ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, December 27, 2014

The Internet is forever

First, let me say that I absolutely welcome any judgment between John Scalzi and me concerning who is more reliably truthful, in a court of law or anywhere else. I believe it will be considerably easier for me to prove I am not a "racist, sexist, homophobic dipshit", or a "troll", than it will be for John Scalzi to prove he is not a rapist or a liar, especially in light of his known associations with the likes of Ed Kramer, Samuel Delaney, Jim Hines, and Jian Gomeshi in addition to his known propensity to make false and self-serving claims.
Got a concerned email this morning from someone who saw online an assertion that I was a “self-confessed rapist.”...

I don’t intend to do anything about Beale continuing to assert I have confessed to being a rapist. I could bring a libel suit against him, on the idea that accusing me of confessing to rape is defamation, it’s an untrue assertion, and Beale knows it’s untrue and continues to assert it anyway, for malicious purposes (the latter being important as I am likely to be considered a public individual at this point). However, I would also need to show that Beale’s actions have caused me harm, economically and/or emotionally. Aside from annoyance, which does not rise to actionable levels, I’m not seeing the harm to me personally. Essentially, Beale escapes punishment here because he’s failed to be important enough to be harmful.

I assume that for the foreseeable future, Beale will continue to lie about me confessing to be a rapist, for his own purposes. Again, annoying. On the other hand, useful. If Beale is perfectly happy to lie so baldly and obviously about this particular thing, perhaps that should be considered the baseline for the truth value of any other assertion that he might choose to make, particularly about people. Likewise, consider what sort of person you’d have to be to intentionally lie about someone confessing to rape, and to continue to offer up that lie for two years straight, despite knowing otherwise. Consider whether this person is worth your time at all, or your belief. 
Of course he's not going to do anything at all. The very last thing John Scalzi wants is to place himself in the position of having a judge deciding who defamed and damaged whom here. As for his latest claims, let's juxtapose two public statements by Mr. Scalzi, separated by two years and two months.
  1. "No, I have not raped or sexually assaulted anyone. No, I have not admitted to raping or sexually assaulting anyone." - John Scalzi, 27 December, 2014
  2. "I’m a rapist. I’m one of those men who likes to force myself on women without their consent or desire and then batter them sexually." - John Scalzi, 25 October 2012
Now, tell me, which statement do I know is untrue? Which statement do you know is untrue? As it happens, I don't know anything at all about Mr. Scalzi's sexual practices or sexual history, except for what he has stated in public. Do you? Did you also know it wasn't true that Jian Gomeshi sexually assaults women? Or that the late Marion Zimmer Bradley assaulted children? For crying out loud, Scalzi is observably lying again when he falsely states: "Beale knows it’s untrue".

I repeat: I don't know anything at all about Mr. Scalzi's sexual practices or sexual history, except for what he has stated in public. As to which of those contradictory statements are true, I have no information at all.

The demonstrable facts are simple. John Scalzi has publicly admitted to being a rapist. He has openly admitted to sexually battering women. Whether he in fact committed the acts he admits to is irrelevant. Retroactively claiming his statements were "satire" doesn't change what he wrote or what he admitted to doing, and it is absolutely and utterly ridiculous to claim that I am somehow in possession of his entire sexual history.

In this vein, it is important to recall that John Scalzi is known to be deceitful and prone to repeatedly telling easily disprovable falsehoods:
John Scalzi @scalzi 6:20 AM - 4 Dec 12
Hey, authors of non-traditionally published books! Promote your book to my 50K daily blog readers TODAY

John Scalzi ‏@scalzi
@gregpak I think if people like the content they will keep coming in regardless. I mean, my site gets 50K readers a day

"Scalzi himself quotes it at over 45,000 unique visitors daily and more than two million page views monthly."
- Lightspeed Magazine, September 2010 interview
All three of those statements are false. I happen to be in possession of John Scalzi's traffic records, and the fact is that at the time he made that last claim, Whatever averaged 12,860 pageviews per day, five times LESS than the 64,516 daily pageviews he was claiming. Nor did he have "over 45,000 unique visitors daily".

Keep in mind too that Scalzi has repeatedly made false claims about me, and that he is actively and professionally associated with those who have publicly made false claims that I am "a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole", a "white supremacist", and who have gone so far as to deny the scientific evidence of my Native American ancestry.

John Scalzi is a proven liar. I am, on the other hand, known to be rigidly truthful, less for any personal qualities than for the obvious reason that as a nationally syndicated political columnist, I have long been accustomed to having my every word closely scrutinized by political opponents seeking to disqualify me. So, by all means, please judge between us concerning who is truthful and who is not. Notice too who permits comments on these posts and who does not.

Perhaps those concerned individuals should ask John Scalzi why it is that I continue to expose his lies and hoist him on his own petard. They might wish to ask him if he refused to pay his dues to SFWA and threatened to leave if I was not purged from the organization. They could ask him if he had any discussions with Tor editor Patrick Nielsen Hayden about it, and if he knew that Mr. Nielsen Hayden was also refusing to pay his dues until I was purged. And finally, they should also ask precisely who was attacking whom, and why, in 2005.

Labels:

142 Comments:

Anonymous Harsh December 27, 2014 8:15 PM  

We have our disagreements, though, and a new one for that list is whether or not Scalzi is a confessed rapist. You don't like him and clearly have your reasons, but in my opinion this is one bone you should stop gnawing on.

Why? Vox is absolutely right that we have nothing to go on but Scalzi's word on the matter and he has repeatedly been proven to lie when it suits him. There's no reason to accept that Scalzi is telling the truth now.

If I were Scalzi, I'd tread very, very carefully here. He's being given a lot of rope and he's pissed off a lot of people in the past 10 years.

Anonymous Harsh December 27, 2014 8:16 PM  

My fault, I'm seem to have commented on deleted comments.

Anonymous VD December 27, 2014 8:17 PM  

I have no objection to the content of your comment, Anonymous commenter, but please note the instructions: "NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted."

You don't need to use a real name, but you do need to pick something to distinguish your comments from everyone else's. Even "Anon" will do.

Anonymous Steve December 27, 2014 8:19 PM  

I've no way of knowing for sure if Scalzi is some kind of sexual predator or not, but I read the blog entry where he *said* he was one, and I've heard it's important that we listen and believe when rape claims are made, or else misogyny.

John Scalzi has made it clear misogyny is a bad thing, so it seems we should listen to and believe his shocking admission.

But perhaps he is not a rapist, but merely a woman-hating rape-chortler who thinks joking about the forcible sexual violation of women and girls is a neat way to make a political point.

Or perhaps there's no *there* there to Mr Scalzi. Perhaps he is a pathetic, hollow husk of a man who uses words in much the same way a squid uses ink, saying whatever he calculates might benefit him in any given situation. In which case we shouldn't believe anything he says without credible independent verification.

There's just no way to know for sure.

Anonymous Not Quite So Anonymous December 27, 2014 8:19 PM  

I know -- it was an error. I clicked the wrong thing when submitting. I was trying to figure out how to recopy it when it was deleted. Them's the breaks.

Blogger Expendable Faceless Minion December 27, 2014 8:23 PM  

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_against_interest

I'll just toss that out for consideration when assessing the probable truth value of contradictory statements of one's own character.

Anonymous VD December 27, 2014 8:27 PM  

Them's the breaks.

No worries. You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think it should be fairly obvious at this point that I will never stop hammering home the facts about John Scalzi until he repents, asks forgiveness, and makes amends. That is the only way he will ever put this behind him.

I didn't seek this conflict. As a general rule, I don't seek conflict. I prefer civil dialectic. But if you see fit to go after me, for whatever reason, you'd probably better be prepared to be in it for the long haul. John chose this path. Not me. It's not as if I forced him to write about me, or about being a rapist, and so forth.

Anonymous Harsh December 27, 2014 8:29 PM  

I've no way of knowing for sure if Scalzi is some kind of sexual predator or not, but I read the blog entry where he *said* he was one, and I've heard it's important that we listen and believe when rape claims are made, or else misogyny.

Very true. Scalzi should be investigated to make sure the rape claim is false otherwise more women could fall in harm's way.

Anonymous MrGreenMan December 27, 2014 8:34 PM  

Now, where does the phrase "authorial intent is irrelevant to the work" live on the political spectrum? I remember laughing when I read through Derrida explaining there was only one way to read Paul de Man. There is nothing new under the sun.

Blogger bearspaw December 27, 2014 8:46 PM  

Fish in a barrel, Vox.

Anonymous tiredofitall December 27, 2014 8:58 PM  

Oh look, Johnny the Raping Rabbit shut down comments on the thread Vox mentioned. What are the chances of that happening?

Also for getting over 50,000 daily pageviews, isn't it odd that at most he gets comments barely in the double-digits, but over here at Vox...

Anonymous VD December 27, 2014 9:02 PM  

For the record, I have averaged 48,147 daily Google pageviews over the last four months. Thanks, of course, to all of you. Ironically, in the Wordpress terms that Scalzi uses, that would be about 50,314 daily pageviews.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 27, 2014 9:12 PM  

I guess I should give a late 'thank you' to "Terd Ferguson" for obsessively reading Scalzi's blog and bringing this post to Vox's attention.

I certainly thought it was just a throwaway line, but apparently it was a full post.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet December 27, 2014 9:34 PM  

Retroactively claiming his statements were "satire"

Last I checked, there was a bit more to satire than simply this nonsense. Do these people not understand the terms they use? They're supposed to be public intellectuals, for the love of all that's good.

But what do I know, I'm in it for the quality, not the awards and fan clubs.

Anonymous zen0 December 27, 2014 9:38 PM  

Now, Terd Ferguson does not know how to spell his name. On a whim, I looked up Turd Ferguson to see if it referred to the guy that used to comment at ZeroHedge, but I got on the Urban dictionary, and the original Turd Ferguson was on a SNL Jeopardy spoof.

Long story short, I found out what a Donkey Punch was from the trending word list, and it reminded me of that woman that said Jian Ghomeshi punched her for no reason, but I think there was a reason because given his proclivities, he was probably using a donkey punch, which sounds like "Duck Commander" but you don't want to play in a football game called the Donkey Punch Bowl.

Anyway, it all came back to Scalzi, didn't it.

What a scumbag.

Anonymous dh December 27, 2014 9:57 PM  

And somewhere in the range of ~1000 actual human readers.

I have no idea if that's true, but from my analysis, Whatever draws about the same 150 regulars, with a big thread having as many as 300 unique commentators.

Anonymous Roundtine December 27, 2014 9:57 PM  

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. Maybe Scalzi forgets the origin of this as time goes on, but he can't be so stupid as to not understand it. If he filed a libel suit, he'd risk being declared mentally incompetent.

Anonymous steve69 December 27, 2014 10:01 PM  

Scalzi is scum.

I purchased, read, and enjoyed some of his books. When I inquired about his hostility towards current issues, I was met with a stream of vitriol calling me a misogynist, racist, and clueless. That readers can be replaced, and that it's HILARIOUS that they think he cares about them.

The complete lack of respect he has for those who made him is disgusting, not to mention his unjustified self righteous seeming hatred of men.

Of course you're on the "easiest difficulty setting" when you're a published popular writer. Attributing that to gender or colour is rubbish.

Anonymous zen0 December 27, 2014 10:16 PM  

> Yes, a bunch of impotent retards.

You spelled "discerning individuals of integrity" wrong.

But you can't be held to such a high standard, seeing as how you don't even know what your screen name is.

Anonymous n.o.o.c. December 27, 2014 10:19 PM  

Pick a name, Anonymous. You know the rules.

Anonymous Harsh December 27, 2014 10:19 PM  

He's being given a lot of rope and he's pissed off a lot of people in the past 10 years.

Yes, a bunch of impotent retards.


So you mean to say that Scalzi is in the habit of picking on the mentally disabled? I knew the guy was scum but that's a new low.

Anonymous MoreLies December 27, 2014 10:19 PM  

John Scalzi to prove he is not a rapist

Hmm, didn't you say recently that white men didn't commit rape?

Blogger automatthew December 27, 2014 10:22 PM  

Hmm, didn't you say recently that white men didn't commit rape?

That's no man.

Anonymous Zippy December 27, 2014 10:33 PM  

I continue to believe that Scalzi, while wrong about many, many things, is right about this. I think his post was written satirically. That is, he intended to say "this is the sort of thing a rapist would say; see how he supports political positions I disagree with." Further, I think you probably know that. Agree, it's rather pointless badly-written satire, but it's satire nonetheless.

Like once years and years ago when I was a teen my mom asked me if I was smoking pot. (I was not -- I am actually kind of a straight arrow that way.) Annoyed by this, I said "no Mom, I've moved on to heroin and cocaine." My mom did not find this amusing, but she did understand that I was not actually mainlining heroin. I smoked it instead. (See, you know the last was not serious, no?)

Honest, I thought Redshirts was trash too, and I think the folks at SFWA were jerks. Also, if he really can't bench press more than his not-particularly-strong daughter, he's a pussy and a half.

But he didn't confess to raping anybody in a statement meant to be taken at all seriously.

Blogger wrf3 December 27, 2014 10:34 PM  

Vox wrote: The demonstrable facts are simple. John Scalzi has publicly admitted to being a rapist.

Yes, but he did it in a context where, if I were on the jury between you and Scalzi, I'd have to conclude that the "I'm a rapist" statement was hyperbole in an attempt to stress his abhorrence of certain political positions.

Sorry, bro. Hyper-literalism is bad enough when Christians read Genesis. It doesn't become you here.

Blogger automatthew December 27, 2014 10:39 PM  

"Hyper-literalism is bad enough when Christians read Genesis. It doesn't become you here."

But it makes the rabbit dance.

Anonymous Sarcophilus December 27, 2014 10:51 PM  

One has to wonder, e.g. if he wears his favorite dress or now a gamma rabbit costume when he rapes.

Oh, the tragedy of deinstitutionalization! Otoh, Scalzi might be the Van Gogh of pink sf - has he any audiobooks?

Anonymous zen0 December 27, 2014 10:52 PM  

@ Zippy
But he didn't confess to raping anybody in a statement meant to be taken at all seriously.

Of course it was supposed to be satire. But it was particularly incompetent and self-righteous, rather incongruent for a person who headed an organization that mollycoddled child molesters, n'est pas?

Moral grandstanding slipping into the realm of hypocrisy.

@wfr3

Sorry, bro. Hyper-literalism is bad enough when Christians read Genesis. It doesn't become you here.

Hyper-literalism is a redundancy. Plus, you mis-identify rhetoric as literalism. The argument here is not literal. If Scalzi can rhetorically claim to be a rapist, Vox can rhetorically claim to take him seriously.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 27, 2014 10:55 PM  

Silly commenters trying to use dialectic in a rhetorical battle... again...

Have you (wrf3 and Zippy) forgotten that people like Scalzi only communicate and understand the rhetorical? That dialectic is lost on them?

Anonymous zen0 December 27, 2014 10:55 PM  

> no harsh, one does not have to actively pick on impotent retards to piss them off

It is amusing that you think anyone, misidentified though they may be, are in any way "pissed off".

Speaking of your use of terminology, I suspect you are a Canadian. Americans usually use the term "pissed".

Anonymous kh123 December 27, 2014 11:01 PM  

"Sorry, bro. Hyper-literalism is bad enough when Christians read Genesis. It doesn't become you here."

And lo, on the 8th day - meaning either several eons or 8 seconds ago - the Lord God did revise the departure and arrival schedules for Grand Central, and reduced everything that is spiritual into pure matter and saxophones. And he saw that the New Yorker overwhelmingly approved, and that everything ran on time, and lo, the train was fine.

Anonymous Tad December 27, 2014 11:04 PM  

That the person attempting to spread obvious lies about me actively allies with a movement that threatens women, however, is unsurprising.

Blogger automatthew December 27, 2014 11:08 PM  

Oh my, is Yama now commenting using the name Tad? I'm not sure my feeble redneck mind can cope with the confusion.

Anonymous realmatt December 27, 2014 11:11 PM  

Wrf3 the jury isn't deciding whether or not Scalzi is a rapist. They only need to decide beyond reasonable doubt that Vox is guilty of libel, which would I imagine depens on Voxs court-proven belief or disbeliwfin Scalzis statements.. Or the judge. I dont think a jury is convened for libel suits. Or any suits..

I K OW NOTTTHINNNFFFFG/GGGGG

Anonymous Harsh December 27, 2014 11:13 PM  

Oh my, is Yama now commenting using the name Tad? I'm not sure my feeble redneck mind can cope with the confusion.

He's probably trying to drum up business on his blog. His last post has two comments and he made one of them.

Anonymous Sarcophilus December 27, 2014 11:14 PM  

@Zippy, read Vox's original post and Scalzi's non-ironic original.

"I can't believe someone would be that evil or stupid" is not an argument contra. Also note it might be his imagination (aka psychotic episode), or do please note he in this missive in a non-satirical, non-ironic manner makes the definition of rape very wide:

The details of how I do this are not particularly important at the moment — although I love when you try to make distinctions about “forcible rape” or “legitimate rape” because that gives me all sorts of wiggle room 

So, as he defines seduction or any attempt at control as rape, (I can't imagine him assaulting a paraplegic successfully), he - in his expansive definition - in the freaking post! - probably is exactly what he claims. Even upon his wife.

Anonymous Boogeyman December 27, 2014 11:17 PM  

He may or may not be a rapist, but I'd bet dollars to dog crap he's a man-spreader.
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/12/25/spread-christmas-cheer/

Anonymous Bobo December 27, 2014 11:20 PM  

It's impossible for me to take Scalzi seriously until he grows a chin...

Anonymous Shut Up, Tad December 27, 2014 11:20 PM  

Tad December 27, 2014 11:04 PM
That the person attempting to spread obvious lies about me actively allies with a movement that threatens women, however, is unsurprising.


I know Tad. You are No-Tad.
But shut up, anyway.

Anonymous kfg December 27, 2014 11:38 PM  

"I can't imagine him assaulting a paraplegic successfully . . "

I imagine he would just manipulate his weak ass daughter into doing it for him by giving her some lame ass gurrrl power speech.

Anonymous Giuseppe December 28, 2014 12:05 AM  

My good self is shocked!
I mean, come on, making satire of rape? And not even funny satire? So not even a rape joke then. Just a...well...an admission of rape really. And how is that supposed to be satire? Political? Surely not. The distinct lack of humor precludes me from being able to assume it is not meant seriously, since, without humour, to claim a political party is FOR rape, is clearly absurd. How on Earth are we, supposedly dull-witted, redneck, racist, inbred, homophobes ever to be able to tell McRapey isn't an actual rapist? And why should we even CONSIDER taking the chance that he isn't. I mean, seriously, would anyone here have written something like that for "fun" or "satire" ? Would any neurologically normal person do so? At the very least McRapey harbours serious rape fantasies and is a possible predator in the making.

Anonymous George of the Jungle December 28, 2014 12:11 AM  

Scalzi is an odious, pathetic individual, to the point of eliciting cringing disgust from others without even trying. He seems to think self-mockery is a clever, innovative approach in order to flaunt his obvious weaknesses, including his flabby ugly persona, his idiotic PC-esque terminology ('dudebro'), etc., etc. He invariably trumps his absurd university degrees as an excuse to double-down on the typical leftist's avoidance of objective truth, essentially making him nothing but an inveterate liar.

If this man never appeared in public again, and everything he has written were expunged from the earth, then truly this world would be a better place. Please, sir, go camp out on your lawn for the rest of your life and never bother the rest of us again.

Anonymous Anon December 28, 2014 12:17 AM  

Even "Anon" will do.

Wait, what!?

Anonymous MPAVictoria December 28, 2014 12:20 AM  

Alexa has Scalzi's site as being WAY more popular than yours

/Keep on shining you crazy Diamond.

OpenID cailcorishev December 28, 2014 12:23 AM  

Do these people not understand the terms they use?

Very often not, I think.

These people tend to be mid-wits, but spending most of their lives around people dumber than them makes them think they're a lot smarter than they are. They've always been smart enough. So they stumble into discussions about Aristotle-level topics that are really pretty challenging, and they don't realize it. They probably could understand something like rhetoric/dialectic if they realized they needed to work at it, but they don't; they assume a quick scan through the Wikipedia page, or what they remember from someone in a movie talking about it, will be sufficient. That's why so often they seem genuinely clueless, and far dumber than their level of success in life suggests they should be.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 12:44 AM  

Alexa has Scalzi's site as being WAY more popular than yours

How does that change the fact that Scalzi constantly lies about his traffic? I'll answer for you: it doesn't.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch December 28, 2014 1:18 AM  

What? This writer, Mr. Scalzi, has admitted to rape?

Good Lord. Has anyone called the police?

Does the science fiction writing community know about this yet?

Anonymous YRAFI December 28, 2014 1:28 AM  

Sweet crap, this is the saddest place on the internet.
Bunch of twizzlers jerking each other with delusions of grandeur.

Anonymous Noap December 28, 2014 2:14 AM  

Anyone who has ever written the following unironically about an author of color:
"it is not that I, and others, do not view her as human, (although genetic science presently suggests that we are not equally homo sapiens sapiens), it is that we simply do not view her as being fully civilized for the obvious historical reason that she is not."

Is impossible to believe about anything. You've proven that you are incapable of any kind of rational discernment and are bordering on delusional.

So no, I don't believe you. I wouldn't take your word for it if you said the sky were blue.

Anonymous jrl December 28, 2014 2:18 AM  

Noap, what about that statement do you specifically disagree with?

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 2:19 AM  

You've proven that you are incapable of any kind of rational discernment and are bordering on delusional.

You've just called an author of color (i.e., Vox) delusional. Good job, you racist.

Anonymous Will Best December 28, 2014 2:20 AM  

Good Lord. Has anyone called the police?

Does the science fiction writing community know about this yet?


I always assumed its actively encouraged in the SciFi community. After all it is nonsensical to complain about a problem with you know, there not being a problem.

Anonymous kh123 December 28, 2014 3:08 AM  

"Bunch of twizzlers jerking each other with delusions of grandeur."

I figured Red Vines, given the PoC ratio here.

As far as "delusions of grandeur," I'm not sure anyone here has ever bragged about their Whitesville, OH plantatio... lawn. Can you point out an example so's we can all follow along, sir/ma'am?

Anonymous kh123 December 28, 2014 3:11 AM  

"I wouldn't take your word for it if you said the sky were blue."

And yet Virginia, it is. It most certainly is.

What does that say about you then.

Anonymous Scintan December 28, 2014 3:35 AM  

Sweet crap, this is the saddest place on the internet.
Bunch of twizzlers jerking each other with delusions of grandeur.


And, yet, in trolling the site, you show yourself to a lower being than those you denigrate by calling twizzlers. That's probably not the level of human being your mom hoped she was popping out of her womb.

Anonymous Scintan December 28, 2014 3:36 AM  

The above post somehow deleted the word "you" after "popping".

Anonymous kfg December 28, 2014 3:44 AM  

And yet kh123, I just had a look outside and it most certainly is not.

Anonymous kh123 December 28, 2014 3:48 AM  

The great train overhead sometimes blocks it out.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 4:04 AM  

Yes, but he did it in a context where, if I were on the jury between you and Scalzi, I'd have to conclude that the "I'm a rapist" statement was hyperbole in an attempt to stress his abhorrence of certain political positions.

Let me get your logic straight. If Scalzi openly claims that he is a rapist, then it must be satire. But if I take his words at face value, then it must be hyper-literalism and cannot be satire.

Got it.

Of course, a genuinely observant individual might consider which hypothetical satire has afforded more humor in the form of vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings being held up to ridicule. Especially when one party's primary defense is: "Hey, I was only making light of rape!"

But then, I am reliably informed by two successive presidents of the SFWA that I do not understand satire, so you're probably right. Although, I do wonder how it could possibly be considered defamation for someone who does not understand satire to fail to understand satire....

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 4:12 AM  

You've proven that you are incapable of any kind of rational discernment and are bordering on delusional.

Then why on Earth are you complaining about anything I write? Why are you even here?

So no, I don't believe you. I wouldn't take your word for it if you said the sky were blue.

I have to admit, I could not care less what you believe. Although I would probably derive some dark amusement out of telling you that the train was coming down the tracks and watching you get run over because you refused to believe it.

It's a character flaw, I suppose, but I always find it funny when you warn someone about something and then discover that they are genuinely surprised when you do exactly what you said you would.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 4:21 AM  

Bunch of twizzlers jerking each other with delusions of grandeur.

Great googly moogly, man, we argue with each other more often than not around here, so anyone who thinks we are "jerking each other" is either a) a complete noob, or b) lying their ass off.

Anonymous daddynichol December 28, 2014 4:52 AM  

YFARI
"Sweet crap, this is the saddest place on the internet.
Bunch of twizzlers jerking each other with delusions of grandeur."


And yet, here you are commenting.

Anonymous Contaminated NEET December 28, 2014 5:30 AM  

I thought Scalzi was never ever going to mention your name again, VD. What'd you do to him to make him change his mind?

Anonymous blackbolt2099 December 28, 2014 5:48 AM  

I know Scalzi wasn't confessing to being a rapist. Vox knows it. Basically everyone reading this knows it.

I get that that is ostensibly an amusing exercise in tweaking the rabbits, but of all the possible attack vectors for a fatuous lump like Scalzi (and there are many), why on earth pick this one? VD is steadfastly determined to "stay in character" on this one, but I really don't see the point of it all.

Anonymous Seconded December 28, 2014 6:06 AM  

What Blackbolt said.

Anonymous Anonymous December 28, 2014 6:42 AM  

Sigh, I remember when John and game devs were on the same team...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.society.generation-x/mWl-5os04XM/Yhas7wjgq6sJ

"Congratulations! How many copies should I buy? Just so you know, this is gonna be a quid pro quo thing. I'll buy your game, but you're gonna have to buy my book when(ever) it comes out. Deal?"

Lots of gold in them thar Google Groups.

Elliott McGucken

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 7:37 AM  

I know Scalzi wasn't confessing to being a rapist. Vox knows it. Basically everyone reading this knows it.

You don't know anything of the sort. Neither does anyone else. You may not BELIEVE he was confessing to be a rapist, but you cannot reasonably say that you know it.

Did you believe that he had two million monthly pageviews in 2010? Why or why not?

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 8:25 AM  

I thought Scalzi was never ever going to mention your name again, VD. What'd you do to him to make him change his mind?

Nothing out of the ordinary. I suspect some of his new TV contacts have been Googling him and been less than thrilled about what they've found. You don't have to like me or agree with me to observe that the guy is a nasty, petty, deceitful self-promoter. This isn't a zero-sum game.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 8:39 AM  

but I really don't see the point of it all.

Vox gets a boost from John's celebrity status. That's all.

But needing a boost from a D-lister gives you an idea of Vox's actual status.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 28, 2014 9:17 AM  

@blackbolt2099
VD is steadfastly determined to "stay in character" on this one, but I really don't see the point of it all.

I think of it this way:

Scalzi is determined to keep misrepresenting what Vox said in order to make him look bad (he's raciss, a woman-hater, white supremacist, etc), so Vox is doing the exact same thing back to Scalzi. Oh, and he doesn't have to misrepresent Scalzi whenever he brings up the fraudulent page numbers, so he brings that up too, yet no one seems to care about a liar.

Really, it's justice.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 9:30 AM  

(he's raciss, a woman-hater, white supremacist, etc),

Vox appears caught in a trap of his own making. He intentionally says things that make him appear to be a racist, misogynist, a white supremacist, etc. however, for most people, probably Scalzi included, Vox is simply not interesting enough for them to get past VD's shock jock character to the nuanced argument.

Blogger JDC December 28, 2014 10:02 AM  

You've proven that you are incapable of any kind of rational discernment and are bordering on delusional.

Then why on Earth are you complaining about anything I write? Why are you even here?


We have a very traditional 8 AM service with liturgy and organ, and a 1045 service that is contemporary where I often play my fender strat, with accompanying keyboard and praise singers. I was accosted by an older gentleman a few months ago. Whilst shaking hands after service, he took the opportunity to publicly chastise me for playing guitar at church, and not revering the liturgy. I said the same thing to him, "Why are you even here!"

Some people just need to find things to complain about, so they places themselves purposefully in situations where they can then, in righteous anger extend their ocular muscles and drop their monocles shouting to the heavens, "This is abhorrent!"

Blogger IM2L844 December 28, 2014 10:06 AM  

Vox appears caught in a trap of his own making.

Ha! “Will you step into my parlor?” said the spider to the fly

Anonymous p-dawg December 28, 2014 10:16 AM  

@Monte Blanc - so is it your contention that an argument is more or less true depending upon how "interesting" the person is who is making it? If not, who cares? If someone's mind is so flawed that they find the arguments Vox uses to be uninteresting, that's their problem, isn't it?

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 10:21 AM  

Pdawg; not at all, my comment was directed at Student in Blues assertion that John Scalzi misrepresents Vox as a racist and misogynist

Anonymous Wierd. December 28, 2014 10:25 AM  

Strange. Scalzi's confession sounds very much like a GG Allin song.

Blogger JDC December 28, 2014 10:29 AM  

@Wierd - Bite it, You Scum?

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 10:34 AM  

Scalzi is determined to keep misrepresenting what Vox said in order to make him look bad (he's raciss, a woman-hater, white supremacist, etc), so Vox is doing the exact same thing back to Scalzi.

I wouldn't say it is the exact same thing. All I ever do is directly quote the man. It's amusing that people keep attempting to blame me for what he wrote.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 10:37 AM  

Vox gets a boost from John's celebrity status. That's all.

Some boost. My blogs have nearly 3x the traffic of his now. If I'm not interesting, then he must really be a tedious bore. There are no few regulars here who used to be Whatever readers, but aren't anymore.

Anonymous I'm impressed December 28, 2014 10:43 AM  

Wow, you really are a special kind of stupid. Not recognizing that piece as satire isn't even willful ignorance - it's totally disingenuous and specious nonsense.

Blogger MendoScot December 28, 2014 10:52 AM  

For those still convinced that Scalzi's admission of being a rapist is nothing but inept satire, consider that a couple of weeks before publishing it, he admitted - non-satirically - to having stalked a woman. But it's all good, see, because now they're besties.

Then he sends up a trial balloon on rape justification.

Which makes you wonder how it would have turned out if she hadn't submitted to his advances.

Blogger Iowahine December 28, 2014 11:49 AM  

Monte Blanc, Learn how to use a semi-colon.

Anonymous anon. December 28, 2014 12:28 PM  

Mendo; did you not read the link you posted? Or perhaps you don't know the definition of stalking?

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 12:28 PM  

@I'm impressed

Wow, you really are a special kind of stupid. Not recognizing that piece as satire isn't even willful ignorance - it's totally disingenuous and specious nonsense.

Are you some kind of rape apologist? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Blogger JDC December 28, 2014 12:29 PM  

Wow, you really are a special kind of stupid. Not recognizing that piece as satire isn't even willful ignorance - it's totally disingenuous and specious nonsense.

Satire: the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.

But he broke the rule, and that is rape is never to be joked about under any circumstances. Ever. No reason...

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 12:33 PM  

VD is steadfastly determined to "stay in character" on this one, but I really don't see the point of it all.

I don't know how you could possibly miss the point as it's been stated three or four times in this thread alone. Did you just skim or are you being willfully ignorant?

Anonymous wEz December 28, 2014 12:35 PM  

Lol. A lot of lurker vermin have come out of the woodwork on this one : P

Love how people like scalzi, and others of his vein, accuse you of every ridiculous, vile, nasty stereotype in the book and thats ok, but when you turn the tables with something credible, HIS OWN FN WORDS, they cry foul injustice, wrong doing, and inproper contextual understanding? The irony.
From my years of observation vox didn't create the game, nor did he start the game. He just took a seat at the table when called on, and he plays much, much better.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 12:43 PM  

wEz gets it.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 12:47 PM  

Vox gets a boost from John's celebrity status. That's all.

That's hysterical. Ask ten random people who John Scalzi is and watch all the weird looks you get. The guy's not a celebrity, he's a circus act.

Anonymous kawaika December 28, 2014 1:32 PM  

"A lot of lurker vermin have come out of the woodwork on this one"

One can only wonder how many of these new commenters will disappear in two weeks. I'm sure VD will feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

Anonymous Weird December 28, 2014 1:38 PM  

"Bite it, You Scum?"

No, GG Allin has a song titled "I'm a Rapist". Which is exactly the first line of John Scalzi's confession letter.

Same disgusting content too. Coincidence? Or is this some kind of coded 'wink wink' from one rapist to another?

Anonymous Randy M December 28, 2014 1:45 PM  

"If Scalzi can rhetorically claim to be a rapist, Vox can rhetorically claim to take him seriously."

Bingo. Scalzi was using a hypothetical rapist to disqualify conservative positions. There is more truth to "Scalzi is a rapist" than to "Rapists support republicans" because at least Scalzi demonstrable is.

Anonymous Randy M December 28, 2014 1:45 PM  

(is in existence, I mean)

Anonymous bob k. mando December 28, 2014 2:21 PM  

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

"Stop playing with the computer and come pay attention to me."
-- Kristine Blauser Scalzi

Anonymous Laz December 28, 2014 2:34 PM  

"That's hysterical. Ask ten random people who John Scalzi is and watch all the weird looks you get. The guy's not a celebrity, he's a circus act."

On the other hand, when I mention something I saw on a blog (this one) without mentioning the name several people have asked if I saw it here. That combined with the number of people I know who at least read this blog makes me think Vox is more widely known than most people think.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 28, 2014 2:54 PM  

@VD
I wouldn't say it is the exact same thing. All I ever do is directly quote the man. It's amusing that people keep attempting to blame me for what he wrote.

Ah, very true. Scalzi blatantly lied about what you said ("self-admitted racist", for example) to make you look bad, and all you do is tell the truth about what Scalzi said.

Some people may find it misleading, but isn't it more misleading to lie than to, perhaps, take out of context?

@Monte Blanc
Vox appears caught in a trap of his own making. He intentionally says things that make him appear to be a racist, misogynist, a white supremacist, etc. however, for most people, probably Scalzi included, Vox is simply not interesting enough for them to get past VD's shock jock character to the nuanced argument.

You use the word "trap" and "intentionally" in regards to appearing as a racist, misogynist, and white supremacist. Where is your evidence that Vox was intending to appear racist, misogynist, or as a white supremacist? Do you perhaps live inside his head and know his motives?

And does Scalzi really find Vox so "uninteresting"? I mean, good heavens, the he's been blogging about Vox for, what, 9 years now?

If someone's been talking about something for 9 years, even if it was on and off, and not bothered to learn more about its nuances... well, that doesn't paint much of their intelligence if they can't even pick up a slight hint of nuance by osmosis.

So really, logically, Scalzi is either stupid (that he hasn't learned of the nuances of Vox's argument by now) or a liar (that he knows it but intentionally misrepresents Vox, lying about Vox's character aka slander).

I mean, 9 years spent doing something voluntarily... that's dedication. That's clearly interest.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 3:18 PM  

Harsh, ask one hundred random people who Voxday is and watch all the weird looks you get. The guy's not a circus act, he's a poseur.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 3:35 PM  

Harsh, ask one hundred random people who Voxday is and watch all the weird looks you get.

No doubt true. I'm sure that outside of the gaming and SFF communities, very few people know who Vox is. But that doesn't change the fact that your absurd claim that Vox is trying to latch on to Scalzi's "celebrity status" is a complete joke. You're a simpleton, Monte Blanc. Stop embarrassing yourself.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 3:51 PM  

Ah, very true. Scalzi blatantly lied about what you said ("self-admitted racist", for example) to make you look bad, and all you do is tell the truth about what Scalzi said.

In fairness, it was Jemisin, not Scalzi, who falsely claimed I was " a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole". Scalzi has merely lied repeatedly about my being a "racist, sexist, homophobic dipshit", "an ignorant jackass", and numerous other things documented in my response to the SFWA report.

Meanwhile, I am guilty of repeatedly quoting him. "John Scalzi is a rapist". Note that he not only wrote that he was a rapist, he also said it on Jian Gomeshi's radio show. You know, Jian Gomeshi, who has been arrested for sexually battering women in much the same way John Scalzi said he enjoyed doing.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 28, 2014 4:15 PM  

@VD
In fairness, it was Jemisin, not Scalzi, who falsely claimed I was " a self-described misogynist, racist, anti-Semite, and a few other flavors of asshole".

Fair point.

I guess if I were far more interested in Scalzi, I would have researched more in depth his actual words and nuances. My only time spent writing (and even thinking) about Scalzi is few and far in between. Maybe a couple of days altogether.

I mean, if I spent 9 years off and on ranting about him I could hardly claim to be uninterested...

Anonymous Amok Time December 28, 2014 4:16 PM  

I suspect Scalzi's rape revelation in 2012 was and is similar to the Dunham Horror's rape discussions in her book. They are meant to pump up their street cred on how "edgy" they enjoy their life. It is a sad statement on their lack of morals and good common sense. I feel regret for them and how they waste their talents to be loved by the secular society.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 4:40 PM  

Harsh, get real, even in the gaming and SFF communities, very few people know who Vox is.

Vox, "an ignorant jackass" would be a judgment call and cannot as such be considered a lie.

Student in Blue; "I guess if I were far more interested in Scalzi, I would have researched more in depth his actual words and nuances." Precisely!!! Your disinterest in John Scalzi is perhaps the same reason he isn't lying when he calls Vox a "racist, sexist, homophobic dipshit". Dipshit aside, a very superficial reading of Vox’s blog posts would give one the impression he is in fact a racist, sexist, homophobe. It takes a closer reading and in many cases, follow up clarification in the comments by Vox to find those descriptors are debatable (but certainly not off the table).

Anonymous n.o.o.c December 28, 2014 4:44 PM  

bob, your ball peen protection posts aren't doing any good. Time to stop.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 4:49 PM  

Harsh, get real, even in the gaming and SFF communities, very few people know who Vox is.

Irrelevent. Not the sharpest knife in the drawer, are you?

Dipshit aside, a very superficial reading of Vox’s blog posts would give one the impression he is in fact a racist, sexist, homophobe.

A very superficial reading of Scalzi's blog posts would give one the impression that he is a sexual predator. What's your point?

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 5:01 PM  

Harsh; my point would be that we have two idiots slap fighting.

Anonymous Tattoo: Customer Relations, Fantasy Island; currently freelance greeting at Walmart December 28, 2014 5:09 PM  

LOOK BOSS! DEE TRAIN! DEE TRAIN! DEE...

Wait, where deh train? I keep pointing toward d' sky, boss.

Blogger Daniel December 28, 2014 5:11 PM  

McRapey lied off the bat in '05. "Ignorant" was an objective measurement, a claim that Vox knew nothing about the subject under discussion, which was, I believe, employment and economics in the sciences as it relates to women.

This was not only obviously untrue in the moment, but has never been retracted. McRapey lied about Vox to disqualify him from the discussion.

I don't know if anyone has kept a clean running list of the lies that McRapey has told about Vox and the Ilk, but just from scratch I can vaguely recall at least a half-dozen, but I would be unsurprised to find that it is actually ten times more than that.

Nothing - and I mean nothing - McRapey has ever blogged about has been 100% true, while a number of his most famous pieces are 100% lies.

If he has a post that does not contain an element of misdirection, obfuscation, double-talk or (at best) burying the lede in a 10-ft. grave, I haven't read it. He even admits that he's not as popular a blogger as he used to be in his annual round-up, but he buries it under so much mushy doublespeak and fake numerology that it barely registers, and if it does, he still falsely qualifies it.

The objective truth is that he never was as popular online as he claimed to the media, he is less popular now than he once was, and he has lost his motivation in SF novels and in blogging. He could have simply tweeted as much. Instead he fragments and maybes his way through 2000 words of statistical nonsense, and yet can't do the obvious thing and just shut up about the defeat altogether. McRapey never silences his ineffective guns. He just keeps popping them off and pretending that the enemy hasn't just marched through, claimed the high ground, looted his vault and made off with the decent womenfolk.

Either that or 6-ft. tall ex-marines everywhere owe him a blowjob.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 5:13 PM  

Harsh; my point would be that we have two idiots slap fighting.

No, your point was that Vox is somehow riding on the coattails of Scalzi's celebrity. You failed to show that. You also failed to show how Vox is any of things that Scalzi says he is. You also failed to show that Scalzi is not a rapist. The consistent theme is that you failed and are not capable of rational discourse or formulating anything like a coherent argument. You are simply meandering from one meaningless rhetorical argument to the next as we call you on your bullshit. That is all you're doing.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 5:18 PM  

The objective truth is that he never was as popular online as he claimed to the media, he is less popular now than he once was, and he has lost his motivation in SF novels and in blogging.

This the key point of the whole argument. Scalzi is a known, and perhaps pathological, liar and everything he says should be informed by that knowledge. He and his sycophants are simply not worth interacting with on a rational basis until he admits that and stop lying.

Anonymous Alexander December 28, 2014 5:39 PM  

Scalzi knows full well that he is one disgruntled feminist pissed off that a white male author - even nominally on her side - is taking Hugos and moneys and spotlight away from a more deserving womyn... away from having this particular point ruin him. Because the day that some banshee starts up and shrieks "John Scalzi made a rape joke", he's going to be devoured from within the warren.

Yesterday's 'edgy' wit is today's noose. Funny, that.

Anonymous Giuseppe December 28, 2014 5:41 PM  

"A lot of lurker vermin have come out of the woodwork on this one"

One can only wonder how many of these new commenters will disappear in two weeks. I'm sure VD will feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.


I actually laughed out loud at this for like a good 45 seconds or so. I can just see clouds of rabbit fur "popping" as an unknown number of rabbits get a sudden shock-conversion to something slightly less Culturally Marxist than their current brain as a result of getting sucked in and reading Vox Popoli for the next few months. As well as the ones now stained with MORE doubt in their miserable little lives... Thanks for that Star Wars image of the Supreme Lord of Darkness silencing millions of Rabbits.

Blogger MendoScot December 28, 2014 5:41 PM  

Mendo; did you not read the link you posted? Or perhaps you don't know the definition of stalking?

He calls it creeping, but it certainly falls within the purview of stalking. Look it up.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 6:28 PM  

Dipshit aside, a very superficial reading of Vox’s blog posts would give one the impression he is in fact a racist, sexist, homophobe.

Even that isn't true. I have a gay fan club. I was signed to a gay record label. I seldom write on anything related to sexual orientation. It's absolutely absurd to claim that I hate or fear homosexuals.

Also, I note with no little amusement that virtually everyone who previously accused me of being a racist stopped doing so as soon as I revealed that I am a Native American. In fact, questioning my ancestry has been about the only thing anyone has been willing to do.

My views haven't changed in the slightest. I am still the same man I was before. And yet, the accusations have vanished....

Anonymous clk December 28, 2014 6:30 PM  

"...fairly obvious at this point that I will never stop hammering home the facts about John Scalzi until he repents..."

Well I would recommend you find a hobby instead.. or perhaps focus that energy on something more useful to you. Shooting fish in a barrel might be fun for a while but it has to be boring by now.


Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 6:31 PM  

No, your point was that Vox is somehow riding on the coattails of Scalzi's celebrity.

Trying to ride them Harsh, trying...

But the idiot slap fight thing is pretty on point.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 6:34 PM  

Harsh; my point would be that we have two idiots slap fighting.

Monte, why is this of so much interest to you? There is an intelligent, educated post on war and its threat to the world order posted here by me today. You call me an idiot, and yet you have exhibited no interest in that. Instead, you've posted six times on a subject that is literally no business or concern of yours.

What is it to you if Scalzi takes shots at me and I return fire? Why is it so important for you to defend one idiot against the slaps of another?

These are not rhetorical questions. I am genuinely curious. Are you trying to convince others that I am not worth listening to? Are you trying to defend John Scalzi's honor? What is your purpose in repeatedly commenting on this subject?

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 6:35 PM  

I have a gay fan club. I was signed to a gay record label.

Do you think John Scalzi cares enough to read the comments to find that our? But when you have posts entitled "How "gay marriage" harms you" and the like then you can see how most people think you are a homophobe or if you insist, a misohomo or some such.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 6:37 PM  

What is it to you if Scalzi takes shots at me and I return fire? Why is it so important for you to defend one idiot against the slaps of another?

It's an obvious chink in your armour. These are the posts where you commit the most unforced errors.

Anonymous Student in Blue December 28, 2014 6:38 PM  

@Monte Blanc
Precisely!!! Your disinterest in John Scalzi is perhaps the same reason he isn't lying when he calls Vox a "racist, sexist, homophobic dipshit".

So you're saying because he's ignorant (doesn't understand the nuances due to "disinterest") he's not lying when he says something that's incorrect?

But what about the evidence I gave that Scalzi is, in fact, interested?

That would make him a big fat liar, wouldn't it?

And those are direct questions, not rhetorical.

Dipshit aside, a very superficial reading of Vox’s blog posts would give one the impression he is in fact a racist, sexist, homophobe. It takes a closer reading and in many cases, follow up clarification in the comments by Vox to find those descriptors are debatable (but certainly not off the table).

So you're saying, "Well Vox isn't racist, sexist, homophobic, etc if you actually use brain cells... but he could be in the future!"?

...Are you holding everyone to that point of view? CNN, The PotUS, even Scalzi? If so, why are you even bothering to bring this up in the first place?

After all, it should be a given that anyone can be misconstrued. Given what you're attempting to defend Scalzi from, you should be able to appreciate just how important not relying on a superficial reading can be.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 6:38 PM  

I would recommend you find a hobby instead.. or perhaps focus that energy on something more useful to you.

I've published something like 35 books in nine languages this year, clk. I'm working on two completely different game projects. And there are three other posts on different topics on this blog here today. I note that this is the only one of sufficient interest to you to comment upon.

Has it never occurred to you that it is primarily people like you who are interested in this? Most of the regulars couldn't care less one way or the other. Furthermore, if you don't understand that John Scalzi is extremely useful to me, then you don't understand how I tick at all.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 6:44 PM  

Do you think John Scalzi cares enough to read the comments to find that our?

I know he cares enough and I know he knows I was signed to Wax Trax!. He knows Chicago, after all.

It's an obvious chink in your armour. These are the posts where you commit the most unforced errors.

If you think it's a chink in my armor, you have so completely misread me that you have inadvertently revealed a level of being socially challenged. And you've also revealed yourself again, Tad. You really need to stop using the same phrases over and over again. It's not at all hard to ID you anymore.

And now we see your real purpose. DISQUALIFY.

Anonymous Monte Blanc December 28, 2014 6:48 PM  

Vox, wrong again about Tad.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 6:52 PM  

Vox, wrong again about Tad.

Perhaps. Then I'll give you another chance to answer the questions before simply spamming you.

1. What is it to you if Scalzi takes shots at me and I return fire?
2. Why is it so important for you to defend one idiot against the slaps of another?
3. Are you trying to convince readers here that I am not worth listening to?
4. Are you trying to defend John Scalzi in some way?

Blogger automatthew December 28, 2014 7:02 PM  

CLK has been a useless bag of mostly water since his first appearance here. Long term concern troll.

Anonymous VD December 28, 2014 7:05 PM  

CLK has been a useless bag of mostly water since his first appearance here. Long term concern troll.

I just found it amusing. I mean, how many more hobbies do I need before he will approve? Do I need to publish 100 books per year and knit a sweater to justify the occasional RESPONSE to Scalzi addressing me directly?

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 7:05 PM  

It's an obvious chink in your armour.

Well, we know he's not American.

Anonymous Harsh December 28, 2014 7:08 PM  

But when you have posts entitled "How "gay marriage" harms you" and the like then you can see how most people think you are a homophobe

Most people are idiots. There's nothing inherently "homophobic" about pointing out harmful things concerning "gay marriage."

Anonymous Alexander December 28, 2014 7:14 PM  

We once thiught there was a chink in vox's armor, but it turned out to be a red card.

Blogger rcocean December 28, 2014 8:31 PM  

I'm amazed Scalzi took this long to respond. If he started taking fire from the even more left-wing rabbits accusing him of being a "rapist" full "white privilege" he'd be tossed out of the warren and destroyed. It must keep him up at nights, as a straight (we assume) white male that his diverse, feminist, and not-so-straight bosses, colleagues and fans might toss him to wolves for being politically incorrect.

Anonymous tiredofitall December 28, 2014 9:01 PM  

"It's an obvious chink in your armour. These are the posts where you commit the most unforced errors." - Monte Blanc

Okay, I'm calling you on your bullshit. Either cite three valid examples, or retract the claim.

Anonymous clk December 28, 2014 9:11 PM  

What do you want me to say "automathew ".... ? you seem to be under the delusion that your opinion means a whit to me ... so to remove the burden from you of providing more of the same insightful input please know that I do not seek nor value yours.

The rest is for VD

"I've published something like 35 books in nine languages this year, clk. I'm working on two completely different game projects."
.
Drink some wine and relax.. your an Italian now :) ... you are seeing criticism where there is none .. I have always been amazed as to the work output you accomplish ... nobody is questioning your work ethic. we all have our day jobs and many of us make really significant contributions.

"And there are three other posts on different topics on this blog here today. I note that this is the only one of sufficient interest to you to comment upon."

I think you would agree that I should only comment on those subjects that I find interesting. I find the whole scific writers sage amusing of which scalzi is only a part of it .. if taken at that level you would perhaps agree that its represents one of the longer running subjects here... but if you want more contributors from me here put up more gun/ammo/1911 vs glock posts and I will be all over it...

But in all seriousness if I offended you I didn't mean it at all.. please accept my apologies as I want no hard feelings .. I have enjoyed voxday for many many years now and would like to continue to stop by on occasion, maybe make a few comments and learn a few things too.

CLK

OpenID ymarsakar December 28, 2014 10:19 PM  

Scalzi's mask slipped on Sarah Palin during the 2008 elections. Then again, so did David Brin's.

It was enlightening, since his book Old Man's War was being spread amongst instapundit type circles. No mention of his philosophy or politics at the time, however. I don't think people knew about it, because Scalzi was hiding it.

OpenID cailcorishev December 28, 2014 11:42 PM  

It's an obvious chink in your armour. These are the posts where you commit the most unforced errors.

Concern troll is concerned.

Anonymous rho December 29, 2014 12:21 AM  

Jesus Christ on a jumped up cross, if you didn't see VD's "Scalzi is a self admitted rapist" as a long-term con, you are probably autistic.

Scalzi's capitulation is less entertaining than it could be, but it's still clear he decided to fall for the con. Thus, he has cast his lot with autistics.

Stop picking on autistics, you guys.

Anonymous Racist! Racist! Racist! December 29, 2014 10:49 AM  

It's an obvious chink in your armour.

Racist! Racist! Anti-Asian Racist!

Anonymous Harsh December 29, 2014 2:38 PM  

It's an obvious chink in your armour.

Racist! Racist! Anti-Asian Racist!


He should watch that Marco Polo series on Netflix. Lots of chinks in armor.

Anonymous Dave Fernig December 29, 2014 7:04 PM  

I don't think your argument would do very well in an actual libel case in a court of law. Might want to check with your friend Clark at Popehat about it, maybe Ken as well, and get a clear answer on your standing.

Anonymous kh123 December 29, 2014 8:26 PM  

Good Lord, how many there are that do miss that train.

[smokes pipe]

Anonymous VD December 29, 2014 8:29 PM  

I don't think your argument would do very well in an actual libel case in a court of law.

That's nice. And you know, when I'm interested to know what you think, I'll be sure to ask you.

Anonymous Anonymous December 30, 2014 3:05 AM  

@Studentinblue

"And does Scalzi really find Vox so "uninteresting"? I mean, good heavens, the he's been blogging about Vox for, what, 9 years now?"

Wanna know a funny story?

I knew Scalzi from alt.society.generation-x.

Perhaps something is coming down the pipe that he's not too happy about?

Elliott McGucken

Anonymous Ericinaustin December 30, 2014 2:13 PM  

The article you cont. to harp on was satire and you know it. He has become successful enough as an author that he may have the money to take you to court and you would not fare well.

Anonymous tiredofitall December 30, 2014 8:06 PM  

"The article you cont. to harp on was satire and you know it."

Okay, prove to me what Vox knew, and when. If Scalzi outright states he's a rapist who are you to say he's writing satire? Especially given the history of SFWA kiddie fiddlers, rapists and stalkers that they've managed to hide for years, sometimes decades. If you missed it; Google Marion Zimmer Bradley, Walter Breen, Ed Kramer, and Jian Gomeshi.

"He has become successful enough as an author that he may have the money to take you to court and you would not fare well."

Uh...no he hasn't, no he won't, and even Scalzi isn't enough of an addle-brained twit to try and drag Vox into court for that dog shit case. Mostly cause he'd be laughed out of court for being such a little girl's blouse about it, considering the YEARS he's been openly mocking and lying about Vox online.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts