aka Think Blue, Bark Two
Brad R. Torgersen, John C. Wright, T.C. McCarthy, Michael Senft, Henry Dampier, Lis Carey, Chris Gerrib, Alexandra Erin, Font Folly and Protest Manager are the featured participants in today’s roundup. (Title credit belongs to File 770 contributing editors of the day Morris Keesan and Craig R.)
Brad R. Torgersen
“Musings, not necessarily sorted” – May 13
Because ultimately this isn’t even about Sad Puppies, or what we said, or did not say, or what we did, or did not do.
This is about the Hugo award, and Worldcon, and decades of seeping stagnation, and the ossification of the mindset of the so-called “keepers” of the field’s self-proclaimed “most prestigious award.” An award that seems to too often deliberately avoid what’s actually happening in the marketplace, has become the personal toy of a self-selected crop of individuals who are happy to play at being large fish in small fishbowls, and does itself and its legacy a disservice by catering to taste-makers and taste-shapers. Both for reasons related to art, and for reasons related to politics. As I said above, the number of people in this group is finite. The actual fans (small f) are legion.
Sad Puppies 3 is an effort to bring fans (small f) to the table. No matter how much people have bashed it, lied about it, or tried to paint it as something it’s not, Sad Puppies 3 is “open source” and egalitarian. We asked for suggestions in the run-up to the formation of the slate, and we encouraged everyone to buy, read, and participate with an open mind. No expectations. No tests. No rules. We demanded nothing. We threatened nothing.
John C. Wright
“On the Unwritten Code” – May 13
A meme currently circulating among the Social Justice Warriors in their relentless attempts to made poor, poor big-eyed puppies sad with their heaping awards upon talent-free uberleftist message fiction is that Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen and Vox Day, merely by asking fans to read and nominate worthy works, have violated the strict and scrupulously observed unwritten code of gentlemen forbidding the crassness of asking for votes in public.
Asking for votes in private, or if you are a Politically Correct leftist in good standing, of course, provokes no furor, as it is evidently not a violation.
I call it a meme because it is a thoughtless and absurd white noise of words, a self replicating sentence phrase that means nothing and says nothing. It is an accusation leveled because the accusers have run out of other, more credible, accusations, and they are not well behaved enough to shut their mouths with dignity after their case has been argued and lost.
Without eventual, organized fan/consumer activism as seen in #gamergate, #sadpuppies will ultimately fail. More thoughts to come.
— T.C. McCarthy (@tcmccarthy_) May 13, 2015
Michael Senft on Relentless Reading (And Writing About It!)
“Marie Brennan and Mary Robinette Kowal talk fantastic women throughout history” – May 13
We also touched briefly on the Hugo controversy, with both authors weighing in, although Mary understandably was reticent to discuss Puppygate. Here are some excerpts from the interview.
Brennan: I sincerely hope that slates will not become the wave of the future, because I find them utterly antithetical to the entire spirit of the Hugos. It is one thing to say “here’s what I published last year” (I’m grateful for that one, honestly, because it reminds me of when things came out, and which categories they fit into, and oh hey I meant to read that story); that doesn’t bother me. Neither does people posting to say “here’s stuff I think is Hugo-worthy” — that’s just fannishness at work. But a named campaign, stretching across multiple years, whose public rhetoric focuses less on the awesomeness of the stories and more on the political message they will send to the “other side”? I’m not in favor. And that would be true even if the slate in question were filled with stories I had already enjoyed.
Kowal: I can’t actually comment on this much, because I decided to try to do something to bridge the gap between the multiple groups of fans and am crowdsourcing a set of supporting memberships for WorldCon. So I’m trying to stay neutral to avoid swaying votes. Which means that I’m declining any Hugo nominations next year (since a supporting membership this year means you can vote next year) and attempting to not express opinions about any of the nominees.
I will say that I’m seeing a lot of people, all around, who are feeling alienated. I think everyone needs to do a better job of listening.
(The principal text of the interview is online at azcentral.com.)
Font Folly
“The stories we have to tell” – May 13
“Moreover, men literally have no clue how much they talk. When Spencer asked students to evaluate their perception of who talked more in a given discussion, women were pretty accurate; but men perceived the discussion as being “equal” when women talked only 15% of the time, and the discussion as being dominated by women if they talked only 30% of the time.”
My conclusion: men think women talk too much because they think women should be silent.
This perception problem isn’t limited to gender issues. Any person in a position of power or privilege thinks that any time someone outside their group talks or is recognized more than a tiny fraction of the time that the others are dominating the situation…..
- And yes, it’s part of the reason that someone like Larry Correia and his cohorts—Brad Torgerson, Theodore Beale (aka Vox Day), and John C. Wright—can see more than one or two women or people of color nominated in a single category for the Hugo Awards and start screaming that science fiction is being taken away from people like them.
Henry Dampier
“About Progressive Situational Dominance” – May 13
The point of this is to argue that it’s a bad idea to challenge progressives in areas where they have institutional control. You could counter by using the recent example of right-wingers crashing the Hugo Awards, but ultimately, what that was good for was just demoralizing fringe progressives while heartening some right-wing genre fiction fans. The official science fiction author’s groups are, for the most part, still solidly progressive, and will continue to be so. Creating alternative institutions is more important and effective than trying to take over progressive institutions which are only nominally neutral.
The more profound impact on progressive institutions has come from the re-emergence of self publishing and small publishing enabled by Amazon and its eBook platform — a mostly neutral bookstore which has contributed much to the weakening of the progressive critical establishment, which they complain about endlessly. When the opposition complains about something, it’s wonderful, because they’re telling you where the pain is, and if they’re telling you where the pain is, then that’s where you should apply more pressure to cause more of it.
It’s also important to understand that, when making moral arguments in a progressive country, where most people believe in most of the tenets of progressivism, that you have the low ground when making such arguments. It’s futile to criticize progressives on moral grounds which they don’t accept, and which the majority of Westerners tend not to accept. You have to shore up the alternative moral institutions to provide those opposing sources of authority in order to create a self-sustaining resistance
Lis Carey on Lis Carey’s Library
“Championship B’Tok, by Edward M. Lerner” – May 13
Paragraph by paragraph, this story is decently written. Character development hovers in the vicinity of competent. The plot, unfortunately, wanders all over the place, and doesn’t go anywhere really interesting. It’s possible this is a piece of a larger whole, and I can easily conjecture a larger whole in which this piece would make more sense, and being doing some important work for the larger story. Sadly, that is in no way indicated, and it’s nominated as a novelette.
Chris Gerrib on Heroines of Fantasy
“Wednesday Review: A Sword Into Darkness” – May 13
There’s an ongoing debate in Science Fiction at the moment. One very loud faction says people are abandoning SF because all our stories are “social justice novels” and we’re handing out awards not for good work but to hit a racial / ethnic / gender checklist. Since I vote on one of the awards (the Hugos) I found that argument rather unconvincing. One of the gentlemen on the other side, I discovered, had penned an SF novel entitled A Sword Into Darkness [by Thomas A. Mays]. The ebook price was right, so I bought it and read it. Overall, it’s a pretty good book – I’d give it three stars.
Sad Puppies
“Celebrating What Is Best In Science Fiction: Foundation” – May 12
Over the past month we here in the Sad Puppies Revolutionary Vanguard Party Ministry of Truth have received a number of questions about which classic works of SF do and don’t exemplify the goals of the Party. While our cohort John Z. Upjohn has done a fantastic job identifying SJW-infused works, we do not wish to present ourselves as wholly negative, so today we’re going to talk about one of the all time great works of SF, a classic of yesteryear which could never win a Hugo today. Yes, Isaac Asimov’s Foundation.
Alexandra Erin on Blue Author Is About To Write
“Sad Puppies Review Books: IF YOU GIVE A MOUSE A COOKIE” – May 13
After a few hours of study, it seemed obvious to me that there must be an agenda at work, and as soon as I knew there was an agenda I could see it everywhere. It’s so easy to see agendas I’m surprised more people don’t do it.
The reason that SJWs have arranged for this hollow mockery of a book to be praised by all quarters is that it is basically a modest proposal for welfare benefits to immigrants. It starts by asking you the reader to imagine a mouse just shows up on your door unannounced and says he’s hungry, and then suggesting that you feed him. The words like “if” and “might” make this sound so polite, so reasonable. The rhythm of the book is I believe intended to lull the reader into a daze where you will nod along. “Makes sense,” you will say to yourself. “If a bunch of hungry vermin want to invade my home, why shouldn’t I give them the food off my table?”
https://twitter.com/ProtestManager/status/598362225460391936
And I don’t know whether I’m emotionally ready for this, but it is rather stfnal….
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
I second The March North, and will note that (I understand) Graydon will soon be publishing a second book set in the Commonweal, which stands to civil engineering as military fantasy does to soldiering.
Rev. Bob,
If you have great books that you think should be an eBook, I recommend you take a look at Reanimus Publishing and drop them a line suggesting a book. They were pretty good to take my suggestion and run with it.
MickyFinn,
The suggestion I made to Reanimus was none other than Wyrm by Fabi. They’re talking to him now, trying to work out a deal. 🙂
I might have to check out John G Hemry’s JAG in Space series. I met John at last year’s Balticon, and I have a soft spot for the JAG after they got me out of some trouble. 😉
Rev. Bob again,
It is my favorite Stephen King horror, Needful Things my favorite Stephen King thriller, and Eyes of the Dragon my favorite Stephen King fantasy.
And I love The Callahan’s stuff because one good pun deserves another.
I am now recalling a children’s picture book in which the main character was a turtle, and the drama of the story centered on the turtle’s fear and loneliness as his mother went to the hospital to have a baby. The whole McGuffin of the plot disturbed me, because after all, in real life, turtles lay eggs, they don’t deliver live young in hospitals. Then I reminded myself that in real life, turtles don’t talk, either.
“Laertes on May 14, 2015 at 3:05 pm said:
Wasn’t Armor great? Rocked my world. Loved Vampire$ too. I wonder why we only got two novels out of him.”
I agree Laertes, he was one of those authors whose works should have made him more popular/prolific.
::Plaintively cries::Y’all might as well ask about my favourite child
Cryptonomicon, Stephenson (Snowcrash got me in, but Crypto is his best work by far)
Bridge of Birds, Hughart (there was an article on io9 asking for the most “beautiful” work you had ever read. When I heard the question, this immediately popped into mind)
The Wheel of Time, Jordan/ Sanderson (Shockingly uneven, yes, but it will always have a place for introducing me to fandom (rasfwrj represent!))
Small Gods, Pratchett (because it showed that you can write about faith without being preachy, or an arsehole towards thinly-veiled Real World Religions)
Look to Windward, Banks (just so amazingly written. And the ending reduced me to tears the first time around)
Long Price Quartet, Abrahams (because it was incredibly original and well written. The whole thing was an elegant and devastating “fuck you” to the grimdark-for-grimdark genre. And the epilogue remains one of the most touching paragraphs that I’ve ever read)
Dreamblood Duology, Jemisin (Hundred Thousand Kingdoms gets all the praise, but to me this is NK’s best)
Shards of Honour, Bujold (Cordelia. Just Cordelia.)
For my last two, I want to go back to the classics. Keep your Heinleins, Bradburys and Clarkes. They’re good. But Asimov and Zelazny? They’re *great*.
Foundation, Asimov (I wonder just how many economists got their interest through this. Can’t just be me and Krugman)
A Night in the Lonesome October, Zelazny ( Short, simple and sweet. Amber of course was fantastinc, but this is my favourite)
So yeah, that’s a woefully incomplete list of my favourite, and I’m already noticing the gaps (where’s Dune? Everything by Brust? Codex Alera? JS&Mr N? LotR?)
Dammit, I wanna go *re-read* this list now
@alexvdl:
You may also want to check out Hemry’s “Lost Fleet” books, written as Jack Campbell. In one of the later books, he even named a few ships in honor of Weber’s works.
I should’ve listed Harry Harrison’s early “Stainless Steel Rat” books, too. I liked ’em all, but that paperback omnibus of the first three holds a special place in my memory. Of course, if I go down that road, I’ll have another nine listed in no time. 🙂
“Andrew — are you aware that “Flowers for Algernon” did become a film?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062794/”
Yes, its pretty good too. I was thinking of a more modern update. Give Charlie a pair of glasses with a camera, or a wearable camera that would show his interactions pre and post surgery. Could be a good movie if it doesn’t stray from the script by much.
@Rev. Bob: “Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon,” another favorite I haven’t returned to in too long.
@Aaron: Asimov’s “Pebble in the Sky” was the first hard SF I can recall reading. It has a special place in my heart, but after reading some of his other work I’ve been hesitant to go back and read it, afraid that the magic won’t hold up.
I can still recall, even at a terribly tender age, the sudden understanding and shuddering at the terrible, matter-of-fact phrase “Schwartz was sixty-two. Sixty-two …”
>> There is no drumbeat of “Surrender”.>>
You keep telling people not to do as they see fit, but to do as you see fit — complete with instructions on judging the material _and_ on what not to say publicly about one’s votes — or awful things will happen next year.
This is what I would call a drumbeat of surrender. You might not, but you don’t choose my words for me any more than you choose my votes, or what I say about them.
>> It surprises me that people who want to allegedly protect their Hugo can’t figure out how to defuse the situation.>>
There is no way to “defuse” the situation, not this year. Your suggestions is to surrender, as you keep proposing. That Hugo voters do what the Puppies want. That wouldn’t work, because if they’re successful, they’ll only increase their efforts.
If they’re not successful, they’ll also increase their efforts, at least until the effort isn’t worth the continual losing. But those who would prefer to oppose the situation aren’t any more interested in defusing it that the Puppies are, and have no interest in surrendering to their demands.
You keep counseling just handing over the Sudetenland, and it’ll satisfy them. It won’t.
So thanks for he advice, but it shouldn’t surprise you that people disagree with you on the value of appeasement in the face of threats.
@Seth Gordon: Some reptiles are ovoviviparous (eggs develop and hatch inside the mother). I don’t think any turtles are, but there you go.
Oops, looks like my initial post fell into moderation, let me try a cleaned up version (sorry Mike, please amend/ bowdlerize as appropriate if this also doesn’t make it through)
::Plaintively cries::Y’all might as well ask about my favourite child
Cryptonomicon, Stephenson (Snowcrash got me in, but Crypto is his best work by far)
Bridge of Birds, Hughart (there was an article on io9 asking for the most “beautiful” work you had ever read. When I heard the question, this immediately popped into mind)
The Wheel of Time, Jordan/ Sanderson (Shockingly uneven, yes, but it will always have a place for introducing me to fandom (rasfwrj represent!))
Small Gods, Pratchett (because it showed that you can write about faith without being preachy, or a jerk towards thinly-veiled Real World Religions)
Look to Windward, Banks (just so amazingly written. And the ending reduced me to tears the first time around)
Long Price Quartet, Abrahams (because it was incredibly original and well written. The whole thing was an elegant and devastating “screw you” to the grimdark-for-grimdark genre. And the epilogue remains one of the most touching paragraphs that I’ve ever read)
Dreamblood Duology, Jemisin (Hundred Thousand Kingdoms gets all the praise, but to me this is NK’s best)
Shards of Honour, Bujold (Cordelia. Just Cordelia.)
For my last two, I want to go back to the classics. Keep your Heinleins, Bradburys and Clarkes. They’re good. But Asimov and Zelazny? They’re *great*.
Foundation, Asimov (I wonder just how many economists got their interest through this. Can’t just be me and Krugman)
A Night in the Lonesome October, Zelazny ( Short, simple and sweet. Amber of course was fantastinc, but this is my favourite)
So yeah, that’s a woefully incomplete list of my favourite, and I’m already noticing the gaps (where’s Dune? Everything by Brust? Codex Alera? JS&Mr N? LotR?)
Dammit, I wanna go *re-read* this list now
@ Mickeyfinn – Graydon’s actually a friend, and he describes his writing as “burlap lingerie” — well-made, but a really small niche, and people who are into it are really into it, but it’s not a commercially viable percentage.
A bit like Stephen Grundy, back in the day–two books, which I would never re-read unless I was feeling ridiculously optimistic about the universe, but absolutely could not put down while I was reading them.
Kurt Busiek @ 8:25 pm- You have a strange world view if counseling civility is the equivalent of handing over Sudetenland.
Am I the only person who knows what a blockquote command is for showing quoted text?
Steve Moss on May 14, 2015 at 2:08 pm said:
Not exactly. The way it works is that we count all the first place votes. If a candidate has a majority, it wins. If not, we take the candidate that finished in last place, eliminate it, and redistribute its votes based on the next-highest preference. (So if you marked A 1 and B 2, and A was eliminated after the first round, your vote transfers to B, but if A was not eliminated, your vote for A is still active.)
After redistributing ballots, we count again. If a candidate has a majority, it wins; otherwise, we eliminate the last-place work and redistribute votes again. We repeat this process until a candidate gets a majority.
What this means is that as long as your highest preference hasn’t been eliminated by finishing last, your vote doesn’t move. It only moves when your favorite candidate is eliminated.
This process is why we recommend that you vote like this: Put a 1 by the candidate you want to win. Now pretend your first choice isn’t on the ballot: put a 2 by the candidate you’d want to win. Repeat this process until finished or until you don’t care anymore. No Award is a candidate.
The voting method is called Instant Runoff Voting, and it simulates the process of running multiple run-off elections with the last-place candidate dropping out after each round until someone gets a majority. It’s discussed in more detail in The Voting System at The Hugo Awards web site.
Other people have already explained some of the special rules regarding No Award. While No Award is a candidate, it also gets one extra chance to win in a head-to-head showdown with the preliminary winner at the end. Note, however, in the entire history of the award, No Award has never won in the showdown; the five times it won in the past were before the “showdown” rules were adopted, and were what you might call a “natural” victory.
kevin: I’m simply never sure which sites allow the use of which html tags in their comments, and tend to avoid using them altogether.
@Kevin Standlee:
I know you’re not the only one I’ve seen using it besides myself, but people have a strange mix of preferences to cite quoted text. I don’t know if they’ll change just because it’s shown.
Nevertheless, HOWTO blockquote:
<blockquote>blockquoted text here</blockquote>
results in:
@MickeyFinn: Note that at the bottom it says “Proudly powered by WordPress”. WordPress has a standard set of HTML tags that it accepts, and blockquote is among them.
Hm, although I just remembered that some WordPress sites are configured such that the blockquote tag is accepted, but text inside them is not displayed any differently than non-blockquoted text, so there’s that. Oh, well. You can try experimenting with non-critical text, to see if it works.
>> You have a strange world view if counseling civility is the equivalent of handing over Sudetenland. >>
I don’t think you’re counseling civility. I think you’re counseling letting them get away with seizing the nominations, and treating it as just and fair, in the hopes they’ll stop there.
I think you’re counseling appeasement. And not daring to say things that might make the big scary war machine angry.
I for one would appreciate a “Preview” function.
Kurt Busiek at 9:12 pm:
It’s also too much like “ignore the bullies & they’ll go away”
Which, as you know Bob, is a tactic guaranteed to work. (And yes, I am being sarcastic here)
@Soon Lee:
You rang? 😉
Bob, are you my Uncle?
>> It’s also too much like “ignore the bullies & they’ll go away” >>
Yeah. And in this case, the “bullies” have to pay $40 a head for their shot at “making SJWs miserable.” If the SJWs don’t get miserable, they just squelch the bullies, that $40 isn’t going to seem like the best investment.
But Steve just wants to let them have some success with it. Because as we’ve learned in labs, if a monkey can press a button and get food, they’ll do it when they’re hungry, but if a money presses a button and gets success some of the time but not all the time, they’ll sit there and press the button over and over again all day, rather than quit and go away.
So unless Puppies and monkeys are wildly different creatures, I think Steve’s strategy is not the best one to follow.
To be fair, I think we hold out hope that at least some of them can be taught not to crap in their hand and fling it at people.
Kurt Busiek @ 9:52 pm- Big scary war machine? No. I’m counseling don’t anger human beings who aren’t yet angry.
Voting against their author? No problem.
Voting No Award? Not a problem.
Voting No Award and then doing a victory dance? Problem.
Larry Corriea did SP1. There was no slate. He doesn’t get a nomination but he gets a handful of people nominated but they lose. Regardless, he was vilified.
Larry Corriea did SP2. There was no slate (as the term is now used by some). He gets a nomination and he gets even more people on the ballot. They don’t win, but regardless he was vilified. Here’s a sampling from one of the supposed current SF/F masters:
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/08/17/get-out-your-bingo-card/
Brad Torgersen does SP3 with a slate. SP3 gets a LOT of works on the ballot. Apparently not noticing a pattern, many in fandom continue to vilify him and pledge No Award across the board confident in their righteousness.
Meanwhile, record numbers of supporting memberships are being bought. Who knows how the percentages break-down. Whether its fandom coming to the “rescue” of the Hugo, Butcher and Anderson fans, GG, or more SP/RP, we won’t now until August. I think it’s all of the above, but what that means we’ll have to wait and see.
But consider- Larry Corriea did not magically create SP voters between SP1 and SP2, and then again between SP2 and SP3. Fandom’s antics, or the antics of those perceived to represent fandom, are increasing the SP voters from year to year. Fandom has been engaged in a lot of antics since the nominees were revealed.
What to stem the tide? Try good manners.
@ULTRAGOTHA –
O. M. G. I *really* want to see that. (art showing Victorian-era realizations of to-them historic costumes)
Think of how that would work for a costume ball that would be put on in the context of steampunk. Not a costume ball *of* steampunk, but a costume ball *within* steampunk. Both historically accurate and very, very, meta.
@Steve Moss _
I’m confused here. Do you mean “SF Western” as in “Cowboys and Aliens” and “Outland” (::ugh::), or SF/Horror tales set in the Old West, or retreads of Western sensibilities into the future (as in “FireFly”) or something like what Cherie Priest did with “Boneshaker” and “Dreadnought?” Or maybe Steven King’s “Gunslinger?”
Or do you mean “western” as in Zane Grey?
If the latter, and you do game it onto the ballot, there are going to be a lot of people who will be upset for the reasons they are ticked at the Puppies right now — you will be subverting the Hugos for a blatantly undeniably political stunt, and you will be preventing other, potentially great works to never see the light of the nomination slate. If anything, you would have the dubious achievement of having people loath you at least as much as they do VD.
@David W –
I think the sticking point was when Mr Layton said he had to “GOOGLE GamerGate.”
That would strike a lot of people the same way that I view Clarence Thomas saying that, prior to nomination for the SCOTUS, he had *never* thought about Roe v Wade in a Constitutional context.
No, Steve. The SP3 guys did not create the big mess this year – the RP did. The SP3s were just used – even if they still had not realized it. Or at least are not ready to admit it yet.
Steve Moss: “What to stem the tide? Try good manners.”
So you’ve evolved to the tone argument now? That if we’re polite and nice and happy and smile, this will all get sorted out?
Larry & Brad keep making unfounded accusations without any evidence or proof, and whenever people call him on it, keeps doubling down. Like you, they seems to be shocked that people don’t take well to being baselessly accused of vote-rigging or shenanigans.
You wan’t people to be polite and civil? Try not accussing them of various crap that you’re not bothered to prove first.
Craig R:
From Gaiman’s Shoggoths Old Peculiar
@Tuomas Vainio : Regardless of the method of achieving artificial gravity, it remains artificial and a secondary interest in regards of breathable air.
Once again, Tuomas, it has been pointed out to you that these fictional space ships accelerate at great rates. Keeping the effects of that acceleration down to a steady nominal 1g are not “a secondary interest”; they are the difference between a ship full of people and a ship full of red paste.
@Alexandra Erin https://file770.com/?p=22515&cpage=8#comment-261920
In that case you can actually have both public and private accounts. You do not have to place your entire online presence in one egg basket. In fact far often that not, people actually have multiple accounts on the same services, even if it is not technically allowed. For example you could have one Facebook account to be silly with your friends, and another more serious one for your work and/or family relationships.
So if one must stand in the public eye, then they should create an account specifically for that purpose. If flak flies in your direction, you do not engage because the steam will eventually run out.
As for that claim that the nature of anonymity makes people strike at those sticking out of the crowd… A correction: it is just the human nature at its worst. The same type of behaviour can be found in real life. Just look at the cases of school and workplace bullying. And in one particulary toxic gaming community, there was an attempt to reduce the level toxicity by removing anonymity. It didn’t work, it remained as toxic as ever. (http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20100707 and it is not the only online jab at the attempt, only the one I remembered from the top of my hat.)
@alexvdl https://file770.com/?p=22515&cpage=8#comment-261921
But do consider the premise of possessing fine china to suit ones position. A bit of a social pecking competition. Now how can we be certain that whatever officer’s fine china is not made out of a material that can have a hazardous effect? After all it is a symbol of status, and a chance to show off with something rare and unique.
So let me present another question. Do you know why the military provides underwear to the members of the military? Simply because like all other modern military equipment worn by the members of the military, clothes have been processed with materials that make them slightly more fire or even chemical resistant. (In a way.) After all, a soldier who has to put out a burning sleeve, cannot momentarily act as an active combatant.
Thus the fine china could be made out of materials that pose a safety risk. Materials that were not considered when the systems were originally designed. Hence my earlier mention of a chemical or mechanical reaction. Not to mention how a set of fine china could always be a potential Trojan horse.
And yes, liquids do pose an issue too. But when it comes fine china, I expect it to be in the very least military issued and manufactured according to the military’s specifications. If only to ensure that the fine china does not clog up air filtering.
@Laertes https://file770.com/?p=22515&cpage=8#comment-261930
And another I suppose.
@Darrell https://file770.com/?p=22515&cpage=8#comment-261931
Top ten list of SFF? In what format?
@snowcrash https://file770.com/?p=22515&cpage=8#comment-261952
You could scroll back on the discussion. Then head over to the earlier blog comment threads. So I would argue that your bull is in fact a pig.
But anyhow, not everyone considers alternative history as science fiction, at least if it is not caused by at least time travel or possess a multitude of wondrous technological marvels otherwise currently impossible. And anyhow, it wasn’t really a task I took up with any joy or enthusiams. It kind of shows as the ‘format’ just deteriorates, and ends with an ugh.
As for your request. Well, just pick the Hugo Winners for the best novel from the past twenty years. You have your list, give or take few entries from the runner up nominations.
>> What to stem the tide? Try good manners.>>
You keep repeating yourself. I keep disagreeing with your premises.
You do try to refocus here and there — now you’re trying to posit that opposing slate voting by voting No Award before any slate nominee is “doing a victory dance.” Last time around it was merely insulting the author by standing for a principle. You figure people who feel they must stand on principle at the very least should do it in secret, so as not to offend.
You think being polite and accommodating to people who don’t know what manners are or what being accommodating is will work. I think you’re badly mistaken, and I think it’s telling that you’re only suggesting that one side be polite, because the other side will be vengeful and destructive.
You don’t seem to have any problem with the Puppies being impolite, or vilifying people for being part of a totally imaginary cabal of lying weasels who don’t care about quality. You just want the people they’ve been vilifying to take it and smile.
Accordingly, I do not find your advice to appease them out of fear to be good advice.
As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve already read SKIN GAME, just as I have all the other Dresden books. I read it the week it came out. I won’t be voting it above No Award, because, as I’ve also mentioned before, I think it’s solid, entertaining genre writing, but I don’t think “solid” and “entertaining” make something Hugo-worthy. There’s nothing whatsoever impolite about saying that, despite your insistence otherwise.
So once again, I’ve said aloud what you think I should keep secret, out of fear of enraging people who will get all stroppy about it. Maybe you should caution them to be polite, rather than get offended at someone thinking an author they like wrote a good but but just not one of the best of the year.
If they can’t stand hearing that, and will be roused to vengeance, then they have a problem with comprehension, no sense of proportion, and poor manners.
You may think it’s a scary scary thing to imagine Jim Butcher fans roused to vengeance. But as one of them, I just don’t think it’s as scary as you do.
Craig R @ 9:44 pm- Zane Grey.
And I agree, Which you might accept as explaining the loathing some feel towards the Dinosaur narrative poem.
Palmer wrote more than one book, but few people seem to have liked his second, THRESHOLD (I haven’t read it).
I kinda liked Threshold – it probably reads as really sexist now, but the main character reminded me of nothing so much as a relentless power gamer up against a biased DM, and hell bent on ensuring that he got to use each and every power the game system gave him to its maximum effect.
Peace Is My Middle Name on May 14, 2015 at 5:31 pm said:
junego on May 14, 2015 at 5:24 pm said.
“I am these days generally reading a half dozen books at a time, novels and nonfiction alike. It slows my average book finishing time down, but something about having all those different thought-spaces to work in helps me play with ideas.”
That number feels very familiar. These days, at least, I can hide the mess on my tablet. :->
But I still often just sink into a book and race through it almost compulsively. TGE was like that on the second try.
Laertes: Long-term, the best the pups can hope for is a repeat of 2014. If you want a picture of the future, imagine Ted Beale, finishing behind No Award, forever.</i.
But if that happens, he'll claim he was winning. Because of Aristotle.
Steve Moss:
“Voting No Award and then doing a victory dance? Problem.”
Well, there is a problem with the puppies winning to. To quote Hoyt:
“I suggest we kick them while they’re down and make them fight for the awards and prestige they crave. Also, that we point at them and make duck noises.”
http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/01/29/dilettantes/
Rev. Bob:
Was thinking of Harrison myself, Stainless Steelrat is just great. But my real favourites there, propably partly because of my scandinavian background, are The Technicolor Time Machine and The Hammer and The Cross. Loved those.
>> Which you might accept as explaining the loathing some feel towards the Dinosaur narrative poem.>>
Nobody has a hard time understanding that some people didn’t like that story.
It’s your buddies that don’t seem to be able to comprehend that some people did.
We get that you don’t like it and that you don’t think it’s SFF. In your quest for understanding and politeness, perhaps it would behoove you to try to comprehend that there are people who don’t agree with you. Instead of suggesting that one group of people gets to act out in rage because people disagree with them and the people that disagree should be polite and accept it in the hopes that they won’t break all the furniture, perhaps you should be counseling anger management and manners to the people who want to break the furniture because enough people disagreed with them about a story that it was nominated for and lost a Hugo.
Kurt Busiek @ 10:03 pm- There you go again, talking in terms of fear.
I thought we agreed this was not the end of the world? Or even a significant issue in the grand scheme of things?
There is nothing to fear. Whether the Puppies when everything or lose everything is not the issue. The issue is the relationship between fans and fandom, and the credibility of the Hugo. Your idea that to avoid “appeasement” means that one must be offensive is not well-thought out.
But carry on. Don’t let me get in the way of your march toward victory.
>> There you go again, talking in terms of fear.>>
This is because fear is what you’re trying to sell.
>> There is nothing to fear.>>
I agree. You don’t — you keep trying to scare people with the “consequences” of not doing things your way. But we don’t have to fear any of the stuff you keep prophesying, which is why you’re getting no traction with this stuff.
>> Your idea that to avoid “appeasement” means that one must be offensive is not well-thought out.>>
Since I don’t think voting as one sees fit is offensive, you’re having comprehension problems again.
[Actually, since you’re perfectly aware that I don’t see it as offensive, you’re having honesty problems again.]
>> But carry on. Don’t let me get in the way of your march toward victory.>>
Okay. Maybe you’ll stop advising us not to carry on, out of fear of strengthening our enemies by not letting them have what they want and not keeping our choices secret to avoid enraging them.
I mean, I doubt you’ll stop, because you really, really, really don’t want people to carry on. But hey, I live in hope.
Soon Lee on May 14, 2015 at 9:13 pm said:
“I for one would appreciate a “Preview” function.”
I’m a real newbie, but I second this request, if Mike is amenable. Also maybe a link to what tags work or don’t work here.
Appeasement? Oh, reminds me of this old favourite!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbvMdHoOrQQ
Anyhow, I think Steve Moss is dead wrong. This is not a question of fans vs. fandom. Most Butcher fans will never hear of this or be interested in it. It is nothing to factor into any voting.
@Soon Lee:
Not unless my mother’s keeping a REALLY big secret…
@Hampus:
Speaking of hammers and crosses, have you read Fred Saberhagen’s The Dracula Tape? The sequels are of decidedly mixed quality, but the two Holmes books are notable. Along more humorous lines, I’m surprised nobody’s brought Robert Asprin’s Myth books up yet.
Hmm. Maybe he was Soon Lee’s uncle… 🙂
Oh, missed that one. Will buy.
Oh, the irony. You know, perhaps fandom shouldn’t have accused me of gaming the awards last year when I did absolutely nothing of the sort. After all, if you’re already getting blamed for something, you may as well go ahead and have the fun of doing it.
Be truthful, or someone just might ram your lies right down your lying throat.
With regard to John Layton’s claims earlier in this thread: “I was civil, polite, and did not attack anyone”
Yeah, nah, I went and looked at the thread in question, and here’s what I found:
“Here, before the nominees have even been officially released, to begin scheming ways to circumvent the participation of a group of fans you don’t like is, well, Orwellian at best.” (he’s accusing non-Puppies of “trying to circumvent the participation of a group of fans you don’t like”, when in fact they are trying to figure out a way to neutralize slates of any kind)
“The primary difference I see so far is SP says “Come on folks, lets all participate and vote on what we like” (in other words, he’s claiming that non-Puppies are not doing this, and that Puppies are doing nothing more than this — both of which are untrue)
“collusion to negate the effect of those people” (in reference to methods intended to prevent the slate from negating the choices of non-Puppies, not to negate the choice of the slate)
Clearly, Mr. Layton’s definition of “I was civil, polite, and did not attack anyone” differs massively from mine — and I am Shocked, I tell you, SHOCKED! that it seems to differ from the definition of those at Making Light as well.
And can I just add, that until I saw the fansqueeing here on File770, I had no idea who Kurt Busiek is, since I don’t read comic books — but that based on his remarks here, I am much inclined to go search out his works?
(See, Puppies, this is how it works. You behave rationally and ethically online, and people want to seek out your works. You behave like a d|ck, as the Puppies have been doing? Not so much. Not at all.)
“Be truthful, or someone just might ram your lies right down your lying throat.”
Which reminds me: have you retracted your numerous statements that I called for either false reviews of your books or death threats? Or are you continuing to bear false witness?