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

Thursday, February 18, 2016

The Great Hugo Wars of 2015

Matthew David Surridge, who declined a Hugo nomination last year, explains his take on the situation in the customarily careful and detailed manner that led me to nominate him in the first place. There is also a discussion of it at Black Gate.
Having received no email, I figured I had nothing to worry about.

Then the next night I opened my email to find a message from the Worldcon administrators congratulating me for being nominated for a Hugo. If I wouldn’t be at Worldcon, could I please select someone who’d be able to pick up the award for me if I won?

I emailed Black Gate editor John O’Neill, and asked him if he’d be in Spokane. He said he wouldn’t, and also mentioned that Black Gate had been nominated for a Fanzine Hugo. That meant I’d now heard of three Puppy picks who’d gotten nominations. I poked around some message boards and found speculation from various people plugged into the field guessing that the Puppies would do spectacularly well when the full list of nominees was made public. One (non-Puppy) editor said that he’d heard that the Puppies had three of the nominations for Best Novel—the most prestigious category. I began to wonder if I wanted to be nominated for an award that was being shaped by the Puppy tactics. If nothing else, what kind of backlash would this create?

Over the next few days I did more research on the Puppy program. Beyond politics, it was clear I didn’t share the Sad Puppy sense of what was good and bad in fiction. Beale only spoke about “the science fiction right,” but Torgersen was putting forward an aesthetic argument about the value of adventure writing over “message fiction.” I like good pulp fiction, but prefer experimental writing. More: it became clear to me that Torgersen and Beale knew that what they were doing was a slap in the face of the SF community—the people who attended events like Worldcon and administered the Hugos. As far as they were concerned, many of the existing institutions of science fiction fandom were not only dominated by liberals, but corrupt, and therefore had to be either reformed or burned down. The Puppies were looking for a fight.

Emotions were already running high on both sides. A lot of fans were treating the Puppies as a threat to the Hugos. To the existing fandom, and apparently to the Sad Puppies, too, who wanted the Hugos to acknowledge their own vision of SF. But not to me. The Hugos didn’t generally go to SF novels that were important to me. But so what? I wasn’t the one giving out the awards. What right did someone else have to try to hijack the process?

Turning the nomination down meant picking a side, if only by implication. But accepting it was also taking a side. Of course, people could be Puppy voters and also genuinely believe I was a good candidate. Did I have the right to back out on them? From another angle, could I win? If the category was entirely flooded with Puppy picks, I thought I might do well. And, realistically, the No Award option existed—and people were already talking about using it.

The more I thought about it, the more confused I got. There was a lot at stake. But I didn’t really know how much; this was not, in the end, my world. I didn’t know how much I didn’t know. I did have a sense that a lot of people involved in the debate had a history with each other, and that a certain amount of subtext in the online discussion was based off of meatspace encounters. (Much later, it’d come out that Correia felt he’d been excluded and mocked at the convention where the 2011 Campbell Award was presented.)

I went back and forth for a couple of days trying to figure out the right thing to do—for me, for Black Gate, for the science fiction field in general. I talked with some people in SF, I read and read, and I still wasn’t sure. Finally I thought: What do I know, exactly? I’d been put forward for a prize—but as part of a program that I didn’t agree with. I didn’t like the tactics the Puppies had used, I didn’t like the fact that they’d pulled me into what they knew was going to be a fraught situation without asking, and I didn’t agree with much Torgersen had to say about SF. Put like that, it was simple enough.

First, I should point out the reason that I recommended both Black Gate and Matthew David Surridge for Hugo Awards is because a) they were worthy of winning the award, and b) they would never, ever have been nominated by the very small group of 40-50 Tor-affiliated SJWs who have dominated the nominations, and through them the awards, for the last 20 years.

Second, all Matthew's actions accomplished was to ensure the award went to a vastly inferior "fan" writer, the professional writer and wife of the then-SFWA president, whose "fan writing" consisted of a single hit piece on one of the lunatics of the field. That, more than anything, is why his decision to renounce his nomination was a mistake. That one is on you, Matthew. If you think Laura Mixon is a better fan writer than you are, fine. But I don't.

What Rabid Puppies did was to rescue the category from the pro writers in the Tor Books cabal who were intentionally using it as a springboard to win the Best Novel award. John Scalzi did this successfully, Jim Hines and Kameron Hurley did it unsuccessfully. Notice how they abruptly disappeared from the category once they win their "Fan Writer" awards. It is simply laughable to claim that any of the fan writers nominated before the Puppy campaigns can legitimately compare with the fan writers we have been recommending, both at Black Gate and Castalia House. The same is true of the Best Related Work category.

Third, the Hugo controversies are only going to become more intense going forward. Last year, we were quiet and allowed all of the various slanders that appeared in the media to go largely uncommented. Instead, we began doing our research, and while we are not neo-Nazis or any of the various things we are accused of being, we have learned that SF fandom is genuinely full of pedophiles, child abusers, child molesters, sexual deviants, and people who are more than willing to publicly defend and even celebrate child molesters... and it has been for fifty years.

This year it's our turn to take our case to the media, and we're going to hit back harder than any of you ever imagined. This isn't over. It has barely even begun. And every time the SJWs in SF try to double-down, as they did with the media and with rules changes like EPH, we're going to take advantage of those actions and make use of them.

So for those of you inclined to Puppy-kicking, I encourage you to think twice before you decide to take their side. Because you're going to find yourself publicly associated with things far darker and more depraved than anything you ever accused the Puppies of being or doing. If you are determined to fight award recommendations in order to defend child molesters, then there is something seriously wrong with you.

And before you protest that we're being unfair, well, you should probably keep in mind that I have written an entire book about the philosophical legitimacy of utilizing tactics that were introduced by the other side. Every sword cuts both ways.

Labels: , ,

72 Comments:

Blogger Sherwood family February 18, 2016 5:27 AM  

After last year I am looking gleefully forward to what ensues this year as VD and the VFMs begin to give the SJWs and puppy-kickers some of what they dished out last year. Schadenfreude is a sin but one that, at least in this case, easily besets me.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge©2016 February 18, 2016 5:37 AM  

Matthew's little bit of moral equivocation/ wrestling with his decisions, by form, structure and logic, suggests it is good he didn't get the award. The sun rose without him. Rain falls places he hasn't sanctioned it. It must have come as a surprise.

Blogger Aeoli Pera February 18, 2016 5:56 AM  

Second, all Matthew's actions accomplished was to ensure the award went to a vastly inferior "fan" writer, the professional writer and wife of the then-SFWA president, whose "fan writing" consisted of a single hit piece on one of the lunatics of the field. That, more than anything, is why his decision to renounce his nomination was a mistake. That one is on you, Matthew.

The question of whether he deserved the award or not appears to have never crossed his mind.

Blogger Aeoli Pera February 18, 2016 6:04 AM  

PhillipGeorge©2016 wrote:Matthew's little bit of moral equivocation/ wrestling with his decisions, by form, structure and logic, suggests it is good he didn't get the award. The sun rose without him. Rain falls places he hasn't sanctioned it. It must have come as a surprise.

It's probably just a simple lack of situational awareness. He senses the civil war brewing and, quite reasonably, is not throwing in until he has an idea what on earth is going on.

Not excusing him here, man is political and therefore situational awareness is chief among the virtues.

Anonymous PhillipGeorge©2016 February 18, 2016 6:05 AM  

As an extreme act of condescending benevolence I'm prepared intermittently to accept awards from people unworthy of bestowing them on me. Yes, I let the little people kiss my ring. Allowing peasants to carry my laurels is the least I can do for them and so much better than they deserve. Hmmmmmm, is that what he said? That's one heck of a club they're running.
One handed clapping, or is that just one handed. Stunning. Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. or the little man behind the curtain. One's worse by far.

OpenID basementhomebrewer February 18, 2016 6:07 AM  

Every sword cuts both ways.

Cue spergy file 770 comment about how a scimitar only cuts one way so your whole argument is DISQUALIFIED in 3..2....1.....

Blogger Aeoli Pera February 18, 2016 6:10 AM  

Because you're going to find yourself publicly associated with things far darker and more depraved than anything you ever accused the Puppies of being or doing.

Godspeed Vox. Burn it down.

I had a recent revelation that sadomasochism (aka BDSM) is an anxiety disorder. You have to admit, it would explain a lot.

Blogger Gordon February 18, 2016 6:11 AM  

I guess I shouldn't be surprised, considering the whole concept of "trufen" or "trufan." But these folks take themselves really, really seriously, don't they?

Blogger Gordon February 18, 2016 6:16 AM  

Aeoli Pera wrote:sadomasochism (aka BDSM) is an anxiety disorder
I suggest a modification to your hypothesis: it is self-medication for anxiety disorder.

Blogger Vis De Loupen VFM #8689 February 18, 2016 6:17 AM  

I can already taste their tears. Delicious!

Blogger SteelPalm February 18, 2016 6:41 AM  

I understand the reaction of the SJWs in science fiction to the Puppies. They are our mortal enemies and wish to destroy us. As we to them.

But why are people like Matthew so hopelessly myopic? At a bare minimum, he is alienating a group that genuinely enjoys and supports his writing to appeal to a group that doesn't like him anyways.

Is this simple bit of logic too difficult for him?

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 18, 2016 6:50 AM  

My .02 the second to last paragraph is several deviations from standard conservative strategy. Mainly conservatives are stuck in 1st or 2nd gen warfare and award themselves for their noble loser title, but that paragraph is 3rd gen, reconnoiter the weakness drive thru to strategic territory. The weak spot is not the command group at this moment but the cultees on the fringes.

Anonymous VFM #6306 February 18, 2016 7:08 AM  

Surridge and BG would have been better off withdrawing without comment. Now they have both marked themselves as mere battlegrounds of the future, especially since now they are writing about how maybe they deserve a Hugo this year...

Blogger Bibliotheca Servare February 18, 2016 7:16 AM  

I hope I'm not breaking the rules if I just say that I couldn't have put it better myself. After all the despicable behavior engaged in, and disgusting statements made by, the people on the other side of this thing...I look forward to watching them suffer the consequences of their corruption and immoral, ignoble, dishonorable actions and behaviors. It is indeed a sin, but it's true nonetheless. I would be overjoyed if some of these scum had their dirtiest, darkest secrets exposed to the public, that they might be too ashamed to ever show their faces in public again. SJW delenda est indeed.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 18, 2016 7:19 AM  

Why would anyone especially this Matthew guy want to defend the Torlings?

Blogger VD February 18, 2016 7:19 AM  

now they are writing about how maybe they deserve a Hugo this year...

I will consider supporting them if nominated. But I will not waste another recommendation on them.

Blogger Aeoli Pera February 18, 2016 7:24 AM  

Gordon wrote:I suggest a modification to your hypothesis: it is self-medication for anxiety disorder.

The reductionism is tempting, but IMO it doesn't withstand initial scrutiny. What you're thinking of is more like an addictive personality disorder.

Anonymous BL February 18, 2016 7:31 AM  

Science fiction doesn't interest me very much. But if you made sending child rapists to prison a plank of the Rapid Puppies campaign, that is something I could get behind.

Anonymous p-dawg February 18, 2016 7:36 AM  

@Sherwood Family & Bibliotheca Servare:

Out of curiosity, which commandment, statute, or judgement does enjoying schadenfreude break? I'm not trying to argue that it's not a sin, because I don't know if it is or not. I'm just requesting clarification because I can't see how it is a sin to enjoy watching natural law operate and I'd like to remedy my ignorance.

Blogger CM February 18, 2016 7:53 AM  

Of course, people could be Puppy voters and also genuinely believe I was a good candidate.

It is truly odd that this was a question. He wasn't nominated to piss people off. He was nominated because people liked his work.

That his nomination pissed people off was a side show with popcorn.

The Hugo awards are treated by Tor as credentialism that they use to vocalize views with authority.

"Trump is Hitler!" Says a pulitzer winning journalist.

"Heinlein is a racist and we should burn his books!" Says a 5-time Hugo winning SF author.

"They must be right." Says the idiot who thinks awards mean they have authority over moral proclamations.

Blogger Thomas Davidsmeier February 18, 2016 7:58 AM  

Points in favor of schadenfreude:

Terrifyingly, God is described as "laughing" mostly at His enemies' misfortune.

Psalm 2:1-5
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

There are other Psalms with similar passages.

Then, there is Elijah vs. the priests of Baal. The priests are trying to get there god to send fire down to burn up a sacrifice. Obviously, it isn't working when the following verse occurs.

1 Kings 18:27
And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, "Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked."

Then, you've got the seemingly always poorly translated verse in Galatians where Paul talks about people trying to require new Christians to be circumcised:

Galatians 5:11-12
"And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offence of the cross ceased. I would they were even cut off which trouble you."

That 'cut off' word essentially means 'emasculate.' Which one can easily imagine happening in a circumcision gone awry. Perhaps that's not outright schadenfreude because the bad stuff hasn't happened yet...

Blogger Gaiseric February 18, 2016 8:02 AM  

What a bizarre take; particularly on the notion of "anyone can buy a membership and thus legitimately be a nominating party, but the handful of ideological partisans who have traditionally done it are really the ones who own it, and it's 'their' award." What could possibly have caused him to come to that conclusion other than that the conclusion preceded the rationale?

Blogger Gaiseric February 18, 2016 8:06 AM  

p-dawg wrote:Out of curiosity, which commandment, statute, or judgement does enjoying schadenfreude break? I'm not trying to argue that it's not a sin, because I don't know if it is or not. I'm just requesting clarification because I can't see how it is a sin to enjoy watching natural law operate and I'd like to remedy my ignorance.
Matthew 5:44-47: "But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?"

Blogger dc.sunsets February 18, 2016 8:16 AM  

In the Internet Age it seems everyone grossly over estimates others' "give a rat's ass."

Every man (and woman, oh God, the shrill women) thinks he orates in a packed amphitheater.

Blogger The Missus February 18, 2016 8:51 AM  

But we don't hate them because they hate and curse us (we don't care!). We hate them because they hate and devour children. Surely there is a difference there.

Blogger Cataline Sergius February 18, 2016 9:02 AM  

now they are writing about how maybe they deserve a Hugo this year

Of course they do. They performed ritual of the Signaling of Virtue last year. Naturally they feel they are entitled to be rewarded for that this year.

Blogger Hunsdon February 18, 2016 9:09 AM  

@6

Push cuts AND pull cuts!

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 18, 2016 9:22 AM  

If you are determined to fight award recommendations in order to defend child molesters, then there is something seriously wrong with you.

Yeah, but as we learned from The Mary Sue and Nicholas "Sarah Butts" Nyberg, it's okay when we do it.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 18, 2016 9:30 AM  

@21 "anyone can buy a membership and thus legitimately be a nominating party, but the handful of ideological partisans who have traditionally done it are really the ones who own it, and it's 'their' award."

Anyone who has joined and worked for a political party out of idealism (like say, the Canadian Socialist Lite party with Jack! because he's anti-war) knows this is true.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 18, 2016 9:32 AM  

I had more sympathy for Mr. Surridge -- I have certainly had the experience of suddenly finding myself in a conflict where I was unsure which side was "in the right" but would not be allowed the luxury of neutrality -- until I read this: "(Much later, it’d come out that Correia felt he’d been excluded and mocked at the convention where the 2011 Campbell Award was presented.)"

Point one: The social hostility Larry Correia endured over the 2011 Campbell was the thing that kicked off the entire Sad Puppies movement to begin with, and he said as much in multiple explanatory posts. The only way this could have "come out" "much later" is for someone to have not done nearly as much reading from both sides as he appears to think he did. Point two: Coming from the side whose entire philosophy is based on the precept that if you feel excluded you have been excluded and thus have a just grievance deserving redress, dismissing Larry's criticisms (by implicitly delegitimizing his experiences, no less!) strikes me as rather breathtakingly hypocritical.

If one wishes to complain about having to choose a side, I can understand, but more and more as I get older that strikes me as something akin to complaining about gravity or entropy: understandable, but pointless.

Anonymous Nathan February 18, 2016 9:52 AM  

I read this article yesterday, and found that there's a certain blindness to Surridge. The culture wars have always been part of WorldCon, even from the first year as people were banned from the convention for promoting Michelism, or the wrong form of social utopianism. And WorldCon has also promoted message fic, as, from the Exclusionary Act states, "the Third Eastern Science Fiction Convention...further resolve that science-fiction should by nature stand for all forces working for a more unified world, a more Utopian existence, the application of science to human happiness, and a saner outlook on life."

Seems like onvention fandom was converged from the start.

Anonymous slarrow February 18, 2016 9:58 AM  

But why are people like Matthew so hopelessly myopic?

Because that's how Potemkin villages work. From afar, they look beautiful and happy, and why would you want to burn down something so good? From behind the scenes, they must be maintained and propped up so you can claim the support of those from afar. But seen up close, it's obvious they're just a lie presented to the world.

Burn them down, and all you lose is the facade. But oh, how so many are so dependent on that facade....

Anonymous Stephen J. February 18, 2016 10:13 AM  

@11: "But why are people like Matthew so hopelessly myopic?" @31: "Because that's how Potemkin villages work. ...Burn them down, and all you lose is the facade. But oh, how so many are so dependent on that facade...."

Speaking as someone prone to the same reactions, I suggest a slightly more charitable interpretation: The vast majority of people, I think, get into SF fandom communities very young, and many of them -- ah, heck, this includes me too, many of us -- do so having failed to integrate into more mainstream subcultures; many times this includes even one's own family. As a result fandom, for many of us, was our first experience of a community that truly welcomed you no matter who you were or what you believed, and has since become a psychological cornerstone (for many, though this time not including me, the only such cornerstone) for the basic human need for acceptance, belonging and security.

Realizing that destructive internal conflict exists in a community after all, and that it may well engulf you and destroy that sense of belonging and security, is one of the more traumatic human experiences, made worse only by the fear that the "aggressive" side in the conflict may have good points and that you stand to lose friendship and affection whichever side wins. This is one reason Christ warned that He came to bring not peace, but a sword; He recognized that division and conflict was inevitable and told His followers that they must be prepared to face it.

Anonymous Mr. Rational February 18, 2016 10:31 AM  

Stephen J. wrote:fandom, for many of us, was our first experience of a community that truly welcomed you no matter who you were or what you believed, and has since become a psychological cornerstone (for many, though this time not including me, the only such cornerstone) for the basic human need for acceptance, belonging and security.

That is exactly it.  It is walking into a group of people you've never met before and recognizing them as being like yourself—often for the first time in your life.

I have gone to a convention nearly a thousand miles from home, and instantly knew I was in the right place.  I have no idea what gaydar is like (I'm oblivious) but I can only think it's like that.

OpenID marsascendant February 18, 2016 10:48 AM  

Vox, Theodore.
I am not one of the ilk, dread or otherwise. Neither am I a faceless minion, vile or other. I read this site regularly because I find what you write interesting. Last year I lent my small voice to Sad Puppies 3, I blogged my little blog, and on the day of the hugo's (evening at Susquan but morning where I was) I tuned in to see the show.

We all know what I saw. I was as disgusted as everyone else. I supported the Sad Puppies because I could still remember the joy Hugo winners of the past had brought me. I thought worldcon could be saved from itself.

I now know better.

If you have a way to burn the Hugo's down then I'll follow your directives. I will march in lockstep, though it is not in my nature. Promise me that I will get to see the faces of the corpulent remnants as they realize they are leaving the last Worldcon that will ever be held, and I will follow orders. Swear you will lead me to Worldcon's pyre, and I will follow.

Blogger VD February 18, 2016 10:49 AM  

It is walking into a group of people you've never met before and recognizing them as being like yourself—often for the first time in your life.

No wonder they disliked me from the start. I was never one of them and both sides were aware of that from the time I showed up for my first SF/F book signing. I remember one kid saying "you don't look like a science fiction writer."

That was presumably because I looked like I could run to the door without collapsing.

Blogger VD February 18, 2016 10:52 AM  

Swear you will lead me to Worldcon's pyre, and I will follow.

I will not swear anything. I do not ask anyone to follow me. But I have ambitions and abilities well beyond those that anyone outside the VFM and Brainstorm will presently credit.

Why settle for Worldcon?

Anonymous Athor Pel February 18, 2016 10:53 AM  

"18. p-dawg February 18, 2016 7:36 AM
@Sherwood Family & Bibliotheca Servare:

Out of curiosity, which commandment, statute, or judgement does enjoying schadenfreude break? ...
"



Proverbs
chapter 24
" 17 Do not rejoice when your enemy falls,
And do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles;
18 Or the LORD will see it and be displeased,
And turn His anger away from him. "

Blogger Sevron February 18, 2016 10:54 AM  

To be fair, not ALL SF writers are like that. I met Neil Stephenson at a book signing and talked to him for a few minutes after he gave a short talk. He appears to be in reasonable physical condition and quite normal. I don't think he would appear weird or out of place in most regular social settings.

His sword fighting game didn't quite work out on Kickstarter, but I don't regret supporting it. Perhaps it will happen in the future from somebody else someday.

Anonymous Stephen J. February 18, 2016 10:58 AM  

I've seen a few horror writers who actually look like they could survive the zombie apocalypses they write about, too. Not a lot, but more than your average SF/F writers' panel, truth told.

Blogger dh February 18, 2016 11:00 AM  

I'm so excited for EPH to become the new standard. It's such a great system for dividing the Hugo nominations into permanent base camps. You just concentrate your fire and you are essentially guaranteed a permanent best novel nomination.

Every year it will be three or four publishers claiming their one or two slots in each category. There is no better way to elevate the new comers in the publishing business to parity then by ensuring a long-term string of nominations.

It is literally like a game theory expert gamed out the best way to get the major SF publishers to disembowel their hold on the nomination process.

Anonymous LastRedoubt February 18, 2016 11:01 AM  

Yeah. Some are very, very broken and bitter people. MRK, McCreepy and McRapey, MZB, etc. They will never humble themselves enough to fix themselves or be content.

Some are broken by circumstance - David Drake forex - and he wrote his way back out of it.

Some are just different, but not broken.

It's only recently I really learned of the depths to which the truly broken would descend.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 18, 2016 11:07 AM  

The left's grannies do a good job of luring in and welcoming the strays before they start policing the thoughts. Go to any white liberal's site, it is like a pleasant opening scene to a horror movie

Blogger CM February 18, 2016 11:28 AM  

Realizing that destructive internal conflict exists in a community after all, and that it may well engulf you and destroy that sense of belonging and security, is one of the more traumatic human experiences, made worse only by the fear that the "aggressive" side in the conflict may have good points and that you stand to lose friendship and affection whichever side wins. This is one reason Christ warned that He came to bring not peace, but a sword; He recognized that division and conflict was inevitable and told His followers that they must be prepared to face it.

I have been experiencing this in my own group of late. I entered it nearly 7 years ago and it felt like home immediately - the first time i was surrounded by a peer group as passionate about Christ and studying his word as I was.

I'm finding myself separated from the community as the divisive nature of politics stirs up its mess.

As an aside, this blog community evokes the same feeling of belonging to me which is hilarious considering the mockery for the rabbit warren that goes on here. I feel particularly rabbitish claiming a den of wolves feels like "home".

Blogger VD February 18, 2016 11:34 AM  

As an aside, this blog community evokes the same feeling of belonging to me which is hilarious considering the mockery for the rabbit warren that goes on here. I feel particularly rabbitish claiming a den of wolves feels like "home".

Why do you always have to make everything weird? Let's not start braiding each other's hair now.

Anonymous Ezekiel Cassandros February 18, 2016 11:35 AM  

@22 @37
Don't forget Psalm 139:19-22.
"19 Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.
20 For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.
21 Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?
22 I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies."

Jonah was rebuked for resenting that the wicked people of Nineveh were spared.
Deborah and Barak were not rebuked for rejoicing in joyful song that the Canaanites had been routed.

Which message will you take as the lesson we must apply in all circumstances? Shall we always hope in our hearts for our enemies to be spared, as Deborah and Barak did not? Shall we always hope for our enemies to be destroyed, as Jonah was punished for?

Blogger Kentucky Packrat February 18, 2016 11:51 AM  

Jonah was rebuked for resenting that the wicked people of Nineveh were spared.
Deborah and Barak were not rebuked for rejoicing in joyful song that the Canaanites had been routed.


Jonah was rebuked for resenting that the repentant, wicked people of Ninevah were spared. The Canaanites were not repentant, nor were the Egyptians, nor will be the people with the Mark of the Beast in Revelation.

Once a group has passed the point of no return and God's judgement is imposed, it's OK to celebrate, because it's just. It's also OK to pray for judgement, because it's just when imposed. When forgiveness has been offered by God, that's when we have to acknowledge that they don't deserve it, but that most certainly we didn't deserve it when offered either.

Blogger dlw February 18, 2016 11:57 AM  

> Godspeed Vox. Burn it down.

I hope not. There's *years* of cheap entertainment to be had here.

Of course, after the assterisks it looks like the SJWs have no problem with burning it down themselves. And then they'll probably brag because the beat the Evil Lord to it.

"We had to save the Hugos by destroying them! It's the only way to be sure!"

Anonymous Athor Pel February 18, 2016 12:03 PM  

"45. Ezekiel Cassandros February 18, 2016 11:35 AM
...
Jonah was rebuked for resenting that the wicked people of Nineveh were spared.
Deborah and Barak were not rebuked for rejoicing in joyful song that the Canaanites had been routed.

Which message will you take as the lesson we must apply in all circumstances? Shall we always hope in our hearts for our enemies to be spared, as Deborah and Barak did not? Shall we always hope for our enemies to be destroyed, as Jonah was punished for?
"



Ninevah repented and God sent Jonah for that very purpose.

The Canaanites were the self-avowed enemy and God sent Deborah and Barak to punish them. Plus, how do you know what was being celebrated? They could have been celebrating the victory of God's army rather than the defeat of the Canaanites.

Last thing, just because someone is doing God's will does not mean that person always does God's will. Just look at Moses.

Following rules is fine and all but following our Master's will is what we should be about.

Blogger dlw February 18, 2016 12:09 PM  

> I would be overjoyed if some of these scum had their dirtiest, darkest secrets exposed to the public, that they might be too ashamed to ever show their faces in public again.
--
I doubt it. Few if any of them seemed to have any particular problems with others knowing about their rapes or pedophilia.

Then there are the ones who have publicly claimed they knew about it for years or decades and chose not to say anything, or even make an anonymous tip to the authorities. That makes them equally guilty of the crime, just like the guy who drives the getaway car at a bank robbery gets charged the same as the ones that actually went into the building.

Maybe the pederasts really *are* sick and not responsible for their actions. Just as a blue sky proposal, anyway. But the people who chose to aid them have no such defense. They're just evil.

Blogger dlw February 18, 2016 12:19 PM  

> Why settle for Worldcon?
---
Holy moley! I'm ordering my extra popcorn NOW!

Anonymous Ezekiel Cassandros February 18, 2016 12:27 PM  

@46
Precisely. Full marks.

@48
"The Canaanites were the self-avowed enemy and God sent Deborah and Barak to punish them. Plus, how do you know what was being celebrated? They could have been celebrating the victory of God's army rather than the defeat of the Canaanites."

What, practically speaking, is the difference?
Judges 5:31 "So may all your enemies perish, O Lord!"

Other than, of course, the case where our enemies are not God's enemies.

Blogger dlw February 18, 2016 12:31 PM  

> I'm so excited for EPH to become the new standard.

EPH is based on some fundamental assumptions. One is that there would be only one "slate", and that that slate will attempt to incluence all categories. Within those assumptions it looks like it will perform well enough.

On the other hand, unless I've made a fundamental mistake of my own, it makes it much easier for any single category to be gamed. And it assumes that each "slate" is running blind. An ept attacker would parcel out his voting bloc with IM in realtime, just enough to take each target.

As has been noted elsewhere, the entire Hugo system depends on secrecy. They control the entire system from beginning to end, using "privacy" as a shield to hide their actions. Because they would absolutely, positively, never even *think* about diddling the results.

The only way to guarantee an honest system is to make the entire process public, where people can ensure their their votes have actually been tallied. Because EPH makes it even easier to conceal someone's thumb on the scale behind the scenes.

Blogger Skylark Thibedeau February 18, 2016 12:32 PM  

Jonah tried to subvert God's will even attempting suicide to do so. He knew if he went to Ninevah and the people repented GOD would not destroy the wicked city and their Grandchildren would destroy the Northern Kingdom after returning to the wicked ways of their forebears.

Jonah was trying to save future generations of Israel\Samaria and resented GOD's will was entirely different.

Anonymous BGKB February 18, 2016 12:52 PM  

We shall fight them in the all you can eat buffet lines, we shall fight them on the rascal scooter ramparts, we shall fight their homeless crack hoes that received ""scholarships"", we shall fight them in, oh wait there are none in the gym.

Beale knew that what they were doing was a slap in the face of the SF community—the people who attended events like Worldcon and administered the Hugos

Actually he took their Cheetos bag from them and slapped them in the face with it.

Cue spergy file 770 comment about how a scimitar only cuts one way so your whole argument is DISQUALIFIED

Should such a person present himself I would be happy to show how the blunt edge of a scimitar could still break his skin.

I remember one kid saying "you don't look like a science fiction writer."

Lack of belly & free candy van.

I have no idea what gaydar is like (I'm oblivious) but I can only think it's like that

Some portion of gaydar is wishful thinking, there are a lot of ugly gays that mine never picks up.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab February 18, 2016 1:11 PM  

Yes Neal Stephenson is a regular guy. He's a friend of my dad's and we've met a couple times. Not a neckbeard or girly man. Weird I've met him a couple times and I didn't want to break the 'just normal guys visiting' thing to ask him to sign the book I had.

Anonymous p-dawg February 18, 2016 1:30 PM  

@Gaiseric:

"For this is the love of God, that we keep the commandments." So loving your enemies means keeping the law. I'll ask again, what is the specific law or commandment that is being broken? Sin is the violation of the law. That is why I need the specific commandment, statute, or judgement. I appreciate what you're saying, but it's not an answer to my original question.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx February 18, 2016 1:37 PM  

Anybody else not-get their new PIN for the Worldcon/MidAmericaCon 2016 Hugo nominations? They said the Sasquan numbers were invalidated and that new numbers would be issued after Feb 5.

Blogger Eric Castle February 18, 2016 2:06 PM  

@45

It is worse than that. Jonah did everything possible including attempting suicide because he would rather die than live in a world where Gentiles could possibly be forgiven by God. There were a lot of causes for this, primarily a Judeo-centrism which bizarrely even some Christians believe existed under the Old Law (e.g. God only cared about the Jews before the church).

Re: schadenfruede. This is an actual legitimate case of the oft used (and oft misused) idea of "love the sinner, hate the sin". There is a seeming dichotomy that is actually an integral part to understanding Biblical grace. The Christian should take comfort, peace and even joy from the reality of God's judgment, both temporally and eternally. There IS order to the universe, and all WILL be made "right". Conversely, one should have compassion for the sinner, for we too are imperfect failures...only we have been forgiven and should seek to aid in bringing about the same forgiveness for others. The key lies with repentance.

If the soul who sins hears the truth, yet rejects that truth and refuses to repent, that soul will die (cf. Eze. 18). This is right and good. However, what joy we have at justice should be tempered by pity for the eternally foolish.

Blogger CM February 18, 2016 2:17 PM  

@Eric

There were a lot of causes for this, primarily a Judeo-centrism which bizarrely even some Christians believe existed under the Old Law (e.g. God only cared about the Jews before the church).

When Jesus heals the gentile woman, he asks her if it is right for the master to feed the dogs before his children.

Is he being critical of his audience's judeo-centric sympathies?

Blogger Were-Puppy February 18, 2016 2:21 PM  

dlw
"We had to save the Hugos by destroying them! It's the only way to be sure!"
---

This probably falls into the category of not interfering with your enemies when they are clobbering themselves.

Blogger Eric Castle February 18, 2016 2:38 PM  

@59

You are conflating rabid Judeo-centrism (e.g. Gentiles have no right to repentance before God) with the purpose of the Jewish nation under the Old Covenant. Remember that Covenant was in place during Jesus' ministry; not until the church came, which Jews were the first to join (Acts 2) and then the Gentiles (Acts 10,11) did that change.

To embrace the thinking I described was denounced by God in Jonah 4. God had special purpose and special status etc. for the Jewish nation. Did this mean thr Gentiles were all SOL?

Paul affirms this when preaching to the Athenians. He explains how God "overlooked times of ignorance" meaning they were separate and apart from the Old Covenant, not because of choice but because of birth. They could not "know" God as the Jews did, but sill had law (how else did they repent? What did they repent of?).

With the coming of the church (e.g. The New Covenant) at Pentecost that Jewish centrism gave way to a universal kingdom of neither Jew nor Greek. Now that they Gentiles could "know" God through Gospel Paul preached he proclaimed that "all men everywhere" should repent (Acts 17:30,31).

Anonymous Obvious February 18, 2016 3:12 PM  

I see Teddy didn't even pay enough attention to the awards to realize that Kameron Hurley not only didn't win the Hugo for Best Novel, but wouldn't have even without slates.

I.E. He doesn't know what he's talking about, and he can't even say he prevented such a thing. :)

Anonymous BGKB February 18, 2016 3:15 PM  

Out of curiosity, which commandment, statute, or judgement does enjoying schadenfreude break?

Don't say I never tried to tempt you guys.
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/gold-digga-broke-kanye-west-asks-zuckerberg-for-one-billion-dollars-fans-start-gofundme-page_02172016

Anonymous Ezekiel Cassandros February 18, 2016 3:35 PM  

Rather successfully at that. You're second place on the list of gays who've led me into temptation after Milo Yiannopoulos and his perfect, perfect hair.

Blogger Banjo February 18, 2016 5:16 PM  

@57 Spartacus
re Hugo Pin

Just use the contact email on their web page and politely explain. A lot of us have had this issue and received prompt responses taking care of it.

Anonymous MidWestCon member February 18, 2016 6:05 PM  

@57 Mine came last week with the announcement of nominations opening.

Blogger epobirs February 19, 2016 2:12 AM  

"What right did someone else have to try to hijack the process?"

$40 worth of right.

It is a club anyone can join. If you don't like SF awards voted on by the supposed actual audience, look to the Nebulas instead. But while you're doing that, pay attention to how little their choices overlap with what actually allows its authors to make a decent living.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx February 19, 2016 2:37 AM  

Banjo wrote:@57 Spartacus

re Hugo Pin

Just use the contact email on their web page and politely explain. A lot of us have had this issue and received prompt responses taking care of it.


Ok,thank you. How do you know that others had this problem? Did any Sasquan Member get any email explaining that the wheel would have to squeak first? Or did they have to discover this on their own, by visiting the MidAmericaCon website? Did the preferred some get the PIN memo and others not? Inquiring Puppies want to know.

MidWestCon member wrote:@57 Mine came last week with the announcement of nominations opening.

Were you a Sasquan Member? Did you vote correctly then?

Anonymous MidWestCon member February 19, 2016 5:42 AM  

No, I was not a member of Sasquan.

Blogger Joe Keenan February 19, 2016 7:09 PM  

I can't wait, pervs hurt kids and ruined Fantasy. Expose the lot of them fhírinne in aghaidh an domhain

Blogger Banjo February 19, 2016 7:28 PM  

A few commenters here mentioned it

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts