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

Saturday, April 25, 2015

A special kind of cowardice

Vox Maximus observes that people are much more interested in talking ABOUT me than TO me:
I recently listened to the Nerdvana Podcast on the 2015 Hugo Awards (a two-part series with Part 2 being located here). Minute after minute, I listened to these individuals converse about Vox Day. They mused about his motives. They psycho-analyzed him. They called his family members “stooges”. And they just talked, and talked, and talked about Vox in quite a bit of detail (they also cried–seriously–when they thought about what Vox was “doing” to the Hugo Awards).

But do you know the one thing that they did not do? TALK TO VOX DAY HIMSELF. That’s right, these individuals used up precious time speculating about everything from Vox Day’s goals to his potential financial fixing of the Hugo Awards themselves. And yet, they did not talk to him. They did not send him an e-mail with questions. They did not try to contact him on his blog. In fact, they did not even quote anything from his blog or his writings (or a bad paraphrase or two was included).
I don't think that this is so much a special kind of lying as it is a special kind of cowardice. The reason so few people are willing to take me on directly can be seen in my interview with David Pakman. Sure, I didn't cover myself with glory there, but the fact is that even with all the advantages on his side, even when taking me completely by surprise by misleading me about the topics the interview would address and demanding that I explain why I had written words that I never wrote and defend a case I never made - see if you can find where I said anything about "signs" or declared that the Denver shootings were definitely a false flag operation in The Lone Gunmen - I still managed to get him on record confessing himself to be in the habit of having sex without obtaining consent first.

Can you blame them for not wanting to take such risks?

Sure, they claim that I am stupid, that I am an idiot, that I am crazy, that I am a badthinker, that my views are beyond the pale and unacceptable to all goodthinking people. But if they are correct, why are they so afraid of me? Why are they so afraid to simply meet me on equal terms and prove that my ideas are indefensible and wrong?

Because they can't. And more importantly, they know they can't.

This sort of thing doesn't upset me. I just sent an email to David Pakman offering to do a second interview with him, one that would actually address #GamerGate, the game industry, and the Hugo Awards. I'm entirely willing to talk to the people on the Nerdvana Podcast too. If you'd like to see me do either, go ahead and contact Pakman or Nerdvana and let them know.

But (and I cannot stress this strongly enough), I don't care. I don't have a media career. I'm not concerned about looking like a politician on camera. I'm not concerned about talking points or winning people over, and I neither need nor want any more platforms than the one I've got.

And if people want to attack me for being a criminal badthinker, well, that's something for which they will have to answer one day. Not to me, but to themselves. For all my terrible thoughts and deeds and words, the one thing I have never been guilty of is telling anyone "you are not permitted to think that and you are a bad person if you do."

The world is what it is. You can be as upset about calling homosexuality a "birth defect" as you like, but being upset is not going to save the life of a single homosexual fetus if - note the word IF - it turns out that there is a detectable genetic component that reliably predicts homosexuality in the unborn child. The "born that way" concept doesn't go very far in a society that permits the murder of the unborn.

If you could boil my perspective down to its essence, it would be this: "The world is what it is and there is no point in pretending otherwise." I may be wrong about some things. I may be wrong about many things. But I do not pretend.


UPDATE: David Pakman emailed me back and expressed his opinion that there was no ambush and no hit piece. He also declined to have me back on next week to discuss GamerGate, the game industry, or the Hugo Awards.

Labels: ,

116 Comments:

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2015 April 25, 2015 6:58 AM  

On some topics it seems you can look so far and then everything breaks down to non locality or blurry imponderables. Medical Journalist Phillip Day likes the phrase, "genetics loads the gun but doesn't pull the trigger"[paraphrased]
It's philosophical selection bias that bogs people down; keeps them in a quagmire of actual denial. It's intellectually dishonest. It's dangerous. It's soul destroying.
The "Red Pill" truth might be passing unpleasant at times - but there's no better way for the humble seeker. Short cut utopia's all crash and burn. Christendom might be hard yards; but they are worth every drop of blood, every bead of sweat, every tear. Keep it up.

Blogger Matt April 25, 2015 7:05 AM  

These people just dont understand that its possible to separate the personal from the political from the philosophical and so on. All they know is emotion. That you had to say twice that you find the idea of a man forcing himself onto his wife to be wrong as well as misguded is insane. They give zero thought to the logical implications of their statements, instead grasp at straws trying to put words in your mouth It really is like talking to a crazed woman.

Btw is Pakman anti gamergate, or in the middle? I couldnt tell if he really cared or was just breaking balls.

One more thing: Being a rich globe trotting expat is nothing without cool facial hair.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 7:06 AM  

The "gay gene" long forgotten bit of SJW lore, if it were true the fetuses would be piled up like the Khmer Rouge had gone thru.

If it were true these shitlib interviewers are gamma rejects wouldn't disqualification throw them off their game since all they care about are the important people above them? As was mused about in the thread below Pakman the Asshat is probably angling for a MSNBC gig and if he cannot defend the media cult he is not even on their radar.

"Now David you're being silly" "David there you go again interjecting your biases and predjudices" David it has been a blast steering you off the script" "Now that is a question best left to the 'serious' ladies on the 'View'"

Just my opinion after decades of watching conservatives allow themselves to be treated like children in the principal's office

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 7:12 AM  

And play the Rule of Threes, play to the audience not so much the hostile interviewer, "Oh David you took that out of context, the audience bless their intellectual selves can go to my website where a lengthy discussion can take place." "David you are obviously a very opinionated man, but let us leave it to the audience to make up their own minds about my views on very complicated and to some very emotional subjects."

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 7:19 AM  

Did I not make it sufficiently clear that I am not interested in media advice, especially from people who know nothing about it, have never been in the situation, and are unlikely to ever have anyone ask their opinion on film about anything?

I don't do interviews in order to try to tear down the interviewer. I'm not interested in that game. And I'm not even remotely concerned about a talking head trying to magically disqualify me.

How hard is it to understand that I answer the questions I am asked to the best of my ability? If you have a problem with that, then go watch Fox News. There you'll see lots of highly trained media professionals doing the sort of thing that you want to see.

I gave Pakman a chance. He did what he chose to do. That's on him, not me.

Blogger Salt April 25, 2015 7:19 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 7:20 AM  

And play the Rule of Threes, play to the audience not so much the hostile interviewer

There is your problem. I'm not playing to anyone. I'm not interested. I had a shot at a career as a media whore and I turned it down.

Blogger Salt April 25, 2015 7:22 AM  

Why are they so afraid to simply meet me on equal terms and prove that my ideas are indefensible and wrong?

You strip away their insulation.

For the past few years I have conversed with a woman about many things. It has taken that long to get her from my making a general, societal, statement and her always rebutting from the point of "I". Sometimes I still have to remind her, "I'm not talking about you."

They just can't help themselves. They hear a stated observable historical fact and cannot help but see it through the lens of themselves. Everything is the personal to them.

Blogger Bogey April 25, 2015 7:28 AM  

I assumed you have little time to entertain everyone who would want to speak with you. If I had a large podcast I would invite you just because I think you would make an interesting guest, any topic would do really.

The Pakman interview was close to a sucker punch but it was still interesting.

Blogger Bobo April 25, 2015 7:30 AM  

I'm sorta missing the all the cool details of posts like these.
Not that they don't pack a lotto love into easy bite-size pieces...it just that I'm still reeling from the image of the 300lb rainbow-haired hyper-twink from one of the previous posts.
I can't unsee it...

Blogger Bogey April 25, 2015 7:34 AM  

...by the way those guys who do the nerdvana podcast are all from the San Francisco bay area, color me surprised that they would find Vox so offensive.

Blogger valiance. April 25, 2015 7:46 AM  

"if - note the word IF - it turns out that there is a detectable genetic component that reliably predicts homosexuality in the unborn child. "

There won't be. Heritability is too low, discordance in identical twins is too high. There is no gay gene, full stop.

Now, if it turns out a virus causes obligate male homosexuality, and that virus can be vaccinated against...

Anonymous farmer Tom April 25, 2015 7:52 AM  

Vox, You said, "The world is what it is and there is no point in pretending otherwise." I may be wrong about some things. I may be wrong about many things. But I do not pretend."

And where the rubber meets the road, the other side is motivated by, consumed by, the desire to make everyone agree with them and their opinions regardless of facts, truth and logic.

So at the end of the day, we are left with two positions which can never be rectified. One position is based in truth/reality and one is not. That is the consequence of living in a post-modern culture.

Blogger rumpole5 April 25, 2015 8:00 AM  

The bottom line is that you are a man. Your words and affect display forthright independent manly traits and virtues. That can't be permitted in our twisted, sick, culture. The Apostle Paul forecast our present secular-materialist zeitgeist in Romans 1:24-32, so you are in good company. Please carry on!

Blogger Jay Lucas April 25, 2015 8:03 AM  


My early guesses around why Gamers weren't being swayed by the noise around the hobby was that they were used to dealing with videogames: Machines made of math, that like all machines and Nature itself, do not care.

Re: Salt - Yes, everything is personal to them because they strive to exist in a purely human world. For them, the social is life or death, because they know nothing beyond it. That has consequences, including being open to Fantasy. I wonder sometimes if the push for politicslly correct media is a means of protecting the feelings of those who do not distinguish between fantasy and reality.

If your goal is to retreat into a maze of narrative to avoid the possibility of pain for being wrong, then heaven forbid you come across something persuasive (and painful) in the imaginative space where you've let your guard down. Fiction is persuasive, it's built into the structure. You read a novel by accepting the premises so you can follow the story.

The SJW makes for a poor enemy because they can't stand learning another side, much less preparing a reasonable counter-argument. Fiction that disagrees with their story must be like swallowing poison, rather than just getting it on your fingers.

One of the best ways to argue seems to be telling stories, rather than setting out reasoning and facts. Maybe that's why the SJW is such an adept gaslighter... They need a defense against storytelling.

Anonymous Stingray April 25, 2015 8:10 AM  

but being upset is not going to save the life of a single homosexual fetus if - note the word IF - it turns out that there is a detectable genetic component that reliably predicts homosexuality in the unborn child. The "born that way" concept doesn't go very far in a society that permits the murder of the unborn.

This is devastating.

Blogger Jay Lucas April 25, 2015 8:11 AM  

Re: Rumpole5 - Romans 1:29

Love that debate is in there. Parliament style idiocy has always been painful to watch: posturing and tricks, it makes you want to gnaw the furniture.

Blogger Rantor April 25, 2015 8:13 AM  

Throughout much of the second half of the interview, Pakman became increasingly, deliberately obtuse. I assume his fight or flight transponders were going off as he did not want to be seen agreeing with any of Vox' points regardless of how rational they were.

It would be impressive were Pakman to man-up and do the interview he said he wanted to do. I have a feeling that he is not ready to repeat the experience.

TIme to order some Castalia House hardbacks!

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 8:30 AM  

Did you honestly think to yourself that it was going to be an honest exchange of ideas? If so when in the fuck has that ever happened?

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 8:41 AM  

You have aspirations of running a notable publishing house do you think the media will leave you alone? Your prospective authors how will they be attacked, by an honest exchange of ideas? Hah

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 8:43 AM  

Did you honestly think to yourself that it was going to be an honest exchange of ideas? If so when in the fuck has that ever happened?

I expected minor hostility on the subject of #GamerGate. Not a stupid and off-topic attempt to disqualify. I have done dozens of neutral-to-friendly interviews on national and local radio stations.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 8:44 AM  

You have aspirations of running a notable publishing house do you think the media will leave you alone?

When is the last time the media interviewed an editor from Tor, DAW, or Orbit? If they won't give us a fair shake, we simply won't talk to them.

Anonymous Godfrey April 25, 2015 8:46 AM  

True, those you refuse to pretend are their enemy. They demand we pretend. They hate us because we refuse. In the final analysis, they hate reality and all those who live in harmony with it.

Blogger hank.jim April 25, 2015 8:54 AM  

Every media interviewer has an angle to tear you down. Vox may be smart enough to avoid that trap, but it doesn't stop them from trying. I agree that turning the tables may be useless. So I'm wondering why even bother. Funny how Fox News gets into the mix. It must be hard to constantly be on the defense.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 9:03 AM  

I've never heard or seen a neutral interview once a conservative has been thrust into the political spotlight, but if it has happened then praise the Lord.

But it seems general principles are to be observed, SJWS gonna lie, Gammas gone suck up shit down and don't expect different.

One day the authority of the Left will be seen as the pile of shit it is, but that day is not here yet

Blogger guest April 25, 2015 9:22 AM  

It would be good to enter a time or restoration in the US, where two people of opposing viewpoints meet each other in public debate.

Proverbs 27:17

As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.

Blogger Jay Lucas April 25, 2015 9:25 AM  

"One day the authority of the Left will be seen as the pile of shit it is, but that day is not here yet"

Let's just hope it happens before they legalize cannibalism.

Blogger AmyJ April 25, 2015 9:28 AM  

You say you didn't cover yourself in glory. Maybe not, but you made that interviewer (with a lot of help from him, too) look silly. Every time you pinned him down, answered him forcefully, or let him paint himself into a corner, he would interrupt you and insist that you need to stay on topic....despite being the one to bring it up first.

Glory? Nah. But you did a great job of letting the other guy cover himself with excrement. It takes a special brand of asshole to marginalize the trauma of a three month old's reaction to a vaccine.

Blogger Edd Jobs April 25, 2015 9:33 AM  

"It takes a special brand of asshole to marginalize the trauma of a three month old's reaction to a vaccine."

I was thinking the same thing.

Blogger praetorian April 25, 2015 9:43 AM  

"I may be wrong about some things. I may be wrong about many things."

And there's that conservative even-handedness creeping in.

Not one step back, Vox!

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 9:44 AM  

Vaccines had my polio shot 45 days later I could not walk for 4 days 45 days after that another 4 day episode. Needless to say my family who could remember the polio scourge were horrified.

Blogger guest April 25, 2015 9:50 AM  

If you really don't care, Vox, don't do these interviews. Because this is a war. And no king goes into a war unprepared to do battle, and win. And if you do care, know your enemy, and be prepared to slay giants, and shut the mouths of lions. That doesn't happen by accident or random good luck. This is a battle of the hearts and minds of young people. If nothing else, use the position you were placed in, to care, and care deeply.

Esther 4:12-14

12 So Hathach gave Esther’s message to Mordecai.

13 Mordecai sent this reply to Esther: “Don’t think for a moment that because you’re in the palace you will escape when all other Jews are killed. 14 If you keep quiet at a time like this, deliverance and relief for the Jews will arise from some other place, but you and your relatives will die. Who knows if perhaps you were made queen for just such a time as this?”

Anonymous Valiant April 25, 2015 9:50 AM  

At 17:10 to 18:00, they actually talk about "pimping" someones work. I don't think they realize they just admitted doing it.

Incredible that they do that, when they are talking about the evilness of Vox, for his slate, and, without any shred of evidence, claim he is maybe buying all the votes.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 10:02 AM  

If you really don't care, Vox, don't do these interviews.

I suggest you stop reading here. Because I don't care if you read here either. Go away, don't come back, and mind your own business.

Blogger Bard April 25, 2015 10:02 AM  

"I may be wrong about many things" (but usually he is not). There, fixed it for you.

Anonymous The other skeptic April 25, 2015 10:04 AM  

In a comment at File 770, Steven Schwartz said:

“But the point is this: How seriously can you take a bunch of people that speak about one particular individual—an individual who is readily available for comment—without even trying to speak to the actual individual himself?”

Quite. Because he has already said he’s a dishonest interlocutor, so why should anyone give him a chance to lie to them, when they can take what he’s said elsewhere as evidence?


I wonder if anyone called him on that?

Blogger Kallmunz April 25, 2015 10:12 AM  

Of course everything said here is true but I will give Pakman one point, he allowed Vox to explain his points. I wouldn't be surprised to find that quite a few people will tune in expecting to hear "Wir oder die Juden" and instead find that the The Dark Lord explained himself very well.
Check out Pakman's interview with Arthur Chu, right now clowns like him are frothing at the mouth because Pakman "gave him a platform." That alone is worth the price of admission.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 10:14 AM  

In case you didn't see it on Twitter, I'd be happy to interview you about the five existent parts Janelle Monae's Metropolis Suite. No other subjects, absolute promise I won't drag up years old blogposts to frame cheap gotcha questions. Just an extended critical debate on afrofuturism, transhumanism, and the subaltern.

You know where to find me, I'm sure.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 10:23 AM  

In case you didn't see it on Twitter, I'd be happy to interview you about the five existent parts Janelle Monae's Metropolis Suite.

I'm sorry, I know nothing about it. It would be a very, very short interview.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 10:23 AM  

I mean, it's only two albums and an EP. You could readily get up to speed.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 10:28 AM  

I mean, it's only two albums and an EP. You could readily get up to speed.

No doubt I could. But I'm not interested. If you'd like to interview me about the internal mechanisms of the Austrian Business Cycle, why no competitor has arisen to replace World of Warcraft, or why there is a perceived dropoff in quality of George Martin's ASOIAF books as the series progresses, that would be fine.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 10:33 AM  

I'm the wrong choice of interviewer for economics, and probably for MMOGs as well, having not really played one since EverQuest and thinking the genre exemplifies the worst tendencies of contemporary video gaming towards mechanics based around forcing players to "earn" fun that they've already paid for.

But ASOIAF is a potentially feasible topic. How about a compromise - ASOIAF, plus you listen to a single Monae album and we discuss that as well.

Anonymous Xander April 25, 2015 10:37 AM  

In fairness, how often does VD ever talk to the people he skewers? Pot-Kettle

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 25, 2015 10:39 AM  

I would like to read an interview of the editor of Tor where he is asked how it is he allowed two Hugo nominated authors slip away to an upstart publishing house ran by a recluse.

Anonymous Steveo April 25, 2015 10:41 AM  

Matt stated it earlier, "All they know is emotion." A self-derived phD in Blame, and the victim lens of life becomes permanent. Things that happen in life, happen to them because someone else made it happen to them. Sad.

Blogger valiance. April 25, 2015 10:53 AM  

Man this is the last place I expected to see Janelle Monae brought up. I liked the ArchAndroid a lot, but I haven't checked for her stuff since then.

Anonymous Ain April 25, 2015 11:11 AM  

"UPDATE: David Pakman emailed me back and expressed his opinion that there was no ambush and no hit piece. He also declined to have me back on next week to discuss GamerGate, the game industry, or the Hugo Awards.

Of course, it doesn't fit into his agenda. It never did and never will. The only thing he wanted to do was a hit peice, his protests to the contrary. SJW's always lie.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 11:13 AM  

But ASOIAF is a potentially feasible topic. How about a compromise - ASOIAF, plus you listen to a single Monae album and we discuss that as well.

I have no desire to discuss music of any kind. Also, what medium is this discussion of ASOIAF and is it a debate or merely a discussion? I mean, I suppose it's possible you think A Dance with Dragons is better than A Game of Thrones.

Anonymous Roundtine April 25, 2015 11:13 AM  

In fairness, how often does VD ever talk to the people he skewers?

He's offered to debate people and comments right on their blogs. Vox has posted things written by people who disagree with him on his own blog. He's debated his own commenters.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 11:19 AM  

Sorry, my interest in expending time giving you a platform drops massively if there's no discussion of something that I consider brilliant and that seems antithetical to everything you stand for and believe.

Although I'm open to proposals for other works that fit that bill, ASOIAF doesn't seem to be it. (Although no, I do not think A Dance with Dragons is better than Game of Thrones, for a variety of largely technical reasons, although I think Benioff and Weiss, based on the first two episodes, are making a good go at fixing most of those problems.)

Blogger ajw308 April 25, 2015 11:21 AM  

@Xander, Vox has lots of invites that are declined. He's open to it. Are you new here it is that just a weak effort to disqualify?

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 11:23 AM  

Just realized that my phrasing suggested that you ought somehow magically know what works I think are brilliant, which is obviously not a reasonable request.

Probably anything you absolutely despise would work, honestly.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 11:24 AM  

Sorry, my interest in expending time giving you a platform drops massively if there's no discussion of something that I consider brilliant and that seems antithetical to everything you stand for and believe.

I neither need nor want a platform from you, Phil. You listen to whatever music you like. I'll do the same.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 11:27 AM  

Probably anything you absolutely despise would work, honestly.

How about the Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle? Or the Munich Manifesto?

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 11:34 AM  

That's something of a non sequitur in terms of the conversation I thought we were having, but perhaps we've just drifted. I'll try to start over.

You expressed a desire to confront your critics on equal terms. I'm interested in doing so, but on relatively narrow grounds: I'd like to keep the terms of the conversation (let's use that, as a neutral term that encompasses something that could range from an interview to a discussion to a debate) on the comparative virtues of works of art.

I'd be most interested in discussing something you don't like, personally - my initial suggestion of Janelle Monae was based on the fact that I ended my essay about you with the suggestion that she did a particularly good job of embodying everything you seem to hate. But if you're not interested in that, I'm happy to consider other things. However, the inclusion of some work that you despise (and for a variety of reasons, I'd rather it not be "If You Were a Dinosaur My Love," because I think there's been a disproportionate amount of focus on that one story) on the topics list is, for me, a basic requirement of participating.

I'd also be happy to include something that we both have mixed views of - ASOIAF seems a fine candidate. And I'm tentatively willing to discuss something you like and I hate as well - perhaps "Turncoat"?

Blogger Aquila Aquilonis April 25, 2015 11:35 AM  

why no competitor has arisen to replace World of Warcraft

Please do a post on this. I've been wondering this myself.

Anonymous Xander April 25, 2015 11:36 AM  

Ajw

I'm just saying, complying that people write about his views and don't even talk to him is kinda amusing since he does the same thing daily as far as I can see.

Anonymous The other robot April 25, 2015 11:44 AM  

The world is what it is. You can be as upset about calling homosexuality a "birth defect" as you like, but being upset is not going to save the life of a single homosexual fetus if - note the word IF - it turns out that there is a detectable genetic component that reliably predicts homosexuality in the unborn child. The "born that way" concept doesn't go very far in a society that permits the murder of the unborn.

Of if it turns out that male homosexuality is due to a pathogen that we can eliminate (either by inoculation or through sanitary means.)

Anonymous Red Comet April 25, 2015 11:57 AM  

That Nerdvana podcast was a pretty entertaining bit of SJWs getting the vapors over the Pupply slate. Put it on in the background and be entertained.

I like how Vox is a common internet troll one moment and then the next he is an international criminal mastermind wanted by the US government.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:00 PM  

I'd also be happy to include something that we both have mixed views of - ASOIAF seems a fine candidate. And I'm tentatively willing to discuss something you like and I hate as well - perhaps "Turncoat"?

Let's choose something you hate that is not directly tied to me. How do you feel about Tanith Lee's Secret Books of Paradys or Susan Cooper's The Dark is Rising?

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:02 PM  

PG Wodehouse is another favorite.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 12:03 PM  

I've not read Lee, have fond childhood memories of The Dark is Rising, and while there are things I find irksome about Wodehouse, they are overwhelmed by my respect for him as a prosesmith.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:08 PM  

I suggest this will take less time: why don't you go through my recent annual reading lists on the right sidebar and pick out three 5-star books you dislike, despise, whatever. Then I will pick one of them.

Also, what is the format? You write on your blog, I respond on mine?

Anonymous Alexander April 25, 2015 12:08 PM  

Re: Warcraft

I always assumed it was simply a case that any competitor would actively have to poach a massive amount of WoW's base - there's no massive pool of people who want a fantasy MMRPG but aren't currently playing one. And so it seems that all the competitors either slavishly ape WoW - in which case why leave a heavily populated world for a possible crash-and-burn, or else try and come up with some gimmick that doesn't end up standing. Especially when you've invested in a character with prestige gear, or a guild, or a billion achievements...

But that's very basic thinking, so if Vox thinks there's a reason to discuss the topic I assume it's more interesting than the above. I too would enjoy and appreciate a post on the topic.

...

As to the other topics: if 'born that way' is conclusively proven to be true, we will know it by the sudden unexplained surge of gay-support for Sarah Palin, and how suddenly wedding cakes and the like are small potatoes compared to being wiped out.

Blogger Poor Guy April 25, 2015 12:08 PM  

You would think an interview about GamerGate, with the logo on the screen, that doesn't mention GG would be embarrassing to Pakman. Why do leftists never seem to have any ability to feel shame?

Blogger Poor Guy April 25, 2015 12:10 PM  

Matt: "These people just dont understand that its possible to separate the personal from the political from the philosophical and so on."

Everything is political to the far left. Everything.

OpenID cailcorishev April 25, 2015 12:10 PM  

In fairness, how often does VD ever talk to the people he skewers?

As often as they show up. Unlike them, he always gives his opponents' views a fair hearing, addressing them directly, quoting them extensively, and providing links to their sites. If they choose not to show up and present a defense, that's not his fault.

Nice demonstration, though, of how "in fairness" usually means, "I'm about to make an unfair claim."

Anonymous B Lewis April 25, 2015 12:12 PM  

Dear Stevensonians –

I am writing today to apologize for a mistake in judgement that took place in the planning of last night’s College Night. The theme was “Intergalactic” and the decor included robots and space ships with aliens. Unfortunately, the program planners made a poor decision when choosing to serve a Mexican food buffet during a program that included spaceships and “aliens”, failing to take into account how these choices might be perceived by others. We would never want to make a connection between individuals of Latino heritage or undocumented students and “aliens” and I am so sorry that our College Night appeared to do exactly that.

This incident demonstrated a cultural insensitivity on the part of the program planners and, though it was an unintentional mistake, I recognize that this incident caused harm within our community and negatively impacted students. As a result of this incident, I will require cultural competence training for Programs staff...


College Apologizes for Serving Mexican Food at Science Fiction Event

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 12:27 PM  

The pool of things you've given five stars to and that I've read and hated is pretty small - there's no shortage of things I blink at and go "five stars? Really? That's more a three, surely." (REAMDE? Seriously? I mean, I love Stephenson - I'm counting the days til Seveneves - but I thought that was a shockingly weak effort from him. Still absolutely tore through it, but I spent the back half going "wait, are we ever going to get back to that interesting book about the two competing factions within the MMOG?" But I don't think a debate between "five stars" and "I mean, it was a decent pageturner I guess, but the back half kinda fell apart" is quite what the world is looking for.) But nothing that particularly gets my blood boiling. I'm also probably more inclined towards short works where possible - things it would be relatively easy for people to catch up on.

What of visual media? It is the area I tend to work in. In terms of things you hate, I note that Doctor Who was conspicuously absent from the Puppies slates. Whereas, on the opposite side, I have next to no patience for Supernatural, which you did put forward.

As for format, I was thinking something realtime - an audio discussion or something - would probably be better, as it would make it harder for both of us to talk past each other.

Blogger rcocean April 25, 2015 12:33 PM  

Of course, he's not going to admit it was an "ambush" - despite misleading you as the subject of the interview. This is Left-wing Journalism 101. Its SOP for Journalists for the MSM to tell some conservative or Republican they want to "talk about their book" "get their views on X" and then turn the interview into a left-wing attack and stir up some controversy. Its one reason Limbaugh rarely does book promotion interviews.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:35 PM  

How about "One Bright Star to Guide Them" by John C. Wright, then?

Blogger rcocean April 25, 2015 12:35 PM  

If the infamous Fresh interview of bill o' Reilly is a good example. BOR thought Terry Gross was going to talk about his book but instead spent the whole interview asking him hostile questions. Result - BOR walked off.

Blogger Poor Guy April 25, 2015 12:36 PM  

B Lewis - Apparently they think there won't be Mexican food in the future?

Blogger rcocean April 25, 2015 12:38 PM  

Ever thought about doing more podcasts where you discuss/interview people of interest?

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:38 PM  

What of visual media? It is the area I tend to work in.

Don't pay much attention to it. If I wasn't married, I doubt I'd watch any TV or see any movies at all. I prefer books and games. Supernatural is fun, but I don't care one way or another about it. I haven't seen Dr. Who since Tom Baker was the doctor.

Blogger rcocean April 25, 2015 12:38 PM  

Ever thought about doing more podcasts where you discuss/interview people of interest?

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:38 PM  

Ever thought about doing more podcasts where you discuss/interview people of interest?

No time.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 12:43 PM  

If we're doing something connected to you after all, why not "Turncoat," which I've read and am reasonably prepped on, and which thus saves me legwork?

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 12:47 PM  

Because I was much more heavily involved in Turncoat, it having been set in my Quantum Mortis universe. I have zero interest in listening to people claim I'm defending it simply because I can't take criticism.

While I did edit the novella, the short story existed before I'd ever heard of John C. Wright. And I consider it to be great. Turncoat is merely better than the other short stories out there.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 12:54 PM  

Ah, I'd not realized "Turncoat" was in a shared universe. (Which is probably obvious, as I'd surely have pointed that out.) I'll try to have a look at "One Bright Star" over the next couple of days, but it'll probably serve.

What of things you hate, however?

Blogger James Dixon April 25, 2015 12:56 PM  

> But if they are correct, why are they so afraid of me? Why are they so afraid to simply meet me on equal terms and prove that my ideas are indefensible and wrong?

The same reason they don't want folks listening to Rush. You have truth and logic on your side. They are afraid that merely listening to you will convert people.

> UPDATE: David Pakman emailed me back and expressed his opinion that there was no ambush and no hit piece.

Do these people even listen to themselves> I know the lie continuously, but seriously, how can he be that disconnected from reality?

> In fairness, how often does VD ever talk to the people he skewers? Pot-Kettle

Whenever they ask.

> I'm just saying, complying that people write about his views and don't even talk to him is kinda amusing since he does the same thing daily as far as I can see.

I suggest you consult an Optometrist. You obviously need glasses.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents April 25, 2015 12:56 PM  

I've never heard or seen a neutral interview once a conservative has been thrust into the political spotlight, but if it has happened then praise the Lord.

Not just "conservative", whatever that means. Happened to catch a libertarian on one of the talkiing head channels trying to explain the Indiana religious liberty law, and he was like chum in the water. It's ironic that the SJW's foamed at the mouth over GW Bush's "if you are not with us you are against us" babble 10+ years ago, since that's exacly how they operate.

Like the Maoist Red Guards, either a person is 100% in tune with whatever the current SJW line is, or that person is out. Libertarian, social conservative, religious conservative, stoic, it doesn't matter. Anyone who isn't on board the latest and greatest SJW parade float in the Insanity Pride Parade is anathema. I'm sure the fact that the ground they metaphorically stand upon is constantly shifting contributes to the endless anxiety SJW's display.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 1:14 PM  

What of things you hate, however?

I thought we were good with A Dance with Dragons.

Anonymous Giuseppe April 25, 2015 1:27 PM  

I honestly think that from his perspective there wasn't a hit piece.

Anonymous Giuseppe April 25, 2015 1:32 PM  

Vox,
that image captcha thing is broken and irritating as hell. Any fix coming soon?

Anonymous Quartermaster April 25, 2015 1:32 PM  

Giuseppe, SJWs lies to themselves as well as everyone else.

Blogger Thordaddy April 25, 2015 1:41 PM  

At the end of the day, these radicals either genuinely believe in the right to self-annihilate as one's greatest freedom OR they are simply selling this belief in a personally prophetable pursuit.

OpenID luagha April 25, 2015 1:42 PM  

As an aside, Philip Sandifer's love of Janelle Monae is clear indication that he can be saved.

As some of her best and most accessible work, I suggest 'The Power Of Yet' which she did with the Sesame Street crew, 'Tightrope', and 'Queen'.

Since 'Queen' makes it clear that she dedicates herself to starting and destroying artistic movements, how can one say that 'afrofuturism, transhumanism, and the subaltern' is not simply something she is toying with?

Blogger Thordaddy April 25, 2015 1:46 PM  

The point being that the object of desire (total self-annihilation) is reflexively required to be hidden, obscured, denied and projected for what should appear to be a self-evident justification. Self-annihilators SHALL GET NO SEAT at the Table of white Supremacy.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 1:59 PM  

No, I think ADWD is a pretty weak effort, and that it's pretty clear ASOIAF is, at that point at least, rapidly spiralling out of Martin's control. Certainly not something I'm willing to defend with any conviction beyond "eh, I didn't hate it and am still eager for Winds of Winter to come out."

Blogger Thordaddy April 25, 2015 2:11 PM  

Separation, exclusion, exclusivity... Such is the seemingly paradoxical essence of anti-liberation. The key is to understand the simple equation:

Final Liberation = self-annihilation...

The mass of "whites" seek Final Liberation, BUT cannot be candid about such desire AND MUST APPEAR inclusive and integrating (so as to serve as "good" minions). Furthermore, they allow "our" extremists to provide their side cover by "our" side's relentless screaming of "white genocide." Who then, in turn, are mocked mercilessly BY THOSE genuinely seeking Final Liberation (and their media masters) for the obvious reason that said "genocide" meme is like a broken cog in the wheel of "progress."

Blogger Noah B April 25, 2015 2:28 PM  

@Giuseppe

You can always log in. That's much less trouble that dealing with the captchas.

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 2:30 PM  

Another possibility occurs to me - anything by Alan Moore you despise? It seems like an anarchist occultist ought to be capable of writing something you hate.

Blogger buwaya puti April 25, 2015 2:32 PM  

Its interesting (and a bit amusing) that Beale and Sandifer are having trouble finding some grounds for disagreement, especially given the passion of the last few days. I suggest that if even on something subjective like literary taste this is so difficult, the true disagreement is more a matter of tribal conflict. The actual objects of controversy, even in arguments over ethics, sex, religion, race, let alone art, are merely symbols. There is very little cross tribal argument in a real sense, because there is little or nothing genuine to argue about, other than power.
To be fair to Beale, this was one of his points all along, at least in the time I have followed this blog.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 2:38 PM  

Another possibility occurs to me - anything by Alan Moore you despise?

No, not really. Not a fan, but mostly indifferent.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 2:40 PM  

Ah, how about the Nebula-winning The Quantum Rose? Or Darwin's Radio by Greg Bear?

Blogger Philip Sandifer April 25, 2015 2:45 PM  

I've not read either, but I'll check them out along with "One Bright Star" and get back to you via e-mail, assuming this task doesn't get lost amongst the amount of other stuff on my plate, which is a regrettable risk.

Blogger Vox April 25, 2015 2:58 PM  

No hurry. This can be done whenever.

OpenID voxmaximus April 25, 2015 3:10 PM  

Xander:

You said:

“I'm just saying, [complaining] that people write about his views and don't even talk to him is kinda amusing since he does the same thing daily as far as I can see.”

Xander, here is the difference: when Vox speaks about other people, he quotes them extensively, engages with their actual arguments, and debates them if they show up on his blog.

By contrast—and just to show you what a clear difference there is between Vox and them—the Nerdvana Podcast people talked about Vox for over two hours, and in all that time, they most that they could muster was a few poorly articulated paraphrases of what Vox has said or written. Now the difference between those two approaches is not just a difference in degree, but it is a difference in kind. After all, just imagine: if Vox Day wrote, say, a dozen scathing and harsh blog posts about one specific individual, and yet Vox did not quote that individual even once in all his blog posts, then we would all be calling out Vox for such a lack of intellectual and argumentative integrity. And that is exactly what the Nerdvana Podcast did, only in a verbal form. And there is no excuse for that.

Vox Maximus

OpenID voxmaximus April 25, 2015 3:12 PM  

Oh, and Vox...thank you for the link. Greatly appreciated.

As well, there are a few other Hugo-related posts on my blog that you and the Ilk might be interested in.

Vox Maximus

Blogger automatthew April 25, 2015 3:28 PM  

"Or Darwin's Radio by Greg Bear?"

Oh, that might be a good battleground. Bear's at the very least a competent SF writer, but Darwin's Radio has serious problems.

Blogger Jay Lucas April 25, 2015 3:40 PM  

@ Aquila Aquilonis - Re: Warcraft

I assumed most folk were like me: they had their MMO fill and moved on. Considering Vox's background though, bet that would be an interesting one.

@ The other robot - Re: Homosexuality

I only just heard about that the other day. Very interesting topic. I probably lack the math to follow the arguments but I'm gonna try later in the week anyway.

And that'd be one hell of a question: If it's as simple as a vaccination, do you eliminate male homosexuality? Individuals, yes. Society? Very hard question. (apparently male and female homosexuality may be different issues.)

@Quartermaster - Re: self-deception

A good con artists first victim is himself.

Anonymous Harsh April 25, 2015 4:33 PM  

In fairness, how often does VD ever talk to the people he skewers? Pot-Kettle

Bullshit. Vox has asked Scalzi, PZ Myers, and George R.R. Martin to debate and they've all refused. He can't very well talk to people if they turn down his invitation.

Anonymous Xander April 25, 2015 5:51 PM  

"Bullshit. Vox has asked Scalzi, PZ Myers, and George R.R. Martin to debate and they've all refused. He can't very well talk to people if they turn down his invitation."

Bullshit back at you. He constantly calls out all sorts of people without ever offering them a chance to debate, let alone communicating with them first.

Now that folks talk back doing the same as Vox, he whines like a little boy with a skinned knee.

Blogger buwaya puti April 25, 2015 5:57 PM  

Why does one have to communicate first ?
It seems to me that Beale has done the right things here, and his objections to the procedure notwithstanding, he is prepared to continue the conversation, or argument.
And, it also seems to me, that anyone who wants a debate can come here and ask for one. That's not at all the normal situation with others in these controversies.

OpenID cailcorishev April 25, 2015 6:14 PM  

Xander, oops, your "Golly gee, I'm just an impartial observer, but aren't you just as bad?" pose is already slipping, after only what, three comments? How surprising.

You only have to look at this thread to see how ridiculous your claim is. A guy challenged Vox to debate something extremely obscure. I assumed he was being facetious and trying to score a cheap point ("Look, Vox refused to debate me!"), and accordingly would have told him to blow, but Vox took him seriously and has been trying to work out something they can debate. It's clear from the back-and-forth that if it doesn't happen, it won't be because Vox isn't willing.

OpenID cailcorishev April 25, 2015 6:33 PM  

Oops myself, should have realized sooner that Xander = Tad. Shouldn't have responded.

Anonymous Harsh April 25, 2015 6:44 PM  

Bullshit back at you. He constantly calls out all sorts of people without ever offering them a chance to debate, let alone communicating with them first.

Do you deny that he offered to debate Scalzi? Myers? Martin?

Anonymous MendoScot April 25, 2015 7:28 PM  

I gave Pakman a chance. He did what he chose to do. That's on him, not me.

Yeah. That's it.

Anonymous Xander April 25, 2015 8:15 PM  

Tad is a faggot nigger. He is a shitstain among trolls.

OpenID voxmaximus April 25, 2015 8:22 PM  

Xander,

Not sure if you saw my Comment at 3:10 pm today, but I contend that it addresses your charge of inconsistency on Vox Day's part.

Anonymous MendoScot April 25, 2015 9:46 PM  

Tad is a faggot nigger. He is a shitstain among trolls.

Fuck off Tad.

Blogger automatthew April 26, 2015 12:05 AM  

Not Tad. He's never belligerent, rarely uses profanity. Tad never responds to allegations of being Tad.

Y'all need better calibration.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 26, 2015 2:54 AM  

I notice that he had the audacity to ask (require?) $6/month for a podcast of his show.

I haven't listened to it, but knowing he doesn't believe changing topics is a bad thing makes me unlikely to check his show out.

It might be nice to add a list of useful shows to your links VD. I like to have things on my list when I want to listen to something in the car, but I have found the options far more limiting than I would like when it comes to news and modern culture.

Anonymous Statists are so dull April 26, 2015 2:47 PM  

@ Philip Sandifer
As something of an anarchist occultist myself, Vox has never attacked my views and I often find common cause with his. Perhaps you are thinking of Straw Vox? The same one Pacman thought he was interviewing?

Anonymous Shut up rabbit April 26, 2015 2:55 PM  

@Xander
Go home you are clearly drunk. You are arguing Vow never debates his detractors in a thread where he is agreeing to debate a detractor ffs

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts