.
https://twitter.com/Yagathai/status/1362839883870527498
I always end up being a Mark. It’s the weirdest thing. Must be the hair. 😉
And the problem with not censoring lawful speech is?
@Mike V.
We collect Mark’s but there’s only One True File770 Mike, so you’ve been re-assigned, obviously. 😉
@Robert Wood:
You’re absolutely correct: that slipped my mind. But perhaps you can understand why and that it’s irrelevant.
To the best of my recollection Jim Baen did 15 years or so ago. I’d known about the Bar but a look proved every plot twist was boring and I think it was still a BBS. The absolute freedom and Barflies are probably why I thought it a fangroup. It was only when all of this blew up and I did some research that I found Baen started it as place for readers and authors to talk, that he’d interfered twice only from Sanfords article on Patreon. However:
That was when few enough people were posting that I once skimmed all of them.
That action was when he was alive and active, more than 15 years ago.
That was the last time ownership played a role in moderation.
As a way of judging time – that was when we were all 15 years younger.
Something Jim Baen did 15+ years ago has nothing to do with today.
@TYP
Clearly you didn’t read the article:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/qanon-patreon-conspiracy-theories-deplatforming-1113458/
In October, Media Matters exposed a bunch of QAnon nutters on Patreon. Patreon said they’d expunge them. 3 MONTHS LATER, Rolling Stone found some of the exact same QAnon people with the exact same Account Name still on Patreon, making thousands of dollars per month for content, including livestreaming from DC Rally on January 6th.
Patreon is profiting from QAnon adherents with actual links to the actual events of January 6th. And, is making money FOR QAnon adherents with direct links to the events of January 6th.
You can choose to do business with them, or not.
AND AS I SAID IN MY P.S.: I’m not advocating that we silence anyone involved with Patreon. I think it’s a ridiculous argument. That was my point. (And I was right, I needed to include the PS. And apparently that wasn’t enough…)
Baen has a decades old bulletin board used by a small core group of people moderated by volunteers. An opinion piece exposed some of the very acerbic and disturbing language in a politics forum. (One small piece of a board with hundreds of thousands of posts spread across thousands of topics and subtopics.) In less than a day, Baen took down the board, and are figuring out the best way to move forward. What action would have satisfied you? What words could she have said that you would have deemed good enough for you? Not enough oversight of the moderation of a bulletin board is enough to disinvite someone from a convention? Really? Is that what it’s come to?
@Jim Minz
She could have taken down the offending pages and kicked the residents of them out of the Bar. That’s the minimum that should have been done. Instead, she refused, and killed the entire Bar. That’s a hissy fit at being asked to take care of a problem that she is ultimately responsible for.
As for Patreon – that’s on them. Pressure them, instead, instead of whatabouting us with it.
I have been hoping that Baen Books would announce that comments advocating political violence had been deleted, the users banned and steps taken to never allow them again on Baen’s Bar. An acknowledgement that Sanford’s concerns about these comments were valid also would’ve been nice to see.
You think the decision by DisCon was too quick, but the status quo of waiting for Baen to act doesn’t seem to have been tenable for the convention, which has a lot of congoers who have strong opinions on codes of conduct and event safety.
No, I think it’s the absolute lack of condemnation from her of what that supposed “lack of oversight” led to that got her the disinvitation.
If TW had initially responded to Sanford’s report that multiple users – and a Baen’s Bar moderator – were egging each other on in the creation of violent, detailed scenarios of mass murder and domestic terrorism in American cities with a condemnation of that behavior as unacceptable in the forums and a promise that it would be removed, she probably wouldn’t have been disinvited.
Instead she minimized Sanford’s reporting as an outside allegation, and said that no forum members had complained (Sanford subsequently showed a screenshot of a user complaining). She COULD have verified Sanford’s report of the behavior of the Baen-appointed moderator in minutes – Sanford gave the handle of the moderator, and screenshots of the posts. Instead she shut down the whole forum so that NOBODY among the public could check the extent of the issues at Baen’s Bar, said she’d look into it, and went silent. No condemnation at all. They gave her a day to come up with the words. She wouldn’t.
Why should people at DisCon who belong to the marginalized groups targeted by Baen’s Bar insurrection fantasists have to put up with those Bar patrons, who’d WANT to honor TW for her silent condonation of their violent fantasies?
@Jim Minz Tell you what, I’m delighted to say that no owner or director of Patreon should be a GoH at a Worldcon until they make an extensive good faith effort to deal with the abuses on their platform. With a song in my heart, even. You see any of those people offered a GoH gig, you tell me at once.
But I don’t think I’ve seen anybody calling for Baen authors to be penalized for the sins of the Bar. Feel free to point me at examples that I’ve missed, of course.
Like OGH, I have been a Worldcon (co-) chair. I shudder at the thought of having to make the decisions that DC3 had to make.
@Jim Minz
Actions that would have satisfied me..? Hm. Not simultaneously admitting to banning topics and making weaselly statements about not censoring lawful speech. Criticising the harassment of Sanford and making a statement requesting that people cease doing so. Not claiming that no users had complained when at least one did. Those would all have been a good start. Most especially: Condemning the calls for violence that happened on the platform she hosts.
But she didn’t.
And I don’t appreciate the insinuation that nothing would have been good enough when what she did was allow the speech in the first place, defend the speech, fail to properly lay out a plan for correcting the problem, allow conspiracy theories to spread, allow harassment of Sanford without criticism or rebuke, and allow Sanford to take the heat for the one action she did commit: taking the forum down.
What she’s done so far mostly sucked.
Pingback: Pixel Scroll 2/19/21 Why, I Sweep My Scroll With A Geiger Counter Every Day, And Nary A Pixel! | File 770
Hear, hear, Meredith!
All Toni had to say was, “Political Violence is something Baen Books does not endorse or support.” take down the comments and ban the posters. That’s it. It isn’t rocket science.
Baen Books is trying to stick with the Freedom of Speech, but the Freedom of Speech doesn’t mean much if you are protecting speech that is inherently harmful and potentially dangerous.
I can only hope that with this story gaining traction and a newly staffed government, that a few of the folks who posted that violent rhetoric get very uncomfortable visits from government agents with no chill. Why? Because they were joking about mass-murder and government agents with no chill keep a look out for that sort of thing.
@Jim Minz
What would have satisfied me is if Ms. Weisskopf had said something along the lines that Baen values free speech, but that calls for terrorism and mass murder are not acceptable and that steps would be taken that it would not happen again.
But while Ms. Weisskopf took down the forums, she did not condemn the calls for violence, terrorism and murder that had been posted on a forum under her control with a single word in her statement.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean free of consequences – it just means that in the US, government isn’t supposed to restrict general speech or promote government censorship. It doesn’t mean that people have to tolerate threats being made against them (or against government!), even in private locations.
Because, as we saw last month, it becomes a real problem when people act on that speech, and it isn’t restricted to government centers.
To all–an example of consequences of free speech:
About half a century ago, activist Abby Hoffman published a book with the title, “Steal This Book.” His free speech had a consequence he didn’t intend. He noticed sales were way below what he expected, although copies were flying off the shelves. Seems a lot of his readers were following the instructions on the cover and shoplifting the thing. Oops.
Free speech of any sort also doesn’t mean that Weisskopf (or anyone) (a) is owed a GoH-ship, or (b) is required to never have it retracted. Like that’s the end of the world, anyway. . . . Free speech is a smokescreen excuse that’s completely irrelevant to Baen’s Bar, Weisskopf, and Worldcon.
Being disinvited as GoH was easily avoidable, if she’d just removed the asteroid-sized chip on her shoulder and taken a smidge of responsibility for what she could do (and TBH something very minimal would’ve sufficed, methinks). Based on past stuff from her, I didn’t expect it, though.