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

Monday, April 20, 2015

Black Gate withdraws

Or rather, they have asked to not be considered for the Hugo award for which they will be on the ballot. While I disagree with John's decision, I respect his right to make it.  I find it ironic, however, that people are responding to a large group of people dictating the ballot by unilaterally dictating to people for whom they will not vote.

 I also find it telling that a threat to support No Award next year is supposedly worse than a vow to do it this year. I am curious. Would they consider it better if I accepted what passes for their reasoning and announced that Rabid Puppies will join the No Award movement this year? Because that is certainly an option. (Settle down, you bloodthirsty bastards, I said no more than the obvious. It is an option.)

 The goal is to improve the Awards, not destroy them. But if the SJWs would rather destroy them than relinquish their control, well, that will tell the world exactly what sort of totalitarians they are. That's two birds for the price of one. We've already got them on the record stating that our views are invalid and should be suppressed by force; seeing them demolish the awards without our assistance will communicate that more effectively than we can do ourselves.

Labels:

341 Comments:

1 – 200 of 341 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 12:04 PM  

HOW DARE YOU LIKE OUR STUFF AND VOTE FOR US TO WIN AN AWARD!

Anonymous Feh April 20, 2015 12:07 PM  

I already thought the editor was a big giant pussy for kicking you off his site. Which was, in my view, the only thing that made it worth reading.

Now it's like NRO without Derbyshire - what's the point?

Anonymous BluntForceTrauma April 20, 2015 12:10 PM  

So these who are withdrawing. . . . They sincerely believe in past years the Hugo awards were given strictly on merit?

They are of the type who just don't want any trouble and, as in the fairy tale, would rather declare, along with the crowd, that the emperor is, indeed, dressed royally. But then a boy speaks up in disbelief. "Seriously, people?"

These are not the kind of people that make the world worth living in.

Anonymous Jon Bromfield April 20, 2015 12:15 PM  

Scalzi is already declaring victory.

If you enjoy pure cluelessness, check out his blog.

Blogger RobertT April 20, 2015 12:17 PM  

They'd rather not be than be mistaken for the wrong side.

Blogger Hunting guy April 20, 2015 12:18 PM  

The SJW's have Alinsky, but it's obvious that Vox studied Col. John Boyd. Vox is so far inside their OODA loop they will never recover.

Anonymous ticticboom April 20, 2015 12:19 PM  

They're feeding others to the alligator in hope of being eaten last. Better to team up and kill the damn thing thing, but that'd be expecting way too much from them.

Anonymous MrGreenMan April 20, 2015 12:19 PM  

All I read in this guy's writing and those of others is, they'll gladly take my money, but, since they consider my presence so odious, they've decided that my opinion is their unique definition of "ballot stuffing". At some point, they will so insult the Ilk, that even if you were to say to leave them alone, the Ilk will, out of a need to restore some insulted honor, unleash the No Award for Eternity nuke.

Anonymous Viidad April 20, 2015 12:19 PM  

What an absolute wuss.

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 20, 2015 12:19 PM  

Love the subtle lawn-dropping.

Anonymous zen0 April 20, 2015 12:20 PM  

@ BFT

.> So these who are withdrawing. . . . They sincerely believe in past years the Hugo awards were given strictly on merit?

John Wright has a video up of Harlan Ellison explaining how the Hugos had become corrupted because an award could be bought. It was done in the 90's, I think

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus April 20, 2015 12:20 PM  

We can be patient. "No award" for everything next year is soon enough. In the meantime, let the "heroes" of science fiction shame themselves.

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 12:20 PM  

"Settle down, you bloodthirsty bastards, I said no more than the obvious. It is an option.'

A wise man once said... if there is something your platoon has already decided to do.... order them to do it.

I'm not saying the Ilk have decided to nuke it all. Yet.

OpenID UnderwaterOperative April 20, 2015 12:20 PM  

This option is already being discussing outside of walls of this blog. I've said I'll wait to see how this fleshes out over the summer, but there are others chomping at the bit...

Blogger Noah B April 20, 2015 12:21 PM  

"So these who are withdrawing. . . . They sincerely believe in past years the Hugo awards were given strictly on merit?"

They are desperate to deny the existence of block votes in the past. Mentioning this fact and then supporting it with evidence finally got me banned from GRRM's blog.

Blogger Iowahine April 20, 2015 12:21 PM  

I wonder how often lately SB has poked VD as he sleeps to rouse him from a bad dream, only to find he is cackling in glee?

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 12:22 PM  

" The goal is to improve the Awards, not destroy them."

Since when? I thought the goal was simply to demonstrate that we didn't rig the thing last year.

I don't give an airborne rodent's posterior about the rotten corpse of the hugo awards. I'm in it purely for the salt and butthurt.

Anonymous ticticboom April 20, 2015 12:23 PM  

To paraphrase Longshanks, "Restore the Hugos if possible; burnt to the ground, just as good."

Anonymous DeepThought April 20, 2015 12:24 PM  

Black Gate's response is why the SJW's have taken over the industry and caused Science Fiction and fantasy sales to slide as fans flee for the doors. They just do not get it. They would rather be liked, than hold fast to their principles.

Just another site and more authors to add to my list of cowards. Two can play this game of banishment. I banish these cowards from any future purchases or clicks.

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 12:25 PM  

"This option is already being discussing outside of walls of this blog. I've said I'll wait to see how this fleshes out over the summer, but there are others chomping at the bit..."

oh look... the SEAL wants to blow shit up...

totally not predictable.

Blogger Markku April 20, 2015 12:26 PM  

Nate: Keep in mind that "improve" in this context means "conquer". To make them again awards about what normal people like, and drive SJW's to a fringe. I think this would be better than to just destroy them. And the butthurt would be the same, if not greater.

Anonymous Daniel April 20, 2015 12:28 PM  

It really is that, Josh - remarkable. I am suddenly struck by the possibility that a tiny subset of the Ilk have long-since infiltrated the Hugos, and are now playing the damsel in distress, all to inspire the ensuing chaos.

Yes. That - to me - would be more coherent than the reality - that people are openly fleeing from a once-coveted award because it might represent the literary opinion of the wrong man.

Ahhhhhh! Lovecraft liked it! It must be Cthulhu!!!

This is the best script I have read in a long time.

I mean this as no critique of John O'Neill, but I am incredibly amused by the potential for new and historic terms people are going to have to apply to these awards in the future:

Filed under Campaigns NEVER EVER NEVER Work

1988 - A campaign (not a slate! Oh heavens! Not a dastardly slate!) to get Black Genesis on the ballot was booed at the awards, and the book barely finished ahead of "No Award". This is evidence that the Hugo committee has ways to deal with unscrupulous rule-following.

1994 - Harlan Ellison gets knocked out of the Awards by Harry Turtledove - identifies the use of internet campaigns (not slates! No not ever slates!) as a troubling degradation of the integrity of the award.

2001-2005 - Frank Wu demonstrates that two cooperative campaigns dictate the winner of the Hugo Awards. Although the Hugo committee has ways of dealing with campaigns (but not slates! Not ever ever slates!), this sort of campaign is okay because everyone agrees that what is inside the recommendation is what the award is for - the average SF reader can't possibly comprehend quality.

2005 - John Scalzi begins to promote his slate campaign (but not a plain slate, no never! A slate campaign called Award Pimpage. Really, its okay, because according to PNH campaigns like this are frequently attempted, and they never work. (I assume he was not referring to the 2001-2005 campaign slate because that was an okay campaign slate. Campaign slates are now good if they have more or less than exactly 5 recommendations on them, but if they have 5 recommendations, that's a slate! Slate bad!)

2015 - For the first time in history, nominees after they have been announced unaccept the nominations. Also for the first time in history, one nominee accepts a place on the ballot while campaigning for No Award, and - in spirit - belatedly refusing the nomination, which could make for a very interesting acceptance speech, should BG win, and No Award finish second...

OpenID UnderwaterOperative April 20, 2015 12:28 PM  

Nate, I believe the say goes something to the effect of, "There's no problem that can't be fix with the proper application of high explosives"

Anonymous MrGreenMan April 20, 2015 12:29 PM  

"> And however you feel about it, I know I come out of this feeling like my support for you, and that of my friends which
> (not all of whom) voted for you, is worth less to you than that of other people. That you’d rather we didn’t,
> didn’t say hi, didn’t show your site to other friends, and really just quietly read, and if we have an opinion, just go
> off elsewhere. We’re not welcome if you actually have to acknowledge us."

Whoever wrote that is right. I used to read it sometimes even after they dropped your column. It can feed worms.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 12:30 PM  

Scalzi is already declaring victory.

If you enjoy pure cluelessness, check out his blog.


Predictably, Scalzi conducts himself like a 13-year old girl. He thinks he's safe now because there have been a few defections so he's going to start trashing the us again.

But you aren't safe, Johnny-boy.

Blogger JartStar April 20, 2015 12:30 PM  

If you read through John ONeill's posts on the matter he's not withdrawing because he hates SP/RP or loves SJWs. He's mad because SP/RP overturned the apple cart and exposed the rotten apples on the bottom.

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 20, 2015 12:32 PM  

They would rather be liked, than hold fast to their principles.

Which is kind of ironic, given that the category of those that "like" this kind of behavior is loud but very small. I do believe that the guys who are pulling out just can't take the heat, though. I can't really blame for that; they didn't sign up for that. They're just doing their thing, and suddenly the find themselves targets.

Blogger Markku April 20, 2015 12:32 PM  

He thinks he's safe now because there have been a few defections

They aren't defections. Remember, Vox supported what he liked, not whom he considered his ally. It was always their choice to make whether to accept or not accept.

Anonymous Huckleberry -- est. 1977 April 20, 2015 12:35 PM  

Scalzi is already declaring victory

@scalzi is always declaring victory, bravely, while beating a hasty retreat.
He's the only chinless, 5'7" man who insists that he gets mistaken "regularly" for a 6'4" "ex-Marine badass" while also mentioning that he can't bench press more than his teen daughter and that a day of walking relegated him to crutches.
So @scalzi's shooting just about par I guess.

Anonymous DeepThought April 20, 2015 12:35 PM  

There is a simple fix to this issue of cowards backing out. Simply include only authors who will not. Will the best in all categories be nominated? Of course not, but most will and that still leaves SJW's outside looking peering in through tear filled eyes.

If others complain, than show them no mercy and let them stew in their hatred. I am tired of playing by their rules and getting destroyed. Vox has it right, ignore their rants and do what we need to do.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 12:35 PM  

They aren't defections. Remember, Vox supported what he liked, not whom he considered his ally. It was always their choice to make whether to accept or not accept.

Agreed. What Scalzi perceives as defections would have been the better way to phrase it.

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 12:39 PM  

"He's mad because SP/RP overturned the apple cart and exposed the rotten apples on the bottom."

exactly.

He's mad at the doctors who told him he had cancer.

Anonymous mookie April 20, 2015 12:42 PM  

The Black Gate guys think they can walk away ('defect') and be welcomed back with open arms by the SJWs?

Too late. They've been wiped with the shit brush already. Like the Old Bolsheviks who sided with Stalin to save their skins, it's only a matter of time before the SJWs put them in hole in the ground.

For their cowardice and treason, these 'defectors' deserve nothing less.

Blogger Durandel Almiras April 20, 2015 12:45 PM  

The vast majority of fans I’ve spoken with have no particular animosity towards the Puppies’ stated objectives, or their right-wing leanings. The “No Award” movement is broad-based response motivated by a sincere desire to protect the integrity of the Hugo Awards, and is not politically-motivated.

What has Vox called this before, where the action taken, A, is against X because of Y but they hedge it first by saying we have nothing against X or Y and this isn't about X or Y, but is about Z, which without analysis looks like something everyone can agree with? After seeing this tactic for the 100th time it just looks so obvious to me.

Proponents of the Rabid Puppies have argued, on the surface quite rationally, that the ballot is now the ballot, and since they’ve had to put up with bad ballots in the past, the rest of us should be able to endure one we don’t like this year. Why not just read all the candidates and vote based on the merits?

This sounds like a compelling argument. Except that it’s based on the premise that this is a legitimate Hugo ballot.

I don’t believe that it is. I believe it is tainted, clearly the product of well-promoted ballot-stuffing, and to endorse such a ballot would permanently damage the reputation of the Hugos.


But continuing the very obvious stuffing being done by the "correct" crowd doesn't damage the reputation of the Hugos? Perhaps he means it doesn't damage the reputation to the hoi poi know-nothings rather than those who are actually paying attention?

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 12:46 PM  

The SJW side really needs a more organized message... Gerrod is out there screaming that anyone that doesn't walk away is committing career suicide.

And GRRM is fully supporting everyone in staying on the ballot and judging them fairly by their merits.

so which is it?

Anonymous Ridip April 20, 2015 12:47 PM  

It is critical that we hold our fire. If the Hugo's are burned to the ground it must be the Nero of the SJW's that light the fire. Once Rome has been burned from the inside out, then and only then, are we free to pave it in glass.

Patience. If we can see awards rightly granted to deserving works, Puppy or Feline, we will have accomplished the improbable and stopped the fire before Rome burns to the ground and the Christians are blamed.

Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 12:48 PM  

If the SJWs had an organized message, the puppies never would have won, because we're such a small minority of SFF fans.

Or so they keep telling us.

Anonymous wEz April 20, 2015 12:50 PM  

Bingo. Vox has always been a few steps ahead this whole time. Every move they make is a win-win because, it allows everyone to see who the SJW's really are step-by-step with an amazing amount of transparency and clarity.

Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 12:50 PM  

He's mad at the doctors who told him he had cancer.

"I bleed red white and blue. My doctor says it's a sign of kidney cancer but I told him to shut his commie mouth."

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 12:52 PM  

Agreed. What Scalzi perceives as defections would have been the better way to phrase it.

Aren't y'all as amused as I am by the hilarious spectacle of leftist hissy fits over non-leftists receiving fan-based awards is causing other leftists to be denied those awards in an orgy of rabbitish victim-hood seeking?

OpenID marsascendant April 20, 2015 12:53 PM  

I would prefer it if you would not support a "no awards" strategy this year. I for one would like to know exactly how large the enemy actually is.

OpenID UnderwaterOperative April 20, 2015 12:54 PM  

One of the reasons I'm holding off committing to the 'No Award' option right now is because the enemy is in the process of 'shitting in their own mess kit.' There's no need to do or commit to anything right now. The threat of it is fine, but strategically it's better to hold off....for now.

Anonymous Porky April 20, 2015 12:55 PM  

There is but one way forward:

"Puppy Fart Story" must sweep every single category for 2016.

Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 12:55 PM  

Scalzi is doing a bang up job of not triggering:

Annalee April 20, 2015 at 12:23 pm
As it is, all we can do for him now is let him show us on the doll where Worldcon hurt him, and offer him soothing hugs until all his pain goes away.

Scalzi, I have a lot of respect for you, but I’m trying really hard to read this line as anything other than an attempt to insult Correia by comparing him to survivors of child sexual assault, and I’m coming up snake-eyes. I find that really hurtful, especially in the context of the wider point that Correia’s injuries are imagined.

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 12:55 PM  

This option is already being discussing outside of walls of this blog. I've said I'll wait to see how this fleshes out over the summer, but there are others chomping at the bit...

...and thus were the Wild Puppies born...

Anonymous Bz April 20, 2015 1:01 PM  

From Black Gate:


The vast majority of fans I’ve spoken with have no particular animosity towards the Puppies’ stated objectives, or their right-wing leanings. [heh -bz] The “No Award” movement is broad-based response [heh -bz] motivated by a sincere desire to protect the integrity of the Hugo Awards [heh -bz], and is not politically-motivated [heh -bz].
I happen to agree with this approach. I also believe that it will be successful. Despite a lot of confusion surrounding “No Award,” it is not particularly difficult for “No Award” to win, and in fact it has done so a number of times in the past. “No Award” is just like any other nominee, and can win just as easily.
...
Vox Day and others have said that a “No Award” sweep at the Hugos this year would be a victory for the Rabid Puppies. (And Vox has rather gleefully posted the graphic at left on his website [hugos nuked in 2016 -bz], as he gears up to wreak havoc on future awards if the Rabid Puppies slate loses.)


I don't get it. Black Gate are seriously saying they advocate destroying their precious Hugos first so the awards can't be destroyed by the forces of eeevil next year? That's the master plan? It's reassuring to see the forces of sanity prevail.

Anonymous Nathan April 20, 2015 1:02 PM  

I fully expect that there will be a retaliation. Problem, for them, is that the retaliation will end up being toothless. What can they do, not publish Brad and Larry? Oh, wait... Baen publishes them. Not publish Vox? Castalia House. Refuse to review their works? They already do that. Badmouth them in the approved circles to drive down their sales? Brad, Larry, and Vox's audiences are outside the outside circle, not in it, and, given the shrinking sales in legacy SF, badmouthing authors that draw in new audiences is suicidal. How does one bring the disapproval of a community to people not of the community? They still don't have an answer for that. Meanwhile, I don't think those agitating for retaliation against the Puppies truly realize the rage out there and that every single Puppies author is pleading with people not to go after Tor.

Anonymous Jon Bromfield April 20, 2015 1:02 PM  

Gerrold must resign as Hugo Master of Ceremonies or we need to petition Sasquan to remove him.

Anonymous Stephen J. April 20, 2015 1:03 PM  

"But if the SJWs would rather destroy them than relinquish their control, well, that will tell the world exactly what sort of totalitarians they are."

Precisely. Because to relinquish control over the awards *would be* effectively to destroy them, in their view, since the awards would no longer be given for the criteria they deem worthwhile.

Anonymous Heh April 20, 2015 1:07 PM  

There is a simple fix to this issue of cowards backing out. Simply include only authors who will not.

Oh no, no, no.

We should nominate those who back out every single year from now on, until they don't back out.

Since they have given us veto power over whether or not they get a Hugo, we should use it.

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 1:12 PM  

i keep hearing about how damaging this will be to Larry's career. What is damaging? people who don't read him anyway... won't read him? People who were never going to give him a hugo... won't give him a hugo?

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 1:13 PM  

and on the otherhand... this controversy puts his work in front of people who may not otherwise see it... many of whom will like it.

Anonymous Huckleberry -- est. 1977 April 20, 2015 1:13 PM  

While I'd find it difficult, in good conscience, to No Award John C. Wright and several other worthy nominees, there is a good tactical argument for nuking the whole damn thing while you're still capable of doing so.
Does anyone here seriously think, win or lose in 2015, that the 2016 Hugo nominations aren't going to be more rigged than a North Korean General Election?
The SJWs need be shown no quarter, no mercy, and they should be wiped off the board with Prussian efficiency at the first opportunity.

Blogger Durandel Almiras April 20, 2015 1:13 PM  

As UO said above, there is no need to do anything other than to hold the line and wait for them to screw up, incidents of which have been plentiful and seemingly grow in number exponentially. They really can't think, they can only shriek and point followed by more shrieking and pointing. To think I was actually worried by such types when I was younger. Now all I have for them is disdain. I'd say pity, but I'm not there.

Blogger Durandel Almiras April 20, 2015 1:15 PM  

good point Nate. In many ways, the whole incident has done nothing more than get many names out there that probably many have not heard. All publicity is good publicity, or something like that

Anonymous Eowyn April 20, 2015 1:15 PM  

These temper tantrums are reminiscent of a spoiled brat not getting their way during kickball. Instead of going home to pout, they'd rather stick a knife in the ball so that no one can play ever again.

The ball game can still go on -with a newer, better ball and players who won't throw hissy fits when it doesn't go how they want it to go.

Blogger Marissa April 20, 2015 1:17 PM  

Does anyone here seriously think, win or lose in 2015, that the 2016 Hugo nominations aren't going to be more rigged than a North Korean General Election?
The SJWs need be shown no quarter, no mercy, and they should be wiped off the board with Prussian efficiency at the first opportunity.


I don't think No Award will work this year for the SJWs and I don't think they will rig next year's nominations either. There simply aren't enough of them. Maybe I am too optimistic in the "Silent Majority" of sci-fi fans who want to be entertained instead of preached at, but all I see is a bunch of Twits and bloggerati astroturf dissent against the SP/RP slates. I don't mean to underestimate the enemy, but I just don't think there's that many of them. They're loud, and appear to be more numerous than they actually are.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 1:18 PM  

Nate--

I really think some of the people withdrawing thing that they still have some career options with the SJW crowd. Like right now they are small time, but next year, they could go very big.

I don't think they really understand that (a) the Tor's of the world are focusing on getting what they can from their "stars" - David Weber, John Scalzi, etc and (b) new authors are not getting signed to great contracts by publishers like Orbit and Tor, it's barely better than being self published and (c) how little influence in the wider non-Hugo world these people have. Tor relentlessly promoted 'Lock In' by John Scalzi, but it didn't even get to the 6th or 7th slot of the Best Novel category. They sent the guy on a multi-state long-haul book tour. Still didn't help. We don't know the real sales, but total units are almost surely under 100k.

The trufan market is tiny and not really that influential, but to even smaller authors, it seems really big. It seems like the big time.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 1:19 PM  

i keep hearing about how damaging this will be to Larry's career. What is damaging? people who don't read him anyway... won't read him? People who were never going to give him a hugo... won't give him a hugo?

That's the "logic" of the Lefties. They're sure he's committing career suicide by indulging in badthink against the collective. But I predict Larry and Wright and Brad will see a big surge in sales of their works over the next twelve months. The whole kerfuffle is getting their names in front of a much wider audience than they previously enjoyed.

Blogger maniacprovost April 20, 2015 1:20 PM  

Speaking of Wild Puppies, the Hugo nominations need to have at least 3 slates next year. If the rabbits can't put one together, we'll have to do it for them.

We can call it "Mad Rabbits..."

Hugo-worthy leftist/moderate works can be put on the Mad Rabbits slate, and widely promoted to the warren as "fighting back" against the puppies and "reclaiming" the award for "trufans."

Step 2, chaos ensues.

Step 3???

Victory!

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 1:22 PM  

Meanwhile, I don't think those agitating for retaliation against the Puppies truly realize the rage out there and that every single Puppies author is pleading with people not to go after Tor.

Problem is, when the question (Who bitch dis is?) is posed with respect to PNH or TNH, one lonely little hill keeps turning up like a bad penny. Tom Doherty and his bosses have a choice: a larger base of customers or sales-averse editors. For years, TOR has, if not actively participated in, allowed its imprint to be openly associated with the garbage spewed forth by and the leftist campaigns run by the N-H's. TOR did not object when the Hugos came in courtesy of the ballot-stuffing in their favor. Now that it has been exposed, they'll have to live with the consequences.

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 1:25 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 1:25 PM  

All publicity is good publicity, or something like that

Markku is being coy, but..yes.

Anonymous joe doakes April 20, 2015 1:25 PM  

Scalzi's obvious ploy will be a rule change at Sasquan to ban overt slates, or better still, change membership so only attendees vote. Any rule change must be confirmed at the next Con so we need to be there.

The Ilk should make reservations at one of the half-a-dozen Kansas City shooting ranges next year, for a warm-up rally. Who lives near there? Which one should we choose?

OpenID marsascendant April 20, 2015 1:28 PM  

@Marissa - I agree, but more to the point, whether you are wrong or right is not currently known. However assuming that the Puppy-lovers, and the dread ilk do not engage in no awarding, we will KNOW exactly how far the rot spreads, The number of No Award votes will tell us. And despite the (IMO) irrational confidence of the scalzi/hayden block I don't think they are nearly as large as they think they are. In fact I suspect that in late august we will see a post by scalzi patting himself on the back for preventing the No Awarder's from "taking over". At the same time we know that the number of supporting memberships has (to use mike glyer's term) exploded, and I expect many of them, if not most of them, are puppy adjacent at the least. Personally I think we should discourage any puppy lovers/ dread ilk from voting No Award while at the same time encouraging the SJW's to vote No Award simply to make sure our understanding if the size of the rot in the house of hugo is as complete as possible.

Spoken as a puppy lover, but not a member of the dread ilk.

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 20, 2015 1:30 PM  

I'd say pity, but I'm not there.

Me neither. I'd like to feel Christian pity for the pitiable, but I mostly feel contempt.

Ah, well. Nobody's perfect.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 1:34 PM  

Scalzi's obvious ploy will be a rule change at Sasquan to ban overt slates, or better still, change membership so only attendees vote. Any rule change must be confirmed at the next Con so we need to be there.

They have tried to come up with ways to do so at Making Light, and it's a very difficult proposition. They've never even gotten to language to present to the business commitee.

It is entirely likely that any change they make will make it easier to game, not harder.

One of the most popular proposals discussed would penalize slated candidates. Which means that not only could you get your own candidates on the ballot, you could effectively veto opposing candidates by putting them on a slate of their own.

Blogger IM2L844 April 20, 2015 1:35 PM  

SJW motion to change the rules: Speculative Fiction shall henceforth be referred to as Polycurious Fiction.

Anonymous ZT April 20, 2015 1:35 PM  

Honestly VD, I don't know why any of you pay even this much attention to the Hugo's? I just posted to BG (under dmonzero) that I have not seen value in the "Hugo" label for nearly a decade and it simply is not worth my effort save to watch it burn, and that is mostly for my entertainment value at watching a train-wreck.

I do enjoy the hand waving that SJW's are doing now that they are challenged but honestly I do not know if the Hugo's is even worth my contempt.

BG should start it's own awards. If the SJW's try to influence it then I can understand the fight, but the Hugos has no integrity at this point. It is simply to late. Its like the corpse from "Weekend at Bernie's", people keep treating it like it's alive and well all because of historic momentum but it is dead and rotting.

Anonymous Scintan April 20, 2015 1:36 PM  

If you read through John ONeill's posts on the matter he's not withdrawing because he hates SP/RP or loves SJWs. He's mad because SP/RP overturned the apple cart and exposed the rotten apples on the bottom.

O'Neill has pretty conclusively shown that he's part of the problem.

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 1:44 PM  

Never have so many made so much out of so little.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 1:45 PM  

Honestly VD, I don't know why any of you pay even this much attention to the Hugo's?

It's a skirmish in part of a bigger war.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 1:46 PM  

Never have so many made so much out of so little.

Not true. Your wife on your wedding night, for example.

Anonymous Porky April 20, 2015 1:47 PM  

Dh.... your summer home wouldn't happen to be an underground lair beneath an active volcano surrounded by shark infested waters.... would it?

Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 1:48 PM  

Never have so many made so much out of so little.

Glad to see you've taken a break from pantsless sharpshooting...

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 20, 2015 1:49 PM  

Never have so many made so much out of so little.

The PTO my wife helped with a few years ago would beg to differ. So would my HOA.

Anonymous Big Bill April 20, 2015 1:50 PM  

Aren't y'all as amused as I am by the hilarious spectacle of leftist hissy fits over non-leftists receiving fan-based awards is causing other leftists to be denied those awards in an orgy of rabbitish victim-hood seeking?

Wait. That can't be right. The SJW authors who lost this year would have to have some followup strategy, like "Sadly, my book came out in the 'Dark Years' of the Hugo Awards when savage barbarians swept in from the West and drove the Hugo natives away from their village. That was the year the Hugos of Evil were awarded and I missed my chance."

But the only way that might work is if they already have some strategy for disenfranchising badthink voters from future elections, i.e. creating "Renaissance Hugos" starting next year (after the Purges).

Hey! Maybe next year (after the Purges of 2015) they could create a special category of "Retrospective Hugos" or "SJW Hugos) to honor the noble SJW authors who dropped out in 2015 and therefore didn't get a Hugo during the "Dark Year of the Hugos".

Anonymous clk April 20, 2015 1:54 PM  

Theres always a danger in believing your own propaganda... and looking too far forward...

We dont really have a handle on the real size of both camps .. as have been explained here it didnt take that many to push the puppies past the first round.. if there are really more puppies than "others" then theres some long term future for the movement .. however.. if it runs the other way and there a more "others" than puppies, this is the only year you can strike and win .. the puppies had the element of suprise this year .. as stupid as you think your enemy is, it will not be as easy next year -- either by numbers or some rule change. The narrative is already being framed ... they have a enemy (VD and the RP's) around which to rally their troops... and every article makes him a more evil enemy. That will bring out numbers ... and In the end its all about numbers.

As some point you should decide what you really want out of this ... and all the SJW's turning to dust and blowing alway is not a valid choice.. its not going to happen. In the end, VD/CH is going to want to attract new authors (which you have beein doing a great job of), publish great stories (again so far so good) and sell books .... Chaos and capitalism dont always mix so well...

IMHO ...

Anonymous BigGaySteve April 20, 2015 2:03 PM  

" Ilk have long-since infiltrated the Hugos... playing the damsel in distress"~Help me help me these puppies are everywhere. Bad dogs, no one expects the fagot to be the one with the Project VERITAS camera.

"There simply aren't enough of them."~ The only one that matters is the one counting the votes.

The next SJW frontier taxpayers on the hook for big weddings. http://chicksontheright.com/blog/item/28378-big-weddings-are-the-next-basic-human-right-for-real Note that the couple could give up cigs and probably save $ 200+ a month for it.

"Honestly VD, I don't know why any of you pay even this much attention to the Hugo's?"

Punching a leftist in the face forces them into contact with reality.

Blogger Noah B April 20, 2015 2:06 PM  

@clk

Even if this doesn't work and we are overwhelmed by SJW hordes this year and next, we have lost 40 bucks a piece. I do believe and hope that this has brought a great deal of attention to Castalia that it would not otherwise have received, ultimately resulting in more book sales for them and less for Tor.

Anonymous Roundtine April 20, 2015 2:20 PM  

The narrative is already being framed ... they have a enemy (VD and the RP's) around which to rally their troops... and every article makes him a more evil enemy. That will bring out numbers ... and In the end its all about numbers.

This assumes the battle is the war and it assumes winning the battle is the objective. If your side doesn't know a war is going on, sometimes even a massacre can be a win in the long-run. I'm not saying the Puppies are aiming to be massacred, BTW, but I don't think it matters whether the Hugos are won or lost in 2015. If nothing else, a major recruiting effort worth millions of dollars is being wholly financed by progressive media outlets.

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 2:20 PM  

BigGaySteve April 20, 2015 2:03 PM
Punching a leftist in the face forces them into contact with reality.



the heck with that.

punching a Leftist in the face is good, clean, wholesome fun.

Blogger JLanceCombs April 20, 2015 2:23 PM  

Why improve them? The awards have been a platform for leftism for too long. I say let them burn their own stages to spite we who will not even notice.

Anonymous ZT April 20, 2015 2:23 PM  

@Harsh
[quote]
> Honestly VD, I don't know why any of you pay even this much attention to the Hugo's?

It's a skirmish in part of a bigger war.
[/quote]

That's fair.

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 2:26 PM  

Wow... I always thought all of these various media awards were on the up and up.

This is disturbing.

Next we will learn the Oscar's are a political farce.

All the pillars of civilization are being wrecked, one by one.

Blogger Student in Blue April 20, 2015 2:27 PM  

We use the most basic of basic HTML around here, not that BBCode-type stuff ("[quote]", etc).

<b>Like this.</b>

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 2:29 PM  

If nothing else, a major recruiting effort worth millions of dollars is being wholly financed by progressive media outlets.

Absolutely. You can bet your bottom dollar they're campaigning and recruiting like mad behind the scenes right now for their "no award" slate. You can also safely assume that they will be provided with whatever registration numbers that worldcon (or a fellow traveler associated with worldcon) can provide them with. They're also trying to come up with rules changes to effectively exclude non-SJW's from the Hugos going forward.

Anonymous ZT April 20, 2015 2:31 PM  

[quote]
This assumes the battle is the war and it assumes winning the battle is the objective. If your side doesn't know a war is going on, sometimes even a massacre can be a win in the long-run. I'm not saying the Puppies are aiming to be massacred, BTW, but I don't think it matters whether the Hugos are won or lost in 2015. If nothing else, a major recruiting effort worth millions of dollars is being wholly financed by progressive media outlets.
[/quote]

I think John's blog post already highlights that essentially 2015 is the lost year for everyone which is why he is ok with no award. VD's simply showing the Hugo powers that be the problem of their setup by following the rules. He has simply followed the rules they put into play better than any of them have.

Blogger Tom Kratman April 20, 2015 2:31 PM  

Aces and Eights.

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 2:32 PM  

I am on the verge of punching this Scalzi character in the nose and calling him a douche bag.

That is how mad I am.

I am with you Josh. I got your back Bro!

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 2:32 PM  

Porky..

LOL no, thank fully. They invited Bruce Schenier, who is a legitimate security and systems expert, to moderate/facilitate the discussion, and he's done a decent job. His design goals are good. But the voting is already borderline too complicated (such that there are numerous posts each around the web on just the basics of how to vote, how to nominate, etc). Making it more complicated is not going help the situation.

The half-formed consensus over there was of an approval system, or alternatively, single transferable vote. The mechanics of each, plus what there is now, are all easily game-able and the changes they propose provide minimal "slate protection", which is exactly what they are trying to protect against.

We don't know the vote totals, but it's going to be difficult to design a voting based system where the absolute majority don't get their way. Certainly in the smaller categories SP/RP was the absolute majority, and no amount of rules changes are going to be able to get around that. In the Best Novel category, it's not clear how many voters were SP/RP as a ratio of the whole, but it's definitely a good slice, though probably not a majority.

The Toad actually suggested revealing who nominated who for what works. I don't think they understand that Dread Ilk care not for that type of thing. I'd love for someone to try to dox Nate or Markuu. Hilarity would ensure, I'm sure.

Anonymous Phil Mann April 20, 2015 2:32 PM  

Mr. Scalzi tips his hand as to how he will handle a Puppies nomination:

"This is why I noted that if one finds me on a slate, it will not be with my consent."

Apparently, he objects only to being on a slate, not actually to being nominated.

Blogger Noah B April 20, 2015 2:33 PM  

Tom, we're counting on you to give that speech.

Anonymous Cheddarman April 20, 2015 2:34 PM  

"Love the subtle lawn-dropping."

I want to hear Nate say "I crap bigger than Scalzi's lawn."

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 2:36 PM  

I am on the verge of punching this Scalzi character in the nose and calling him a douche bag.

Film it and put it up on YouTube.

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 2:37 PM  

the greatest thing about all this talk about restricting voting rights to physical attendees of the WorldCon?

a - at some $200, plus travel expenses ( going to England or Australia can run north of 10 grand ), this is going to put voting rights out of the reach of almost all fans
b - which effectively restricts voting to industry pros ... who can write the expense off of their taxes and / or charge it to their company

so, this would be a 'fan award', how?

if it's almost exclusively a pro determined award, it's different from the Nebulas, how?

gosh, i wonder why the Frog of Tor ( someone unleash her ) would be in favor of rigging the rules so only industry insiders have a say?

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 2:37 PM  

"This is why I noted that if one finds me on a slate, it will not be with my consent."

Translation: I'm publicly opposed to slates to appeal to the masses but I'll still do whatever it takes to get moar Hugoz!!!

Anonymous Musashi April 20, 2015 2:38 PM  

What would be delicious is for a book to be nominated next year wherein the storyline and thinly veiled caricatures of the rabbits we all know and love makes a mockery of everyone and everything they hold dear.

And then of course it wins a Hugo.

Every sacred cow of theirs eviscerated....from top to bottom.

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 2:40 PM  

Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 2:32 PM
I am with you Josh. I got your back Bro!



Tiny Tim, the only guy who, when standing behind them, makes the Ilk more nervous than BigGaySteve.

Anonymous Cheddarman April 20, 2015 2:40 PM  

"A wise man once said... if there is something your platoon has already decided to do.... order them to do it" - King Leonidas of Sparta

Blogger Marissa April 20, 2015 2:41 PM  

If nothing else, a major recruiting effort worth millions of dollars is being wholly financed by progressive media outlets.

Are they going to do this every year? It seems to be the only way they can get a large number of people to vote their way. All Larry and Brad did was spend a few hundred dollars of their time asking for help nominating and reading those works which they did decide to nominate. Same with Vox--who did so after registration for nomination took place. It should be repeated that Rapid Puppies had no effect on getting more people registered to nominate because it came out after that time. Imagine if RP had been released before the registration deadline. Sad Puppies swept the nominations without the full power of RP.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler April 20, 2015 2:41 PM  

This is disturbing on so many levels.

You know what this situation tells?

It is about SPOILED BRATS. People are withdrawing their nominations because somebody they differ politically has some entries?!?

These are the action of spoiled Brats! The Left are full of pussies. Spoiled Brats are pussies. They are throwing their temper tantrums because they aren't getting their way!

Also to note, that these SJWs and their fellow travelers want PURITY. Any hint of political incorrectness and you are to be disbarred. They are ensuring the purity of the movement, thus their totalitarianism. They are NOT for tolerance and diversity. Vox Day is the diversity but they can't stand it. It is all hypocrisy.

And it is obvious that John is a craven ball-less coward. What an effeminate.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 2:44 PM  

Scalzi illuminates why their comments are so stupid.

Next year, all you have to do is put Scalzi on the SP/RP slate. Then you disqualify not only your own votes, but all the people who voted for him who are not puppies.

Now that SP/RP get not only the choice of 4 of 5 candidates, but veto against anyone else as well.

It's telegraphing your weakness to an opponent. Idiots.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2015 2:46 PM  

I will admit I am getting kind of disgusted with those who are withdrawing. They are just proving the point that it is a popularity contest and they are aiding those who want their club to continue ruling what they took over.

Blech.

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 2:48 PM  

Aces and Eights.

Indeed. They might even realize that at some point, maybe even in time to try to avoid having the door at their back. Problem is, they're in a room that has doors on every side.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2015 2:48 PM  

spoiled Brats

Exactly.

Though I wouldn't be surprised at more of those who have been silent speak up against the hypocrisy that is rampant and in full view now.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 20, 2015 2:51 PM  

One thing lefties don't spend their own money, cheap theatrics and crap like that they can spare but to actually spend money of their own, No. Maybe some deep pockets will give out voting memberships.

Blogger Brad Andrews April 20, 2015 2:51 PM  

dh,

Bruce Schenier is not loved in the security field from what I have read in the past. His comments on this topic help explain that in my view.

I sent him an email on that, but I don't expect to hear back.

Anonymous GreyS April 20, 2015 2:53 PM  

"Eleven-time Hugo Award winner and frequent award presenter Connie Willis..."

Unsurprising that a double-digit winner who rides and lives on the back of this corrupt monstrosity would find the "courage" to decry the spears thrown at the beast.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 2:55 PM  

Brad--

I follow it somewhat closely, he's not exactly controversial, but he is polarizing. Partly because of who he has worked for, and partly because his handling of non-security issues makes his expert status seem a little bit unearned.

I don't really disagree with him on anything security related of substance. I strongly agree with his vies on the US TSA.

The discussion on changes to the voting system for the Hugo's borders on insanity with the various changes they've tried to come up with, none of which are effective at limiting the slate without dramatically making it more difficult to run. There we even a few comments just randomly weighting votes. That's the extent that they are brainstorming on a way to prevent Sad Puppies 5 (RP4 is going to happen, no doubt about it, rules can't be changed in time).

Anonymous mookie April 20, 2015 3:03 PM  

Dear Ilk:

I am finally horrified by the SJWs. It took me a few years (I am rather slow, probably below most of you in IQ.) But after seeing the smear job on John C. Wright of all people, I am now ready to quit fucking around and start stomping SJWs skulls in my personal sphere of influence.

I want BLOOD.

Can you help me put together a reading list? I need to "undo" more than 27 years of Midwestern middle-class churchian bullshit. Here is my book list so far -- can you please make suggestions of what to add/delete?

48 Laws of Power by Robert Greene
Art of War by Sun Tzu
The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli
Winning Through Intimidation by Robert Ringer
The Art of Worldly Wisdom by Baltasar Gracian
Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky
Will by G. Gordon Liddy

Generally looking for books on strategy, realpolitik, and generally crushing my enemies, see them driven before me, and to hear the lamentations of the rabbits.

Blogger JaimeInTexas April 20, 2015 3:05 PM  

I have a nagging suspicion that there is someone out there that is diagramming all this Hugo, with gamergate as an unrelated twist, into one heck of a space opera.
Move over GRRM.

Blogger JaimeInTexas April 20, 2015 3:10 PM  

"Next year, all you have to do is put Scalzi on the SP/RP slate."

When your opponent has no spine, they will slither.

For those of you so inclined to save the Hugo to truly represent excelling work in sci-fi/fantasy, continue to nominate works that represent that ideal.

For those who think that things have gone too far and the only solution is to rebuild, then, nuke away.

For us who are watching this as a lesson in levels of warfare, it is all candy.

Anonymous Daniel April 20, 2015 3:10 PM  

Brad, I have no problem with any of the withdrawals:

1) They are irrelevant to the objectives. Stay or go, it has no effect on what happens next.
2) These are not people who volunteered their works. That's why the Hugos have always checked first before announcing - being worthy of an award doesn't mean you want the attention of an award.
3) Even for those who accepted and then rejected, I have no problem: their waffling has to do with the fact that maybe they thought the SJWs would settle down and be civil. When that didn't happen, the somewhat dubious "value" of receiving a decades-long tarnished rocket would fall. I'm not going to question the choice.

The only exception is John O'Neill, whose choice I don't question, but whose timing could not have been worse for the insider faction: it came out after the Hugos declared the canon closed, which means that now there is a reluctant candidate on the ballot who happens to be lobbying hard for "No Award."

That's got to be...uncomfortable. I mean, even Marlon Brando took his award - he just had an Indian stand up for him.

Problem is, this time all the Indians are on the other side.

Blogger The Deuce April 20, 2015 3:10 PM  

Or rather, they have asked to not be considered for the Hugo award for which they will be on the ballot.

Well then, I suppose I don't have to oblige their wishes, do I? And in fact, I think I would be damaging the integrity of the Hugos they care so much about if I did. :-)

Blogger Joshua Dyal April 20, 2015 3:12 PM  

That's got to be...uncomfortable. I mean, even Marlon Brando took his award - he just had an Indian stand up for him.

NOW I see the cunning of Vox's plan!

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 20, 2015 3:16 PM  

I found one thread at Kos, a very quick perusal I found no planning or even hints of it. There were mainly liberals there trying to stay on the good side of the rabid skunks of political correctness. The usual jabber in a disparate political grouping, people saying the safe stuff.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/13/1376743/-Freeping-the-Hugo-Awards

Blogger Bard April 20, 2015 3:16 PM  

All,
I have enjoyed this for amusement's sake only, but now I am truly disgusted beyond what I was before. What do I actually do to vote? Where and to whom do I send the $40? When it all burns down, I want to say I was a part of the solution.

Anonymous tiredofitall April 20, 2015 3:17 PM  

"Also also, yes. I fully expect this to cause a spasm of WWHHHHHARGLEBAAAARGLE over in the Puppyverse, as I am the Root of All Evil (or at least one of the roots) in their eyes. I look forward to whatever ridiculous bit of nonsense issues forth about me from them next." - McRapey

Wow, from six foot four marine bad ass to the "root of all evil" in less than a decade? That's gotta be a record.

Also, as much guff as we give him for mentioning his huge lawn, ol Johhny boy posted this gem of a pic: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7671/16581551184_ac1d4c74e2_z.jpg

It's like that man has no sense of how he's being perceived. I picture McRapey sitting back in his house thinking he's beloved by all, except a few cranks over at VD. But in reality everybody outside his echo chamber of a website thinks he's a preening doofus who has overstayed his welcome in the field of scifi.

Anonymous Giuseppe April 20, 2015 3:17 PM  

Nate, Vox,
I am already on record that I will no award anything not RP/SP. Reparations for the past, using the SJWs own playbook and ok, ok, bloodthirstiness. As far as I am concerned it will be RP/SP or nothing. And am willing to pay $40 into perpetuity to see the radioactive halflife of the next campaign...Radioactive Cubs lasts until SJWs are extinct.

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 3:17 PM  

another thing, you remember a couple threads back where i pointed out that the WorldCon exists as a funding mechanism for the Hugos?

IF they gut voting rights for non-attending members
THEN they gut financing for the WorldCon.

what were they getting, some %50 of registration revenues from 'supporting' memberships before this all blew up?

if you don't get voting/nomination rights, why would you give money to a Con that you are on the other side of the planet from?

Anonymous MG April 20, 2015 3:19 PM  

From the comments over at BG by John ONeill:


"If this had been a balanced ballot, with input from a host of people, then I think you’d have an argument here. But it’s not. The Rabid Puppy ballot resulted in a record number of Hugo nominations (six) for John C. Wright… meaning that last year, Wright was superior to Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, and James Tiptree Junior in their prime.
I’ve never read anything by John C. Wright, so I have no real opinion about his fiction. But when I see that, alongside 11 nominations for Castalia House and two for Vox Day, my natural skepticism kicks in."

Yet they never had a problem with Tor/Scalzi.

Apparently the withdrawal is too late, the ballots have gone to the printer

Anonymous noname47 April 20, 2015 3:20 PM  

Larry said this:
Amusing side note, I was told Vox Day loved Three Body Problem, and the only reason it wasn’t on his RP was that he hadn’t read it in time… So quick, nobody tell the angry guilt by association mob.

Let's break it down for the quislings:
+ Vox Day actually likes Three Body Problem and he's on verbal record in that recent podcast as saying so. Not only that, but he also said he would have put Three Body Problem on his rec list if he had read it earlier before he published the Rabid Puppies slate.

+ Cixin Liu is now in because Marko Kloos declined due to guilt by association.

+ SJWs twitting about how great it is a non-white author is nominated.

Would Vox care to write a review extolling how great Three Body Problem is? Feels like a convergence of honesty and SJW delusion is begging for a black knighting.

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 3:22 PM  

Bard April 20, 2015 3:16 PM
What do I actually do to vote? Where and to whom do I send the $40? When it all burns down, I want to say I was a part of the solution.



click on the Rabid Puppies logo in the upper right.

then go here
https://sasquan.swoc.us/sasquan/reg.php

Anonymous BigGaySteve April 20, 2015 3:23 PM  

"The Toad actually suggested revealing who nominated who for what works"

Wouldn't it be funny if someone could used a pre paid credit card and spoofed his name on a ballot voting all RP when he releases the info. Are they planning on calling up peoples workplaces and telling them what people read?

Blogger Bard April 20, 2015 3:26 PM  

thanks Bob

Blogger bob k. mando April 20, 2015 3:26 PM  

Marissa April 20, 2015 2:41 PM
It should be repeated that Rapid Puppies had no effect on getting more people registered to nominate because it came out after that time.



so, Marissa, how do you explain the RP slate being more effective than the SP slate for nomination purposes?

*wink*

Anonymous Nathan April 20, 2015 3:28 PM  

"It's like that man has no sense of how he's being perceived. I picture McRapey sitting back in his house thinking he's beloved by all, except a few cranks over at VD. But in reality everybody outside his echo chamber of a website thinks he's a preening doofus who has overstayed his welcome in the field of scifi."

Scalzi's the perfect example of Eric Flint's idea that the awards actually harm those writers who chase after them. Old Man's War was pretty decent. It's been downhill from there. Your average non-industry SF board spends more time talking about Ringo, Butcher, and Weber, not to mention media tie-in books, than Scalzi. Although most of them are familiar with his banhammer.

Blogger Marissa April 20, 2015 3:29 PM  

Also, as much guff as we give him for mentioning his huge lawn, ol Johhny boy posted this gem of a pic:

Looks like he's wearing mom jeans.

Blogger Markku April 20, 2015 3:31 PM  

if there are really more puppies than "others" then theres some long term future for the movement .. however.. if it runs the other way and there a more "others" than puppies, this is the only year you can strike and win .. the puppies had the element of suprise this year .. as stupid as you think your enemy is, it will not be as easy next year -- either by numbers or some rule change.

The number of puppies is a very dynamic thing too. Just compare SP1, SP2 and SP3/RP.

Right now, they are knocking the GamerGates of hell and then running away laughing, like wee babbies. But what hellhounds lie on the other side of those gates, I wonder?

Let sleeping hellhounds lie.

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 3:31 PM  

Bob K. Mando said: "Tiny Tim, the only guy who, when standing behind them, makes the Ilk more nervous than BigGaySteve."

Bob, I have no doubt you are nervous when someone comes up behind you. All those years you spent in bath houses would make anyone a little jumpy. That is understandable. I think you probably suffer from a form of PTSD associated with dropped bars of soap. Very common in prison inmates.

Blogger Noah B April 20, 2015 3:34 PM  

"so, Marissa, how do you explain the RP slate being more effective than the SP slate for nomination purposes?"

The only thing scarier to SJWs than Dread Ilk: telepathic Dreak Ilk.

Blogger Marissa April 20, 2015 3:35 PM  

so, Marissa, how do you explain the RP slate being more effective than the SP slate for nomination purposes?

*wink*


Was it? If so, that could mean 1 of 2 things. Vox's call for people to check out Sad Puppies resulted in a lot of people registering to nominate, people who would have naturally sided with RP-nominated works. What's crazy is that means, without having even released a slate yet, Vox mobilized a bunch of people to sign up for the ability to nominate, more than Larry and Brad combined. That's extraordinary, but believable.

2. Lots of folks signed up for SP who have never heard of this site, but then saw the RP slate and thought the works were nomination-worthy. Seems less likely, because the strictly-SP crowd doesn't appear to be very RP-friendly. Not unfriendly, but simply uninterested. I could be wrong.

What do you think, bob?

Anonymous Cheddarman April 20, 2015 3:36 PM  

mookie,

It may do you well to understand that what the Ilk would call "game" is recognized in the Bible as being part of human behaviour. If you want to see examples of "game" in the Bible, start with Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well. She starts out by shit testing Jesus. He does not give her a polite churchian response, He ignores the shit test and points out that she is a tramp.

OpenID pancakeloach April 20, 2015 3:40 PM  

Re: nuking awards

I plan to read the voter packet, and rank the works I deem award-worthy in order of my preference. Then put "no award" as my last, least-preferred nominee. Nothing will go under "no award": any work I don't like will be left off my ballot entirely.

If I understand the vote-counting procedures correctly, that means if none of the works that I think are worthy of a Hugo win, my vote will be cast for "no award." Which will have no effect unless there are a lot of other people voting for no award, too.

I want the best work to win, but if that's not in the cards, I'm happy to contribute to No-Awarding a category.

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 3:40 PM  

Cheddarman, "and all of your righteousness is as dirty rags".

Blogger rcocean April 20, 2015 3:41 PM  

"Next year, all you have to do is put Scalzi on the SP/RP slate."

What a dumb idea. You simply don't know Scalzi. Put him on the slate and he will simply do a quick calculation. If he thinks it will result in a nomination and a Hugo he will find some BS reason to NOT withdraw, then if he wins, he will crow about how fooled all the VoxDay "shitbird racists" to give him a Hugo. If he thinks it will get him nothing, he will just withdraw his name.

Blogger rcocean April 20, 2015 3:42 PM  

And go read his latest screed. What a hate filled, bitter, little gamma. His hatred for nice-guy Brad Torgensen is almost scary.

Anonymous Jon Bromfield April 20, 2015 3:42 PM  

Ironically, I don't buy or read Connie Willis BECAUSE of her many Hugo wins. If she were nominated on the Sad or Rabid Puppies lists I would give her a read.

Blogger Marissa April 20, 2015 3:43 PM  

All those years you spent in bath houses would make anyone a little jumpy.

Wouldn't someone who spent a lot of time in bathhouses be less jumpy about someone behind them? Speaking of bathhouses, this is one of the greatest threads ever posted on Steve Sailer's blog. I learned a lot of things that brain bleach was invented to erase.

Anonymous BluntForceTrauma April 20, 2015 3:48 PM  

Just an Inside-the-Sci-Fi-Bookselling-Industry question: Are most of these books sold to individual fans or, as with many other genres, get a good portion of their sales from public libraries and public school libraries — both of which are dominated by SJW-sympathetic liberals?

Blogger Tiny Tim April 20, 2015 3:52 PM  

Marissa says" "Wouldn't someone who spent a lot of time in bathhouses be less jumpy about someone behind them? Speaking of bathhouses, this is one of the greatest threads ever posted on Steve Sailer's blog. I learned a lot of things that brain bleach was invented to erase."

Good point Marissa. But you would have to get with Bob K. Mando on that one. I certainly could be wrong.

What say you Bob?

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler April 20, 2015 4:07 PM  

To mookie,

For a history on how we got here, for realpolik, read Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn's Liberty or Equality and Leftism Revisited. Yaas got to understand hows we got here.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell April 20, 2015 4:09 PM  

Call me a pessimist but having so many of the nominees you boosted back out doesn't seem like victory to me.

Blogger John Wright April 20, 2015 4:09 PM  

@ "If this had been a balanced ballot, with input from a host of people, then I think you’d have an argument here. But it’s not. The Rabid Puppy ballot resulted in a record number of Hugo nominations (six) for John C. Wright… meaning that last year, Wright was superior to Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, and James Tiptree Junior in their prime.
I’ve never read anything by John C. Wright, so I have no real opinion about his fiction. But when I see that, alongside 11 nominations for Castalia House and two for Vox Day, my natural skepticism kicks in."

I wish someone would gently remind Mr ONeill that Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison were not shunned for badthink from the short story market for a decade and a half until finding the sole publisher willing to print their works, so that all their best short stories all appeared at once three anthologies all published in the same year.

But that exactly this happened to yours truly.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell April 20, 2015 4:10 PM  

Call me a pessimist but having so many of the nominees you boosted back out doesn't seem like victory to me.

Anonymous BigGaySteve April 20, 2015 4:14 PM  

Tiny PP "Bob, I have no doubt you are nervous when someone comes up behind you. All those years you spent in bath houses would make anyone a little jumpy. "

Logic question if you claim he spent years in bath houses why would he be bothered by someone coming up behind him? Well Bath House Barry Obama was jumpy if you didn't pay him first.

Blogger Cataline Sergius April 20, 2015 4:15 PM  

Look I love Brad's work. I genuinely like the guy.

But he doesn't have a talent for gutter fighting. The problems of a genuinely inclusive slate have become self-evident.

The ridiculous thing being, its only a nomination. You aren't supposed to have, to ask anyone's permission over whether or not you will nominate them.

Although apparently now, you do.

Regardless, there aren't any Harlan Ellison type leftys out there anymore. They can't stand up to their own side. They just can't. It's not possible.

We can't represent deserving talent, regardless of politics. We can at least say we tried.

Something to keep in mind for Sad Puppies 4.

Blogger maniacprovost April 20, 2015 4:15 PM  

Also, Mr. Wright, I would note that the golden age authors had to compete against each other, whereas the Great Works of 2014 were somewhat... limited.

Anonymous Roundtine April 20, 2015 4:21 PM  

You can bet your bottom dollar they're campaigning and recruiting like mad behind the scenes right now for their "no award" slate.

I have no doubt about it, but they're also recruiting/advertising for our side by throwing a tantrum in the media.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 4:22 PM  

Call me a pessimist but having so many of the nominees you boosted back out doesn't seem like victory to me.

There are victories aside from winning the most Hugos.

Blogger Eric April 20, 2015 4:24 PM  

Now it's like NRO without Derbyshire - what's the point?

Williamson, Goldberg, and Cooke are good. Particularly Williamson. But yeah, would have been better with Derb.

Blogger 罗臻 April 20, 2015 4:28 PM  

Would Vox care to write a review extolling how great Three Body Problem is? Feels like a convergence of honesty and SJW delusion is begging for a black knighting.

Considering Three Body Problem has environmentalists as villains and is influenced by the Cultural Revolution, seems trivially easy. The first chapter of Three Body Problem is just like the current Hugo battle. Substitute SJWs for Red Guards and there you go.

Anonymous Scintan April 20, 2015 4:34 PM  

I wish someone would gently remind Mr ONeill that Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison were not shunned for badthink from the short story market for a decade and a half until finding the sole publisher willing to print their works, so that all their best short stories all appeared at once three anthologies all published in the same year.

But that exactly this happened to yours truly.


Please go post that on Mr. O'Neill's blog.

I'll go get some popcorn.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 4:36 PM  

What a dumb idea. You simply don't know Scalzi. Put him on the slate and he will simply do a quick calculation. If he thinks it will result in a nomination and a Hugo he will find some BS reason to NOT withdraw, then if he wins, he will crow about how fooled all the VoxDay "shitbird racists" to give him a Hugo. If he thinks it will get him nothing, he will just withdraw his name

The point is to tempt him into abandoning his promise to stay away from Slates. He'll never be able to accomplish it.

Scalzi is just doing more of the same, which is, try to distance the parties involved, and isolate VD. Which is failing badly, as even his own commentators are pointing out to him.

Anonymous xdpaul April 20, 2015 4:43 PM  

dh; Brad disavowed VD last Thursday. I don't get that anyone is actually trying to make Brad and Larry distance themselves from VD, VD is handling that himself, but if that were Scalzi's goal, he wouldn't be failing badly.

Blogger praetorian April 20, 2015 4:43 PM  

Thanks for your concerning, Derrick.

Blogger Cataline Sergius April 20, 2015 4:44 PM  

No, do not nominate Scalzi.

If there was one thing we gained, it's a reputation for integrity. At least amongst the three undecideds who aren't insane.

We will blow that if we nominate like that.

Also, I won't nominate Scalzi, unless I feel he has written the best SF book of the year. So, I will never nominate John Scalzi.

It would be too embarrassing anyway. I mean, what is his next book going to be about? A revolt on a lunar penal colony? A human raised on Mars exploring life of Earth? Maybe something really original with a farmboy boy from desert planet who becomes a psychic-telekinetic-samurai to avenge his father's death, only to discover his father is still alive?

It's Scalzi so the twist will be, he has sex with his own twin sister anyway. Hey, it worked for Martin.

Anonymous Bz April 20, 2015 4:51 PM  

"It would be too embarrassing anyway. I mean, what is his next book going to be about?"

I've heard it will be about Riker refusing a command.

Blogger luagha April 20, 2015 4:51 PM  

Mookie:

On the list of books that everyone should read is: "Don't Be A Chump! The Princeton Review Guide To Negotiation." It's a simple, quick read and you should be able to pick up a copy of the older version (that I read, I haven't read the revised version) for pennies.

A lot of stuff you may know, but it formalizes it, and it is simple and brilliant and lays bare many games.

Anonymous Stilicho April 20, 2015 4:57 PM  

I've heard it will be about Riker refusing a command.

Nah, it'll be about this crew of conformist space cowboys who travel around the 'verse helping the Alliance establish control over outlying areas.

Blogger Edd Jobs April 20, 2015 4:58 PM  

Cataline:

Scalzi will co-author a novel with David Gerrold about a revolt in a lunar penal colony overrun by flat cats.

Blogger maniacprovost April 20, 2015 5:00 PM  

@mookie,
The Go Rin no Sho (book of 5 rings) is possibly better than The Art of War, with the caveat that a lot of people may not understand Musashi's description of the fractal nature of reality.

Anonymous omar's running shoes April 20, 2015 5:01 PM  

Why is the hugo award shaped like a penis and why do all the men holding one seem so darn happy about it?

MICROAGGRESSION!!!

Blogger John Wright April 20, 2015 5:07 PM  

@ maniacprovost

"Also, Mr. Wright, I would note that the golden age authors had to compete against each other, whereas the Great Works of 2014 were somewhat... limited."

Ah, well, as I said elsewhere in this same context, even a small hill looks like a mountain when it is found amid the salt flats. Thank you for the compliment.

Anonymous Ain April 20, 2015 5:08 PM  

Huckleberry -- est. 1977: @scalzi is always declaring victory, bravely, while beating a hasty retreat. He's the only chinless, 5'7" man who insists that he gets mistaken "regularly" for a 6'4" "ex-Marine badass" while also mentioning that he can't bench press more than his teen daughter and that a day of walking relegated him to crutches.

The funniest thing about this is it's true. Real life is stranger than fiction.

Anonymous dh April 20, 2015 5:09 PM  

I've seen the guy in person, he has bad posture (of course), and also, I think 5'7" is pinching two inches.

Anonymous Fp April 20, 2015 5:29 PM  

"Patience. If we can see awards rightly granted to deserving works, Puppy or Feline, we will have accomplished the improbable and stopped the fire before Rome burns to the ground and the Christians are blamed."

Nah, leftists/SJW's are criminals and just like criminals they''ll burn down the house to get the insurance money and of course say someone else started the fire.

Blogger Russell April 20, 2015 5:31 PM  

Well, I've plunked down my $40 in blood money. This has got to the point where it's doesn't make sense not to throw one's hat in the ring, if for no other reason but to tweak the noses of the perpetually offended.

"The Rabid Puppy ballot resulted in a record number of Hugo nominations (six) for John C. Wright… meaning that last year, Wright was superior to Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, and James Tiptree Junior in their prime."

Yes, yes he is.

Anonymous Fp April 20, 2015 5:43 PM  

"I'm not saying the Ilk have decided to nuke it all. Yet."

"There will be war" but the brightside is the SJW's would be cleansed from the territory and you can start over.

OpenID cailcorishev April 20, 2015 5:50 PM  

The Rabid Puppy ballot resulted in a record number of Hugo nominations (six) for John C. Wright… meaning that last year, Wright was superior to Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, and James Tiptree Junior in their prime.

Or it means the competition is much worse than those men faced, which is kinda the point. But he continues:

I’ve never read anything by John C. Wright,

I know nothing about this guy, but that right there is pathetic. If you want to know whether the slate has integrity, and you haven't read anything by the main author on it, how hard is it to read 1-2 of Wright's nominations and find out? Maybe an hour out of his day, to get a feel for whether Wright's nominations could be deserved or are purely political? He clearly doesn't want to know, so he can assume the worst.

In previous years, did Vox or anyone else on this side say, "Well, they nominated Scalzi again this year. I still haven't read any of his stuff, but he's a big liberal who promotes some extreme leftists, so this thing is clearly rigged." No, they read the works, even stuff like "If You Were a Dinosaur," determined that many of the works sucked, and decided from that (and other evidence) that the thing was rigged.

Which raises a common question when dealing with SJWs (though I don't know if this guy is one): Is he too dumb to see the difference, or does he think we are?

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 5:54 PM  

I want to hear Nate say "I crap bigger than Scalzi's lawn.""


The lake in my back yard is bigger than Scalzi's lawn.

Blogger borderwalker April 20, 2015 5:54 PM  

"...Scalzi conducts himself like a 13-year old girl..."

"He's the only chinless, 5'7" man who ... can't bench press more than his teen daughter"


As much fun as it is to mock Scalzi's lack of chin (or strength, or manly conduct, etc.) it's useful to note their sources: Scalzi grew up without a father.

One simply cannot overestimate the damage that can do to a boy. A parent is, for most of us, the earliest and strongest archetype of an adult of that gender. A boy who has no father has very little to work with.

That's the biggest difference between Scalzi and Correia, not the over a foot in height and a hundred-fifty pounds.... One had a hardworking, present father who cared enough about his kids to support them, and teach them something; one didn't

Scalzi also grew up desperately poor (to hear him tell the tale), raised by a mother unable (or unwilling) to stay afloat without government handouts (again, according to him), picked from the herd of poor children (presumably for being brighter than most), and packed off to private schools as a scholarship (charity) student, where he was no doubt mocked and ostracized for his lack of fashionable clothing, etc.

I don't say this out of any desire to plead his case, only to illuminate the contours of exactly how he is warped.

Is it any wonder that he thinks and argues like a female? Is it any wonder that he married a woman a head taller than he (in flat shoes!), who (again, according to him) initiated their courtship? Who supported him while he got the writing career off the ground, and (according to him) does the household finances and makes all the business decisions?

Will he ever feel at home in a social group, even a social group of outcasts? Will he ever cease to hate-hate-hate those who fit in better than he (or simply don't care about the approval of others)?

Not without significant spiritual and personal growth, and certainly without more self-awareness than he typically displays.

For example, his appearance on Oprah as a "relationship expert" - it's on YouTube, don't miss it! - nearly convinced me that he's a closeted gay man.

"How can it not know what it is? Deckard, in Blade Runner

Blogger borderwalker April 20, 2015 5:59 PM  

BTW, when and where did Scalzi claim to have been mistaken for an "...ex-Marine badass"? I've heard this before, but never with attribution.

Blogger Russell April 20, 2015 6:07 PM  

"Vox Day and others have said that a “No Award” sweep at the Hugos this year would be a victory for the Rabid Puppies. (And Vox has rather gleefully posted the graphic at left on his website, as he gears up to wreak havoc on future awards if the Rabid Puppies slate loses.)"

Vox strides like a Titan across the landscape. His merest musings are treated as dread prophecy. His enemies quail before the sound of his footfalls, scrambling to find something solid to cling to in tremulous fear, hoping to find an unmovable object in the face of Vox's unquenchable rage, lest they be swept away by the maelstrom of Rabid Puppies marching to war.

Can no one save us? they cry. Will none oppose the Rabid Puppies? they wail into their hot chocolate while wearing their footy pajamas.

Suddenly, upon the ridge, John Scalzi appears! The 6'2" ex-marine, standing at 5'7" and sporting his wife's used last season dress, he stands, calmly holding his banhammer tenderly, carefully reviewing the horde as it moves across the land.

Doom, doom, doom! beat the war drums of that fell host.

John merely sniffs, his eagle eyes scanning the horizon.

Doom, doom, doom! echoes the rallying cry of the Rabid Puppies.

John shifts in anticipation. He stops, shades his eyes from the glare with a soft, white, woman-like hand. There! The very thing he was watching for!

He springs into action! Madly rushing, pell-mell, heedless of the dangers over which he swiftly flies, heading for the only opening he can see; he dives for security of his lawn and into the warm embrace of the warren!

The Rabid Puppies march along, never flagging, never noticing the brave Scalzi's devastating move.

John snarks from the warren, fingers flying as he tweets, with a voice that almost is heard.

And the Rabid Puppies marched along.

And the Rabid Puppies marched along.

OpenID cailcorishev April 20, 2015 6:07 PM  

Predictably, Scalzi conducts himself like a 13-year old girl. He thinks he's safe now

Doesn't he realize that's because the crosshairs have shifted to GRRM, a much juicier target?

Anonymous Scintan April 20, 2015 6:09 PM  

As much fun as it is to mock Scalzi's lack of chin (or strength, or manly conduct, etc.) it's useful to note their sources: Scalzi grew up without a father.

Given his Scalzi's own comments about himself, it seems that his daughter is growing up without a father, too.

At least she's got two mothers to counter the absence.

Blogger rcocean April 20, 2015 6:24 PM  

"it's useful to note their sources: Scalzi grew up without a father."

Plenty of boys grow up without fathers. Very few of them turn into hate filled gammas. Scalizi did that all by himself.

Blogger rcocean April 20, 2015 6:25 PM  

Beneath all the eye-rolls and 13- year old girlish snark - there's a lot of hate.

Blogger ScuzzaMan April 20, 2015 6:31 PM  

@Scintan:

well, you know what they say ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmFnarFSj_U

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 6:34 PM  

"there's a lot of hate. "

There is a lot of envy. The root of all of this... is Vox is what Scalzi will never be.. but desperately wishes he could be. For all his talk of privelege and such... its really just Scalzi's attempt to prove himself worthy to be in the social elite set that the Beales have been in for decades, if not centuries.

The man's whole life is about climbing a ladder... and the ladder doesn't work the way he thinks it works.

Blogger IM2L844 April 20, 2015 6:51 PM  

I don't say this out of any desire to plead his case...

I remain unconvinced. Everybody has baggage and sob stories.

Blogger Chiva April 20, 2015 6:55 PM  

@borderwalker. Do a simple google search "Scalzi ex-marine". It is on flickr posted February 10, 2008.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 7:01 PM  

Is it any wonder that he married a woman a head taller than he (in flat shoes!), who (again, according to him) initiated their courtship?

I bet she's the top.

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 7:04 PM  

BTW, when and where did Scalzi claim to have been mistaken for an "...ex-Marine badass"? I've heard this before, but never with attribution.

I'm not sure if I'm remembering this correctly but I think it's something that Scalzi said about himself on his blog. He claims that military guys that read Old Man's War are surprised he's not ex-mlitary.

Blogger Josh April 20, 2015 7:04 PM  

Scalzi also grew up desperately poor (to hear him tell the tale), raised by a mother unable (or unwilling) to stay afloat without government handouts (again, according to him), picked from the herd of poor children (presumably for being brighter than most), and packed off to private schools as a scholarship (charity) student, where he was no doubt mocked and ostracized for his lack of fashionable clothing, etc.

Holy shit, he's Harry Potter!

Blogger Nate April 20, 2015 7:09 PM  

"who (again, according to him) initiated their courtship?"

she approached him.

Blogger imnotandrei April 20, 2015 7:22 PM  

"I wish someone would gently remind Mr ONeill that Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison were not shunned for badthink from the short story market for a decade and a half until finding the sole publisher willing to print their works, so that all their best short stories all appeared at once three anthologies all published in the same year. "

Having read several of the works in question, I can safely say that I don't think "badthink" had so much to do with it as "badwrite".

Of the above writers, the only one whose characters were more two-dimensional were those of early Asimov; none of the three of them wrote anything anywhere near so predictable, and not even Heinlein at his most didactic or the Ellison stories *with explicit morals* were as preachy.

Unless the other nominees manage to do significantly better, I'll be "No awarding" the categories Mr. Wright is in, because the work, as presented, doesn't come close to my Hugo bar; there's nothing particularly original, interesting, novel, or powerful in the stories.

As to the person who believes that Wright is a better writer than Ellison, Asimov, Tiptree, etc. in their prime -- that's simply proof of how wide a range SF can contain, when people aren't trying to drive out things that they disapprove of, if you're being honest -- and an example of why slate voting is a bad thing, because no slate will cover that whole range honestly and fairly.

Anonymous Tyrion April 20, 2015 7:28 PM  

I agree with the Popehat guys: Wright is a shit laywer, shit writer and shit human being.

Blogger bornagainpenguin April 20, 2015 7:31 PM  

From the comments over at BG by John ONeill:


"If this had been a balanced ballot, with input from a host of people, then I think you’d have an argument here. But it’s not. The Rabid Puppy ballot resulted in a record number of Hugo nominations (six) for John C. Wright… meaning that last year, Wright was superior to Robert E. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, Harlan Ellison, and James Tiptree Junior in their prime."


Pardon me, but who the ^%$# is Robert E. Heinlein?

Is he the lesser well known cousin or maybe a nephew to the famed Robert Anson Heinlein whose work I grew up on and continue to cherish today? If so is he any good? I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of authors who are comparable to R. A. Heinlein and actually share a similar voice to the Grandmaster of Science Fiction.

Discovering an addition to the already great imitators such as Anson MacDonald or Lyle Monroe would be a boon beyond imagining! Granted Monroe isn't quite as good as Heinlein himself or even MacDonald but he's better at aping the voice and the style than most. So despite myself I'm curious about this other fellow.

So does anyone know anything about it? Google has been most unhelpful pointing me in the right direction for this Robert E. Heinlein

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 7:31 PM  

Uh oh, guys, it looks like we've got some angry Scalzi fans in our midst. Quick, someone call an ex-Marine bad-ass to save us!

Anonymous Harsh April 20, 2015 7:34 PM  

Google has been most unhelpful pointing me in the right direction for this Robert E. Heinlein

I believe he's the second cousin of P. Ron Hubbard.

Blogger maniacprovost April 20, 2015 7:41 PM  

imnotandrei,
Personally, although I'm a big fan of Wright, I thought the plots in The Book of Feasts and Seasons and One Bright Star were a little weak. I didn't think they were plot focused so much as emotion focused. I'm not sure how you can fault the characterization, though. That's the second time I've heard that, so if you're serious, I think the problem is either 1) the characterization is too subtle, shown by the characters' actions and reactions, or 2) the characters are a different type of people than you prefer to read about. None of them are melodramatic whiners. They don't obsess over goldfish or dinosaur revenge fantasies, or how gender is a silly cultural artifact that a sophotech can't quite figure out. They're much more like normal, or better than normal, human beings.

Blogger maniacprovost April 20, 2015 7:45 PM  

bornagainpenguin,
John Varley can be compared to golden age Heinlein, although more progressive. Think nanomachines that let you change age and gender at will. Try Steel Beach. But don't expect Heinlein.

Blogger Daniel April 20, 2015 7:46 PM  

They don't get it. Whine there...they lose. Sock puppet troll here, they lose. Win the hugos by proving their bad books are the only ones that win any more, they lose. Lose the hugos to no award, they lose. Lose the hugos to quality books they hate, they lose. There is no Kobayashi Maru for them...because they will always be the computer, and never Captain Kirk.

They have one job: to lose.

The only question is if they will lose well or lose poorly. That is the game now.

I am going to bet they lose well, but only because I love a longshot gamble.

Blogger Noah B April 20, 2015 7:46 PM  

"she approached him."

Doesn't that mean that he owes her a blowjob?

Anonymous Randy April 20, 2015 7:47 PM  

Tyrion April 20, 2015 7:28 PM

I agree with the Popehat guys: Wright is a shit laywer, shit writer and shit human being.


Shit Mr. Lahey, is that you?

Anonymous clk April 20, 2015 7:52 PM  

Noah B says "Even if this doesn't work and we are overwhelmed by SJW hordes this year and next, we have lost 40 bucks a piece. I do believe and hope that this has brought a great deal of attention to Castalia that it would not otherwise have received, ultimately resulting in more book sales for them and less for Tor."

Absolutely... for $40 you could not have gotten more fun. But there's good attention and then there's bad attention and this is moving to the bad. The puppies has proven their point but it seems the movement is at a fork now... one path is a beserker, burn the place down and chaos... the other is to propose a solution... something that is reasonable, workable.... certainly someone in any of the puppies groups had enough foresight for a plan if you were successful... The narrative is being created ... either you form it or be formed by it...everyone is talking about the puppies ... now what do you do ?

Anonymous Godfrey April 20, 2015 7:54 PM  

LMAO... so much for "democracy" and " the will of the people". This so fun!

What next? Bad-think trials.

Blogger John Wright April 20, 2015 7:55 PM  

@Tyrion

"I agree with the Popehat guys: Wright is a shit laywer, shit writer and shit human being."

And a sinner.

What is pathetic is that I am a worse man than you make me out to be, but you condemn me for my virtues, not my vices.

As if you were caviling, unbeknownst to yourself, at an ax murderer because he was so gauche as to help an old lady across the street.

Out of curiosity, how would you or Mr Stross have any idea how well or poorly I did in my legal practice?

What was the name of my firm? Who were the senior partners? Did you call the firm and ask for a report of the work I did for them, lo, these many years ago?

Or are you just going on the logic that, since I am Roman Catholic, hence believe same sex attraction to be an objectively disordered passion, I am a 'bad man', and a bad man, since he is bad, must be bad at all his jobs, talents, activities and vocations?

That would be the logical fallacy of ambiguity.

As well as the sin of wrath.

1 – 200 of 341 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts