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

Sunday, May 03, 2015

Patience is a strategic virtue

An informative dialogue between members of the Dread Ilk:
Ticticboom: "Larry Correia and Brad Torgensen have mentioned that most of their interactions with Vox have been asking him not to burn the Hugos down. What the SJWs don't realize is how downright forgiving and tolerant Vox is compared to what they think of as his followers."

Vile Faceless Minion 156: "Agreed. When I see interviews where the left twists Vox's (or another truthteller's) words, calls names and basically spit on those I appreciate for standing up for Western Civilization... I feel blinding rage and a desire to destroy. Vox shrugs and presses onwards. I don't understand this calm moderation and cannot maintain it."
I feel flashes of emotional reaction just like anyone else. I know what it is like to feel the blinding rage and harbor the intense desire to destroy. The difference is that I spent six years in a very hard school learning not to trust such feelings or to give into them. In the martial arts, when you react emotionally, when you throw caution to the wind, you pay for it, and you often pay for it in pain.

The best, fastest, hardest kick I ever threw in my life was in my fifth year, when I was sparring my sensei one afternoon. We were going at it hard and fast. I was holding nothing back and he was probably going about 90 percent. He feinted with a left jab, then pulled back-and-up as he often did; reading it correctly, I moved in and launched a skipping front sidekick that would have taken a lesser fighter's head off. I mean, it was a rocket! I had him absolutely dead to rights and I knew it.

But somehow, he managed to lift his head up and turn it so that my heel barely brushed the side of his chin. He ducked and leaped sideways to safety before I could follow it up, smiled broadly, and said, "Now THAT was close. But not close enough!"

I completely lost it. It was maddening. I couldn't BELIEVE that I'd read him perfectly, timed him perfectly, threw the perfect kick, and STILL didn't catch the bastard cleanly. I went after him hard with my hands, he retreated, blocking everything, until finally, in frustration, I literally leaped at him and threw a haymaker at his head. This was insanely stupid, and in five years I'd never made such an unmitigated error before, but I was seeing red. My sensei told me later that he had so much time, and I'd left myself so open by leaving my feet and extending myself, that he actually had time to think "I cannot believe he did that" as he ducked under the wild punch and came up and across with a rear-hand shot to the body, which in combination with my forward momentum hit me so hard that it not only knocked the wind out of me, it actually lifted me higher off the ground on his fist.

I was lucky that I didn't rupture anything. I've been knocked out and I've had bones broken, but that was the hardest anyone has ever hit me. I went down in what we called the full "armadillo" and stayed down. Getting up was not an option;  I couldn't breathe and I couldn't even roll over onto my back. It felt like I'd been hit by a charging bull. My abdomen was bruised for days and if he'd hit me just a few inches to the left, I'd have had several broken ribs.

In light of that experience, consider the completely unsurprising news that Floyd Mayweather not only won last night, but won rather easily against a very highly-regarded fighter.
Floyd Mayweather Jr. spent Saturday night doing -- for the most part -- what he's done in the vast majority of his championship bouts over the last decade. He fought strategically. He landed counterpunchers. He held to offset rallies. The significance of this one was that the opponent was Manny Pacquiao. In a welterweight bout that's seemingly been a generation in the making, Mayweather controlled the action in mid ring, eluded prolonged damage along the ropes and worked his way to a unanimous decision that earned him the WBO welterweight title to go along with the WBA and WBC belts he arrived with. The win boosted him to 48-0 as a pro in a 19-year career. Pacquiao is 57-6-2.
"He fought strategically." That's the significant quote here. Now let's look at how fighting strategically applies to the Hugo 2015 situation. We know, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the SJWs are going to vote No Award on most of the Puppy-recommended works. Some will claim to have read them all, some will proudly proclaim that they have read none, others will pretend to genuinely believe that there is not a single award-worthy work in the lot, and a few particularly foolish ones will even convince themselves they believe as much. That's fine, we all know what their opinions are worth as the list of past winners are well-documented. The only relevant point is that they are going to do it.

So why shouldn't we join them? Why not pour on the gasoline as they run around shrieking and lighting matches? After all, getting things nominated that the other side would No Award, then turning around and joining them to ensure no awards were given out was my original idea, which I set aside in favor of SP3 and Brad Torgersen's ultimately futile attempt to save the Hugos from the SJWs. The reason to abandon this original objective now that it is firmly in our grasp is that the situation has developed in ways that I did not fully anticipate, thereby indicating a strategic adjustment. Why settle for burning Munich when Berlin may be within reach, especially if the munchkins are promising to burn Munich for us as we advance? Jeff Duntemann's summary to which Mike Glyer directed our attention yesterday is informative in this regard.
It’s something like a sociological law: Commotion attracts attention. Attention is unpredictable, because it reaches friend and foe alike. It can go your way, or it can go the other way. There’s no way to control the polarity of adverse attention. The only way to limit adverse attention is to stop the commotion.

In other words, just shut up.

I know, this is difficult. For some psychologies, hate is delicious to the point of being psychological crack, so it’s hard to just lecture them on the fact that hate has consequences, including but hardly limited to adverse attention.

My conclusion is this: The opponents of Sad Puppies 3 put them on the map, and probably took them from a fluke to a viable long-term institution. I don’t think this is what the APs intended. In the wake of the April 4 announcement of the final Hugo ballot, I’d guess the opposition has generated several hundred kilostreisands of adverse attention, and the numbers will continue to increase.
In other words, thanks to the SJW overreaction, our capabilities may now permit us to accomplish more than we had reasonably believed possible at the start. Brad wanted to do something that was always impossible because the SJWs are much more poisonous than he naively believed them to be. I was not surprised by their nature (which is why I was always dubious about the SP3 goal), but I was surprised by how astonishingly stupid and self-destructive their post-shortlist reactions have been. So, thanks to them, the strategic situation has now changed and it behooves us to take advantage of their mistakes. The original options as I saw them, prior to the nominations being announced, were as follows:
  1. SJWs and Puppies play it straight. Puppies win between 1 and 3 awards. Vox Day collects two more 6th of 5 participation prizes.
  2. SJWs choose nuclear option and Puppies play it straight. No Award wins the majority of categories. Vox Day collects two more 6th of 5 participation prizes.
  3. SJWs and Puppies choose nuclear option. No Award wins the majority of categories. Vox Day collects two more 6th of 5 participation prize.
Three options, two outcomes. From a strategic perspective, Option 3 is obviously the preferable one there. It may be little hard on John C. Wright, Jim Butcher, Toni Weisskopf, and other strong finalists who might genuinely appreciate winning an award, but as I have consistently pointed out from the start, I don't care about awards. Neither do the hundreds of Vile Faceless Minions of the Evil Legion of Evil. But this situation no longer applies. Now, with the influx of THOUSANDS of new voters, whose allegiances are unknown, there are three possible outcomes.
  1. SJWs and Puppies play it straight. Puppies win between 3 and 6 awards. Vox Day collects neither Hugo Awards nor 6th of 5 participation prizes.
  2. SJWs and Puppies choose nuclear option. No Award wins the majority of categories.Vox Day collects two more 6th of 5 participation prizes.
  3. SJWs choose nuclear option and Puppies play it straight. No Award wins the majority of categories. Vox Day collects two more 6th of 5 participation prizes.
  4. SJWs choose nuclear option and Puppies play it straight. Puppies win between 10 and 12 awards. Vox Day wins Best Editor, Short Form and finishes third, behind Toni Weisskopf and Jim Minz, in the other editorial category.
The Option 4 is a legitimate possibility if two-thirds or more of the new supporting members are Puppy sympathizers. The reason Option 4 is the more desirable outcome is because a) the results of Option 2 and Option 3 are exactly the same, and b) it will publicly break the perceived power of the SJWs under the current rules. Option 2/3 interrupts their inability to hand out awards to themselves for a single year, but Option 4 will reveal the hard limits of their influence and render them relatively impotent for the foreseeable future.

The best possible outcome is not to see them nuke themselves, as amusing as that would be, but to see them try to nuke themselves and fail, thereby demonstrating that they don't even possess the nukes they think they have. And even if Option 4 turns out to have been beyond our reach this year, its failure is still within the range of our victory conditions. This is what it means to successfully execute a Xanatos Gambit. If we fail, we win. If we succeed, we win even bigger. Why settle for victory when we can vanquish?

Now that the science fiction SJWs have publicly declared No Award, the best possible outcome for us is for them to try to burn down the awards and fail. And that is why we should not help them do it. I very much understand the temptation to cry havoc, run amok, and gleefully set fires, but keep this in mind: while strategic arson is good, strategic occupation is glorious.

Translation: stow the flamethrowers. For now. And as for those who are tempted to freak out and overreact simply because the other side is throwing punches, keep in mind how the great champions react to getting hit.

Floyd Mayweather let Manny Pacquiao hit him with a slew of body blows, then looked Pacquiao in the eye, shook his head, and said NOPE.

Labels: ,

152 Comments:

Anonymous Lulabelle (68) May 03, 2015 6:08 AM  

" was in my fifth year, when I was sparring my sensei one afternoon. "

How old were you?

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 6:41 AM  

How old were you?

26, IIRC.

Blogger Doug Cranmer May 03, 2015 6:57 AM  

Probably five. :)

Blogger Laramie Hirsch May 03, 2015 7:17 AM  

It kind of sucked hearing Pacquiao's team complaining about the shoulder. Lose gracefully, man. Don't make excuses. I was rooting for Pacquiao. Mayweather was a loudmouth, and I was looking forward to hearing about him being put down. But then, the Pacquiao comes off complaining about the shoulder in the post fight press conference. Bah.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyxSiHi10n4

Anonymous Logan May 03, 2015 7:20 AM  

Exactly which martial art did you practice?

I've got to say, this whole Hugo awards thing has just been beyond entertaining. I mean, I remember not long after TIA was released when that chick from the Rational Response Squad was trying to mount a particular chapter. I remember thinking how entertaining this blog was back then. But the past couple months? Damn...

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 7:25 AM  

Exactly which martial art did you practice?

Basically MMA before it was called MMA. The base was Shorin Ryu, Wing Chun, and Kali, but our sensei brought in boxers and wrestlers to help us broaden our skill set. And once a month we'd hold open sparring nights so we got to face a broad mix of fighters from different disciplines.

The most difficult were the true Thai kickboxers. Boxers could be tough if you didn't have a fast sidekick to keep them off you, they were pretty easy if you did. Wrestlers were really tough unless you knew how to deal with them, in which case you could reliably beat them very quickly.

Blogger BCM May 03, 2015 7:48 AM  

The SJW freak out over this post will be glorious.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 7:51 AM  

The SJW freak out over this post will be glorious.

Especially since I have done nothing more than point out what should be completely observable to anyone. They really seem to believe that unless you speak it into existence through the magic power of words, it does not exist.

Blogger Shimshon May 03, 2015 7:59 AM  

"They really seem to believe that unless you speak it into existence through the magic power of words, it does not exist."

Like Pakman and the miraculous pre-interview transcript.

Either that, or the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal.

"The creature's aforementioned stupidity makes it relatively easy to deal with - if the Guide is to be believed. For, according to the Guide, draping a towel over your head will confuse the beast long enough for one to make a quick getaway. This is because (as mentioned above) the philosophy of The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast is that, if you can't see it, it can't see you."

Blogger Rantor May 03, 2015 7:59 AM  

Thanks for that. I had about three years of Kenpo Karate while in high school. While I never connected the two, I grew much more detached from threats and better able to control my temper. Probably related to the ability to ignore moderate levels of pain when focused on an activity.

Agree with your strategy. We win if we win, we win if they nuke. We just need two things 1 numbers. 2. Enough rational people in the middle who ignore the hype and vote for anyone on the ballot.

When you see how few people vote once you move past best novel, it seems to show that many did not vote if they were unfamiliar with the category. That indicates some honesty on their part, and paved the way for the SJWs to dominate in these categories with a small block vote.

Fight on Rabid Puppies and see if we can influence the moderate middle to resist voting for Noah Ward.

Blogger Shimshon May 03, 2015 8:01 AM  

Any idea on when the nomination packets are to be sent? Is it normal to take this long?

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 8:04 AM  

We are supposed to turn in materials for the packet by May 10th. Everything appears to be on schedule.

Blogger Remo - Faceless Vile Minion #99 May 03, 2015 8:10 AM  

Naturally if the occupation is successful we the faceless horde expect a long night of pillage and rapine if we are success.... WHAT?!?! No wait cancel that last part! I forgot for a moment what village we were razing!!! Take deep breath... toad of tor... there isn't enough whiskey in all of Kentucky... YUCK!!!! I think I just triggered myself.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet May 03, 2015 8:11 AM  

but to demonstrate that they don't even possess the nukes they think they have

Truly a beautiful observation I hadn't seen, and which highlights your previous Xanatos post... you not only know your enemy, you know your enemy doesn't know themselves.

Their rage will likely be intense with that error... And yet irrelevant with that outcome.

Blogger Rantor May 03, 2015 8:12 AM  

Too funny, I was just looking at the Sasquan site and they will host a Hugo Losers party...

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 8:16 AM  

Too funny, I was just looking at the Sasquan site and they will host a Hugo Losers party...

And everybody's invited!

Blogger Salt May 03, 2015 8:16 AM  

The best possible outcome is not to see them nuke themselves, as amusing as that would be, but to demonstrate that they don't even possess the nukes they think they have.

stow the flamethrowers.


That's up to them. Whether they come to situational awareness is immaterial; we don't care. As you say, win or lose - puppies win.

And that is why we should not help them do it.

We are Ilk and Rabid Puppies. It's enjoyable to confound the opposition, keep them in a lather. Besides, we like to play with dangerous things. So, one never knows, does one?

Blogger olaf lee May 03, 2015 8:25 AM  

Oh Evil One,
You took over the Hugo's by getting deserving works (in your mind) placed on the ballot.
For an outsider who would have never cared about who got a Hugo, or a dinosaurs lover for that matter its a ligit shot at the podium. I'm tired of voting for the best guy/girl only to have them aced out by some backroom deal. I am voting to knock the Vile ideology that feeds these SWJ's back to where it belongs. I hope they remember to put a cross up and bring flowers to it to remind themselves that 2014 was the death of SWJ's control of the Hugo's. They were sloppy and careless and thought they had the #'s. I love it when fools are so angry they throw tantrums on the floor. Time for some corporal punishment.

Blogger CSAFarmer May 03, 2015 8:32 AM  

Literally the 'school of hard knocks'. I think your sensei slipping that kick illustrates the difference between the very talented amateur and the pro, i.e. it was his reason for being and he did it for a living.

I too have had my ass handed to me in a different kind of competition, wherein I was the big fish in my little pond. And then a real pro came along and explained the facts of life to me.

I could only appreciate the whupping I received in it's sheer artistry, and take the lesson. Congratulations to Mr. Beale for taking and using the lesson.

Jeff Duntemann echoes the very same sentiments that led me to post here for the first time a few weeks ago. In particular the very telling statement that he has lost respect for authors whose work he had enjoyed.

I'm probably a 'mid-wit' for most things, with the exception of my use of and appreciation for language.

I love reading; I apparently taught myself to read before kindergarten. Partly because of a natural proclivity, and partly because of a 'secret government experiment' (OK it wasn't secret, but the other elements were there ;-), my tested reading speed - read, retain, correctly answer questions about the material - is somewhere north of 1,500 words/minute.

My point, (and I do have one) is I read EVERYTHING. I have probably read all the authors we have seen embroiled in this discussion, including Scalzi, Gerrold, Willis, et al. I once spent an idle summer in a small town in central Nfld., and read their SF library, from Asimov to Zelazny.

Then did the same in the murder-mystery section - love the dialogue of Robert B. Parker, and I want to grow up to be Travis McGee.

I read a ridiculous number of blogs and on-line news sources, more lately for some reason. It's disheartening to find out that someone whose work you admired is in fact a giant douche.

It's not that they hold differing opinions; I got no problem with that. It's the shrill, sanctimonious, self-entitled (reaches for thesaurus), petty, back-biting TONE of their words. They have made me not like them.

Possible exception of Connie Willis, who flat-out expresses her hatred and acts on it. I can respect an 'honest villain' (probably the Parker/Spencer influence).

Tangibly, the anti-Puppies, anti-GG's (and Auntie Scalzi and Auntie PNH and Auntie Gerrold) have also led me to financially support the Honey Badger Brigade in their fight, and to buy many of the books available from this site.

They know not what they have wrought.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 8:33 AM  

I'm going to read the packet and vote on merits. Maybe that's naive given the opposition's vow to nuke the awards, but I agree that playing it straight this year is the best option. Save the nukes for later.

Blogger Kull May 03, 2015 9:00 AM  

I was lucky enough to train with a guru that mixed up his silat with Muay Thai, Escrima, and some Chinese stuff (Cun Tao). I thought we were a little weak on ground stuff but you can't have everything.

But anyway, I have said what I am about to say in other comments in the past weeks. The SJW reaction has done more damage to their cause than anything anyone could have done. They are hysterical lunatics. One could almost forgive them for that if they didn't display a total lack of honor or integrity. I read this blog because I find it entertaining. I registered with Sasquan because I thought it would be fun, free books and all that. I disliked last year's results so why sit idly by? Now I have a vote. I didn't vote straight slate for either SP or RP because either I didn't have time to read much of it or maybe some things I read and didn't care for. No big deal. But I am proud of the choices I made and I am happy the ones I picked from RP/SP did make it onto the ballot.
Then the reaction. The sff establishment just lost it. To borrow from their own preferred metaphor, they shit themselves. These people are not normal. They could have just acknowledged their defeat this year and got to work to come back stronger. But no. Shrieking insanity. Manipulation of the media. Bold face lying and outright libel. I have been around all sorts of people in my life. Nothing prepared me for these people. I blame the internet. In ages past there was no reward for being a lying, snarky, worthless piece of failed humanity. Now that and a few publication credits gets you a high backed chair in the circle of sff establishment wankers. Screw them for taking the genre I love and turning it into a colossal joke.
Long Live Castalia.

Blogger JACIII May 03, 2015 9:01 AM  

"I was lucky that I didn't rupture anything. I've been knocked out and I've had bones broken, but that was the hardest anyone has ever hit me. "

"I could only appreciate the whupping I received in it's sheer artistry, and take the lesson."

It is proven over and over that we are more defined by our scars than by our trophy case.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan May 03, 2015 9:04 AM  

Good I preferred to vote for the best not the nuke. Please keep us informed of when the reading packets are sent or how they are acquired and how the voting takes place.

Blogger JaimeInTexas May 03, 2015 9:05 AM  

It is called slow walking.

The first time I heard the proverb, it was by an old black woman tellling me about some problem that another person would not do right by her. She told tthe feller that "I will slow walk you down."

She had explain what that meant.

Blogger JACIII May 03, 2015 9:12 AM  

"They really seem to believe that unless you speak it into existence through the magic power of words, it does not exist."

This rabbit hole goes deeper than you may realize; it's the whole "perception is reality" nonsense. I hear folk attempting to apply this idea to things not swayed by a PR campaign. I have even seen attempts to apply it to groupings of inanimate objects.

The phrase, "You can't bullshit the machinery." is revelatory information for a disturbingly large portion of the population.

Blogger Zaklog the Great May 03, 2015 9:15 AM  

I've never been tempted to vote No Award this year. Now, on the other hand, if they do and No Award sweeps, I'm all for burning down next year's with No Award across the board.

Blogger CSAFarmer May 03, 2015 9:27 AM  

JACIII - It is proven over and over that we are more defined by our scars than by our trophy case.

Yeah, and the guy that mopped up the floor with me was gracious as hell about it too. Taught me what a good winner looked like.

Blogger JDC May 03, 2015 9:31 AM  

If he is at ease give him no rest, and don't over-extend yourself. Got it...I think.

Blogger JACIII May 03, 2015 9:35 AM  

If he is at ease give him no rest, and don't over-extend yourself. Got it...I think.

addendum - your opponent can sometimes be encouraged to error by goading him into an unthinking act.

Blogger RC May 03, 2015 9:38 AM  

BCM: The SJW freak out over this post will be glorious.

VD: Especially since I have done nothing more than point out what should be completely observable to anyone. They really seem to believe that unless you speak it into existence through the magic power of words, it does not exist.

The salient point is that they're incapable of analyzing the chessboard even though it's before their very eyes so, yes, your pointing it out is the point of creation in their own mind. Well played, a strategic tutorial for anyone willing to follow it.

I unintentionally added this blog to my homeschool senior son's curriculum and it's been a fine learning opportunity for him. He is a VFM-in-training.

Anonymous RedJack May 03, 2015 9:41 AM  

JACIII
One of the things that has "hurt" my career is that I don't give a rat's but about perception. I have made my targets, or exceeded them, every quarter. My teams work. They may be made up of the biggest aholes in the place, but they work. But, and this is from my review, I don't socialize enough with my betters outside of work, so they have a negative perception of me.

My plant is the only one making money in the division, yet the perception is more important than the reality.

Such people make me wonder if the whole world is really mad.

Anonymous jack May 03, 2015 9:49 AM  

I had hoped to vote this year. Sent my money in; it cleared my credit card on April 8. Over two weeks no confirm. Emailed them. No answer. On April 30 went to the pin number site, entered the info. No response.
I keep hearing here that people are getting confirms within a few hours, and pin numbers and ballots same day.
I will give them until early next week; try a phone call, if I get an answer will tell them they have 48 hours for my pin to clear. If not, I call my card company and report fraud on Worldcon.

Blogger Cataline Sergius May 03, 2015 9:51 AM  

I've recruited two outsiders who actually paid money to join the Iron Puppy Offensive.

Actually it would be more accurate to say, that one person I recruited, recruited a mutual acquaintance of ours.

I have no way of knowing if I am typical of the Dread Ilk in this regard or not. These people are both long time genre fans, who had gotten tired of the genre because of the endless dreary message fic.

Has anyone else has had similar luck?

It wouldn't really be statistically significant but it might give us an indication of what trends are developing.

Anonymous Steve May 03, 2015 9:51 AM  

Shimshon - Either that, or the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal.

What's Big Seanan been up to now?

Blogger Nate May 03, 2015 9:56 AM  

The very existence of this post is proof that Vox is not leading a bunch of blind followers.

What self-respecting leader explains his plan and sells it to his followers?

You sell it to equals in a cohort... you order followers.

"Look guys believe I understand the desire for curb stomping. Curb stomping was my original plan! ... but look! something may be better than that now... if we wait now... there could be even greater curb stomping in the future!"

Anonymous Feh May 03, 2015 10:02 AM  

Over the long term, the "thousands" of people who cared because of the controversy will go away, and it'll be back to the small cadre of SJW having excessive influence.

Blogger Shimshon May 03, 2015 10:08 AM  

I love the smell of SJWs shrieking in the morning.

Anonymous Roundtine May 03, 2015 10:13 AM  

I thought this was the plan all along. I would have been surprised if it came down to Noah Ward. I don't think they have enough people who would no award all the categories. They could try to no award the full puppy categories down list, but I think we already have the votes to beat them in block v block.

Anonymous Red Comet May 03, 2015 10:23 AM  

Speaking of Floyd Mayweather, one of the strangest recurring bits of SJW delusion I've seen over the past couple years are people thinking he could be beaten by Ronda Rousey just because she's at the top of the female MMA world.

Blogger Kull May 03, 2015 10:23 AM  

The worst knock down I ever received in the studio came from a bit of hubris. We had a guy, tall, heavy, bit chubby actually, but he was surprisingly quick and graceful. He was fantastic at the flashy stuff, especially the spinning back kick. So we would spar and he would try to set one of these up and telegraph the shit out of it. You can't not telegraph that. At that point I would close in and take him down. He wanted to do that kick so bad. So one day we are sparring and this happens three times in a row. He is getting madder and madder and I am really enjoying it. So he backs me off with a flurry and then starts his little spin. I think the kick is coming and close. Instead of a kick his fist comes around, much faster of course, and connects perfectly with my temple. I was out for a while. Lesson learned. I stopped really looking at him because I was so sure what was coming next. If hadn't decided that I knew what was coming I would have seen his leg wasn't really coming up as high as it had in the past and his shoulders were winding up. It must have been almost 25 years ago and I can remember it perfectly.

The funny thing is I don't think the SJW are going to learn. They are not rational actors. If they were, they would see how their antics effect people. How many other people are out there, like me, pseudo-ilk, casual readers, that have received a first class education by the Hugo kerfuffle?

Anonymous Sensei May 03, 2015 10:30 AM  

The martial arts analogy is apropros, and reminds me that there is an even deeper and subtler Gambit going on here underneath the Xanatos. Just as combat/conflict of any kind will be beneficial to many men, the effect of this conflict is subtly going to begin unrabbiting some of them. Now a real SJW, will always lie, and will debase themselves with displays like Scalzi back with the gamma rabbit debacle.

But plenty of those in the SJW camp have the seeds of something better in them. A good fight -I'd argue even the very inferior online analogue in lieu of physical fighting can count, it's the only battlefield many of them know- will cause something in the souls of many men to rear its head and shake off the corpulescent decay and prevaricating slime and say "No. I will win or go down trying." At that point, if the change sticks, however wrong-headed a leftist they may still be, they are at least no longer an SJW rabbit.

Blogger Pinakeli May 03, 2015 10:35 AM  

Is it too late to register Noah Ward as a pen name for a house writer for Castalia?

Just in case they do succeed in the nuking, it would be great to have someone "mistakenly" going up for his award.

Anonymous James May 03, 2015 10:42 AM  

Vox,

Some will claim to have read them all, some will proudly proclaim that they have read none, others will pretend to genuinely believe that there is not a single award-worthy work in the lot, and a few particularly foolish ones will even convince themselves they believe as much. That's fine, we all know what their opinions are worth as the list of past winners are well-documented. The only relevant point is that they are going to do it.


So explain this to me. Maybe I'm not as smart as you (because god knows you like to keep yapping about how so smart you are), but do me a favour.

You're saying that these works are so objectively superior to anything from previous ballots on what basis, exactly?

Can you use your awesome literary skills to break this down for me? Can you break the novels down and show me a real, factual basis for why your picks are so awesomely better?

I mean, I want an actual literary analysis here. Convince me that Ancillary Sword is better than...fuck, Blackout/All Clear, or Among Others.

Blogger Daniel May 03, 2015 10:43 AM  

I have gotten them to say everything I needed them to say for my purposes, and now they and the neutrals are making my points for me.

And is Pacquiaod camp seriously complaining about the shoulder? Did they know he had been planning on fighting Floyd Mayweather?

Blogger Daniel May 03, 2015 10:45 AM  

James, don't ask for contradictory things, for starters. Do you want objective superiority or literary analysis? Literary analysis is not objective.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 10:55 AM  

Speaking of Floyd Mayweather, one of the strangest recurring bits of SJW delusion I've seen over the past couple years are people thinking he could be beaten by Ronda Rousey just because she's at the top of the female MMA world.

That would be a cool 5-second fight.

Blogger Mint May 03, 2015 11:00 AM  

@Kull
Didn't expect to see something familiar from back home here. How did you come to learn Indonesian martial art (Silat)?

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:08 AM  

For all of the embellishments going on, this entire fiasco can be cynically judged as an effort to give Vox (and his publishing house) awards.

Sure, Vox claims that he "doesn't want the award", and that of course, he doesn't lie (it's the "other side" that always lies). But when you judge the actions and not the words, what is Vox doing?

Step one - try to polarize into two distinct camps. Us vs them. Yes vs no. Anything else is much more complex to analyze.
Step two - analyze the four possible outcomes. If it's us vs them, yes vs no, then there will only be four. Yes/Yes, No/No, Yes/No, No/Yes.
Step three - of the four outcomes, find the one in which Vox has the best chance to win the award.
Step four - make a case to the followers as to why that is the preferred option. Present it within a palatable frame of "truthiness".

Rabid puppies? Vocem canis.



Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:16 AM  

You're saying that these works are so objectively superior to anything from previous ballots on what basis, exactly?

No.

Convince me that Ancillary Sword is better than...fuck, Blackout/All Clear, or Among Others.

Why would I do that? I don't believe that. I applaud you for grasping the intelligence gap and all, but did you even bother to read the list of works I recommended?

I'll be happy to explain why Three-Body Problem or Monster Hunter: Nemesis is better than Redshirts sometime, if that would content you.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:17 AM  

Three-Body Problem will likely get my vote.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:19 AM  

For all of the embellishments going on, this entire fiasco can be cynically judged as an effort to give Vox (and his publishing house) awards.

You can claim that to be the case. That doesn't make it correct. I suggest you look up the term "Xanatos Gambit".

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:19 AM  

Three-Body Problem will likely get my vote.

It will definitely get mine.

Blogger Daniel May 03, 2015 11:20 AM  

Owen, you didn't even try to read Aristotle, did you?

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 11:23 AM  

For all of the embellishments going on, this entire fiasco can be cynically judged as an effort to give Vox (and his publishing house) awards.

We welcome that judgment. It allows us to make bigger moves while the enemy is distracted with triviality.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:24 AM  

Is it still possible to refuse to accept the Hugo? Or is that not possible now that the ballot is finalized and nobody further could withdraw?

That would be a way to avoid the appearance of lying when you state "I don't care about the award" even though all of your actions are leading towards you claiming the Rocket statue.

You could simply speak up the moment that your name is read, and say "No... I refuse to accept."

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 11:24 AM  

That would be a way to avoid the appearance of lying when you state "I don't care about the award" even though all of your actions are leading towards you claiming the Rocket statue.

Caring about appearances is a rabbit problem.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:26 AM  

@Daniel

Hi Denial. Yes, I did read the first bit. I started skimming about half-way through the first part, when he started talking about virtue and vice.

Blogger A Martian Warlord May 03, 2015 11:28 AM  

I have already decided how I will vote, and it is essentially in line with this post. Strategic voting to get Puppies something if at all possible and nuking anything not puppy related. Is it in the "spirit" of the awards? No. But then the "spirit" of the awards is right up there with unicorns and virgins.
Until humanity (or at least the SF/F readers and voters) become honourable creatures...one must fight fire with (strategic) fire.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:29 AM  

@Harsh

"Caring about appearances is a rabbit problem."

Yesterday a user named "Sean" was worried about marching in lockstep, because that's what the SJWs do. A few users pointed out to him that even if "this side" marches in lockstep, they're still superior. Vox Dei himself said that there would be a strong reason to march in lockstep. Sean quickly acquiesced, saying that he was only afraid of the appearances of acting similarly to SJWs, but then said something like "that's how evil they are... they take things that good men do and pervert them".

I'll let Sean know that he should stop being a rabbit if he appears.

Blogger Salt May 03, 2015 11:29 AM  

I'm sure Vox is touched by your concern for him, Owen. You're probably inducing him to seek out a beach, somewhere he can shed a single tear for the warmth you show.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 11:32 AM  

I'll let Sean know that he should stop being a rabbit if he appears.

You do that, Gamma.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:35 AM  

Is it still possible to refuse to accept the Hugo? Or is that not possible now that the ballot is finalized and nobody further could withdraw?

I can do that even after my name is called.

That would be a way to avoid the appearance of lying when you state "I don't care about the award" even though all of your actions are leading towards you claiming the Rocket statue.

Perhaps. I don't care. I know that I am telling the truth and that is all that matters to me. And I note that Larry did just that and it didn't make a damn bit of difference. They claimed his refusal of the nomination only proved that he desperately wanted to win one.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:36 AM  

"Vox is touched by your concern for him"

I think he's quite busy feeling smug and self-important to be bothered with me.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:41 AM  

@Vox

Well... but you're not Larry. And you're not Brad. They're only Sad Puppies. So perhaps refusing the award would make a bigger point. Who cares about appearances, as you yourself know that you're not lying.

John Wright got into an argument with me just last night, and accused me of lying, but like yourself, I know that I was entirely honest with him, both in my facts and in the way I tried to argue them (in my own uneducated manner). If he wants to persist in calling me a liar, then I guess it's his problem, and he won't owe me any rent for the space he gave me in his head.

Blogger Salt May 03, 2015 11:41 AM  

I think he's quite busy feeling smug and self-important to be bothered with me.

Yet you wish to engage him. Do you have a crush, gamma boy?

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 11:46 AM  

Yet you wish to engage him. Do you have a crush, gamma boy?

You ever notice how much Gammas act like a teenage girl with a crush? They say they hate a guy but they can't leave him alone. It's pretty amusing and it confirms the idea that Gammas are just feminized men.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:48 AM  

If a gamma was born to be a gamma, and fits within that role, then how is that an insult? Unless the gamma fools himself into thinking he's a sigma, I'd say that "gamma boy" to an actual gamma is a fairly futile jab.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:48 AM  

Well... but you're not Larry. And you're not Brad. They're only Sad Puppies. So perhaps refusing the award would make a bigger point.

Wow. Just wow. You guys really don't connect cause-and-effect at all. It's true, I'm not Larry or Brad. But they are the same SJWs. So, what you are proposing will not work, even if I cared, which, I will point out again, I don't.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 11:49 AM  

If a gamma was born to be a gamma, and fits within that role, then how is that an insult?

Because Gammas think of themselves as wrongfully misplaced Alphas. If they were comfortable with their place in the socio-sexual hierarchy, they'd be Deltas.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 11:57 AM  

"They are the same SJWs".

That's where I diverge from you. I know you are proud to say "I don't tell lies on the internet", but nothing in that statement precludes one from going ahead and telling one big lie. "I don't tell lies on the internet. I only tell one lie, not several. And it's a big one. It involves the existence of a secret and organized cabal of SJWs."

I really don't believe that there's a conspiracy of SJWs trying to control anything, Vox. Maybe that's criminally naïve of me, but I don't buy it.

That's as simple as I can make it. Hope that helps.

So yes...

Anonymous Steve May 03, 2015 12:02 PM  

Owen - I really don't believe that there's a conspiracy of SJWs trying to control anything

LOL.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 12:02 PM  

I really don't believe that there's a conspiracy of SJWs trying to control anything, Vox. Maybe that's criminally naïve of me, but I don't buy it.

Which means you are either ignoring a mountain of evidence or lying. In either case, you're not providing an analytic argument.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 12:05 PM  

If a gamma was born to be a gamma, and fits within that role, then how is that an insult? Unless the gamma fools himself into thinking he's a sigma

You just answered your own question.

Blogger Salt May 03, 2015 12:05 PM  

Owen doesn't even rise to the level of making popcorn. It's distressing.

Blogger Corvinus May 03, 2015 12:06 PM  

John Wright got into an argument with me just last night, and accused me of lying, but like yourself, I know that I was entirely honest with him, both in my facts and in the way I tried to argue them (in my own uneducated manner).

You got b!tchslapped by John C. Wright? Not the best way to make a first impression here, I must say.

If a gamma was born to be a gamma, and fits within that role, then how is that an insult? Unless the gamma fools himself into thinking he's a sigma, I'd say that "gamma boy" to an actual gamma is a fairly futile jab.

You sound exactly like The Scalzi. Your Gamma Rabbit T-shirt and Unwitting #1 Minion badge are in the mail.

I really don't believe that there's a conspiracy of SJWs trying to control anything, Vox. Maybe that's criminally naïve of me, but I don't buy it.

Then how do we have f@g marriage all over the place?

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 12:09 PM  

@Harsh

A mountain of evidence may exist for you, but I've lived my entire life in the plains. There's never been a mountain of anything.

I've happily been a patron of sf for many years, buying works of John Wright and John Scalzi. I buy most of the Baen books that are new, and many of the Tor books that are new.

And suddenly I have to choose sides in us vs them? My sf all went on the same bookshelf, and there was no need to worry about the politics of any particular author, because none of them pretended that their personal opinions mattered within the realm of a larger democracy.

And suddenly that changed.... and I'm told the problem was my blindness. But only one side is using dialogue that escalates, and only one side is beating the war drums, and of course, that's because the other side always lies.

And didn't you know that there can only be two sides in any scenario?

Blogger JACIII May 03, 2015 12:09 PM  

Not so much a conspiracy with SJW's as simply a totalitarian, statist mindset.

The list grows:

Grass is Green
Sky is Blue
Water's Wet
Women Lie
Retards Lick Windows
SJW's Always Lie.
Retards lick windows.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 12:10 PM  

@Harsh

"If a gamma was born to be a gamma, and fits within that role, then how is that an insult? Unless the gamma fools himself into thinking he's a sigma"

"You just answered your own question."

haha... touché. I enjoyed that, Harsh. Cheers!

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 12:11 PM  

And didn't you know that there can only be two sides in any scenario?

What does that have to do with anything? You keep going into these autistic rants that make no sense and then you wonder why we call you a Gamma.

Blogger JACIII May 03, 2015 12:18 PM  

Step one - try to polarize into two distinct camps. Us vs them. Yes vs no. Anything else is much more complex to analyze.
Step two - analyze the four possible outcomes. If it's us vs them, yes vs no, then there will only be four. Yes/Yes, No/No, Yes/No, No/Yes.
Step three - of the four outcomes, find the one in which Vox has the best chance to win the award.
Step four - make a case to the followers as to why that is the preferred option. Present it within a palatable frame of "truthiness".


-snip-


"And didn't you know that there can only be two sides in any scenario?"


Never seen this before..... /s

Anonymous A Reader May 03, 2015 12:18 PM  

I'm trying to figure out how likely a 'No Award' vote could win. I've seen it said that 'No Award' has won before, but I can't find an instance of it. I've looked at the lists of Hugo Award nominees and winners at Wikipedia, for instance.

My sense is that those who advocate 'No Award' are bluffing. That contingent is not as strong as they make themselves out to be.



Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 12:18 PM  

@Corvinus

"Then how do we have f@g marriage all over the place?"

I'm not in favor of that either, but I don't need to subscribe to conspiracy theories to explain the leftward trends in any democracy.

Your theory is that leftists have deficient thinking. But also somehow a bizarre power to control. The only way to reconcile this is to assert that they manage to do so by always lying.

But a democracy gives everybody a vote. So there doesn't have to be a conspiracy, and there doesn't have to be army of leftist SJWs that will always lie. Yes, I do believe that left politicians always lie, and I do believe that right wing politicians tell the truth more often.

But the voters tend to pick the leftists because they want protection. "I didn't finish high school and I still want my share of the pie. I'll vote for (insert left wing social justice politician here)."

So of course if education cannot prevail, you'll end up with a surplus of initiatives designed to help the lower stratum of society. There's more of them.

But the wrong response is to jump to "us vs them", at least in my opinion. Pushing back will not have useful consequences to our society. Why not use social justice as a means to educate?

Oh.. because you have to believe in the humanity of the masses. You have to believe that they can be lifted to a higher existence. You have to discard thoughts of "I'm superior"...

Blogger Danby May 03, 2015 12:21 PM  

See, the thing is Owen, Women and Gammas lie to themselves. That's the big tell, how we know you're a Gamma, you are insisting that the stupid conclusory statements you make after a chain of pseudo-logic started from obviously false premises are not only true, they are self-obviously true, and we're lying liars who lie because we tell you to your face that you're lying to yourself.

All the prancing and mincing and self-delusion in the world is only making you more ridiculous.

Blogger Feather Blade May 03, 2015 12:22 PM  

@Owen Yes, I did read the first bit. I started skimming about half-way through the first part, when he started talking about virtue and vice.

Yeah, no. If you are going to actually learn something from Aristotle, you have to actually read what he wrote. Read it and try to understand it on the author's terms.

You can't just skip past the parts you find unpleasant. Doing so means that you have shortchanged yourself not merely on information, but on knowledge.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 12:26 PM  

Oh, shut up already, Scoobius.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 03, 2015 12:37 PM  

"Oh, shut up already, Scoobius."

Patience, Vox.... remember the virtue.

Blogger Corvinus May 03, 2015 12:39 PM  

Oh.. because you have to believe in the humanity of the masses. You have to believe that they can be lifted to a higher existence. You have to discard thoughts of "I'm superior"...

Owen, there is where you make your mistake. Mankind is inclined toward evil. We are all born essentially as demon/animal hybrids. And as such, we can no longer lift ourselves to a higher existence than we can flap our wings and fly like birds.

Anonymous Viidad (Vile Faceless Minion #0156) May 03, 2015 12:39 PM  

Thanks for the excellent post, VD. I will (try to) slake my thirst for blood at the appropriate time.

Blogger Kull May 03, 2015 12:48 PM  

Mint-
Selamat Siang!

Actually I am from Pennsylvania. I was lucky enough to study silat close to home. It was many years ago. The instructor was American but he had spent a few years in Indonesia. I got lucky again at university when they offered Bahasa Indonesia and I even got to visit Jakarta while in the service, unfortunately only for a few days. A beautiful place with wonderful people but so hot!

We used to listen to gamelan when doing movements. The guru would take a padded rattan and whack at us and we would move or block. The music put me into almost like a trance. Awesome stuff.

Blogger Harsh May 03, 2015 12:51 PM  

Aspie's gonna aspie.

Blogger buwaya puti May 03, 2015 12:58 PM  

Actually, one has to take seriously the arguments of the likes of Chomsky and Gramsci (upper thread stuff brought here).
There is a great deal of truth in the concepts of "hegemony", and Chomsky certainly had something with " Manufacturing Consent".
Gramsci described a process "the long march through the institutions" that is very far along, and blow me down, I see "manufacturing consent" all over the place. I guess its easier to see when the shoe is on the other foot.
Its NOT all about perceived self-interest.
I recall dealing with third world international trade bureaucrats, thoroughly corrupt sorts, that in spite of that, and their frequent lapses, still maintained and defended absurd policies, because due to their leftist education, these met their remnant standards of virtue. Even the self interested have ideals.

Blogger Vox May 03, 2015 1:08 PM  

I said, shut up, Scoobius. Keep this idiocy up and you will be banned permanently.

Anonymous FP May 03, 2015 1:12 PM  

"And suddenly that changed.... and I'm told the problem was my blindness"

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

"Oh.. because you have to believe in the humanity of the masses. You have to believe that they can be lifted to a higher existence. You have to discard thoughts of "I'm superior"..."

Theory and/or hope is one thing, reality another. You can wish in one hand, and crap in the other. Which one fills up first? You can hide out in your safe spot in the mid-west but reality will show up eventually. See all the left wing gamers who were told "gamers are dead" last year. They're catching up to what I saw and experienced for the last 15 years.

Blogger Russell May 03, 2015 1:13 PM  

So, Owen, you need to prove Vox knows there are no SJWs and yet he's persisting in saying there are.

It's a tough row to hoe, Scoo--Owen.

Blogger Masha K. May 03, 2015 1:27 PM  

Anyone here concerned about Hugo Membership scholarships/giveaways meant to increase participation? Since they were initiated by, let's just say, the opposition, can there be sufficient influx of anti-Puppies to sway the vote? Or am I being too paranoid?

Anonymous Godscalc May 03, 2015 1:27 PM  

Vocem canis

What's your reason for the oblique case, Mr. Latinist?

Anonymous Shut up rabbit May 03, 2015 1:30 PM  

This OTO fella is a self-confessed liar/ SJW (i.e. liar)/ gamma (i.e. liar)
Please don't encourage it. It has already shit pseudo-smugness over a few threads. Mock if you must but do not engage, its sophism 101 in action.
0/10 would not debate

Anonymous BigGaySteve May 03, 2015 1:31 PM  

The SJW freak out over this post will be glorious.

Lets not forget to put something painful for them here like EVOLUTION DID NOT STOP AT THE NECK IN HUMANS

strangest recurring bits of SJW delusion I've seen over the past couple years are people thinking he could be beaten by Ronda Rousey just because she's at the top of the female MMA world.

The same feminists that would want to see the fight would be calling the cops afterwards.

Over the long term, the "thousands" of people who cared because of the controversy will go away, and it'll be back to the small cadre of SJW having excessive influence.

Possibly but they will be like feminists wanting to see Ronda Rousey fight a man. They know their little world only exists because of a restraining order placed upon their betters.

"that's how evil they are... they take things that good men do and pervert them".

The good men Sean is looking for are down by the railroad tracks. Was it a Sean L?

Blogger Sam Hall May 03, 2015 1:32 PM  

But the voters tend to pick the leftists because they want protection. "I didn't finish high school and I still want my share of the pie. I'll vote for (insert left wing social justice politician here)."

Common leftist rant. There is no "pie', There is as much wealth as people create. You want more, earn more, don't try to steal from those that have.

Blogger Rantor May 03, 2015 1:38 PM  

OTO, I should probably ignore you, but having had a lot of Gamma traits in High School, herewith. No, being proud of being Gamma because that is what you are is stupid. Realizing that you have Gamma traits and that you will be happier and more successful if you get rid of them is the objective.

Years of military training and leadership jobs beat much of the gammatude out of me. For that I am thankful.

Vox' ability to pinpoint the issue, describe the characteristics, and show the appropriate path to a more fulfilling astate of being is a gift. You need to go read a whole lot at the Alpha Game Blog so that you understand how to let go of your gammatude and identify yourself with and work towards real manhood.

Yes your nattering is irritating. You have a chance to read, learn and improve yourself. Go for it.

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 1:39 PM  

Masha K. May 03, 2015 1:27 PM
Or am I being too paranoid?



this.

it doesn't hurt either puppies cause if the SJWhoreriors burn down the Hugos. because the blood will be ON THEIR HANDS.

what are the Hugo's supposed purpose? to recognize the 'best' skiffy in the previous year.

a - we have OTHER ways ( best seller lists, amazon rankings, goodreads reviews, etc ) to identify 'best' skiffy
b - if there truly is a demand for such an award AND the SJWs succeed in destroying the Hugo ... then a new award will arise to take it's place
c - if the Hugo gets destroyed, this probably also destroys WorldCon

the only thing you're 'losing' is the direct historical connection to the Hugo. but all those works will still have won the Hugo. unlike the Tour de France, nobody is going to go back and retroactively take away the previous awards.

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 1:42 PM  

as to the patience thing, yes, taking the checker is ALWAYS the best option.

sure, totaling the other guy's car out can provide a lot of instantaneous satisfaction ... but trust me. it's way, WAY better to be standing on the top platform, hosting the big trophy and slobbering all over the bikini girl than it is to finish 10th, but the other guy was knocked out of the race.

of course ...
if you can do BOTH ...
this IS best.

Anonymous BigGaySteve May 03, 2015 2:10 PM  

Common leftist rant. There is no "pie', There is as much wealth as people create. You want more, earn more, don't try to steal from those that have.

The leftists are not even smart enough to understand wealth is created. They will burn down a CVS over a heroin dealer and say that whitey didn't build enough stuff for them. Only Asians & whites seem to have the ability to create anything of lasting value, but leftists think white privilege makes concrete rise from the ground. For those under 90IQ things just majikly appear and they say gibbs me dat.

Anonymous Crimson Vest May 03, 2015 2:45 PM  

"thanks to the SJW overreaction, our capabilities may now permit us to accomplish more than we had reasonably believed possible"

Say whT you really mean. You may finally get the award that your midwit, mediocre talent could never produce without cheating.

Here is the cold hard fact you go to sleep knowing: those folks you like to dub AJW have mor integrity, talent, long term viability and success than you and your dimwit Ilk could ever dream of mustering.

How's it feel to be in the process of building the asterisk that will forever be next to your name?

Blogger buwaya puti May 03, 2015 3:01 PM  

The last commenter Crimson Vest obviously has not been paying attention. Beale has been consistent with his statement of objectives, agree or disagree. This all is a propaganda campaign towards ends that are not limited to a minor literary award.
If nothing else, it seems to have sold a lot of books and raised the profile of his business and authors.
As for the value of this award, it seems to be very very limited. After all, who remembers Alexei Panshin, and did Gene Wolfe ever win one ?

Blogger ajw308 May 03, 2015 3:12 PM  

@Crimson, Of all the typos, on all the blogs, why'd you have to pick that one?

Blogger ajw308 May 03, 2015 3:18 PM  

@Crimson, you are missing the whole point of the BIG RED FLAG if you think feelings about what some small group thinks, a contemptuous group at that, are going to influence anyone who uses reason, let alone Vox.

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 3:23 PM  

Crimson Vest May 03, 2015 2:45 PM
Here is the cold hard fact you go to sleep knowing: those folks you like to dub AJW



Asshole Justice Whorerior?


Crimson Vest May 03, 2015 2:45 PM
How's it feel to be in the process of building the asterisk that will forever be next to your name?



you mean, like the asterisk about being the only author ever thrown out of the SFWA ... except that the SFWA never followed their own bylaws and put this to a vote to the entire SFWA membership ...

so Theo has never actually been thrown out of the SFWA ...

so the SFWA withholding member benefits from Theo is highly illegal?

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 3:25 PM  

oh, and Doctor Jerry Pournelle ( co-author of several landmark works of SF ) is having work published by Vox.

so, on that basis alone, Vox has already exceeded the quality AND success of everything Scalzi has ever done.

Anonymous BGS May 03, 2015 3:43 PM  

Leftists want NYC to go dark so that cameras wont catch as many black criminals.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/dgreenfield/environmentalists-to-plunge-manhattan-into-darkness-to-protect-mating-frogs/

& decriminalize public urination because of disparate impact
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/editorial-council-pee-brains-article-1.2192241

Anonymous John V. Marsch May 03, 2015 3:45 PM  

Anyone who votes No Award ahead of any shortlisted person or work who they either (a) think worthy or (b) haven't read, is acting like a bit of a c*nt.

Blogger bornagainpenguin May 03, 2015 3:59 PM  

@ bob k. mando (May 03, 2015 1:39 PM)

unlike the Tour de France, nobody is going to go back and retroactively take away the previous awards.

Don't give 'em any ideas. They're just stupid enough to think that's be a great way to punish us by trying to dethrone writers we admire, never mind how much it cuts off their own nose.

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 4:11 PM  

bornagainpenguin May 03, 2015 3:59 PM
Don't give 'em any ideas. They're just stupid enough to think that's be a great way to punish us by trying to dethrone writers we admire, never mind how much it cuts off their own nose.



why should we not? they already call Heinlein a fascist racist.

you're acting as though THEM doing so would harm us in any way.

it would not.

remember, THEIR answers are OUR recruiting tools.

if they are actually so ideologically pure that they start going back and re-awarding a lot of stuff to Delaney ...

well. sounds like a win to me.

Blogger MidKnight May 03, 2015 4:12 PM  

First - I'd be hesitant to declare at this point that I'd just no award everything next year if they burn it to the ground this year.

Not because I'm not willing to.

No - the question is, what IS the goal, and between now and when the awards are announces, what may change?

So when all is said and done, my choices for what I vote over a year from now will be determined by the actions of many people who cannot, even if I was inclined, be controlled by me, across several decision points, with data that is unknown. And what course leaves me the most possible "win" conditions that meet our goals.

As Vox says - strategy, and the necessity of adapting it to the changing conditions on the ground.

Second - John Wright points to a set of hatchet reviews ( http://secritcrush.livejournal.com/tag/pathetic%20puppies ) and I just stand - even as jaded as I've been by some of the progressive crowd - amazed.

I know that I take some of John Haidt's work re: "liberals are less nuanced than conservatives" with a grain of salt (at least without treating it as greater/lesser continuums) but I read those reviews and the commentaries for each of them, and can't help but think these people have something MISSING. Something deeply, badly broken and just NOT THERE. I can understand stories not being to taste, but even having dealt with Borderlines and Narcissists, seeing it that plainly written out is disturbing.

Blogger bob k. mando May 03, 2015 4:13 PM  

that's another reason why i don't mind making my analysis public here ( because you know there's a bunch of them doing oppo research on this blog );
the SJWhoreriors are so damn stupid that they're likely to go ahead and do all the retarded shit even AFTER i point out that it's retarded.

because it's ideologically pure for them to do so.

Blogger Russell May 03, 2015 4:25 PM  

@Bob
"the SJWhoreriors are so damn stupid that they're likely to go ahead and do all the retarded shit even AFTER i point out that it's retarded."

That's what Vox keeps doing, and they keep falling over themselves to prove him right.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit May 03, 2015 5:21 PM  

Every non-leftist Hugo winner should be divested of their awards and be thrown down the memory hole. Any existing copies of their works should be expunged and current publication cease.

It's the right thing to do.

Blogger S1AL May 03, 2015 5:45 PM  

I'm just wondering where Owen goofed up his anagram.

Anonymous Roundtine May 03, 2015 6:04 PM  

But the wrong response is to jump to "us vs them", at least in my opinion. Pushing back will not have useful consequences to our society. Why not use social justice as a means to educate?

Oh.. because you have to believe in the humanity of the masses. You have to believe that they can be lifted to a higher existence. You have to discard thoughts of "I'm superior"...


You're a Turing computer running an Orwell loop. What's my prize?

Blogger Masha K. May 03, 2015 7:01 PM  

@MidKnight: It's actually worse than that with reviews. There are a bunch of 1 star reviews on Amazon for the Puppy related stuff that just say "Bad." Of course, as a reader, whenever I see those, esp. from an author/publisher I know, I reach out for my credit card. BUT the other side is defo pulling out all the stops.

Does that answer the other poster's "us vs. them" comment"? "We" stop pushing back when "they" stop trying to destroy "us" by any means necessary.

Anonymous Androsynth May 03, 2015 7:02 PM  

Here is the cold hard fact you go to sleep knowing: those folks you like to dub AJW have mor integrity, talent, long term viability and success than you and your dimwit Ilk could ever dream of mustering.

You and your fellow SJWs are so small and sad and ignorant, and so thoroughly broken that you don't even realize it. You think you've made some kind of grand point here, strolling into our midst, flaying us with your wit, and exposing the naked emperor, when all you've really done is stumbled clumsily into court and soiled yourself.

Anonymous Darth Toolpodicus May 03, 2015 7:08 PM  

Ugh, Vox, you needed to put a spoiler warning in there...watched the Mayweather/Paquiao fight today. Was able to stay incommunicado about the results until I really this post.

Blogger Nate May 03, 2015 7:52 PM  

oh shut up... lord it grates on my nerves for you DVR hero's to claim that the rest of us should not talk about a massive event because you're to damn special to bother watching it live with the rest of us.

Blogger Nate May 03, 2015 7:53 PM  

the other thing that infuriates me is the notion that the fight last night actually means anything.

it doesn't.

May waited until Manny was a shadow of himself to actually fight him... and now everyone will claim that he was greater than Paq all along.

Anonymous 141 May 03, 2015 8:54 PM  

You should vote for puppies rather than nuke it all.

The Hugo's are a fan vote and nuking it signals you were just dishonest asshole nonfans who just wanted to piss in some nerds cereal.

Voting for the works you actually liked upholds the spirit of the awards and makes it appear to third party onlookers that the SJW's merely lost a popularity contest.

It also gives your side's award winners credentials, credibility, and visibility using your enemy's propaganda machine.

The mayweather fight was fucking boring. Fuck yo strategy nigga.

Anonymous Daniel May 03, 2015 9:14 PM  

Pacquaio did himself no favors, plus he is old. The fight would have been great fun four years ago, but as it was, Pacquaio probably should have gone Ricky Hatton-style for a spectacular loss. Everyone knows that Money rolls the shoulder and plays defense. Pacman could have tried that, but he's a three-punch fighter with a shorter reach. He is beloved, but nowhere close to his former self (at a lighter weight.)

There just wasn't any circumstance where these two past-peak fighters were going to have a great match, and no circumstance by which Mayweather was going to lose. There's no such thing as a puncher's chance against the shoulder roll when you are slow.

Only fighters who could beat Mayweather are the hyperkinetic defensive ones that he makes sure he doesn't fight.

Blogger Darth Toolpodicus May 03, 2015 9:24 PM  

Nate, you're bringing me down...I was getting my snowflake on dammit! It was a DVR party after bench day at the gym, but I'm glad I didn't stay up late to watch it last night. I did a pretty good job avoiding the news...seriously; Who talks boxing in a GG post?!? (answer: Vox)

It was weird, I was the only one out of 10 at the party who (admitted) knowing the outcome. I get the strategy, but it was the only unanimous decision I've seen where the loser was the more aggressive and less the worse for wear after 12 rounds. Felt like the boxing version of a GSP - BJ Penn fight with GSP working the front leg 'till the cows come home. Boring.

Now they'll give May a nice cream-puff fight in a couple months so they can say he beat Marciano's record. lame. Especially considering how he ducked Spadafora.

There's a hilarious photochop of Mayweather celebrating post-fight with Justin Beiber floating around.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 03, 2015 9:44 PM  

Everyone knows that Money rolls the shoulder and plays defense.

Yet in the last few days I started hearing people predicting a late-round TKO by Mayweather, which was odd. I knew very little about these guys, but I knew that was the least likely outcome. I guess they were overthinking it.

The two main possibilities seemed to be 1) Mayweather wins in a decision, or 2) Pacman wins in a close, controversial decision to set up a rematch. But at their ages, maybe a rematch didn't seem like that good an idea after all.

I've seen some pretty good boxing on the broadcast networks for free this spring. Nobodies compared to these guys, maybe, but fun to watch.

Anonymous Crimson Vest May 03, 2015 10:03 PM  

"u and your fellow SJWs are so small and sad and ignorant, and so thoroughly broken that you don't even realize it"

We know we are broken. Everyone should know they are broken in one way or another.

But we venture into this pit Of hate to remind mr. Beale that we see and we understand his brand of immorality and evil and to remind him that it won't go unchallenged.

There are more of us, the ones who believe in something, than you who merely do the bidding of hate and darkness.

We win against your type because there are more of us , we call you out publicly and in the end God always wins.

Blogger Daniel May 03, 2015 10:05 PM  

May waited until Manny was a shadow of himself to actually fight him... and now everyone will claim that he was greater than Paq all along.

Yep. Money needed it. Paq didn't. Five years ago, I still think the strategic guy with longer reach would have won but Paq was deceptive with this automatic, almost subconscious counter that he no longer has. It was like young Vitali klitschko's head dodge...but a defensive punch.

Five years ago, a ko was a definite if minority possibility. That is why Money didn't beg for the fight until now.

Blogger Daniel May 03, 2015 10:10 PM  

Oh so you are a Christian, son? Bless your heart Crimson Vest.

Now flee back to the warren and tell them you made noise at the Altar of Hate, and even thought about saying rude things to Satan.

Blogger Darth Toolpodicus May 03, 2015 10:17 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Darth Toolpodicus May 03, 2015 10:19 PM  

ooooh Crimson Vest....what is under the vest? Eleven blocks of Tofu and a micro-agression trigger? Should I be worried?

Blogger Desiderius May 03, 2015 10:25 PM  

Man, that Torgerson link.

She's like an eighth-grade Heather pretending to be grossed out when the Down's kid holds the door for her.

Cold and sick? Really?

Blogger John Wright May 03, 2015 10:37 PM  

"It may be little hard on John C. Wright...who might genuinely appreciate winning an award, but as I have consistently pointed out from the start, I don't care about awards."

Let all the Dread Ilk know that as a Vulcan, while I have emotions on my human side, I keep them carefully trained to the leash like hunting dogs.

There is no hardship for me no matter what happens: if the awards are played straight, that is, every one votes for the merit of the work, I will get the awards dues and overdue to me.

If the awards are played crooked, and every one votes out of political loyalty and no award is given on merit, that is an award I do not want and would not accept if it were offered for the very logical and obvious reason that it is counterfeit.

So, no one who votes for any reason other than his dispassionate judgment on the merit of the work deprives me of anything -- anything worth desiring.

I don't care about an award if it is meaningless.

It is like the difference between gold and fiat money. If the gold value can be returned to the inflated paper currency, and the old standards kept, then the award would mean something to me, and I would be honored to accept one, if my readers thought my work worthy of the honor.

But a paper currency award, a 'fiat' award means nothing to anyone. It is counterfeit.

Either way, I loose nothing.

If the Morlocks officially prove to the world that the awards are meaningless, so be it. Truth wins; Liars lose. That is as it should be.

I urge one and all to vote as your unemotional and dispassionate judgment best directs you.

The hate and fury, whining, whinging, lies and libels of the SJWs do not to touch us; their petty hates only heaps deeper layers of bullshit-scented irrelevance on their head, and increases the disgust of any honest but uninvolved onlookers for the SJWs.

Blogger John Wright May 03, 2015 10:41 PM  

@ CSAFarmer

I am impressed. You are a good soul.

Blogger John Wright May 03, 2015 11:28 PM  

"Maybe I'm not as smart as you (because god knows you like to keep yapping about how so smart you are), but do me a favour."

Why do these people telegraph their unsightly psychological problems to the rest of us? You suffer from the crushing burden of your own ghastly inferiority? Fine. By why tell us? We don't care.

Why flail around so blindly, and dump such shameful admissions on yourself? No one here can grant absolution, and even a priest cannot hear a confession you never admit.

Why not pray, learn humility, learn the truth, and know some peace?

Blogger bornagainpenguin May 03, 2015 11:30 PM  

@ bob k. mando (May 03, 2015 4:11 PM)

if they are actually so ideologically pure that they start going back and re-awarding a lot of stuff to Delaney ...

well. sounds like a win to me.


I'm not sure you understand me here...

http://i.imgur.com/gxd6CXP.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/5l0Ff30.jpg

Blogger John Wright May 03, 2015 11:32 PM  

" I started skimming about half-way through the first part, when he started talking about virtue and vice."

Oloren, I will ask you the same question I asked James: why do you make such startling admissions of your own self-disgust in public? Why not tell a priest, and get cleansed, or tell a psychiatrist, and get treated?

I do not understand your motives at all. Are you simply unaware of what such admissions imply?

Blogger Corvinus May 03, 2015 11:35 PM  

But we venture into this pit Of hate to remind mr. Beale that we see and we understand his brand of immorality and evil and to remind him that it won't go unchallenged.

Thou writest like a spastic. One would think trolls would at least make sure to spell things properly. I rather doubt that thou, at least, wilt be posing much of a threat to anybody... except maybe thyself.

There are more of us, the ones who believe in something, than you who merely do the bidding of hate and darkness.

We win against your type because there are more of us , we call you out publicly and in the end God always wins.


"Hate" and "darkness"... but of course. We are the Evil Legion of Evil, after all.

As for which side God is on... I think thou wilt be surprised.

Anonymous Earl May 04, 2015 12:02 AM  

Mr. Wright, OTO is a long time reader who has taken to trolling using multiple handles. I know the word trolling gets thrown around a lot... but its the exact word needed.

Blogger olaf lee May 04, 2015 12:21 AM  

Oh Evil One,
You took over the Hugo's by getting deserving works (in your mind) placed on the ballot.
For an outsider who would have never cared about who got a Hugo, or a dinosaurs lover for that matter its a ligit shot at the podium. I'm tired of voting for the best guy/girl only to have them aced out by some backroom deal. I am voting to knock the Vile ideology that feeds these SWJ's back to where it belongs. I hope they remember to put a cross up and bring flowers to it to remind themselves that 2014 was the death of SWJ's control of the Hugo's. They were sloppy and careless and thought they had the #'s. I love it when fools are so angry they throw tantrums on the floor. Time for some corporal punishment.

Blogger Mint May 04, 2015 12:38 AM  

@Kull
Not sure you still read this thread or not, but in case you are reading; selamat siang or pagi or malam (whatever time you are in)! It was over midnight when I posted my question so I went to sleep before you posted your response.

Yeah, Javanese music is pentatonic which has trance inducing quality. Great for meditation or when you want to focus like doing martial art. It helps the body to get the movement rhythm and tempo. Silat looks like dancing to untrained watchers.

Blogger Desiderius May 04, 2015 1:42 AM  

"Are you simply unaware of what such admissions imply?"

He was told there would be no implications.

Anonymous James May 04, 2015 2:45 AM  

Vox,
I applaud you for grasping the intelligence gap and all, but did you even bother to read the list of works I recommended?

I'll be happy to explain why Three-Body Problem or Monster Hunter: Nemesis is better than Redshirts sometime, if that would content you.

It would. But I want a deep analysis. Not just "the grammar is poor"; I want examples.

I would also like to know on what basis you believe you are so superior in your intelligence.

Blogger John Wright May 04, 2015 9:22 AM  

"John Wright got into an argument with me just last night, and accused me of lying, but like yourself, I know that I was entirely honest with him, both in my facts and in the way I tried to argue them (in my own uneducated manner). If he wants to persist in calling me a liar, then I guess it's his problem, and he won't owe me any rent for the space he gave me in his head."

The difference between an adult and a child is that an adult wipes the chocolate crumbs off his mouth before claiming that a monster broke into the kitchen cookie jar and ate all the cookies.

For the record, the falsehood of which Owen stands accused is that he cannot offer evidence nor reasoning to support his claims, but instead, as if compelled by an inevitable law of psychology, must level an ad hominem accusation against his accuser personally, an accusation he knows or should know to be false, in order to dodge the accusation without answering it, on the alleged ground that the accuser is disqualified because of thoughtcrime.

In this case, the child both protests that my accusation is false, and, without pausing for breath, states that my accusation is not prompted by the facts of the case, but by a psychological obsession unique to me. I have never heard the phrase about living rent free in someone head except from the pen of John Scalzi, but I assume it means that one is an obsessive stalker.

In this case, I had of course instantly forgotten the conversation with this witless, simpering, and girlish whiner, until he again provokes me again by leveling the selfsame false ad hominem.

Here again he attempts to disqualify the evidence of his own rampant and unending addiction to falsehood with the selfsame falsehood of which I previously complained.

One need only read the two sentences he pens and compare one to the other to see the childish deception: his claim that if libels me, and I answer, my motive for answering is bad, because I am obsessed with him, therefore the answer .... somehow ... does not count or is not fair.

How is it proof of my guilt if I claim innocence? Somehow.

How, no matter who makes the accusation, does disqualifying the accuser's motive make the accusation false or true, valid or invalid? Somehow.

On that "somehow" that mental moment of blank and thought-free nothingness, the entire structure of the Morlock mind is erected.

Blogger SirHamster May 04, 2015 2:39 PM  

@ James

He'd know he's a superior intelligence from experience, duh. Like being able to quote text properly in a blog comment.

If you can't tell someone is smarter from the way they act and write, you're not intelligent enough for the answer to matter. It is a pointless question.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 04, 2015 7:33 PM  

@John Wright

Part 1) An explanation, and to be followed by a full and unconditional apology for my behavior.

First, the explanation:

I truly was unaware of the non-interchangeability of the words "sex" and "gender" in my sentence.

Two users told me I had made an error, but didn't say where. I was perusing the dictionary looking up each word (even "the" and "is"), trying to eliminate the words which were correct, when Danby grabbed the dictionary, hit me over the head with it, and explained that the word that comprised my error was "gender".

I dropped the dictionary and went to Wikipedia, which said that in common usage, the words are considered interchangeable. But this is an educated forum, and I didn't want to rely on Wikipedia.

I accepted correction from Danby, and believe I did so gracefully.

Following this, you called me "illiterate", and I was upset that you would do so. I admit that you angered me, because I thought you were being crass when I've already admitted my mistake.

(However, I've since looked up the word "illiterate", and there are several definitions. One says "unable to read or write", and that would make me angry, as I'm sure I was demonstrating that I was able to do so at least 90-95% of the time. But another definition says "not following prescribed rules for communication", and guess what... that applies to me. So, although I considered you crass, and responded with vitriol, you were in fact using the word "illiterate" faithfully. At least according to wikitionary, and then there we go again...)

So I pushed back and inserted weasel words in my rebuttal. I said "I'm sorry I didn't use the words properly as to your custom", and I felt certain that since Wikipedia said that the words could be used interchangeably, then while it may be your custom to differentiate, that doesn't mean that it needs to be my custom.

And that's where you have been quite insistent that I must address. In your opinion, it shows that I am a liar. I'm arguing instead that I used it based on the information that I had at the time, which is still there on Wikipedia if you care to check such a source.

So please accept that I was not trying to be dishonest. I was trying to argue from facts, and any "attack of the man instead of the ideas" came afterwards, when I was upset about being first called illiterate, and later called dishonest.

That's my explanation, and it's not distorted or twisted. I'm certain you don't care, and I can accept that.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 04, 2015 7:35 PM  

@John Wright

Part 2) An apology

Now, a full and unconditional apology for my behavior. Not an apology for lying, because I've not lied to you, but I'll give you the best apology that I hope you'll ever encounter for everything else I've done.

I am sorry, John.

I did wrong. I own that, not you. It is my error and my transgression. I will own this apology because my poor behavior was a result of my actions, and my poor judgement, and does not reflect on anything you've done. It was my rash decision to take offense at the word illiterate. It was my rash decision to insert weasel words intended to exonerate me of the error involved in using gender for sex. I should have either retracted fully without weasel words, or else argued fully that the words are interchangeable, either trusting Wikipedia or not trusting it, but not waffling indecisively.

Why do I know it was wrong? Because I escalated something that was trivial and meaningless, and in reflection your response needed to offer no offense. Even your correction (stating me "illiterate") is not an escalation. I did that. My behavior was beneath my own standards.

To continue the apology, I'd like to try to put myself in your shoes and empathize with how I made you feel. I would suspect that you found me quite tedious and tiresome, and that you still responded to me is something for which I am thankful.

To complete the apology, a promise from me as to how things will be different in the future. I will avoid attacking the man, dishing out insults, and generally rude behavior. I will think carefully about what you've written before jumping to conclusions. And I will remember that you are a regular here, and myself a relative newcomer.

You are a writer whose work I admire, and I do own most of your books in my collection. Please accept my apology for my behavior, and in the future, if we disagree about ideas, I will take time to carefully consider what you are saying.

Thanks very much, John.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 04, 2015 8:08 PM  

@Earl

I'm not a long time reader. I'm new here. I have never used any other name. I'm not Scoobius (and had to look him up when Vox started calling me that), and I'm never visited this blog prior to this week.

Blogger John Wright May 04, 2015 9:47 PM  

Apology accepted.

Blogger Owen T. Oloren May 04, 2015 9:53 PM  

Thank you very much, John. It means a lot to me.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts