"You honor, please award me damages from this horrible convention on the basis that I didn't get what I wanted!"
Puppies; still mentally 5 years old.
Yeah. Lou Antonelli made up a new definition of "exaction" to claim that any Tor author who lost to "No Award" might have some sort of case against Tor.
If they go the "crazy lawsuits" route, I actually think the sad puppies (but not the rabids) will have problems maintaining coherency through next year. Nothing stinks of desperation like crazy lawsuits. I was reading the comments on File770 and a poster made a great point about the psychology of the sort of people who are puppies: if they don't think they're winning, they lose interest fast.
OK, I thought the “Raaah! We’ll be back” people were funny, but that was before I saw your remarkable “getting our asses handed to us only makes us stronger” argument. Real life don’t work like that, Obi-Wan.
It’s over. This was puppy peak, and it’s all downhill from this point. You want to rally the people who are in it for the culture war thrills, you need wins. No one likes to be thoroughly trounced, and only a few, easily led diehards are willing to sign up for it for a second round — especially when they have to pay for it. There are other shiny objects out there. Next year’s gamergate awaits … oh, wait. You’re still hanging onto that one too, aren’t you? Good luck. I’m sure victory is right around the corner!
Anyway. You get one bite at the apple. No one rallies for the loser who led them into defeat the previous year. Sarah Palin is never, ever going to be a candidate for presidency or vice presidency again. If health care reform had failed in the US, we wouldn’t have been getting single-payer as a second take. People who think otherwise are delusional. Thus the frantic “we meant it to happen” puppy messaging taking place in between the fits of rage.
The puppies are already making noises about recommendation lists, presumably in recognition of the fact that getting anywhere is going to mean at least an attempt at mollification of the greater group of voters. No author or editor with an eye on success, based on what happened this year, is going to go willingly along with them, so there’s going to be that cluster(*&^% to deal with: people loudly and embarrassingly disassociating themselves from whatever list the puppies come up with. That leaves them with whatever unfortunate people they can find who are simply desperate for recognition, so so much for quality nominations. No real media coverage this time — it’s a rerun, no one cares.
To sum up, this particular culture war battle just ain’t going to be fun anymore for the puppies. It’s so hard to get your enjoyable sense of outrage and persecution on when everyone’s such a downer and the stakes are so low and even your opponents are bored with you. Anything left will be a shadow of this year.
Here’s my prediction. The puppies shoot out a “suggestion list” of few candidates. Beale does his usual little song and dance and maybe gets a few names on the list, but finds the vast swelling numbers he expects to join him are only interested in actual winners, not people who get humiliatingly thumped by social justice warriors (Ewww. How is that even possible? Aren’t they supposed to be weak and corrupt and like, girls and minorities and stuff?). He does some desperate things and makes a fool of himself entertainingly to us, but no one outside this very small community cares anymore. He’s mostly ignored, and so are his picks. Puppies take four ends with an oh-so-apt whimper.
Then the voting changes go into effect, and game over, thank you for playing, and especially for all the money.
So yeah. The more crazy and spiteful the puppy true believers get, the more support they'll lose among their more casual sympathizers. That crowd has no patience for losers.
The puppies crying and accusing about how the SJW meanies voted against their books without reading them, when that is exactly the purpose of the puppy slate. You didn't have to read the stuff Torgersen and Vox picked out. You didn't really have a say in what was picked. All they wanted you to do was voted the slate.
Sure you could read slate noms before voting, but if you decided to swap out a nom for a book you liked better, you where failing the puppies. They wanted lockstep behavior and blind obedience to their self-appointed leaders of the true SF fandom.
I don't even know what to call this behavior. It goes way beyond projecting.
Truthiness is a quality characterizing a "truth" that a person making an argument or assertion claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or because it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.
See also: Manifest Destiny.
I disagree about where the Puppies stand regarding hard/soft SFF. Torgeson and Correia and Hoyt and the others don't write hard SF, and the mission statements for the Puppies say that they want fun stories. The Cold Equations isn't their cup of tea. Had it been a Puppy story, I think that Barton and Malilyn would have run off together as boyfriend and girlfriend to be space pirates, because that's much more fun and entertaining. The Puppies are much more into Star Wars than they are 2001. They like Good vs. Evil stories where the square jawed hero getting the girl, and to have depressing not-fun things happen in a story turns them off. They'd much rather see Kirk with his shirt off fighting an alien to save the babe of the week than they would see a story like the Cold Equations - it's sad and depressing and what's the point?
Within that set of parameters, they have terrible taste. But I don't doubt BT, LC, SH, etc when they claim to want fun, pulpy stories.
That's part of what's frustrating about the Puppies. If they really wanted a quick, fun read like a Hollywood blockbuster, with cool technology and a good sense of humor, Lock In is perfect for that. If a story where a person thrust into a Game of Thrones-like situation is able to come out on top by holding onto Good Christian Values like kindness, charity, forgiveness, temperance, and patience, then the Goblin Emperor should be right up their alley. If they want a space opera in the best traditions of Star Wars and Star Trek, featuring star ships and evil empires and a woman with a weapon and unknowable mysterious aliens and secret identities, the Ancillary books are right there.
Yes, but the Goblin Emperor is also about a member of a distrusted racial minority taking power, and Ancillary Justice doubles as a long meditation on gender and identity. Those are themes that melt real men's testicles right off.
I'm guessing that The Left Hand of Darkness may not be popular in some Science Fiction fandoms.
I have no doubt that LeGuin is The Enemy.
It's funny. A couple of years ago I read through Dangerous Visions and Again Dangerous Visions which were New Wave short story collections edited by Harlan Ellison. Aside from The Word for World is Forest and a couple of other stories, most of them read like much of the other 'shock literature' I've seen plenty of in non-genre fiction short story collections. You know, the kind of stuff that focuses on sex, death, suicide or other subject matter in a way that is shocking to help cover up that there isn't much beyond sex, death, suicide there. And to make matters worse, the stories don't say all that much about the sex, death, suicides that is at all novel or interesting.
Frankly, a lot of it came off as being pretty pretentious (well, it was edited by Harlan Ellison) and too interested in being provoking rather than anything deeper, or in many cases, well written stories. That said, there were some really groundbreaking top quality short stories among the bunch that made me glad I read the collections and at least there was some effort there.
There's some decent and even great stuff among the New Wave writers, but their main contribution was to pave the way for writers who came after by expanding the boundaries of what was possible and acceptable in the genre. If you like any sort of American/British literary or even character-focused science fiction, you are enjoying the fruits of that nasty little literary knife fight.
The weird thing is, I got into reading Science Fiction/Fantasy short stories after checking out a few of Timothy Zahn's short story collections. For all that I would think he'd be a favourite of the puppies given his plot-focused space operas, his short story fiction includes a lot of material that is closer to what the New Wave put out. And arguably one of Zahn's stronger points in his better stuff is the more character focused nature of the material. It's almost like a writer can include more literary and character-focused material while still being able to produce a rollicking space opera adventure. Unless you are a women I guess. Their stuff doesn't count.
Somewhat Less Short Version: So, there’s an obnoxious bigot who is obsessed with me who the other day released a poorly-edited ebook on the subject of “social justice warriors” and how generally horrible they are, and allegedly (as I have not read the work), I am featured in the ebook quite a lot, because, again, the obnoxious bigot who wrote the book is obsessed with me.
So “Theo Pratt” wrote a parody of the ebook, entitled John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Comparative Popularity Levels. Here’s the writeup on it:
Everyone knows that SJWs always lie, but few know why they lie, or at whose bidding, or for whose benefit. While other books may claim to tell you how to take down the Thought Police, only one book is taking the fight right to the top.
Yes, from the mind that brought you the popular blog feature Sad Puppies Review Books comes this definitive takedown of the internet’s culture of Social Justice as embodied by the man who controls it all:
JOHN SCALZI.
Read this book to learn everything you need to know about Social Justice Warriors, their tactics, their treachery, their perfidious entryism. Topics include:
* John Scalzi’s blog is not that interesting and no one reads it.
* John Scalzi does not understand satire as much as I, Theophilus Pratt, understand satire.
* John Scalzi did not get me, Theophilus Pratt, kicked out of the SFWA.
* John Scalzi’s deal with Tor was not a very good deal.
And more!
I love it already.
Basically as soon as its existence was made public, people started asking me to do an audio version of it, because that would be meta, wouldn’t it. And (with the permission of “Theo,” aka Alexandra Erin), I said fine — if doing so could have a positive benefit. In this case, raising money for Con or Bust, a charity which works to bring fans of color to science fiction and fantasy conventions (and yes, donations are tax-deductible in the US).
So, the deal: If Con or Bust raises $2,500 by by 11:59pm (Eastern), Sunday, August 30, I will create the audio version of the John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular. And because I’d actually like to do it, because I think it would be fun and because I like the charity, I will gift-match for the first $500 in donations. You can donate by going here.
But if I had gone to law school, and I had zero ethics or shame, I could probably make so much money convincing this crowd they had a case on this or that.
But if I had gone to law school, and I had zero ethics or shame, I could probably make so much money convincing this crowd they had a case on this or that.
AKA "I'm going to totally own all of Battletech because of this lawsuit"
Probably not the best person to be taking legal advice from.
Whoa, what? When was this? I was pretty into Battletech for a while and I don't remember this guys name ever popping up on their forums. Before or after they (the website) got bought by corporate.
But if I had gone to law school, and I had zero ethics or shame, I could probably make so much money convincing this crowd they had a case on this or that.
And then every time I lose, I blame the media.
Nah. Up your game.
Blame the liberal activist judges and feminized juries.
AKA "I'm going to totally own all of Battletech because of this lawsuit"
Probably not the best person to be taking legal advice from.
Whoa, what? When was this? I was pretty into Battletech for a while and I don't remember this guys name ever popping up on their forums. Before or after they (the website) got bought by corporate.
It's been a bit. He did some writing for the Light Horse (of course) way back, felt he didn't get paid properly and that somehow entitled him to the franchise?
Somewhat Less Short Version: So, there’s an obnoxious bigot who is obsessed with me who the other day released a poorly-edited ebook on the subject of “social justice warriors” and how generally horrible they are, and allegedly (as I have not read the work), I am featured in the ebook quite a lot, because, again, the obnoxious bigot who wrote the book is obsessed with me.
So “Theo Pratt” wrote a parody of the ebook, entitled John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Comparative Popularity Levels. Here’s the writeup on it:
Everyone knows that SJWs always lie, but few know why they lie, or at whose bidding, or for whose benefit. While other books may claim to tell you how to take down the Thought Police, only one book is taking the fight right to the top.
Yes, from the mind that brought you the popular blog feature Sad Puppies Review Books comes this definitive takedown of the internet’s culture of Social Justice as embodied by the man who controls it all:
JOHN SCALZI.
Read this book to learn everything you need to know about Social Justice Warriors, their tactics, their treachery, their perfidious entryism. Topics include:
* John Scalzi’s blog is not that interesting and no one reads it.
* John Scalzi does not understand satire as much as I, Theophilus Pratt, understand satire.
* John Scalzi did not get me, Theophilus Pratt, kicked out of the SFWA.
* John Scalzi’s deal with Tor was not a very good deal.
And more!
I love it already.
Basically as soon as its existence was made public, people started asking me to do an audio version of it, because that would be meta, wouldn’t it. And (with the permission of “Theo,” aka Alexandra Erin), I said fine — if doing so could have a positive benefit. In this case, raising money for Con or Bust, a charity which works to bring fans of color to science fiction and fantasy conventions (and yes, donations are tax-deductible in the US).
So, the deal: If Con or Bust raises $2,500 by by 11:59pm (Eastern), Sunday, August 30, I will create the audio version of the John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular. And because I’d actually like to do it, because I think it would be fun and because I like the charity, I will gift-match for the first $500 in donations. You can donate by going here.
Somewhat Less Short Version: So, there’s an obnoxious bigot who is obsessed with me who the other day released a poorly-edited ebook on the subject of “social justice warriors” and how generally horrible they are, and allegedly (as I have not read the work), I am featured in the ebook quite a lot, because, again, the obnoxious bigot who wrote the book is obsessed with me.
So “Theo Pratt” wrote a parody of the ebook, entitled John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular: How SJWs Always Lie About Our Comparative Popularity Levels. Here’s the writeup on it:
Everyone knows that SJWs always lie, but few know why they lie, or at whose bidding, or for whose benefit. While other books may claim to tell you how to take down the Thought Police, only one book is taking the fight right to the top.
Yes, from the mind that brought you the popular blog feature Sad Puppies Review Books comes this definitive takedown of the internet’s culture of Social Justice as embodied by the man who controls it all:
JOHN SCALZI.
Read this book to learn everything you need to know about Social Justice Warriors, their tactics, their treachery, their perfidious entryism. Topics include:
* John Scalzi’s blog is not that interesting and no one reads it.
* John Scalzi does not understand satire as much as I, Theophilus Pratt, understand satire.
* John Scalzi did not get me, Theophilus Pratt, kicked out of the SFWA.
* John Scalzi’s deal with Tor was not a very good deal.
And more!
I love it already.
Basically as soon as its existence was made public, people started asking me to do an audio version of it, because that would be meta, wouldn’t it. And (with the permission of “Theo,” aka Alexandra Erin), I said fine — if doing so could have a positive benefit. In this case, raising money for Con or Bust, a charity which works to bring fans of color to science fiction and fantasy conventions (and yes, donations are tax-deductible in the US).
So, the deal: If Con or Bust raises $2,500 by by 11:59pm (Eastern), Sunday, August 30, I will create the audio version of the John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular. And because I’d actually like to do it, because I think it would be fun and because I like the charity, I will gift-match for the first $500 in donations. You can donate by going here.
It met all the goals, we're getting the audiobook!
A stretch goal to have a song version is now up.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
So, former Sasquan committee member Meg Frank, who resigned her position after the reversal of the Antonelli ban, has released all the emails on that decision. There's more discussion about the release here. If you're wondering why we said that it was such a poor decision, I would recommend you go take a look, as it really illustrates all the problematic arguments made.
So, former Sasquan committee member Meg Frank, who resigned her position after the reversal of the Antonelli ban, has released all the emails on that decision. There's more discussion about the release here. If you're wondering why we said that it was such a poor decision, I would recommend you go take a look, as it really illustrates all the problematic arguments made.
(also the Embiggening, and the Embitchening, given that I, Kate the Impaler, am Queen Bitch and I am ably seconded by Sarah, the Beautiful But Evil Space Princess, and Amanda, the Redhead of Doom, and we are all more than capable of going Queen Bitch when we need to).
And thank you to the wonderfully talented ArtRaccoon (Lee Madison) for his fantastic artwork. The new puppy’s name is Robert. His three creators are Isaac, Frank, and Ray. Yes, those names do mean what you think they do. You can find more of his artwork on http://artraccoon.deviantart.com/gallery/ Contact me, Sarah, or Amanda if you want to give him money and we’ll send you his PayPal.
The Hugo awards has entirely too small a voting and nominating pool. Five thousand votes is the largest number ever received? Two thousand nomination ballots? That’s piddly. For a field loved by millions, it’s nowhere near enough, and makes it easy for any small clique to corrupt the idea of awarding great SF and start giving themselves awards.
We want at least ten thousand nomination ballots. Tens of thousands of votes (which means tens of thousands of Hugo memberships, either supporting or attending). So many votes and voters that it’s almost impossible for any one group – and yes, that includes the Sad Puppies – to dominate anything.
So, SP4 is all about MOAR! More voters. More votes. More people. We want to make the Hugos bigger and more representative of fandom as a whole, to bring people in rather than give them an asterisk that looks kind of wrong (especially beside the rocket) to try to drive the “interlopers” out. SF is a big tent: we don’t want to kick out anyone, even writers of bad message fiction that makes puppies sad.
To that end, this thread will be the first of several to collect recommendations. There will also be multiple permanent threads (one per category) on the SP4 website where people can make comments. The tireless, wonderful volunteer Puppy Pack will be collating recommendations.
Later – most likely somewhere around February or early March, I’ll be posting The List to multiple locations. The List will not be a slate – it will be a list of the ten or so most popular recommendations in each Hugo category, and a link to the full list in all its glory. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you want to see your favorite author receive a nomination and an award, your best bet will be to cast your nomination ballot for one of the works in the top ten or thereabouts of The List. My recommendations will not count any more or any less than anyone else’s recommendations (with one exception – I will NOT be on the list. Neither will Sarah or Amanda. If anyone wants to nominate any of us they’ll need to do it on their own).
Anyone can post any number of recommendations (obviously not for the same work – one recommendation per person per work), and there is NO political test. The only criteria is that you’ve read it/watched it/seen it and you think it’s one of the best in its Hugo class published in 2015.
The other side of SP4 is to have the biggest, best floating party and alternacon in WorldCon history, and for that, anyone who can needs to go to MidAmeriCon. Go, vote, and attend the World Science Fiction Society business meeting so more voices can be heard. And of course, have the biggest and best floating party regardless of the official programming – although if the official programming is awesome, that can join the party as well.
After all, nobody parties like a Puppy trying not to be so Sad.
If only it was what they were selling, the Sad Puppies wouldn't be getting grief if all they did was encourage more people to participate in Hugo voting. They're getting to wacky here, should have waited a few more posts before that to build credibility because they literally lost it all a few days ago (not that they had much to begin with).
I don't get why they've segregated the men and women running these things, intermingle leadership - it wouldn't hurt. I'm dreading the shit these women will get if they fail, I don't see them getting off with no consequences from the base like Correia, and Torgersen did this year.
I don't get why they've segregated the men and women running these things, intermingle leadership - it wouldn't hurt.
They complain when people call them racist or sexist. The Puppies like to say "Look who we have for our leaders! One white man, a native American with Mexican ancestry, and a Latino! You CHORPs are the real racists because you call them all white!"
Nevermind that Vox Day's Native American and Mexican heritage are negligible if even true. Nevermind that he looks white, his parents look white, neither parent is a white Mexican, he proudly proclaims the superiority of the white race, and he refuses to pin down any details about his heritage when pressed.
Nevermind that Correia is white and American born and his Latin ancestry is from Portugal rather than Central or South America. Nevermind that Latino is a cultural rather than racial identifier, and he doesn't belong to that culture, making him no different than a British- or German-American outside of having an extra box he can check off on census forms.
They're having women run SP4 because they think they're clever and they can preempt that kind of criticism.
So we're totally not running a slate, but you should actually vote for this list, that is in no way written on slate.
Also we're doing this because we want more people to come in so we're meaningless. Why, yes, exactly like what actually happened this last year when we had a slate.
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
So we're totally not running a slate, but you should actually vote for this list, that is in no way written on slate.
Also we're doing this because we want more people to come in so we're meaningless. Why, yes, exactly like what actually happened this last year when we had a slate.
If they do actually do end up having lists of ten, that's actually not bad at all. It becomes a lot more like, say, a politically oriented Locus recommended reading list. It can't be turned into a slate as easily, either, because there's too many for nominations. I'm sure they'd get a large boost, especially the first five, but it dilutes the voting power to an extent.
This is kind of ambiguous:
If you want to see your favorite author receive a nomination and an award, your best bet will be to cast your nomination ballot for one of the works in the top ten or thereabouts of The List.
I'm assuming that means to cast a nomination ballot to get it into the list, not a Hugo nomination ballot (which doesn't make much sense; how would it help my favorite author to nominate a totally different group?). Outside of that one sentence, there's not too much pushing the ballot as a slate, just using it as a recommended reading list and trying to get more voters (which is a good thing and exactly the right way to influence the Hugos!).
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
You've got to think about the personality and beliefs of the kind of women who willingly identifies with this type of group. The language makes sense then. They have a certain image they are trying to be.
I'm assuming that means to cast a nomination ballot to get it into the list, not a Hugo nomination ballot (which doesn't make much sense; how would it help my favorite author to nominate a totally different group?). Outside of that one sentence, there's not too much pushing the ballot as a slate, just using it as a recommended reading list and trying to get more voters (which is a good thing and exactly the right way to influence the Hugos!).
They're not going to push that right now. The Puppies have always tried to cover themselves from this, which doesn't necessarily mean it won't be in practice. Though I can't see how much they'd fuck up the nominations process as bad as Torgersen did. If they don't secretly put people on the ballots, omit their real agenda with said people and pick their buddies they'll be doing better than SD 3 in that part of the process.
Harry Dresden on
0
Options
knitdanIn ur baseKillin ur guysRegistered Userregular
It's funny how they're quite obviously putting the women out front this year to try and deflect against charges of misogyny.
“I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
The aesthetics are terrible, but to be fair, this is what the (sad) puppies should have been in the first place. A "get out the vote" effort is a moderately worthy endeavor, even if it's for cynical reasons. Torgersen and Correira wanted to be the Don Quixote and Sancho of internet forum fights too badly to realize that.
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
The aesthetics are terrible, but to be fair, this is what the (sad) puppies should have been in the first place. A "get out the vote" effort is a moderately worthy endeavor, even if it's for cynical reasons. Torgersen and Correira wanted to be the Don Quixote and Sancho of internet forum fights too badly to realize that.
Which would have merit if any of these women didn't approve of the previous Sad Puppies methods, instead they were encouraging them. Hoyt, in particular, was more extreme in her behavior than Correira was - I've posted her response to the SD 3 losing pages ago. That's why I'm not expecting anything that much different from the last tries.
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
The aesthetics are terrible, but to be fair, this is what the (sad) puppies should have been in the first place. A "get out the vote" effort is a moderately worthy endeavor, even if it's for cynical reasons. Torgersen and Correira wanted to be the Don Quixote and Sancho of internet forum fights too badly to realize that.
Which would have merit if any of these women didn't approve of the previous Sad Puppies methods, instead they were encouraging them. Hoyt, in particular, was more extreme in her behavior than Correira was - I've posted her response to the SD 3 losing pages ago. That's why I'm not expecting anything that much different from the last tries.
Yeah, I'm not saying she's any better than the two stooges, just that a GotV effort accompanied by a broader list of "recommended" works is far less problematic than the slate-nomination shenanigans the puppies got up to this year.
Also, even assuming the worst about Hoyt (and based on the stuff from her you posted, there's no reason not to), I think there are good odds that the puppies won't put forward such a tight slate next year. The slate was actually the cause of their ultimate humiliation. It gave the anti-puppies a precise way to oppose them. The slate let the puppies be an unstoppable force during nominations, but it also made them an easy target for the final vote. And this year, there's no way the anti-puppies will let them run away with nomination process again. So the only way the puppies avoid getting publicly spanked a second time is to put forward a fairly broad list of "recommendations" that has significant overlap with what they think the anti-puppies will vote for, too. That way, they set themselves up to claim victory no matter who gets nominated and ultimately wins. They may hate Anne Leckie, but they hate loosing and looking like idiots even more.
I also think the sad and rabid puppies will part ways this year. The two stooges were (rightly) ridiculed as Vox Day's useful idiots. The next gen puppies will take pains to make sure that doesn't happen again. To do that, they'll have to recommend a list long enough that it will be difficult for the rabids to piggyback on.
Their current mission statement is just bizarre. I feel like they're trying to get the "girl power" team together and not understanding how to differentiate that from the "queen bitch" motif. If you are trying to get that whole vibe of "let's party together!! " your preamble should probably not be all about how you want to fu' u' erryone's shi' and then randomly coyly pretend the future of fandom has been bestowed upon you by the past?
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
The aesthetics are terrible, but to be fair, this is what the (sad) puppies should have been in the first place. A "get out the vote" effort is a moderately worthy endeavor, even if it's for cynical reasons. Torgersen and Correira wanted to be the Don Quixote and Sancho of internet forum fights too badly to realize that.
Which would have merit if any of these women didn't approve of the previous Sad Puppies methods, instead they were encouraging them. Hoyt, in particular, was more extreme in her behavior than Correira was - I've posted her response to the SD 3 losing pages ago. That's why I'm not expecting anything that much different from the last tries.
Yeah, I'm not saying she's any better than the two stooges, just that a GotV effort accompanied by a broader list of "recommended" works is far less problematic than the slate-nomination shenanigans the puppies got up to this year.
Also, even assuming the worst about Hoyt (and based on the stuff from her you posted, there's no reason not to), I think there are good odds that the puppies won't put forward such a tight slate next year. The slate was actually the cause of their ultimate humiliation. It gave the anti-puppies a precise way to oppose them. The slate let the puppies be an unstoppable force during nominations, but it also made them an easy target for the final vote. And this year, there's no way the anti-puppies will let them run away with nomination process again. So the only way the puppies avoid getting publicly spanked a second time is to put forward a fairly broad list of "recommendations" that has significant overlap with what they think the anti-puppies will vote for, too. That way, they set themselves up to claim victory no matter who gets nominated and ultimately wins. They may hate Anne Leckie, but they hate loosing and looking like idiots even more.
True, but that wasn't the only reason the SD were hated. It wasn't just the slates, which was bad enough on its own. It was how they were jerks at every opportunity - if they had a chance to make themselves look good they choose the other option almost every time. It was embracing the RP/VD then not convincingly cutting ties with them, Correira had an infamous post where he refused to severe ties and he was Churchill because this was literature WW II you guys. Far to often it wasn't about the content or the authors it as incoherent conspiracy theories and far right wing propaganda Fox News would be proud of. They tried their damndest to be literature's own Gamer Goobers, thankfully their stupidity made them look incompetent rather than actually dangerous (aside from the psycho who SWATed Gerrold) - though I've heard the live posting during the streaming Hugo awards was GG to the core in being repugnant assholes. There's plenty other reasons I'm likely missing, which Scalzi posted on his blog. It failed by every metric known to man. If they had a genuine cause, and they don't, they blew their credibility at every stage.
They hate losing, what they lack is self awareness and analysis to do anything with damage control. SD 4 has begun, they've got a lot of opportunities to fail like their predecessors did. And they already have made themselves appear idiotic right off the bat.
I also think the sad and rabid puppies will part ways this year. The two stooges were (rightly) ridiculed as Vox Day's useful idiots. The next gen puppies will take pains to make sure that doesn't happen again. To do that, they'll have to recommend a list long enough that it will be difficult for the rabids to piggyback on.
Eh I have a feeling the large list will eventually boil down into a more "manageable" slate.
But SP never actually tried to cut ties with the gamergaters and VD did they? All I read from them was basically whhining that people pointed out the close relationship between SP/GG/VD, not any actual cutting so to speak.
Yeah, they never really distanced themselves effectively
AND
pop media pretty much latched onto the "Sad Puppy" name, whether anyone "approved" of it or otherwise, and so major news outlets who were more or less half-assing it because isn't it funny when the nerds fight!!, never really disambiguated it from the actual purpose and function of *Rabid* Puppies.
So they're stuck with a name which to outsiders is basically "kind of a bigoted grognard" at best and "laughably delusional" to most of fandom.
Posts
What votes didn't they count? Those below "No Award".
......
The tattered remnants of their pride and self respect?
- John Stuart Mill
Yeah. Lou Antonelli made up a new definition of "exaction" to claim that any Tor author who lost to "No Award" might have some sort of case against Tor.
If they go the "crazy lawsuits" route, I actually think the sad puppies (but not the rabids) will have problems maintaining coherency through next year. Nothing stinks of desperation like crazy lawsuits. I was reading the comments on File770 and a poster made a great point about the psychology of the sort of people who are puppies: if they don't think they're winning, they lose interest fast.
Here's the whole thing, spoilered due to length:
OK, I thought the “Raaah! We’ll be back” people were funny, but that was before I saw your remarkable “getting our asses handed to us only makes us stronger” argument. Real life don’t work like that, Obi-Wan.
It’s over. This was puppy peak, and it’s all downhill from this point. You want to rally the people who are in it for the culture war thrills, you need wins. No one likes to be thoroughly trounced, and only a few, easily led diehards are willing to sign up for it for a second round — especially when they have to pay for it. There are other shiny objects out there. Next year’s gamergate awaits … oh, wait. You’re still hanging onto that one too, aren’t you? Good luck. I’m sure victory is right around the corner!
Anyway. You get one bite at the apple. No one rallies for the loser who led them into defeat the previous year. Sarah Palin is never, ever going to be a candidate for presidency or vice presidency again. If health care reform had failed in the US, we wouldn’t have been getting single-payer as a second take. People who think otherwise are delusional. Thus the frantic “we meant it to happen” puppy messaging taking place in between the fits of rage.
The puppies are already making noises about recommendation lists, presumably in recognition of the fact that getting anywhere is going to mean at least an attempt at mollification of the greater group of voters. No author or editor with an eye on success, based on what happened this year, is going to go willingly along with them, so there’s going to be that cluster(*&^% to deal with: people loudly and embarrassingly disassociating themselves from whatever list the puppies come up with. That leaves them with whatever unfortunate people they can find who are simply desperate for recognition, so so much for quality nominations. No real media coverage this time — it’s a rerun, no one cares.
To sum up, this particular culture war battle just ain’t going to be fun anymore for the puppies. It’s so hard to get your enjoyable sense of outrage and persecution on when everyone’s such a downer and the stakes are so low and even your opponents are bored with you. Anything left will be a shadow of this year.
Here’s my prediction. The puppies shoot out a “suggestion list” of few candidates. Beale does his usual little song and dance and maybe gets a few names on the list, but finds the vast swelling numbers he expects to join him are only interested in actual winners, not people who get humiliatingly thumped by social justice warriors (Ewww. How is that even possible? Aren’t they supposed to be weak and corrupt and like, girls and minorities and stuff?). He does some desperate things and makes a fool of himself entertainingly to us, but no one outside this very small community cares anymore. He’s mostly ignored, and so are his picks. Puppies take four ends with an oh-so-apt whimper.
Then the voting changes go into effect, and game over, thank you for playing, and especially for all the money.
So yeah. The more crazy and spiteful the puppy true believers get, the more support they'll lose among their more casual sympathizers. That crowd has no patience for losers.
Then they're suing the whole group, they lost that when they signed onto the Puppies.
The weird thing is, I got into reading Science Fiction/Fantasy short stories after checking out a few of Timothy Zahn's short story collections. For all that I would think he'd be a favourite of the puppies given his plot-focused space operas, his short story fiction includes a lot of material that is closer to what the New Wave put out. And arguably one of Zahn's stronger points in his better stuff is the more character focused nature of the material. It's almost like a writer can include more literary and character-focused material while still being able to produce a rollicking space opera adventure. Unless you are a women I guess. Their stuff doesn't count.
Oh hey it's Calbeck.
AKA "I'm going to totally own all of Battletech because of this lawsuit"
Probably not the best person to be taking legal advice from.
But if I had gone to law school, and I had zero ethics or shame, I could probably make so much money convincing this crowd they had a case on this or that.
And then every time I lose, I blame the media.
Whoa, what? When was this? I was pretty into Battletech for a while and I don't remember this guys name ever popping up on their forums. Before or after they (the website) got bought by corporate.
Nah. Up your game.
Blame the liberal activist judges and feminized juries.
It's been a bit. He did some writing for the Light Horse (of course) way back, felt he didn't get paid properly and that somehow entitled him to the franchise?
http://www.sarna.net/forums/showflat.php/Cat/4/Number/166262/Main/165799
Looks like I'm going to make a donation.
It met all the goals, we're getting the audiobook!
A stretch goal to have a song version is now up.
“John Scalzi Is Not A Very Popular Author And I Myself Am Quite Popular,” the Audiobook, Read by Me, John Scalzi
It's live.
Also, a song has been commissioned.
Also no 4.
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union
But it was always about merit.
It's going to be hilarious if this gets a nomination, or better yet, the Hugo, for 'Best Related Work' year.
scalzi does a pretty good parody of a vox day voice, cf.
and the writer does a good job parodying vox's style and tone
http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/09/03/introducing-sad-puppies-four-the-bitches-are-back/
And thank you to the wonderfully talented ArtRaccoon (Lee Madison) for his fantastic artwork. The new puppy’s name is Robert. His three creators are Isaac, Frank, and Ray. Yes, those names do mean what you think they do. You can find more of his artwork on http://artraccoon.deviantart.com/gallery/ Contact me, Sarah, or Amanda if you want to give him money and we’ll send you his PayPal.
The Hugo awards has entirely too small a voting and nominating pool. Five thousand votes is the largest number ever received? Two thousand nomination ballots? That’s piddly. For a field loved by millions, it’s nowhere near enough, and makes it easy for any small clique to corrupt the idea of awarding great SF and start giving themselves awards.
We want at least ten thousand nomination ballots. Tens of thousands of votes (which means tens of thousands of Hugo memberships, either supporting or attending). So many votes and voters that it’s almost impossible for any one group – and yes, that includes the Sad Puppies – to dominate anything.
So, SP4 is all about MOAR! More voters. More votes. More people. We want to make the Hugos bigger and more representative of fandom as a whole, to bring people in rather than give them an asterisk that looks kind of wrong (especially beside the rocket) to try to drive the “interlopers” out. SF is a big tent: we don’t want to kick out anyone, even writers of bad message fiction that makes puppies sad.
To that end, this thread will be the first of several to collect recommendations. There will also be multiple permanent threads (one per category) on the SP4 website where people can make comments. The tireless, wonderful volunteer Puppy Pack will be collating recommendations.
Later – most likely somewhere around February or early March, I’ll be posting The List to multiple locations. The List will not be a slate – it will be a list of the ten or so most popular recommendations in each Hugo category, and a link to the full list in all its glory. Nothing more, nothing less.
If you want to see your favorite author receive a nomination and an award, your best bet will be to cast your nomination ballot for one of the works in the top ten or thereabouts of The List. My recommendations will not count any more or any less than anyone else’s recommendations (with one exception – I will NOT be on the list. Neither will Sarah or Amanda. If anyone wants to nominate any of us they’ll need to do it on their own).
Anyone can post any number of recommendations (obviously not for the same work – one recommendation per person per work), and there is NO political test. The only criteria is that you’ve read it/watched it/seen it and you think it’s one of the best in its Hugo class published in 2015.
The other side of SP4 is to have the biggest, best floating party and alternacon in WorldCon history, and for that, anyone who can needs to go to MidAmeriCon. Go, vote, and attend the World Science Fiction Society business meeting so more voices can be heard. And of course, have the biggest and best floating party regardless of the official programming – although if the official programming is awesome, that can join the party as well.
After all, nobody parties like a Puppy trying not to be so Sad.
If only it was what they were selling, the Sad Puppies wouldn't be getting grief if all they did was encourage more people to participate in Hugo voting. They're getting to wacky here, should have waited a few more posts before that to build credibility because they literally lost it all a few days ago (not that they had much to begin with).
I don't get why they've segregated the men and women running these things, intermingle leadership - it wouldn't hurt. I'm dreading the shit these women will get if they fail, I don't see them getting off with no consequences from the base like Correia, and Torgersen did this year.
We'll see where this goes. I'll get my popcorn.
They complain when people call them racist or sexist. The Puppies like to say "Look who we have for our leaders! One white man, a native American with Mexican ancestry, and a Latino! You CHORPs are the real racists because you call them all white!"
Nevermind that Vox Day's Native American and Mexican heritage are negligible if even true. Nevermind that he looks white, his parents look white, neither parent is a white Mexican, he proudly proclaims the superiority of the white race, and he refuses to pin down any details about his heritage when pressed.
Nevermind that Correia is white and American born and his Latin ancestry is from Portugal rather than Central or South America. Nevermind that Latino is a cultural rather than racial identifier, and he doesn't belong to that culture, making him no different than a British- or German-American outside of having an extra box he can check off on census forms.
They're having women run SP4 because they think they're clever and they can preempt that kind of criticism.
Also we're doing this because we want more people to come in so we're meaningless. Why, yes, exactly like what actually happened this last year when we had a slate.
Like
What?
I think the complete lack of any unity in the messaging is a good sign for some and a verybad sign for others.
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union
If they do actually do end up having lists of ten, that's actually not bad at all. It becomes a lot more like, say, a politically oriented Locus recommended reading list. It can't be turned into a slate as easily, either, because there's too many for nominations. I'm sure they'd get a large boost, especially the first five, but it dilutes the voting power to an extent.
This is kind of ambiguous:
I'm assuming that means to cast a nomination ballot to get it into the list, not a Hugo nomination ballot (which doesn't make much sense; how would it help my favorite author to nominate a totally different group?). Outside of that one sentence, there's not too much pushing the ballot as a slate, just using it as a recommended reading list and trying to get more voters (which is a good thing and exactly the right way to influence the Hugos!).
You've got to think about the personality and beliefs of the kind of women who willingly identifies with this type of group. The language makes sense then. They have a certain image they are trying to be.
They're not going to push that right now. The Puppies have always tried to cover themselves from this, which doesn't necessarily mean it won't be in practice. Though I can't see how much they'd fuck up the nominations process as bad as Torgersen did. If they don't secretly put people on the ballots, omit their real agenda with said people and pick their buddies they'll be doing better than SD 3 in that part of the process.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
The aesthetics are terrible, but to be fair, this is what the (sad) puppies should have been in the first place. A "get out the vote" effort is a moderately worthy endeavor, even if it's for cynical reasons. Torgersen and Correira wanted to be the Don Quixote and Sancho of internet forum fights too badly to realize that.
Which would have merit if any of these women didn't approve of the previous Sad Puppies methods, instead they were encouraging them. Hoyt, in particular, was more extreme in her behavior than Correira was - I've posted her response to the SD 3 losing pages ago. That's why I'm not expecting anything that much different from the last tries.
Yeah, I'm not saying she's any better than the two stooges, just that a GotV effort accompanied by a broader list of "recommended" works is far less problematic than the slate-nomination shenanigans the puppies got up to this year.
Also, even assuming the worst about Hoyt (and based on the stuff from her you posted, there's no reason not to), I think there are good odds that the puppies won't put forward such a tight slate next year. The slate was actually the cause of their ultimate humiliation. It gave the anti-puppies a precise way to oppose them. The slate let the puppies be an unstoppable force during nominations, but it also made them an easy target for the final vote. And this year, there's no way the anti-puppies will let them run away with nomination process again. So the only way the puppies avoid getting publicly spanked a second time is to put forward a fairly broad list of "recommendations" that has significant overlap with what they think the anti-puppies will vote for, too. That way, they set themselves up to claim victory no matter who gets nominated and ultimately wins. They may hate Anne Leckie, but they hate loosing and looking like idiots even more.
I also think the sad and rabid puppies will part ways this year. The two stooges were (rightly) ridiculed as Vox Day's useful idiots. The next gen puppies will take pains to make sure that doesn't happen again. To do that, they'll have to recommend a list long enough that it will be difficult for the rabids to piggyback on.
True, but that wasn't the only reason the SD were hated. It wasn't just the slates, which was bad enough on its own. It was how they were jerks at every opportunity - if they had a chance to make themselves look good they choose the other option almost every time. It was embracing the RP/VD then not convincingly cutting ties with them, Correira had an infamous post where he refused to severe ties and he was Churchill because this was literature WW II you guys. Far to often it wasn't about the content or the authors it as incoherent conspiracy theories and far right wing propaganda Fox News would be proud of. They tried their damndest to be literature's own Gamer Goobers, thankfully their stupidity made them look incompetent rather than actually dangerous (aside from the psycho who SWATed Gerrold) - though I've heard the live posting during the streaming Hugo awards was GG to the core in being repugnant assholes. There's plenty other reasons I'm likely missing, which Scalzi posted on his blog. It failed by every metric known to man. If they had a genuine cause, and they don't, they blew their credibility at every stage.
They hate losing, what they lack is self awareness and analysis to do anything with damage control. SD 4 has begun, they've got a lot of opportunities to fail like their predecessors did. And they already have made themselves appear idiotic right off the bat.
I hope they will.
But SP never actually tried to cut ties with the gamergaters and VD did they? All I read from them was basically whhining that people pointed out the close relationship between SP/GG/VD, not any actual cutting so to speak.
AND
pop media pretty much latched onto the "Sad Puppy" name, whether anyone "approved" of it or otherwise, and so major news outlets who were more or less half-assing it because isn't it funny when the nerds fight!!, never really disambiguated it from the actual purpose and function of *Rabid* Puppies.
So they're stuck with a name which to outsiders is basically "kind of a bigoted grognard" at best and "laughably delusional" to most of fandom.
Uncanny Magazine!
The Mad Writers Union