ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, May 02, 2014

An unconvincing president

Steven Gould's inept and dishonest efforts to mitigate the continuing damage to SFWA taking place on his watch is really rather entertaining. And while I will leave the discussion of whether SFWA's philosophy is hellish or not to the more theologically inclined, there are few things more Orwellian than Mr. Gould's historical revisionism.
Recently a member of SFWA resigned and gave as their reasons that they were being slandered and libeled by leaders and members of SFWA who were also engaged in an “organized attempts to harass my readers and hurt my sales figures.” He subsequently posted this letter on his website.

The writer in question is a successful author of over a dozen SF & Fantasy novels and has previously been nominated for the Nebula Award. The fact that I’d never heard of them before receiving their resignation email says far more about me and the scope of my reading in the field than it does about them. There are 1800 members of the organization after all, but I would like to point out that this also means that neither I nor any other officer or director of this organization has been slandering, libeling, or organizing against that person–I would certainly have heard about it. When asked for specifics, the author replied that it would be unprofessional to name those who had.
Notice the first thing the SFWA president attempts to do is diminish John C. Wright's standing in the field. Perhaps it is true that he'd never heard of any of Mr. Wright's brilliant novels, from the magnificant The Golden Age to the Nebula-nominated Orphans of Chaos and the amazing Night Land novella, "Awake in the Night" that was literally named The Year's Best Science Fiction. The fact that the SFWA president openly admits he has never heard of the man who Publisher's Weekly described as potentially bing "this fledgling century's most important new SF talent" tends to underline what I, and others, have pointed out concerning SFWA's irrelevance to the genre.

But whether his claim is true or not, what is the point of telling everyone that? To underline his ignorance? No, what he is trying to do is send a signal to the lesser talents of SFWA that it doesn't matter that one of the best and most important writers in the genre is spurning them.

He's also implicitly attempting to attack John C. Wright's integrity. To show that Gould is being disingenuous here, the SFWA Report that was used to justify Gould's purging of me included 20 statements from individuals purported to be either members, prospective members, and in one case, "an outgoing board member". Not a single one was named.
In researching this I have seen some critical historical posts by both members and non-members responding to statements made by the author. Without passing judgment on the nature of the author’s posts I would like to make the following points:

1. The only place where the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America makes an effort to monitor and control what members and non-members say or write is within the official publications and venues of the organization itself and then only to the extent that the language does or does not support the goals and purposes of the organization. These venues include, among others, The SFWA Bulletin, the SFWA website, our meetings, official communications to the membership, and our online member discussion boards. They certainly do not include members’ own websites, their fiction, their conversations, pieces published in non-sfwa publications, and any other private and public space.*
This is an absolute lie by Gould. In the SFWA Report, Section B. Continuing pattern of actions prejudicial to SFWA, Board Member Matthew Johnson writes:

1. Attacks on members
Attacks on members which occurred through SFWA channels or in SFWA-controlled spaces are addressed in part A. The following looks at attacks and threats which were made in his blog and other public space.
 

Personal attacks
Beale has made numerous attacks on fellow SFWA members which may be seen as going outside the bounds of professional conduct. The best-known and most consistent is likely his use of derogatory nicknames, such as “McRapey” for John Scalzi and “McRacist” for N.K. Jemisin (see Fig B.1). He has also compared Amal el-Mohtar to an Egyptian cleric who has, according to Beale, called for the ethnic cleansing of Egypt (Fig B.2); accused James Enge of “despicable behavior” (see Fig B.3); accused Ms. Jemisin of plagiarism (see Fig B.4); and has published a blog comment claiming that Teresa Nielsen Hayden has herpes. (See Appendix I for the question of whether and why to consider blog comments.  In this case, though, Beale actually reprinted the comment in one of his own blog posts, making him more clearly the publisher of the comment: see Fig B.5)


This proves Stephen Gould to be a blatant liar. The SFWA clearly monitors and controls what both members and non-members say on their personal blogs and other public spaces. Of course, the SFWA has tried to bury this report, so perhaps Mr. Gould thought that he could get away with telling outright lies.
2. It is the position of SFWA that language within our official channels and publications which marginalizes and/or alienates any portion of our membership  does not support the goals and purposes of the organization.
This is fascinating, considering that in my response to the SFWA Report, I chronicled no less than 71 attacks on other members in the SFWA Forum itself by the following SFWA members, most of which were NOT directed at me.

Athena Andreadis, Liz Argall, William Barton, Andrew Burt, Steve Carper, Gregory Norman Bossert, Carrie Cuin, Amal El-Mohtar, Jim Fiscus, Diana Pharoah Francis, Steven Gould, Sarah Grey, Jim Hines, Keffy Kehrli, Kate Kligman, Lee Martindale, David Moles, T.L. Morganfield, Jason Sanford, Steven Saus, Catherine Shaffer, Cory Skerry, Charles Stross, Rachel Swirsky, Elise Tobler, Wendy Wagner, Sean Wallace, Damien Walter, Bud Webster, Django Wexler

For example: Board Member Jim Fiscus. Posted 15 May, 2013 - 10:23 PM "We have a reckless jerk who wants to harm people -- not just harm SFWA or sff.net -- they want to harm individual human beings.  And they do not give a damn what harm they do to people. The thing is that this thinking has much wider implications.  It is no different from the ideological purity demanded by the Tea Party or the Taliban, and it's only a small step from the tactics used by the Taliban and the Westboro Baptist Church." Note that this attack, by an SFWA Board Member in the SFWA Forum, took place before I'd violated any SFWA policies myself. So, again, we see that Gould is lying.
3. I don’t see this as a particularly onerous or oppressive policy as this simply boils down to treating all our members with respect in our official channels of communication. While it is my belief that the vast majority of our members would not intentionally disparage their fellows based on irrelevant factors like gender identity, ethnicity, religion, age, sexual preference, or ableness, they certainly are not constrained from doing so in a host of non-SFWA venues.
And for the third time, it is easy to prove that Gould is lying. Not only are members constrained from disparaging their fellows in a host of non-SFWA venues, they are expected to constrain their own commenters as well and will be held responsible for ALL of their commenters comments, even if they utilize an open and unmoderated comment system. From the SFWA Report Appendix I. Inclusion of blog comments:

This Appendix examines the question of whether to give weight to comments made on Beale’s blog by people other than himself. A key question is whether or not Beale actively manages the content of the comment threads on his blog by removing comments: if he does so, it follows that he has permitted all
other comments to remain.


In considering the question, it’s worth looking at the precise meaning of the term “moderate” in the context of Blogger, the blogging platform used by Beale. As this article by Blogger explains, turning on Comment Moderation in that platform means that all comments have to be actively approved by the operator of the blog before they are published. Beale’s blog is not moderated in this sense, possibly because the large volume of comments on his posts would make it impractical.

However, there is evidence to suggest that Beale actively manages the comments on his blog.
... Therefore it would seem that Beale actively manages the content in the comment threads on his blogs, meaning that while he may not necessarily agree with the content of those comments that are not deleted, he does consider them to be appropriate for publication.
4. Just as SFWA doesn’t control what members and non-members say in non-SFWA spaces, it also doesn’t control what members and non-members say in response to members’ public comments, statements, essays, and blog posts. When persons say things in public that others find objectionable, it is likely they will receive criticism and objections. There is an odd misconception among some that Freedom of Speech includes freedom from the consequences of one’s speech and freedom from commentary on what one has said.
A fourth and particularly egregious lie. Gould knows that the very blog post he used as an excuse to purge me was a RESPONSE to NK Jemisin's attack on me, an attack to which he himself linked in the SFWA Forum. Once more, the evidence is in the SFWA Report.

The incident which prompted this investigation was Mr. Beale’s use of the SFWAAuthors Twitter account to distribute his blog of June 13, 2013 “A black female fantasist calls for Reconciliation.” 
5. There also seems to be an oddly misplaced tendency to look at SFWA’s recent efforts to moderate language in its own channels as somehow being responsible for public criticism of various individual’s public statements and positions. I submit, though, that if one is somehow threatened by the organization’s requirements that we treat fellow members with respect within our official channels, then the problem is someplace other than with SFWA.
For the first time, Gould doesn't directly lie, he merely attempts to deceive with misdirection and then launches another passive-aggressive attack on Mr. Wright. In his attempt to minimize the impact of Mr. Wright's renunciation of SFWA, he has done nothing more than to show himself to be a shameless liar, and in doing so, helped support Mr. Wright's case for leaving the organization.
*Board investigation of harassment complaints may take public statements into consideration, but this is extremely rare.
Translation: Never mind what I said above, we'll actually do whatever we want, whenever we want. But don't worry, as long as you stick sufficiently close to the currently approved opinions with which we will provide you, you shouldn't have a problem. As long as you don't run for office against me, of course.

Labels:

123 Comments:

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 9:24 AM  

Don Delillo once said something about wishing that the novel really was dead, so that he could be the "ghoul of literature."

I don't think this is what he had in mind.

Gould needs to figure out how to shut up, for the sake of his organization. Everyone knows that the SFWA hasn't been operating in good faith for a long time. There's no good strategy in proving it once again. His resurrection of the Problem with Purging is just further turning the bowl of liquid talent into a colander.

Blogger Torial May 02, 2014 9:27 AM  

I wonder if Gould's comment "When asked for specifics, the author replied that it would be unprofessional to name those who had." is referring to a commenter named Zachriel, who asked in the blog comments on Wright's blog, what the names of the individuals involved were. Wright said in the comments it would be unprofessional to name them. If so, Gould is portraying Wright's unwillingness to respond publicly on his blog to a weird individual (who used royal "we" a lot) as though Wright was being unresponsive to the SFWA's inquiries.

Anonymous Zippy May 02, 2014 9:29 AM  

Did you notice the asterisk? Or was that added later?

He says they do take public statements into account in harassment investigations. But that's rare. In other words, they don't take public statements into account -- except when they do.

Anonymous JRL May 02, 2014 9:32 AM  

You said the lady had herpes? Daaaanng.

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 9:35 AM  

You said the lady had herpes? Daaaanng.

I didn't say anything about her to that effect. A commenter did.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 9:36 AM  

Wait a sec.

"Racist" is now a derogatory term? Boy, have the left got some explaining to do...

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 9:38 AM  

On a pure mercenary level, I can accept making it up as you go along, as long as the suckers keep buying. Gould's comments are closed. Not even the suckers are buying. Maybe they can just change the meaning of A in SFWA to Antarctica. Maybe they haven't heard of them down there yet.

Anonymous JRL May 02, 2014 9:39 AM  

Thought that smelled fishy. Been reading the blog for years, that didn't sound like you.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 9:39 AM  

If you leave our organization, we'll try to publically belittle you. Also, you should stay in our organization because it's not our fault that all the members of our organization attack you, cuz we won't let them do it *on this particular piece of turf* (except when we will...)

Honestly... let's say you join a company, and anytime you see your boss or colleagues off the worksite, they come up to you and punch you in the face. One might find it a bit much to swallow when HR responds to your resignation letter with BUT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN *HERE!!!*

Anonymous MrGreenMan May 02, 2014 9:41 AM  

@Toriel

You are spot on - he's citing the weird little demon commenter who wanted us to believe that "they" had no interest in it, had just woken up, was interested in having all of this explained to "them", and was just the most disinterested and impartial party imaginable...and then refused to answer any questions but kept on the Alinskyite tactic until Wright justifiably told him to go take a walk.

Blogger James Dixon May 02, 2014 9:41 AM  

"Comments are closed."

That tells you all you need to know about his statement.

Anonymous Josh May 02, 2014 9:43 AM  

I think that your open mindedness in letting non humans like desert toads comment on your blog is something that should be applauded. The rest of SFF is clearly speciest.

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 9:43 AM  

So...is Gould intentionally or unintentionally suggesting that the weird commenter at Wright's letter was him representing the SFWA in official capacity?

Anonymous Feh May 02, 2014 9:44 AM  

Athena Andreadis, Liz Argall, William Barton, Andrew Burt, Steve Carper, Gregory Norman Bossert, Carrie Cuin, Amal El-Mohtar, Jim Fiscus, Diana Pharoah Francis, Steven Gould, Sarah Grey, Jim Hines, Keffy Kehrli, Kate Kligman, Lee Martindale, David Moles, T.L. Morganfield, Jason Sanford, Steven Saus, Catherine Shaffer, Cory Skerry, Charles Stross, Rachel Swirsky, Elise Tobler, Wendy Wagner, Sean Wallace, Damien Walter, Bud Webster, Django Wexler

Except for Stross, what a bunch of total nonentities.

Anonymous Hound's Tooth Check May 02, 2014 9:45 AM  

They've turned on Hines.

http://legionseagle.dreamwidth.org/263137.html

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 9:45 AM  

The actual comment was from a Sonoran desert toad:

“I would point out that licking *me* brings on a state of euphoria and a series of pleasant hallucinations, while licking Ms. Nielson would cause spastic uncontrolled vomiting and give you herpes.”

Anonymous MrGreenMan May 02, 2014 9:45 AM  

It's a good thing we're reminded - you specifically chose Hunt's comments all those years.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 9:48 AM  

A reasonable question to the SFWA:

Do you censor all toads, or just toad of color?

OpenID adfaciem May 02, 2014 9:49 AM  

(Formerly Myrddin)
So...is Gould intentionally or unintentionally suggesting that the weird commenter at Wright's letter was him representing the SFWA in official capacity?

I was under the impression we were talking with Legion.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 9:51 AM  

Man, it would be a shame if with the mainstreaming of the Science Fiction Hugo Hilarity, Jim Fiscus found his quote comparing the Tea Party to the Taliban coming out in the press. That would really suck for him and the SFWA by extension.

Blogger jacopo.saracini May 02, 2014 9:51 AM  

Is Gould's consistent use of plural pronouns for a single male an accident or an intential avoidance of gendered pronouns that a normal person would use in written English?

Anonymous MrGreenMan May 02, 2014 9:58 AM  

@jacopo.saracini

It's intentional - male bad, female/trans-/queer/androgynous good. Note he has no problem describing Vox as male, but, when he'd have to say that Mr. Wright had the slightest bit of actual literary merit, he has to switch to "them".

It's like how there are no men anymore except in prison - there are four "employees" stuck in the coal mine; there were six "service members" killed in the accidental drone strike on our boys, etc.

Anonymous Harsh May 02, 2014 10:00 AM  

So basically the SFWA is shaping up to have all the charm of Stalin's Russia with its doublespeak and creepy insistence on not naming the accused. Unfortunately Gould doesn't realize he's Trotsky, not Uncle Joe. Let the purges begin.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 10:08 AM  

That seems unfair to the Russians. Those guys know how to crack heads. The SFWA has only succeed in making Vox a larger threat to them than ever before, and pretending not to know who a Nebula award nominee is.

Purges there will be, but it's akin to watching a cripplefight.

Blogger Joshua Dyal May 02, 2014 10:11 AM  

Funny how the SFWA became the public laughing stock that it has almost immediately after Gould took over. How did Scalzi manage to dodge this bullet? Is he just lucky?

Blogger John Wright May 02, 2014 10:14 AM  

Toriel, sorry for the misunderstanding, but Mr Gould if referring to a private letter to me. He is not getting his information from the troll on my blog, who (as far as I know) is not associated with SFWA, or the human race, in any way.

In a private letter I told Mr. Gould that it would be unprofessional of me to gossip about people I was calling gossipers, since my reason for leaving was my disgust with gossip. That is what he refers to.

Anonymous SFWA May 02, 2014 10:14 AM  

YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO GO AWAY!
ALL OF YOU WERE JUST SUPPOSED TO GO AWAY!
WHY COULDN'T YOU GO AWAY?

OpenID cailcorishev May 02, 2014 10:17 AM  

I had to read his second paragraph a couple of times to understand it, because he starts out talking about "the writer in question" (singular) and then shifts to "their resignation email" (plural), so I was trying to figure out whom else he had added to the list since the beginning of the sentence, or whether it was the novels that were resigning rather than the writer.

I realize pretty much everyone has caved in to the feminists on using plural pronouns and possessives for the singular when the gender is unknown; but when we're talking about a male individual, can't we use "his" without fear that some screaming harpy will come at us with a castrating knife? Can't people who get paid to use words get this stuff right, at least?

Blogger John Wright May 02, 2014 10:17 AM  

A comment left on my blog, too good not to share:

Mr. Gould: Recently a member of SFWA resigned and gave as their reasons that they were being slandered and libeled by leaders and members of SFWA who were also engaged in an “organized attempts to harass my readers and hurt my sales figures.”

Mr. Wright: Too many members and leaders in SWFA are not willing to reciprocate. They are not even willing, out of common courtesy or common decency, to withhold their pens from libel and their tongues from slander.

Mr. Gould’s reading comprehension seems a bit slack. Mr. Wright did not claim that he was being libeled or slandered.
*****
My comment: His writing skill are also lax “a member” is singular ergo the pronouns in the sentence should be singular: “gave as his reasons that he was being slandered…” etc.

One person, male or female, is a ‘he’ and not a ‘they’. No one not a Leftist disputes the authority of Strunk and White. http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk3.html

Anonymous Foolish Pride May 02, 2014 10:19 AM  

They will resemble Mongoloid, I mean Downs Syndrome, Fights indeed.

Anonymous Rabbit Haiku May 02, 2014 10:22 AM  

Ess Eff Dub'you Aye
big effort to purge the right
instead lost Wright - oops!

Blogger tz May 02, 2014 10:30 AM  

One person, male or female, is a ‘he’ and not a ‘they’.

That was before the modern lgbt stuff. Charlotte's web vs the world wide one. Humpty Dumpty's semantic shell game.

Blogger tz May 02, 2014 10:33 AM  

Silence is golden.
Some tongues are silver.
And there's the PyWriter's ship of fools.

Blogger Sheep May 02, 2014 10:50 AM  

Never read anything by Gould. Looking at his works on his Wiki page I don't think I want to. It all looks like Eco-terrorist propaganda.

Anonymous Bozu May 02, 2014 10:58 AM  

Good move by Gould. Get into an argument with a lawyer about what the lawyer said. Yeah, that should go well.

Blogger FALPhil May 02, 2014 11:02 AM  

Clearly, Gould is a prevaricator of doubtful paternity.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 11:11 AM  

Athena Andreadis, Liz Argall, William Barton, Andrew Burt, Steve Carper, Gregory Norman Bossert, Carrie Cuin, Amal El-Mohtar, Jim Fiscus, Diana Pharoah Francis, Steven Gould, Sarah Grey, Jim Hines, Keffy Kehrli, Kate Kligman, Lee Martindale, David Moles, T.L. Morganfield, Jason Sanford, Steven Saus, Catherine Shaffer, Cory Skerry, Charles Stross, Rachel Swirsky, Elise Tobler, Wendy Wagner, Sean Wallace, Damien Walter, Bud Webster, Django Wexler

Good lord, what a parade of nonentities.

When I first began reading SF, back in the '60s, you couldn't swing a paperback anthology without hitting an Anderson... Asimov... Ballard... Bester... Bradbury... Dick... Lafferty... LeGuin... Leiber... Moorcock...Niven... Pohl... Silverberg... Simak...Sturgeon... Van Vogt... Wyndham. (All working contemporaneously, mind!)

How the field has shrunken and shriveled!

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 11:31 AM  

On Hines getting ripped for not hating Baen: the comments include this gem -

Anne - "That plus Scalzi's recent fail have made me lose my faith in mankind (though, to be fair, not humanity)."

The damsels are distressed. McCreepy/McRapey just haven't got the hero thing quite nailed down...

Anonymous aviendha May 02, 2014 11:32 AM  

If you have to list the authors first name in the hopes of recognition it increases the probability that I've never heard of them... yup never heard of a single person.

Speaker-To-SFWA: I've read everyone in your second list except moorcock. Now I gotta look him up to see if its worth a search in the used book store. Or is that piracy? :)

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 11:38 AM  

That's an insult to Ecoterrorists, Sheep.

And propaganda.

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 11:45 AM  

Funny how the SFWA became the public laughing stock that it has almost immediately after Gould took over. How did Scalzi manage to dodge this bullet? Is he just lucky?

He quit just in time. Most of this is fallout from his three-year regime. And Gould is too inept to have any idea how to go about dealing with the fallout. And even though my situation was wholly his responsibility, Scalzi backed him into a corner by threatening to quit if he didn't do what Scalzi wanted.

Anonymous JoeyWheels May 02, 2014 11:48 AM  

After skimming through the comments at legionseagle it is painfully obvious that the dominant setting for the SFWA is "Wanna-be". The majority of these cackling hens have managed to (apparently) acquire their membership(s) by meeting the minimum requirements and then doing nothing else of merit.

They are wanna-bees pretending to be writers; clucking amongst themselves that they are officially recognized professional writers and as such, the only arbiters of what constitutes 'good' writing and to whom the label of 'good writer' is attributable to.

Anonymous Scintan May 02, 2014 11:48 AM  

Never read anything by Gould. Looking at his works on his Wiki page I don't think I want to. It all looks like Eco-terrorist propaganda.

Gould seems to be a complete asshat, but he's got some talent. Jumper was a good read, and it could have been the key to some real money and fame for Gould, but the movie version tanked domestically. Signing Hayden Christiansen as the lead can do that to a movie.

Blogger ScuzzaMan May 02, 2014 11:49 AM  

You know how you enter into online discussions for the benefit of third parties - lurkers, usually - and not in order to persuade your opponent?

Same thing happening here.

Gould is preaching to his choir. He knows they're never going to read your rebuttal, so he can blow any flavour of smoke in their eyes and he's mostly going to get away with it.

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 11:52 AM  

Gould is preaching to his choir. He knows they're never going to read your rebuttal, so he can blow any flavour of smoke in their eyes and he's mostly going to get away with it.

Which is fine. The thing is, a lot more people are going to read it here and other places and become aware that SFWA is a PC organization being run by a shameless liar. Even I thought Gould was better than this, but apparently I was mistaken.

Anonymous jack May 02, 2014 11:53 AM  

I have found John C. Wright to be a fine Christian, seems to be a loving father and husband, and, obviously, a Gentleman and scholar. And, he writes better than anyone I know of at SFWA.
Any attack on him is an attack on me. I am beginning to feel the need to contact my second [if anyone is crazy enough to take on the responsibility, that is]

Anonymous Scintan May 02, 2014 11:55 AM  

Which is fine. The thing is, a lot more people are going to read it here and other places and become aware that SFWA is a PC organization being run by a shameless liar. Even I thought Gould was better than this, but apparently I was mistaken.

Is there some binding legal restraint keeping you from publishing the entirety of that SFWA report? I would think a good fisking of the entire thing would go a long way towards sowing the sort of chaos and discord that I, personally, would enjoy reading.

Anonymous pseudotsuga May 02, 2014 11:57 AM  

The practicing editor in me cringes at Hines' prose. For example:
"Recently a member of SFWA resigned and gave as their reasons that they..."
The plural "they" can't be used to refer to the singular "a member." It's basic grammar.
This hurts Hines' credibility for me--if he can't care enough to get that right, what else is he ignoring in his rush to judgment? The SFWA ship has struck the iceberg, has sprung a leak, yet the band on this ship refuses to see the water rising up to the decks as they play popular tunes for each other.

Blogger James Dixon May 02, 2014 12:01 PM  

> I've read everyone in your second list except moorcock. Now I gotta look him up to see if its worth a search in the used book store.

The Elric series is worth reading. Some of the other Eternal Champion series are OK. Not much else that I'd recommend.

Blogger The Aardvark May 02, 2014 12:02 PM  

Apparently gender trumps number.

Anonymous joe doakes May 02, 2014 12:03 PM  

None of that matters because their intentions were pure. Your heresy was so grievous that you had to be purged, to protect the purity of the remainder. When dealing with a devil, the ends justify the means. And it was all so long ago, what does it matter now?

Anonymous dh May 02, 2014 12:05 PM  

The damsels are distressed. McCreepy/McRapey just haven't got the hero thing quite nailed down...

This is Scalzi's pattern:

1. Speak candidly, because he has to (in this case, saying that Day/Correia slate was an acceptable method of getting a nomination [because he had to admit he did the same thing])

2. Step on Feminist SJW toes in doing so

3. Immediately post a mea culpa, but lock down comments so he doesn't get too badly bruised.

4. Then "make up for it" by posting something banal and mindless that Feminist SJW will lap up. In this case, it was a general paean for men to be nice to women, which he then sent around to all sort of people with popular tumblrs, and so got it posted all over tumblr.

5. Spend the next 5-10 days posting things about how much he loves cheese or how much he loves and adores his wife, that type of thing, and let stuff fade.

You do have to give it to him, he is shameless and spineless and sleazy all at the same time. If he wasn't such a beta-manboob I could actually imagine him being a really insidious dark triad, doing all this out of some sort of devilish manipulation.

Blogger Brad Andrews May 02, 2014 12:06 PM  

I love the TLDR version at the end VD.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 12:07 PM  

And it was all so long ago, what does it matter now?

"Dude, this was, like, two YEARS ago!"

Anonymous pseudotsuga May 02, 2014 12:10 PM  

Oops...flog me with a pen-wiper....I meant GOULD, not Hines.

Blogger JCclimber May 02, 2014 12:12 PM  

Have they had a recent rash of resigning members of both genders?
Because from what I've read on this blog, it seems to be male. Thereby making the whole gender neutral pronoun thing extremely passive-aggressive.

Big surprise, that gamma rabbits engage in passive-aggressive attacks....

Blogger tz May 02, 2014 12:20 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 12:21 PM  

Vox, have you given any thought to responding -- whenever some Jemisin-esque or Scalzi-ish sort evinces the vapors over something you've said or written, more than three or four months earlier -- with: "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

I mean... it (evidently) works in the case of actual, agonizingly bloody and violent deaths, after all. Mere badthink ought to be the equivalent of an overdue library book or jaywalking, in comparison.

Blogger tz May 02, 2014 12:27 PM  

This is the need to feel morality superior. They have to spout some nonsense about why the goalposts are in the parking lot after they've been nuked. Alas, psychobabylon. (Interestingly, on my kindle, the suggested spelling correction for PB was "laughingstock" The kindle is artificial but shows more intelligence)

Blogger Feather Blade May 02, 2014 12:29 PM  

They've turned on Hines.

http://legionseagle.dreamwidth.org/263137.html

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy


Reading that thread should be enough to convince one that leftists of any stripe have no sense of humor.

It is amusing to see them parroting the dudebro's justification for tasteless jokes though "Lighten up, dude, it was just a joke. And this is totally a private conversation."

And the complaints about "allied men" acting as tone police? That's comedy right there.

Anonymous Joshua May 02, 2014 12:31 PM  

Nice summary dh (at May 02, 2014 12:05 PM).

IN a similar vein, any takers on a bet that all his Big Idea slots for May are female authors? Otherwise, I'm wondering what post that post about how all the slots are filled for May (I mean, does anyone looking for a publicity slot on Whatever really care whether it's this week or five weeks from now?) is serving.

Anonymous Molon Rouge May 02, 2014 12:32 PM  

This appears to sound more and more like playground dust-ups. I rather doubt their childish lefty rants and make them better novelists. Stephen Gould and NK Jemima
only hurt themselves with their attacks. Sure, their own "safe" buddies will buy their writings but who else? Perhaps they better think about their publishing futures in the strange new world of publishing. I personally have never heard of Mr. Gould until this blog. He may want to thank Mr. Day for the exposure, be it good or horrible!

Anonymous Giraffe May 02, 2014 12:41 PM  

Translation: Never mind what I said above, we'll actually do whatever we want, whenever we want. But don't worry, as long as you stick sufficiently close to the currently approved opinions with which we will provide you, you shouldn't have a problem. As long as you don't run for office against me, of course.

That applies almost universally to leftists in any office.

Anonymous Salt May 02, 2014 12:41 PM  

The pink Hashtag Wars continue unabated. Lovely.

Anonymous Molon Rouge May 02, 2014 12:50 PM  

Oh, and further more. It is time to for all Wright-minded individuals to initiate a new fantasy and science fiction writers organization as SFWA appears to be in decline. It is dying not unlike liberal-rag newspapers.

Blogger Joshua Dyal May 02, 2014 12:54 PM  

To be fair, he could be also obliquely referring to his wife's similar open letter.

Blogger Joshua Dyal May 02, 2014 12:55 PM  

Oh, and further more. It is time to for all Wright-minded individuals to initiate a new fantasy and science fiction writers organization as SFWA appears to be in decline. It is dying not unlike liberal-rag newspapers.

Why is there always a call to start a new SFWA without all the baggage of the old? If it's been years since they accomplished anything worthwhile, and the landscape is such that independent writers can flourish perfectly well, why not stay independent? Whatever happened to the notion of the rugged individualist? Why such an automatic tendency to form a herd?

Anonymous Amok Time May 02, 2014 12:57 PM  

" How did Scalzi manage to dodge this bullet? Is he just lucky?"

Yes!! He has the largest lawn in all of Ohio or someplace. Whereever the heck he resides with his above average home, wifey and kids. I bet his dog is named Asimov.

Anonymous Huckleberry - est. 1977 May 02, 2014 12:59 PM  

Why is there always a call to start a new SFWA without all the baggage of the old? ... Whatever happened to the notion of the rugged individualist? Why such an automatic tendency to form a herd?

Everyone knows that the Legion of Doom must be met with the Justice League, not just Superman.
Even though it was pretty much just Superman who defeated them.

Anonymous GX May 02, 2014 1:00 PM  

It's a tremendous business plan:

When you lose a customer, shit in public on the former customer.

That will win 'em back.

These SF writers earn every penny of their $64,000 a year incomes. Business geniuses, I tell ya.

Blogger Doorstop May 02, 2014 1:08 PM  

Still cracks me up every time I see Hines's name get mentioned as some sort of heavyweight. I remember him telling me he was an author back when he did not have any published sci-fi/fantasy books yet, just articles in a few periodicals. I almost went to his book signing for Goblin Quest, solely because I knew him and liked the idea of supporting a local author. Haven't read enough of his writing to comment on it, but I guess he's enough of a "heavyweight" now to be an SWFA enforcer and be on Vox's radar. Not that either of those distinctions are likely to last, especially if he got them mostly by dressing in drag and being Scalzi's sidekick, so it's probably a good thing he hasn't quit his day job yet.

Blogger GK Chesterton May 02, 2014 1:17 PM  

@ Torial,

Yep I thought the same thing when I read this but you and others beat me to it. I have to wonder if this wasn't _just_ Gould then since he did insist on using "we" and dodged questions about it.

@Wright,

And no I don't buy that it wasn't Gould or someone SFWA related or that didn't personally know him because of the choice of words in both messages. Does he have a wife? I could see a wife "sticking by her man" in such a way (and using we). But if it wasn't him it was someone close to him who knew about the letter.

Anonymous Harold Carper May 02, 2014 1:21 PM  

They've turned on Hines.

The wheedling, understated way he's defending Baen, he must have submitted something to them, or he's about to.

Anonymous homosuperiour May 02, 2014 1:21 PM  

Christians are new Queers:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/saletan/2014/05/02/religion_and_gay_marriage_are_conservative_christians_the_new_queers.html

Payback time....

Anonymous Jeanne May 02, 2014 1:25 PM  

So is the evidence thus far suggesting that Scalzi was a better president than Gould is proving to be?

Anonymous Jeanne May 02, 2014 1:28 PM  

Never mind. Apparently not is the answer.

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 1:32 PM  

So is the evidence thus far suggesting that Scalzi was a better president than Gould is proving to be?

Too soon to tell. I think Scalzi was destructive, Gould is merely inept. Both are dishonest, obviously.

Anonymous WaterBoy May 02, 2014 1:42 PM  

From the article:

"*Board investigation of harassment complaints may take public statements into consideration, but this is extremely rare."

Yes. So rare, in fact, that it has only ever been done once in which somebody was expelled.

What a coincidence.

Perhaps Wright should have filed a harrassment complaint with the SFWA board. Too late now, though...and most probably not even in his nature to do so.

Anonymous Hound's Tooth Check May 02, 2014 1:56 PM  

"...he must have submitted something to [Baen], or he's about to."

Either that or he's realized he's not going to be invited to any of the good parties at Worldcon (the leftist parties are about as much fun as a Marxist "self-criticism" session).

Anonymous WaterBoy May 02, 2014 1:56 PM  

RE: Plural pronouns in place of singular gendered pronouns

Even amongst the PC, it is generally OK to use singular gendered pronouns, when applicable. I can see four contexts in which one might use a plural pronoun for a singular third person:
1. Gender is not known
2. Gender is known but not wished to be disclosed
3. Usage rules are not known
4. Usage is a positional good

Since neither (1) nor (2) are applicable in this case (as demonstrated in the opening paragraph), the only options left are (3) Gould is inept; and (4) Gould is posing.

Given that Gould is a successful writer, I tend to think (3) is less likely the case, and must conclude he is merely posing.

Not that this particular element is more important than the egregious lies which Vox already identified, because it isn't. But it does go a ways toward clarifying Gould's character, for those tempted to vote for him next time.

Anonymous Obvious May 02, 2014 1:58 PM  

These posts are my favorite. I can't wait to get all the juicy details on the blog owner's lawsuit against those evil rabbits.

Anonymous WaterBoy May 02, 2014 1:59 PM  

Is that juice for basting those tasty ankles? 'Cause you might find that a decent beef broth works better.

Anonymous Obvious Troll May 02, 2014 2:00 PM  

(fart fart fart. Pull my finger for more)

Anonymous Androsynth May 02, 2014 2:08 PM  

Board Member Jim Fiscus: "It is no different from the ideological purity demanded by the Tea Party or the Taliban..."

Hm, yes, certainly the left has never enforced any kind of ideological purity.

Anonymous GX May 02, 2014 2:17 PM  

Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter 6h
In short, Larry Correia has fatally damaged his reputation as a writer by linking it to white supremacist Vox Day http://www.huffingtonpost.com/foz-meadows/politics-belong-in-scienc_b_5246418.html

Anonymous A. Nonymous May 02, 2014 2:27 PM  

It is no different from the ideological purity demanded by the Tea Party or the Taliban, and it's only a small step from the tactics used by the Taliban and the Westboro Baptist Church

In the Leftist mind, there's apparently no practical distinction between a confused group of would-be conservatives without much of a coherent platform and a Mohammedan army, between waving obnoxious signs at a soldier's funeral and gunning down schoolgirls.

Good to know.

Anonymous wEz May 02, 2014 2:33 PM  

White Supremacist Vox Day, lol. This stuff is rich, you cant write this sh*t!
He's not a pure blood though...this angers me.

Anonymous Scintan May 02, 2014 2:34 PM  

Damien Walter ‏@damiengwalter 6h
In short, Larry Correia has fatally damaged his reputation as a writer by linking it to white supremacist Vox Day http://www.huffingtonpost.com/foz-meadows/politics-belong-in-scienc_b_5246418.html


Sadly, for some people, all the scrubbing in the world won't be enough to wash off the stupid.

OpenID thetroll May 02, 2014 2:50 PM  

> he is shameless and spineless and sleazy all at the same time... a really insidious dark triad, doing all this out of some sort of devilish manipulation.

You guys really overthink him. He's simply the kind of buttock-smooching weasel that infests lower-middle management in large corporations. Those types are pretty easy to manipulate once you realize that you can with near 100% certainty count on them doing whatever they perceive as leading to a short-term political advantage, and therefore arranging said perceptions to suit you.

Anonymous Daniel May 02, 2014 2:51 PM  

Uh-huh. And Scalzi didn't fatally damage his reputation as a writer by posting an altered cover of his own book with him
copulating with his cat in space on it.

The irony of ironies is that Scalzi uses this post to lay down his somewhat narrow understanding of international libel risks, a risk he would later take with abandon.

Anonymous GK May 02, 2014 2:58 PM  

Andrea Harris ‏@SpinsterAndCat 1h
To be fair, though, the headline is a tad misleading: @instapundit seems more concerned with "punishing" writers for their politics.


Instapundit.com ‏@instapundit 1h
@SpinsterAndCat I didn't write the hed, which isn't really what the piece says. But against narrowmindedness.


Andrea Harris ‏@SpinsterAndCat 9m
@instapundit but re "narrowmindedness" - I'm not sure dumping racists like Vox Day from your org before he pulls any more shit qualifies

OpenID cailcorishev May 02, 2014 3:02 PM  

(4) Gould is posing.

Gotta be. Everyone throws in a "them" or "their" in the singular once in a while, since it's so common now; I catch myself doing it in conversation, though I try not to. But it makes that sentence especially tortured, and he could have reworded it to remove the possessives altogether and make the sentence easier to understand. Posing.

Anonymous kh123 May 02, 2014 3:12 PM  

"The actual comment was from a Sonoran desert toad:"

So they can't even differentiate between the blog owner and the commentators. Or satire for that matter.

Either lazy or scared sh*tless, or maybe a bit of both. This coupled with the Tea Party-as-Taliban comment: Despite the increased attempts at marginalization, the pinks apparently see everyone on the other side of the fence as a unified legion of demons.

OpenID cailcorishev May 02, 2014 3:25 PM  

It is no different from the ideological purity demanded by the Tea Party or the Taliban...

And my schlong is no different from the Washington Monument, since they both point up at the sky (sometimes).

Hey, this leftism stuff is pretty cool!

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 3:27 PM  

I rather enjoy how "half-savage" isn't bad enough for some of them, so they have to modify the "quote".

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 3:54 PM  

The textbook definition of "Pavlovian Response."

Blogger tz May 02, 2014 4:19 PM  

That inspires a subtitle: my better half savage.
Remembering The Last Witchking

Anonymous Pope Cleophus I May 02, 2014 4:39 PM  

@SFWA

YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO SHUT UP!
WHY WON'T YOU JUST SHUT UP!

And while you're at my pet toad needs to be liked.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 4:49 PM  

From the lionseagle warren:

Larry Correia is an unmitigated asshole. I have blocked him on every social network. [...] One of my friends likes his monster hunter books. I've never read them, because LC is an unmitigated asshole.

"I hate because I hate because I hate."

Anonymous Harsh May 02, 2014 5:25 PM  

In short, Larry Correia has fatally damaged his reputation as a writer by linking it to white supremacist Vox Day

Aw man, we're white supremacists now? Does that mean I have to shave my head and get some tattoos?

Blogger The Aardvark May 02, 2014 5:26 PM  

"Christians are new Queers"

Been waiting for Haldeman to be right.

Anonymous Alexander May 02, 2014 5:30 PM  

I understand the confusion: this all is coming out from the Hugos, and as Mr. Gould, there president has shown, a firm grasp of the English language is not something these people are overly blessed with.

Given my reading over the past few weeks, I am a Wright supremacist. That's NOT a typo, rabbit friends.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 5:32 PM  

Does that mean I have to shave my head and get some tattoos?

Being Hispanic, Vox (as well as Larry Correia and Sarah Hoyt) gets to go with the waycool "teardrop tattoo" option. Lucky stiff.

Anonymous Edward Norton May 02, 2014 5:32 PM  

I thought I'd take a break from my newest film - whatever that is - and chime in on the subject.

Anonymous Harsh May 02, 2014 5:43 PM  

I thought I'd take a break from my newest film - whatever that is

Death to Smoochy 2?

Anonymous WaterBoy May 02, 2014 5:56 PM  

Harsh: "Aw man, we're white supremacists now?" Some here are, yes, but others are not. Truly, we are a diverse group.

Blogger Pinakeli May 02, 2014 6:07 PM  

Scintan May 02, 2014 11:48 AM

Never read anything by Gould. Looking at his works on his Wiki page I don't think I want to. It all looks like Eco-terrorist propaganda.

Gould seems to be a complete asshat, but he's got some talent. Jumper was a good read, and it could have been the key to some real money and fame for Gould, but the movie version tanked domestically. Signing Hayden Christiansen as the lead can do that to a movie.


That's because the movie version was a steaming pile of suck!

The original book was pretty good. Even the sequel was not bad. The adaptation of the movie took it off my list forever.

Blogger IM2L844 May 02, 2014 6:14 PM  

Everyone throws in a "them" or "their" in the singular once in a while, since it's so common now; I catch myself doing it in conversation, though I try not to.

Wow. I've never given this a second thought. I probably do it all the time without realizing it. Damnit, now I'm gonna be all self conscious about it for a whi...Okay, we're over it.

Blogger Desiderius May 02, 2014 6:14 PM  

"And my schlong is no different from the Washington Monument, since they both point up at the sky (sometimes)."

Well, your schlong maybe. For some of us, the similarities are more striking.

Blogger Desiderius May 02, 2014 6:31 PM  

"I rather enjoy how 'half-savage' isn't bad enough for some of them, so they have to modify the 'quote'."

It's the educated but ignorant part that's driving the whole thing.

You don't get a leadership (corporate, government, media, education) class this lightweight/mendacious/midwitted without a lot of better men (and some women) being passed up/outright sabotaged along the way.

The better women experience it was a "War on Women," the better black men as straight up racism, and everyone else as some amorphous mix of misandry/leftism/PC.

What we in fact have is a war on excellence/merit being fought by a privileged few (yes, they're mostly "white") on behalf of their legacy offspring in cahoots with a mediocre many anxious to avoid any competition/challenge to their incompetence.

So far, they've successfully divided and conquered. They do this by creating boogeymen (as we've seen, out of whole cloth as necessary) to keep the better women blaming sexism, the better blacks blaming racism, and the rest blaming the Left/PC - while making sure that all the boogeymen are taken from the outcaste class itself.

Anonymous bob k. mando May 02, 2014 6:38 PM  

Harsh May 02, 2014 5:25 PM
white supremacist Vox Day



but ... but ...
Vox is part Japanese and Mexican?

how do you know he's not a Hispanic or Japanese Supremacist?

Anonymous WaterBoy May 02, 2014 6:57 PM  

For shame, bob...didn't you know that PoC can be white supremacists, too

(Link probably NSFW)

Anonymous Rico May 02, 2014 7:15 PM  

For the record, Damien Walters immediately closed the comments on his personal site after I kindly pointed out to him that both Mr. Correia and Vox were PoC

Anonymous VD May 02, 2014 7:22 PM  

For the record, Damien Walters immediately closed the comments on his personal site after I kindly pointed out to him that both Mr. Correia and Vox were PoC

Being English, he should have already known the wogs begin at Calais....

Anonymous bob k. mando May 02, 2014 7:32 PM  

WaterBoy May 02, 2014 6:57 PM
For shame, bob...didn't you know that PoC can be white supremacists, too




boy, Uncle Ruckus be kicking your coon ass.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrYRtCui5EE

Anonymous Scintan May 02, 2014 8:52 PM  

"But SF’s award season has brought a saddening kickback from some SWM authors. In the Hugo awards a clique of writers including Larry Correia, Theodore Beale and Brad Torgerson block voted themselves on to the award shortlists. They’ve pretty much destroyed any credibility they had in the process, but it’s still an annoyance. SF novelist John C Wright has flounced out of the Science Fiction Writers of America in an open letter that claimed the organisation no longer represented his “interests”. Wright, Beale and Correia weave a lot of cant around their agenda. But the truth is, they’re lashing out out against an SF community that is becoming much more diverse, and which they feel deeply threatened by."

Damien Walter writes comedy?

Blogger jacopo.saracini May 02, 2014 10:13 PM  

By their blog post on Mr. Wright, they has declared war on the English language? I hope I got that right.

Anonymous kh123 May 02, 2014 11:28 PM  

"They’ve pretty much destroyed any credibility they had in the process,"

But the process itself is completely legitimate regardless, amirite.

"But the truth is, they’re lashing out out against an SF community that is becoming much more diverse,"

Not everyone can handle both country and western. Informati... Diversity overload.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 11:45 PM  

This [all-male awards shortlist] is often defended by the argument that the Gemmell’s are a popular award voted by 70,000 fans. But that’s not a justification for a total lack of diversity,

"The preferences of the readers be damned and double-damned! Ovaries and melanin are what excellence in fiction are really, TRULY all about!"

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 02, 2014 11:58 PM  

Damien Walter writes comedy?

Proudly declares himself a "Clarion graduate" and "teacher of writing"... yet Amazon doesn't show any writing credits for him. (There's a Damien Walters, mind; but their Amazon site photo would seem to indicate this is another individual, altogether.)

Anonymous pseudotsuga May 03, 2014 12:09 AM  

The annoying thing about Walters post is that it will be taken as accurate by many who will never sully their snowflake eyes to actually READ Correia or Day to find out if they actually feel threatened. Walters is clearly projecting his own insecurities as he pretends that DIVERSITY is more important than anything else, such as stories that people like to read.
Correia doesn't feel threatened--we can hear the laughter from Yard Moose Mountain as he keeps making book sales. Day doesn't feel threatened--I see a lot of amusement and I-told-you-so, but no fear.

Anonymous Speaker-To-SFWAs May 03, 2014 12:16 AM  

as he pretends that DIVERSITY is more important than anything else

Is this the first time the Hugo ballot has ever boasted of TWO Hispanic nominees for major awards? You'd think the dour diversity duennas would be genuinely pleased by that, if so.

Anonymous Daniel May 03, 2014 1:43 AM  

Perhaps Scalzi and Hines are black lesbian rape victims who just happen to play them on the lowest difficulty settings.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts