Monster Hunter Nation

George R. R. Martin responds

I was offline all weekend. I needed the sanity break and spent it playing the latest Call of Duty with my son.

George R.R. Martin has posted a series of blog posts about the Sad Puppies campaign. On the 9th I responded to the first 3. He posted a 4th while I was composing my response,  and a couple more since, and of course, despite Mr. Martin being pretty civil, the narrative spewing attack dogs aren’t, so when I came back this morning I found people all over the internet calling me out, saying, ooooh, he got you! Why can’t you answer him? Why are you ignoring him? Where’s the Beef? Got you, Correia, GOT YOU!!!!

Sorry, my time machine was inoperable, so I’ll lump my answers to his 4th post in with the response to today’s letter directly to me.  George R. R. Martin took the time to respond to my post from last week, and though we see things very differently, he was polite, and I would like to respond to a few things. Warning. This post is going to be HUGE. I’m responding to two great big blog posts here. If you just want to read the response to the response, skip down to that link.

 

Mr. Martin,

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my letter. I too am worn out of this whole thing. It turns out being labeled the second coming of BushSatanHitler across the internet isn’t super fun, and is actually very time consuming.

In this post, http://grrm.livejournal.com/418285.html titled Where’s the Beef, you tried to demonstrate that my side’s arguments are spurious, and that there is in fact no political bias in the awards.

I’ve read Brad Torgensen’s statements on this point, and I’ve read Correia’s MONSTER HUNTER NATION, and I’ve read hundreds of comments from their supporters. As with any large group, there is a wide range of opinion. Some of the Puppies are relatively moderate and reasonable. Others, I fear, are beyond the pale, raging and ranting about SJWs and cliques and secret conspiracies.

If I am responsible for everyone that comments on my site, then you are responsible for yours. I think we can both agree that is absurd.  I let everyone speak for themselves, debate, and I don’t remove comments just because I disagree with them. I don’t “massage” or “disemvowel”, and I hardly ever block anyone except for insane trolls and usually then only after they’ve become really repetitive and boring.

But for the rants, yes, there have been some among the 3000 comments, but I think you are being unfairly dismissive. Especially since most of those posts come from one man who has made a hobby of collecting racist quotes from Social Justice Warriors.

On SJWs, you have already told us that you don’t think SJWs don’t exist.  However, half of America thinks they do, and it is a running joke to us. Did you use the term NeoCon to describe many republicans during the Bush years? Did they disagree? Irrelevant, because the term entered common usage.

So here is a question for you.  What term would you use to describe the shared politics of the dozens of reporters, columnists, and bloggers who have run similar articles this week with obvious false accusations that Sad Puppies supporters ran an anti-diversity slate, motivated by racism, sexism, and homophobia?

Jerks? Yes, they are, but that is a bit too coordinated for mere jerkage. That was a political attempt to establish a political narrative.

So, what politics do those reporters share? The answer is glaringly obvious to most of us.   

As for “secret conspiracies” for the last few years we talked about there being campaigns, cliques, and a dominate group culture in the award process. Keep in mind it wasn’t until last week that anyone of note on your side admitted that there were actually campaigns and cliques. And you yourself talked about the prevailing culture of WorldCon and how the Hugos belong to WorldCon.  

A few weeks ago, all of that stuff would have gotten labeled secret conspiracies by people who don’t like us, so forgive some of my fans for kind of feeling like they are on a roll here.

In your Where’s the Beef post you attempted to dismiss our allegations that there is a political bias in the awards now, by going through the history of the awards and looking at the political diversity of winners from long ago. Nice, but we are talking about a relatively recent trend.

You do admit and recognize that, and then go through the last few years, trying to dismiss our complaints. You listed a bunch of names of various people and demanded to know if they should be there or not…  

Nope. Not falling for that. Even assuming your attentions are pure, I’m not walking into that.

This entire time I’ve tried hard not to name other authors or talk negatively about their books. The times that I’ve screwed up and violated that (Ancillary Justice, Redshirts, Dinosaur Revenge) I’ve come to regret it later, because now I’ve made it personal between me and another author, which isn’t what I’m trying to accomplish.

I do like how you constantly rail against McCarthyism, and then demand I name names.  You even cited some authors’ ethnicity, brought up their race specifically, and challenged us to say if we approved of their works or not (after you made it about race) so if we didn’t think the book was deserving, now it is about racism and we have no point, or to avoid that we say we do approve of the book, and now we have no point.

Since you set a trap and invited me to walk into it, I thought about how best to answer you over the weekend. Basically, there is no good way to answer. Point out specifics, be the bad guy, don’t point out specifics, still be the bad guy. That is a Kafka Trap.

The actual tastes of my people, or the idea that our supporters formed their own opinion on this, or that they could come to their own conclusions never enters into your argument, just an assumption that Brad and I were somehow able to sway all of these people without evidence… Trust me. This obstinate crowd of roughnecks and manatees made that decision themselves, and we just gave them a vehicle to get noisy about it.  

I’m going to try hard to not insult any other author’s work I haven’t already insulted, because narrative to the contrary, I actually like some of the people you listed, and I hope they go on to have long fantastic careers.

I don’t think I ever said it was all a Social Justice conspiracy, and if I did, I was probably being flippant. I said it was politically biased. SJWs are just the loudest. The bias comes in a few forms, some of which you’ve already agreed with.

  1. The author is popular with, or part of, some of the cliques.
  2. The book appeals to the cliques’ politics (which overwhelmingly skew left).
  3. The author has managed to not upset the angriest of all cliques which shall not be named.

Violate one of those rules and you are hosed.

But appeasing political bias and being a good book are not mutually exclusive. Something can satisfy A-C and still be a good book. There have been plenty of good works that still got onto the ballot. Yet you are trying to dismiss our argument that there is bias, by saying look at these good books that satisfy our bias! And meanwhile, we are all like, where are all the works that violated A, B, or C?

Let’s go to your list. Redshirts won that year, and you said:

Scalzi — look, I know Scalzi is liberal, and I know that the Puppies seem to hate him, though I can’t for the life of me understand why — but whatever you think of the writer’s politics, REDSHIRTS is a light, fun, amusing SF adventure, an affectionate riff off of STAR TREK, Ghu help us

No, I think he’s a fine of working a popularity contest. Redshirts was a light read, but I’m on record already disagreeing about amusing or fun and leave it at that. As for not understanding how my side could possibly dislike this man, here is him being gracious in victory the night last year’s final Hugo awards were announced:

John Scalzi @scalzi
I’m not going to lie. I’m going to be THRILLED to snarkread the whiny “I didn’t want it anyway” nonsense that will squirt forth tomorrow.

John Scalzi @scalzi
WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THE HUGO SLATE A REFERENDUM ON THE FUTURE OF SCIENCE FICTION (loses) THE HUGOS DON’T MATTER ANYWAY

John Scalzi @scalzi
SHUT UP I AM NOT CRYING IT’S THAT LITTLE FLECKS OF GUNPOWDER FELL INTO MY EYEBALLS SOMEONE GET ME A FLAMING SWORD SO I CAN FLICK THEM OUT

John Scalzi @scalzi
WHO IS CALLING ME PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE I AM ALL AGGRESSIVE DON’T YOU SEE THIS HUGE GUN I HAVE WITH ME AT ALL TIMES (breaks down, sobbing)

John Scalzi @scalzi
AND NOW I WILL IGNORE THE HUGOS AGAIN UNTIL NEXT YEAR WHEN MY FEELINGS OF PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE INADEQUACY ANGRILY WELL UP ONCE MORE

John Scalzi @scalzi
I’VE LEARNED MY LESSON AND MY LESSON IS THAT WE DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH PATENT RACIST SHITBAGGERY ON OUR SLATE WHAT THAT WAS GOOD WRITING MAN

John Scalzi @scalzi
ITS PROOF THAT ALL THE FEMINISTS NEED TO DO TO WIN AWARDS IS WRITE BETTER STORIES ACCORDING TO THE JUDGEMENT OF THE FANS SHEEESH

John Scalzi @scalzi
I NEVER WANTED THE AWARD THAT’S WHY I’VE WHINED LIKE A KICKED DOG ABOUT IT FOR A COUPLE YEARS RUNNING.

 

Simply can’t imagine why my side doesn’t care for him… But anyways, we’ve got plenty more examples of him being classy if you’d like them.

As for the rest, I’m not going to stick my foot in those giant steel jaws you provided and talk trash about their work. They all satisfy A-C, and they can play the game.

Come to think of it, Bujold is actually liked on my side. She is also the only Baen author to get on the ballot in… Hell… I’m not actually sure. Decades? Ever? Has another Baen book ever been nominated pre Sad Puppies?

So moving past the quality of the work, let’s talk about this “social justice conspiracy”, which I suppose is your way of dismissing the competing cliques you already admitted exist and our claim of political bias. SJWs are just the loudest, angriest, poo throwing bunch who can be counted on to run all the articles calling their opponents racist. So the best novels that year as far as I can tell the politics wing left, left, left, left, and a question mark.

Then you move down the ballot, to where the presence of Brandon Sanderson, who is a political moderate and one of the most popular authors alive, got a nomination, but to you this proves there is no bias, and not that Brandon has worked within your culture for several years in order to be accepted and considered. As you’ve said, he’s paid his dues. But we’ll run with that… and then left, left, left. Okay. I’m convinced. No bias here!  

You try to make the next category about the author’s sex, which is just being disingenuous.  And I’m not sure of everyone’s politics, because I can’t remember, but looking at those names, I’m thinking among those 5, not a lot of Romney voters if you get my drift. You next cite shorts, correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t all of those authors vocally on the left side of the spectrum too?  Sorry, I didn’t check beforehand because I wasn’t aware there was going to be a quiz.

I don’t think movies and TV shows should count in this particular discussion, because they are products created by hundreds of people, but nobody has ever mistaken you or Joss Whedon for Rush Limbaugh listeners (last I checked, there are like 4 of those in Hollywood, and I’m friends with all of them). But hey, if you do want to include movies, last year’s HUGE WIN FOR DIVERSITY (92% white liberals with one Asian liberal) does get a slightly better ratio if you include Alfonso Cuaron, because in America he would check the same box on an EEOC form as I do.

You then went back to the year before, and skim through ChiCon, looking for something we never alleged to prove us wrong, but again, the same old thing. They satisfy A-C. I don’t know Corey’s politics, but other than that, where do the other 4 nominees fall on the spectrum? From communist to liberal? Wow.

Oh, I’m sure there are some broad philosophical differences in there… to you… But to my side we’re back to the fact you have a thousand words for snow, and all we see is snow.

So in all the writing categories, you’ve got a handful of nominees with unknown or moderate politics.

What could we possibly have against Charlie Jane Anders? I don’t know, why don’t you go over to the article she wrote last week on io9 about how Sad Puppies is all motivated by racism and woman hating, and take a wild guess?

Then Torgersen and Resnick… Wow. Yeah, you got me there. Out of three years you found a couple of people who could be described as conservative in the writing categories. Resnick, a living legend, managed to survive his witch burning from the SFWA bulletin, but I believe Torgersen was still in the closet then.

Again, not trying to bag on an author’s work, but if you can’t find dreary, preachy message fic in some of that stuff you listed above, it might be because you are part of their target audience. And you don’t see it as preaching, but rather you see it as obvious truth.  Meanwhile, my people look at that list, and all we can do is shake our heads, and wonder if we outsiders even speak the same language as you guys.

But if you want to make this about the Social Justice “conspiracies”, let’s run with that and talk about C for a minute. I didn’t say they controlled the awards, they’re too inept for that. In fact, many times I’ve said the haters are outnumbered by regular WorldCon voters. I said that they would actively try to destroy any author with bad politics who got in. Of those authors you listed above, how many have ever said anything in public to disagree with the SJWs?  What happened to them if they did? What percentage have agreed with them or remained silent?  

By the way, some of the authors you listed above? I happen to know for a fact that a couple keep their politics quiet out of fear, because they know they have the wrong beliefs, and they don’t want to hurt their careers. And though I know you’ll demand proof, it isn’t my place to out them. Sorry.

There were like four other posts in there too, and I don’t have time to address them. I’ve already killed one week of productive writing time going back and forth on this subject, and I can’t afford to lose another.

So, on to the response letter directly to me. http://grrm.livejournal.com/420090.html

I am just about blogged out on the whole Puppygate thing, having devoted half a dozen posts and thousands of words to it over the past few days. However, Larry Correia responded to some of those posts on his own blog, MONSTER HUNTER NATION, as several dozen of his followers immediately emailed me to point out, and I promised to reply in turn. So here it is.

Thank you, Mr. Martin.

My original posts were long, and Mr. Correia’s reply was long, and if quoted them all, and then piled more on top of it, all of Live Journal might sink beneath the weight. So I am going to cut out the stuff by me that Correia quotes, since the originals are all available upstream, and edit down his own reply to just the point I want to answer.

Going back and forth quoting each other in public gets complicated, but I’ll do my best to be clear. I will do the same, with Mr. Martin in italics and me in bold. I’m going to be cutting everything that I’m not responding to directly, so I’d encourage everyone reading this to click on that link above to read the original in context.

I would have responded earlier, but as you can see, I have been busy posting about other aspects of this thing. But I do appreciate the response, and even more so, the courtesy you have shown. It’s my hope and belief that people on different sides of an issue can disagree, even heatedly, without it turning into rancor and name calling. We are, after all, fighting about a literary award.

Agreed. We may see the world differently, but we’re both fans and professional writers (though you’ve got me beat by orders of magnitude worth of success) and we both want our genre to thrive and readers to be happy.  

Mr. Martin said some nice things about my year’s Campbell ballot and his own loss. Cutting for space and sticking to the debate, but that was nice.  

What did matter was that the Campbell launched my career, just as it launched yours.

Actually, I’m not sure if that’s the case anymore. It used to be that the awards were a huge part of launching a career, but in recent times they don’t seem to make that much of a difference anymore, economically speaking. You’d have to ask publishers, but from what I’ve heard a Hugo nomination is usually a negligible difference in sales and new fans, and a win isn’t a whole lot better, but everything I know on that topic is second hand.

You spoke about how WorldCon used to be the biggest thing in Fandom, and I think back then the Hugos really would make a profound impact, but I think we’ve lost that. Mostly because fandom has kept growing, but as you’ve said, the Hugos have stayed small.

Sure. Of course, we had no internet in 1973, no emails. I had to make do with a few passing comments in print fanzines, and the occasional encounter at a con with a fan who had actually read one of my stories. Egoboo (as we called it) was hard to come by in those days. I sold my first story in 1970, published it in 1971, went to my con that same year, lost the Campbell in 1973, lost my first Hugo and Nebula in 1974, won a Hugo in September 1975… but it was not until a couple of months later, at the 1975 Windycon, that I was finally deemed to be enough of a writer to be asked to sit on a convention panel. Paying our dues, we called it. Acclaim was hard to come by; it had to be earned, and earning it took YEARS.

I was born in 1975. Considering how much the typical WorldCon voter likes me, luckily for me I was able to go around them to get my acclaim. Sorry, I’m just being flippant again.

I don’t condone treating anyone like shit. And I have never been a Mormon or a conservative or a gun-shop owner, so I don’t know what that is like.

It is awesome.

But I do wonder… you say you were called a liar, that people were angry with you for being who you were, that they said not to read your books… well, no need to paraphrase, you just said it all. But WHO called you a liar?

Who? Jackasses I assume. 🙂 

Serious answer, it wasn’t like I wrote the names down at first. I just put my head down and plodded on, mostly trying to avoid fights that might damage my career.

As time went on, I was making more money, I became more vocal, and more people like that showed up to pick fights, we started to collect them on the blog, and I mocked them right back.  If you actually care I could probably get some of my fans to compile a list of names and links for you. This has been a spectator sport over here for the last few years.

How many people said this stuff, where, in what context?

One person, ten people, a hundred? 

Leading up to Reno specifically, hard to tell, since it isn’t like most haters on the internet use their real name and post their business cards. Back then I didn’t know who they were. There were enough to scare the new guy. And since back then I wasn’t exactly planning on kicking over the table and stealing all your chairs, I didn’t think I’d need to catalog them for future evidence.

As time has gone on, you start to recognize the recurring haters, and realize that most of the slanderers are little no name writers, who’ve never had much success, or they are has beens, or almost weres, either way, they’re hoping that if they fling enough hate at people with the wrong politics to show that they are part of the tribe, that somebody important will notice them. Not being on that side, that’s my best guess anyway.

You have lived in a house made of gold bars since this has been a thing, so you might not be aware of how the Flaming Rage Nozzles of Tolerance operate.

Their actual status in the publishing world is irrelevant, because the goal of slander is to toss out as much as possible to see what sticks. Throw out some racism there, sexism here, a little misogyny on top, complete strangers hear it, don’t think about it too hard, and then for the rest of your life your name is connected to these vile things in their minds.

If the attackers get called on it, or busted, they delete the embarrassing stuff, run away, then come back somewhere else, often under a different name, trying to stick narrative into whole new conversations. I’ve got a couple of guys who are so persistent at it, posting under dozens of pseudonyms, whenever my name shows up anywhere that I’m pretty sure they’ve got me on Google alerts.

If you are talking about more recent times, and the number of people like that, plug my name into your search engine for the last week. Now we are in the hundreds, if not thousands. Forums, blog comments, all over FB, and this time it is racist, sexist, blah blah blah… I wish they would mix the narrative up a little and accuse me of something interesting.

I don’t doubt you got some criticism, that people took shots (no pun intended) at you… but fandom is large, even worldcon fandom. There are always assholes. No doubt they were there in 1973 as well, in that first Campbell race. I mean, have there ever been two contenders as opposite as Pournelle and Effinger? That was a classic Old Wave/ New Wave showdown, with us other nominees just caught in the crossfire. However, the internet did not exist to magnify it all, and most of the sniping went on in room parties, with no permanent record of the drunken debates. I am not sure that what you suffered was any worse than what they did, way back when.

Mr. Martin, I’m afraid that you are comparing the behavior of a handful of assholes against organized slander for political ends. Your hypothetical asshole could try to defame somebody for having the wrong politics, but it took a whole lot of work to spread it to thousands of strangers unless you worked at a newspaper. Not anymore.

You keep conflating the history of WorldCon with now, before many of those involved in the current controversy were even born, but they’re not the same thing.  The world has changed. I don’t think it is meaner, but it has made meanness convenient, and the ability to defame is just a click away.

You’ve not been the target of these people, because they don’t see you as an enemy. And even if they did, you sell all the books, they’re bugs to you. Most authors on my side aren’t in the financial position to weather a slander storm.

And regardless of what happened in Reno a few years ago—if you are trying to poke holes in the veracity of my story that I never suspected I would need to document—go search the internet and see how these people reacted last year when Sad Puppies got a handful of people on the ballot. Or look at the giant flaming shit storm of last week, where blatantly stupid lies were passed around to hundreds of thousands of readers with impunity.

Also, all these things that people said about you… are those direct quotes, or are you paraphrasing?

Paraphrasing primarily, because I’d have to start huffing paint to kill enough brain cells to pass for some of these folks. I’m not that good of a writer.

 Because it seems to me that the Sad Puppies love to paraphrase, taking any challenge or criticism and tweaking it around to make it more offensive and insulting.

Okay. Then don’t accept our version. Go read reporter Damien Walter’s account in the Guardian about my sexist homophobic campaign to steal the Hugos last year. (by the way, how did he know about my nomination before it was announced?) Or go read his account in the Guardian where he libeled Toni Weisskopf. Or go read Entertainment Weekly, the Telegraph, Salon, Slate or the many other places where I’m a racist white guy from earlier this week.

Of course we tweak their words around to mock them, because bullies hate that.  You have to have fun with this stuff, or it’ll drive you nuts.

Take this “Wrongfan” moniker I now see popping up on Puppy sites. Neither I nor any of the other SMOFs or trufans or worldconners that I know have ever called you or your friends “wrongfans.” You guys made that up and applied it to yourself.

Damn right we did. I’m pretty sure I invented the word Wrongfun to describe how the perpetually outraged crowd on Twitter was perpetually offended that somebody somewhere was having fun wrong.

Let me give you an example of wrongfun. After my last letter to you went public I had three or four people concern trolling me on Twitter because I used the term “Twitter Lynch Mob” to describe a well-known type of behavior. They’re perched like falcons, waiting for somebody to transgress, so that they can swoop in and feel superior. If you use the wrong words, play the wrong games, read the wrong books, wear the wrong shirt, they’ll be there. These people are always looking for an excuse to shake their fingers at you for having fun wrong, hence the term, Wrongfun.

So when Teresa Nielsen Hayden (who somehow knew that SP3 had 3/5 of the best novel nominations before they were announced) started going off about us, and how we were outsiders, my people took Wrongfun and turned it into Wrongfan. I don’t recall who did that, but it was funny, and it made my people laugh, so it stuck.

Words are awesome like that. I do find it ironic that you don’t approve of my people making up words to describe the world as they see it, in the same sentence that you speak of SMOFs, Trufans, and Worldconners.

 I wish that would stop. People are saying enough hurtful shit in this debate already without making up new insults and suggesting that the other side was throwing them at you. 

We don’t take it as an insult. It is more of a badge. We don’t need to make up new insults. There are plenty already. Did you read the thread on Making Light? Have you been on Twitter? Have you seen the hundreds of Facebook threads? Have you seen the many blog posts and newspaper articles?

I really have no idea what you mean by a “whisper campaign.” You make it sound so sinister.

It was easier than typing out Bunch of Political Assholes Talking Shit In An Attempt To Discredit And Defame Someone They Did Not Like.

Do people talk about books and writers? Sure they do. (They used to do it more. These days, con suite debates are more likely to be about movies than novels). But nobody is whispering. Fans don’t whisper. Fans are loud-mouthed and opinionated.

Oh no, they do both. If you think they are only open and honest about their opinions, you’ve missed the backstabby, gossipy side of the equation. That’s there too, but since they don’t write it down, I can’t copy it over to my webpage to make fun of it, and when we talk about that stuff you guys just assume we are paraphrasing.

You’d win that bet. Nobody said much of anything about me before my first Worldcon, because no one had any idea who I was. I was pretty much an invisible person at that con. I had been to one earlier con, and I knew maybe half a dozen people. I spent much of that con standing quietly in corners, trying to look interesting so people would talk to me. Oh, yes, there were a few people who were terrific, friendly, welcoming — Gardner Dozois, Terry Carr, Phyllis and Alex Eisenstein –but you could count them on the fingers on one hand. Nobody rolled out the red carpet for me. Nobody gave two shits that I was a Campbell Award finalist. So we all have our traumas, Mr. Correia.

Trauma is a strong word, Mr. Martin. I save trauma for things like blunt force, or running out of Coke Zero right before a deadline with a bunch of writing still to do.

How many belligerent drunks? One? Two? Ten?

One that I can recall. Most people aren’t stupid enough to start shit with the 6’5” 300 pound guy who grew up punching cows.

I think it matters.

Having removed rowdy drunks from establishments, I’d say!

You say that you were “berated” by other panelists… but panels at SF cons do often become loud and heated, it is not at all unusual. I doubt any special malice was directed at you. WHat was the panel topic? Who was on it? Who berated you? With what words? Is it possible that you were berating the other panelists back?

Sea Lion

 

I’m supposed to remember all the details of a few panels I was on, like 200 panels ago? Well, answering your questions in order, I don’t remember. I have no flipping idea. Some jackass? I don’t remember what words. It is possible I berated them back, I do that sort of thing. Beats me. I’m going off of a memory of being pissed off and surly. Kind of wrote it off and moved on.

I am not trying to call you a liar, Mr. Correia, but…

I feel like you are, but that’s fine. I’ve already had people digging through my blog history to find my con report to say “He sounds too cheerful!” (no shit, because all this writing stuff beats milking cows). This exchange is a good example of why I refused my nomination. This shouldn’t be about just me.  Now I regret sharing my personal experience, because it just turns into another angle to dismiss the whole thing.

Tell you what, Mr. Martin, go ahead, in your mind, erase all references to my personal experiences, because yours were different and better. For this current debate, it’s as if my experiences never happened, everything was wonderful and inclusive, and joy and butterflies… Strike that personal testimony from the record and just say that I’m a malicious dick of unknown motivation who decided to prove a point for an unknown reason.  

Instead, let’s focus on the stuff we have been paying attention to, and what we have documented over the last two years when we were actively looking for this stuff.

Some people love to argue, some don’t. Some take disagreement to mean disrespect. Some are thin-skinned. I don’t know you well enough to know where you fall in respect of all that.

I spend my free time arguing politics on the internet for fun. To prove a point I picked a fight with half of publishing, and now in between reading articles about what a racist I am, I’m having a public debate with one of the most famous authors in the world with lots of angry people waiting to jump on any mistake. I must be incredibly thin skinned.

I don’t know who the Barflies are. Do you just mean you hung out in the bar? Lots of people hang out in the bar at a con, I was not aware there was a specific group. You can always find lots of writers in the bar, usually around some editor who is buying the drinks.

Barflies… Capital B, as in Baen Barflies, from Baen’s Bar, one of the oldest scifi forums dating back to the dawn of the internet. Great folks, and there is always a small contingent of them at any con. I’m kind of surprised you don’t get the reference.

Come on, Larry. The cool kids? Surely you have been around fandom long enough to realize that there are no cool kids. We’re all the fat kids, the nerds, the computer geeks, the guys who always had their nose in a book, who loved comics and played chess and couldn’t get a date for a prom. And the girls are the geek girls, our female counterparts.

Cool is relative, I’ll give you that. I meant in terms of the In Crowd.  You know, like how you established your WorldCon cred with the giant list of things you’ve been to and people you’ve known since the 70s.

Did you go to the Hugo Losers Party? That’s become an offical con thing now, and the SMOFs have taken it over and made it stuffy and semi-formal, with door dragons deciding who gets in (but as a Campbell loser, you would certainly have been on the list. Gardner Dozois and I founded that party in 1976, the night after I’d lost two Hugos. The whole point was to get drunk and bitter and bitch and tell each other we’d been robbed. We had a little contest, each of us insisting “I am a bigger loser, because… ” It was all in good fun. People who get honestly for real pissed off about losing Hugos… no, man, really, that’s no good. Fake bitter takes the sting out of losing. Real bitter poisons everything.

I did. I recall it being boring and sad, with lots of complaining and crying from people. I remember I hung out for a bit until I saw the spreadsheet printout, then I bailed. I’m an auditor, the numbers were way more interesting. Especially how this whole damned thing was determined by like .001% of fandom.

It’s history that gives the Hugos their prestige, not statistics. I believe I made that point at some length in my first post, so I won’t repeat myself.

You did. You were very clear. I was also clear that I thought they were supposed to be a prestigious big deal, and not just a popularity contest for a couple little groups of insiders.

Okay, these are some strong statements, and I have to ask once again, is it possible that some of this is wounded feelings and hyperbole?

Very possibly. Wounded feelings? I’m not a machine. I was bummed and annoyed. Hyperbole? No Portuguese person has ever been accused of subtlety. I ran a campaign with a spokesmanatee riffing off of Sarah McLachlan animal shelter videos. I wasn’t giving testimony in court. But if you think I’m exaggerating about the venom, I’d invite you to go read the internet right now. Same nonsense, only louder now.  

Were you actually called “a liar,”

Yes. Repeatedly.

or did someone just claim your statement was untrue? Big difference there.

Both.  But again, pretend that I’m just a crank with a faulty memory and look at what is going on right in front of your face from the last week. You’ve got an editor from one of the biggest publishing houses saying that Larry Correia is a lying liar who lies, and that’s not a paraphrase. That’s still getting retweeted today.  

Were you “attacked,” or did people just disagree with you?

Both. For example, right now I’d say that George R. R. Martin or Mary Robinette Kowal disagree. I’d say that Teresa Nielsen Hayden, Arthur Chu, and a bunch of reporters attacked.

Did someone actually use the words “shit writer” and “shit product?”

That is accurate. I’ve gotten that one a lot. It is a constant favorite on Facebook.

Or is this just more “wrongfan” stuff, where someone says something critical, and it gets turned all the way up to eleven on the offensiveness scale?

Nope. Wrongfan is us having fun and showing these assholes that they can’t drag us down. And shitty writer is only like a four or five on the scale. Seven or eight is the white supremacist, angry white male, racist, woman hater stuff. I don’t think these little wimps have the imagination to hit a nine or ten and the EW article attempt at the gold just made them look stupid. But just in case, I’m ready for the eleven, and I’ve warned my local sheriff’s department what’s going on. Luckily they were already familiar with the tactic of SWATing, and I live in a sensible rural area, so I’m not worried about it.

You didn’t, though. (speaking of proving my point) At least I do not believe you did.

I said that people with the wrong politics who got on the ballot would be campaigned against and actively slandered. -Check.   

I said that WorldCon was really a small group that did not represent all of fandom. -Check.

I said there was campaigning. – Check.

I am not calling you a liar, I am just saying that I believe that statement to be false. In fact, I think my own “Where’s the Beef?” blog post pretty well demolished the Sad Puppy claims.

See above.  I think demolished might be a stretch. More like there is a severe difference in perception between our respective sides.

Your supporters may not think so. Does that mean they are calling me a liar? My supporters think I was totally convincing, so…

Which is why ultimately internet debate is a spectator sport. I am under no illusion that I will sway you. I present my arguments to convince the undecided and give support to my side.

However, your posts have been absolutely wonderful for me and my people, because you’ve been honest and come out and said many things we’ve been saying too. Plus, you shot down that whole stupid narrative with people yelling at Brad Torgersen for failing to contact everybody we put on our suggested slate, by pointing out how stupid and hypocritical that is. So on the contrary, if any of my people are calling you a liar, point them out and I’ll gladly tell them to shut up.

I wish I could disagree with that, but I won’t. I am not dishonest either. You’re right, Mr. Correia. You will never win a Hugo. Whether you could have won one before the Sad Puppies, well, I don’t know,

No, trust me. I couldn’t. I’m not good enough at ass kissing to ever overcome my politics.

but now, it is true, you have pissed way too many people off. On the other hand, you know, there are many terrific writers in the history of our genre who have never won a Hugo. Your friend Brad Torgersen has his little list, and I have my own, and the names on his list and the names on mine are very different. Doesn’t mean there is a secret conspiracy. All it means is that tastes differ.

Again, not a secret conspiracy. If I said that academia or Hollywood was overwhelmingly liberal, would that be a secret conspiracy?  No, it would be pointing out that culturally they are overwhelmingly going to swing one way. Keep in mind, up until you and TNH last week, nobody important would come out and admit there was campaigning or cliques.

Has your career been sabotaged? From reading Monster Hunter Nation, it seems as if your career is going rather well.

I said they would try. I didn’t say they were good at it.

You’re on the TIMES bestseller list, are you not? I know a hundred writers in this field, damn good writers, hard-working and talented, who would love to have their careers sabotaged so that they could be on bestseller lists too.

I made the NYT list before I got my Campbell nomination (how often has that happened?)  In the last 6 years I’ve written 13 novels and 23 paying short stories. The reason these people haven’t been able to mess me up is that I work too hard, and my core fan base is made up of a bunch of normal people who don’t like being preached at and scolded either.

You said above you don’t know me well, so I’ll give you an idea. A few years ago I started taking what the perpetually offended wrote and having fun with it. I’d post up their articles in their entirety and then Fisk them, line by line. The fans loved it. So for every sale I lost because the slander stuck with some stranger and they wrote me off as a sexist homophobe, I figure I gained two who were also sick of this crap.

But most authors aren’t like me. They don’t like confrontation. Good people tend to freak out when you call them racist for no reason. And when they find themselves the victim of a Twitter Mob, they apologize, and retreat, afraid to sin again.

But apparently you’ve never seen this, and don’t think it can happen. My side lives it. They’ve watched all this unfold live for years. I don’t know if we’ll ever see eye to eye on that.

I try to assist other authors (and artists, and filmmakers, and fan writers) as well, by recommending their works on my Not A Blog. Sometimes it works. More often it does not. If you do the same thing, I doubt anyone will have a problem with it.

They sure minded when I did that last year.

The backlash you are getting now is because you went way beyond that. Yes, all completely legal… but your campaign, your slate tactics, did not just get some authors you overlooked onto the ballot, it pretty much drove everyone else off the ballot. In the three short fiction categories, there are no choices but your choices (well, yours, and Brad Torgersen’s, and Vox Day’s). You say you just wanted a seat at the table. But you kicked over the table, and took ALL the seats.

So we obeyed all the rules, but violated the secret gentleman’s agreement you guys had in place.

You know that we didn’t expect to sweep the categories. Some of the categories that were swept weren’t even because of Sad Puppies, but by Vox Day’s separate campaign that I had absolutely zero control over.

And please, please, don’t say that was what was done to your side in prior years. I think I demonstrated in “Where’s the Beef?” that that claim is simply not true. There have always been plenty of writers and stories that the Puppies should have liked on the ballot every year. If you think that’s untrue, please give me chapter and verse, with specific references to the ballots for Reno, Chicon, and LoneStarCon. Let’s at least see where we disagree.

Hey, stick your head into this hear bear trap, Correia… Nope, and I explained why above. Even if you were being completely honest there, Mr. Martin, I’m not stupid enough to give that kind of ammunition to the people who hate me by insulting other authors who aren’t currently pissed off at me. Bagging on individual author’s works accomplishes nothing for me, I regret the few times that I have. We made a case to the fans and they agreed. These fans didn’t just spring fully formed into being, just to mess with the Hugos overnight. You can use my refusal to dismiss the whole thing if you want, but again, I’m doing this for the undecided. They can look at the books and see if I have a point or not themselves.

Worldcon is a community. FIAWOL. I don’t regard that as trivial. We welcome newcomers, but yes, the hope is that they will embrace our history and traditions and culture, not just our awards. It’s a proud history and a rich culture. Some of it is silly, sure, but we even love that silliness. Some of it, like the Hugo awards, we take very seriously.

I asked you a very specific question last time on that topic, and I notice that you did not answer it in this letter. You did write a whole lot of posts last week, and I’ve been very frazzled, so I admit that I may have just missed it. So speaking of taking this stuff seriously, are the Hugos 1. an award that represents the likes of one small con, or are the Hugos 2. the award that represents all of fandom? Can’t have both. It has to be one or the other.

So far as I’m concerned, the Hugos are the Big Deal still. There’s no other award in the field with half as distinguished a list of previous winners. The Nebulas challenged for a time, but now they are a distant second.

Then if that is the case, if they are the Big Deal still, and not just coasting on history, shouldn’t everybody in fandom have a say? Or should WorldCon stay small, and have a smaller, more elite voting pool?

Perhaps. Maybe there is altogether too much “lumping together” on both sides. From over here, on the other side, it seems as though the “moderate, rational, normal” conservatives rarely seem to condemn the Vox Days and Rabid Puppies on your side, so we take your silence and lack of condemnation against the hate mongers as tacit approval.

Ah, but I have repeatedly, on Sad Puppies related posts, both last year and this year said that I don’t agree with Vox Day, I don’t condone what he says, I don’t speak for him, control him, or have any sway over him. Do you think Rapid Puppies has somehow made my life easier?

As for Rabid Puppies, there is absolutely nothing for me to condemn. They are fans too, who obeyed the rules, and bought their memberships to participate. Just because you don’t like them or what they want to vote for doesn’t make them bad people. Right now Mary Robinette Kowal is putting together “scholarships” buying memberships for people. I think they’re up to 70. I figure they’re going to disagree with me. FANTASTIC. Contrary to what you might think, I think that’s awesome. The more people voting the better.  And whether you like them or not, Rabid Puppies are fans too.  

Vox Day wasn’t on our slate. Things from his company were on our slate. But if he’d not put himself up for editor on his own slate, directly to his fans, and gotten himself nominated, I doubt anybody would have ever noticed that he published them. Now, whether you hate Vox or not, I’d still ask people to read Wright’s work and vote according to whether they think it is worthy or not.

But I see your Vox Day and match you with Requires Hate. And then I raise you a few hundred others. If you want to match unseemly quote to unseemly quote, you’ll run out of Vox’s before we get through NK Jemisen’s. Only one is the devil, and the other gets a pass. And I find that hypocritical, because both say inflammatory things, and have hurled insults at each other, but one has good politics and the other bad. Yes, I’ve seen his top five dumbest quotes and I don’t like them, but people keep posting them on my blog over and over and over again, and I keep saying the same thing. I don’t like them, don’t own them, and hey, I thought you guys were always saying to separate the art from artist… Oh, wait. That only counts for the child molesters your side showers with awards.

So, if we can bring you say, a hundred quotes from Hugo and Nebula nominated authors that are inflammatory and racist would you go through and specifically condemn each one? Would you demand a witch hunt? Try to drive them out of the industry? Publically distance yourself from them when they show up on the ballot? No? Why? They’re not your problem? Well, that’s what you guys keep asking me to do.

For this next one, I am going to leave in my original bit that you responded to, Mr. Martin, because I believe it illustrates a point.

[[CORREIA: Hypothetical question, if Robert Heinlein wrote Starship Troopers in 2014, could he get on the Hugo ballot now? Or would he be labeled a fascist with troubling ideas, and a product of the neo-colonial patriarchy? And before you dismiss that question, maybe you should read up on what the voting clique that shall not be named says about Heinlein now. Sadly, I suspect the only way Heinlein could get on the ballot today would be if my horde of uncouth barbarian outsiders got involved and put him on our suggested slate.]]

Kind of ironic that you should bring up Heinlein, since it was the Puppy slate that knocked William Patterson’s Heinlein biography off the Related Works shortlist this year. But to answer your question, I don’t think Heinlein would write STARSHIP TROOPERS in 2014. If you know Heinlein, you know that he was a man who changed with the times throughout his career. He was always trying new things, new techniques, new challenges… and his political views changed HUGELY over his lifetime. He wrote much of STARSHIP TROOPERS and STRANGER IN A STRANGE LAND at the same time, yet one book is beloved of conservative military buffs while the other became a hippie bible. I have no idea what he would be writing in 2014… but if he were still at the top of his form, I would love to read it.

You didn’t actually answer the question. I didn’t say, if Heinlein evolved into something hypothetically suitable to you guys today, or if Heinlein wrote a novel today, I flat out asked, could Starship Troopers get nominated today?

And to me, I find it more ironic that the first volume of Heinlein’s biography lost to Chicks Dig Timelords.

There is no excuse for any of that. I tried to speak to some of these issues in my blog post called “Hatespeech.” Too much of this kind of shit is flying across the internet in both directions, and I don’t think any good whatsoever is served by debates about who flung the first shit, or who flung the most shit, or who flung the smelliest shit.

It doesn’t matter who did it first, or who did it more, or who did it in 20 international publications, says the person not being slandered… It is remarkable how people unbloodied can stay so above the fray and pronounce how it is all morally equivalent to them. Fantastic. Congratulations, sir, you have claimed the moral high ground. I’m going to head over to Facebook and read about how I eat babies.

(That was hyperbole… Maybe)

Look, I know I’m very testy on this subject, but when the blogs, newspapers, and authors pushing the narrative that Brad and I are white supremacists outnumber the moderate and leftwing professional authors public calls for not being lying, threatening, douchebags, then maybe I’ll be more receptive. But right now, it looks like the people calling for more honest debate and less lies are drastically outnumbered.

More and more, I grow convinced that the internet is toxic. Every controversy brings out the trolls and toads, of every political, religious, and literary persuasion, most of them anonymous, all of them venomous. You can’t control the assholes on your side and I can’t control the assholes on my side. I fear we will both just have to live with that.

Excellent. So why do you guys keep bringing up the right wing answer to Harlan Ellison to try and pin him on me? Turnabout is actually fair play, and if I have to answer for Vox’s sins, then your side should have to answer for the Flaming Rage Nozzles of Tolerance.

Nice, sure. Basic human decency, really. It is grotesque how you cannot have any sort of discussion on the internet without rape threats and death threats coming into it. Makes me despair for our civilization. Hell, I ever see these things on sports blogs.

Agreed.

(this bit is in response to the Locus list having zero Baen books on it)

Do you think that makes Baen unique?

For its size and success? Yes.

It does amuse that so many of your Sad Puppies seem to revere Baen Books and despise Tor Books, which reveals an astonishing ignorance of publishing.

Nope. http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/11/last-sp-post-for-the-week-to-my-people-dont-yell-tor/  When I saw that popping up in the comments, I posted this.

Both Baen and Tor were financed by the same guy, Tom Doherty. You know who the first editor was at Tor? Jim Baen.

Yep. Knew that.

Tor publishes your Puppy favorite, John C. Wright. Kevin Anderson too,

Knew that too.

I believe. And Baen published liberals… me, for instance.

Yep. I’m a fan of Misty Lackey and Eric Flint. Because just like I said in the post, Baen doesn’t care about an author’s politics as long as they can entertain their readers and sell books. I’m waiting for the astonishing ignorance part.

But hey, since you are saying this, maybe you should clarify to the haters that Baen isn’t the home of right wing misogynist sci-fi? Because apparently a whole bunch of reporters and bloggers have an astonishing ignorance of publishing.

Come on. Really? Look at the LoneStarCon ballot, the last before the Sad Puppies really began to have an impact. John Scalzi and Lois McMaster Bujold. Indistinguishable from one another? Can’t tell Brandon Sanderson from Saladin Ahmed? Jake Lake and Kim Stanley Robinson? Ken Liu and Pat Cadigan, identical snowflakes? How about the editors? Stanley Schmidt of ANALOG and Sheila Williams of ASIMOV’s, do you imagine they had the same taste, published the same stories? In long form editor, you had Toni Weisskopf, a Puppy favorite, against Patrick Nielsen Hayden, who your Puppies love to hate, with Sheila Gilbert of DAW thrown in as well, plus Lou Anders and Liza Gorinsky. All just snow? I mean, if you say so… but I see a feast there, a table laid out with all sorts of different meats and fruits and cheeses.

Went over this above, but let me point out a couple of things. Who on there went against my A-C above? I see a couple… That’s it.  

Sadly, Stanley Schmidt had to retire before he could win after two decades of losing to somebody with a bigger clique, which is bull crap. Toni Weisskopf was on the ballot that year because of Sad Puppies 1. Yep, Toni’s only nominations in her career have been from Sad Puppies, so I think it is kind of funny you are tossing that at me as evidence of how unbiased you are, since we got her there.

 When you guys ignore somebody like Toni Weisskopf for decades, and give Patrick Nielsen Hayden a dozen nominations, yeah, that’s a regular fruits and cheese tray right there.    

Diversity all over the place.

Yeah, a white liberal beats the Jewish single mom. I’m sure Kameron Hurley will call it a triumph of diversity.

That made me laugh, I admit. Very funny… but it’s all hyperbole and sweeping generalization. I don’t recognize any of those characterizations. Which book was “bigots are stupid?” Which one was “capitalists are stupid bigots?” Can you slap name tags on these straw men?

It would be faster for you to tell me which books featured capitalism as a positive thing. 🙂

I think that once again you are paraphrasing and turning the insult dial up to eleven. I will agree that there was a backlash.

It is interesting how you just dismiss lying defamation campaigns so easily.

Permit me to suggest that much of the negative press you got derived from the fact that one of the stories you placed on the ballot was that novelette by Vox Day, who was already infamous by that point because of his attack on Nora Jemison, his run for SFWA president, and his expulsion from that organization. Here we are back again to the “lumping together” we discussed earlier. Had Vox Day not been on your ticket, I suspect the backlash would not have been a tenth as vociferous as it was.

Yep, I put one story from Vox Day on the ballot for SP2. I read it earlier that year, and personally, I enjoyed it, but then again, my perceptions weren’t colored by all of you guy’s hatey-hate and judging books by their covers. I also had it on my sidebar for a month, so many of my fans read it.

When it came time to put my SP2 slate together (which was such a nefarious master plan that it consisted of me saying, hmmm… what did I like this year, and then posting it on my blog) I remembered that story. I was also trying to get people motivated to get involved in the Hugo process, and I knew he had a lot of blog traffic. Not to mention that one of my stated goals was to demonstrate that SJWs would have a massive freak out if somebody with the wrong politics got on. So on the slate it went. I nominated Vox Day because Satan didn’t have any eligible works that period.

Not to mention that in my nefarious lockstep slate voting, I think Vox had like half as many nominations as I did, because my fans are just going to do whatever the hell they feel like. Maybe if you guys hadn’t kept WorldCon so tiny, a handful of people wouldn’t be able to violate your secret gentlemen’s agreements and get bad people on the ballot.

Imagine, for example, that there had been a “SJW” slate the same year, and that they had gotten half a dozen stories on the ballot,

We don’t have to imagine.

but one of those had been by Requires Hate? (Actually, of course, Hate was nominated for the Campbell, but under a pseudonym).The lashback would have been just as nasty. In your case, it did not help that the Day story was terrible.

Really? So where was this nasty lashback when one of your cliques nominated somebody for having a racist blog? Oh, wait… There wasn’t any. Sheesh, at least Vox Day actually wrote some fiction.  

Your public platform was all about restoring “quality” to the Hugos, and yet one of your standard bearers was the worst piece of writing on the ballot. (In my opinion, of course. All of this is opinion).

So, I let something you don’t like get onto the ballot, and that destroys every other work on the ballot, and it also destroys every other work on the ballot the next year, and I’m assuming it destroys every work on the ballot forever. Those are some harsh double standards you’ve got there.

But it doesn’t really matter, because Vox is off doing his own thing. You tried to shun a man who is incapable of being shunned. He got kicked out of the market, so went and built his own market. The more you go after him, the stronger he gets. I don’t think you guys realize that most of me and Brad’s communication with Vox consists of us asking him to be nice and not burn it all down out of spite.

Got it. Politics, race, religion, and sexual orientation, OUT. Damned good stories, IN. And for this year’s Damned Good Story standard bearer, you chose… John C. Wright SIX TIMES!!! John C. Wright, a writer famed far and wide for having no opinions on politics, race, religion, or sexual orientation, and would never dream of injecting such messages into his Damned Good Stories.

No, I actually chose Jim Butcher in novel, which is the flagship big deal award. Wright is in the other categories.

Were you upset when Mira Grant got 5 nominations in one year? (only unlike Wright, she had nominations for several years before that too), and I do believe that she can be rather politically outspoken herself (but for the record, I think she’s a damned good writer).

Because, after all, the Puppies get sad when they are made to read Message Fiction.

Why, Mr. Martin, I do believe you are paraphrasing or using hyperbole! Or you’re just putting words into my mouth, couldn’t tell. Our problem isn’t that message in fiction exists. It is when message overshadows story, or in many cases in recent years, message replaces story. Or message kills the story, and sodomizes the corpse.   

Besides, Wright wasn’t on Sad Puppies ballot six times. We had him in for novella, short story, and I believe related work, all for things which frankly, we thought were excellent. That was it. The other nominations came in from Vox’s rival Rabid Puppies slate. And it probably helped that when I Book Bombed Wright’s suggested work in our Book Bombs leading up to the close of nominations, while people were on Amazon they bought his other eligible stuff too and found they liked it.

Also, the ones on our slate aren’t preachy message fiction. From your description I’m assuming that you haven’t read it yet, because I don’t think Wright’s story will bother you with his Catholic cooties. I can’t speak for the Rabid Puppies selections because I’ve not read all of them yet, but the SP ones were good.  

So Wright is in, and who is out? James S.A. Corey. Emily St. John Mandel. John Scalzi (of course). THREE BODY PROBLEM. Joe Abercrombie. Larry Niven. Greg Bear. Daniel Abraham. John Varley. William Gibson. Joe Haldeman. Greg Benford. Lev Grossman. Stephen King. No damned good stories there. I guess. No real science fiction, no exciting fantasy, nothing entertaining or commercial, just pretentious left-wing literary crap, right?

I’m not sure how Wright’s nominations in short story, novella, and related works bumped a bunch of novels out. Apparently hyperbole is only a sin when I do it.

But you would probably find it amusing to know that at least one of the people you listed quietly support Sad Puppies, but sadly, judging by their tweets, another one I’m a fan of now believes that I’m a white supremacist.

I think everybody you listed there had a novel, so Wright bumped none of them. The SP nominations for best novel were from Jim Butcher, Marko Kloos, and Kevin J. Anderson (speaking of paying his dues, this is his 125th novel). I’m curious what makes any of the novelists you listed such a profoundly better choice than the three from Sad Puppies? Couldn’t you just as easily have said Leckie is in, and who is out, and then wrote the same list?

I have already posted about my opposition to the various NO AWARD strategies.

Thank you.

I hope that NO AWARD will not sweep the board top to bottom. My best guess right now is that it won’t, but there is a good chance that NO AWARD will take all the “All Puppy” categories, the three short fiction categories and Best Related Book. No one really knows, of course. We are all in uncharted territory here.

And if they do that, it will send a very, very clear message. My people will proceed accordingly.

If I could clap my hands and make everybody play nice, I would, but I do not have that superpower.

You are one of the most famous authors in the world. I’m a pulp writing hack nobody. If I can change the entire Hugo process just by posting about it on my blog, I don’t think you give yourself enough credit.  

But it is interesting that you talk about “scaring the hell out of authors” on your side. Fear is a big part of this. People on the other side of the fence are scared as well, and when people are afraid, they lash out.

My side has had a few years head start. It has been something of a slow burn.

Both sides here feel they are being attacked, and the war of words just seems to keep escalating, and all that can come of that is mutually assured destruction.

I don’t want to see that either, but the ball is no longer in my court. Again, like I closed with last time, you guys need to decide what the Hugos really are, an award for just one small part of fandom, or an award that represents all of fandom. Can’t have both. You guys decide. If it’s just for you guys, and we’re not welcome, fine. We’ll take it from there.

Anyways, thank you for taking the time to respond to me. We see things very differently, but it is nice to be able to discuss it. I do apologize in advance if anything I said came across as cranky, because that wasn’t my intent. It has been a long week.

Honestly, I figure we’ve said about everything we can say and should move. I spent half the day writing this and need to get back to work. If I keep you from writing your next book, YOUR FANS WILL MURDER ME.

Okay, that’s hyperbole… Maybe… A little.

Thanks

-Larry Correia

Wendell's Roughnecks shirts
Last SP post for the week, to my people, don't blame Tor
RWP
Guest
RWP
2 years 3 months ago

Sometimes reading one of Larry’s posts is like trying to take a sip from a fire hydrant. NTTAWWT.

Alex
Guest
Alex
2 years 3 months ago
Actually, Brandon Sanderson is a great example of SJWs in action. Back in 2007, right as his career was starting to take off, Sanderson wrote a blog post about Dumbledore’s homosexuality that was insufficiently pro-gay for the SJWs. He even (gasp) noted that he agreed with the LDS position on gay marriage. Consequently, you’ll find him listed as a homophobe across the Internet by the rabid left. And you’ll also note that he’s made it a point to never, never comment publicly on politics since. One of the Writing Excuses podcasts, IIRC, even addressed the topic with a strong caution… Read more »
Michael Z. Williamson
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

And yet, I support marriage equality and gays in the military, but I don’t generally get called names or attacked by conservatives. We disagree sometimes vociferously, but we make our points and move on.

TNH is apparently quote-mining my work to prove I’m a homophobe and should be shunned from SF entirely.

I just love tolerant liberalism.

S1AL
Guest
S1AL
2 years 3 months ago

Come to the Dark Side Mr. Williamson. We have cookies. And cool t’s.

eriko
Guest
eriko
2 years 3 months ago

Mister Williamson sell a lot of those cool T’s.

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago

STAL, Mad Mike is welcoming YOU to the Dark Side. He has bacon.

😀

S1AL
Guest
S1AL
2 years 3 months ago

No, no, Mad Mike is a Gray Jedi.

Akatsukami
Guest
Akatsukami
2 years 3 months ago

Sure, you say you have cookies…but you’re the Dark Side; how do I know you’re not lying?

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago

Of *course* we’re lying, we’re the *Dark Side*?

Geez, you think some people haven’t read an unsourced “tear off and print” libel campaign news story or six… 🙂

Guest
palaeomerus
2 years 3 months ago

It so happens that we DO have cookies. We stole them from orphans. You can look at them but if you want to eat one or more you must brave the arena. Or spring some kind of nefarious ambush. Or deceive everyone or install a new order via a coup. Or if you have a teleporter…

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

How is the hippie tear content holding up?

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago

It’s only the cake that’s a lie, the cookies are real.

Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

They’re DARK CHOCOLATE cookies. The best kind!

Or were those cooties? No matter; mix ’em into the cookie dough.

Achillea
Guest
Achillea
2 years 3 months ago

The hippie tear content is fine. You know I keep those tanks topped off. sheesh.

weixiaobao
Guest
weixiaobao
2 years 3 months ago

It all depend on where you post your comment. Certain youtube channel is conservative but mostly youtube is pretty liberal. On the other hand, yahoo is mainly conservative. Some of the yahoo comments I have read made me felt sick to my stomach. So what. There is a lack of empathy. Everyone want to me the victim (whites, or blacks, or purples) and want to rail against the so call main stream. To the conservative, the mainstream is liberal media. And yet to the progressive, the mainstream is all bought by corporations.

Wes S.
Guest
Wes S.
2 years 3 months ago

I remember some dark muttering from leftists during last year’s Hugo campaign, about Brandon Sanderson being Mormon and (presumably) a homophobe, including in the comments over at TorCom. Mostly it was lost in the background noise what with all the caterwauling about Sad Puppies 2 (and how gauche it was that Tor and Robert Jordan fans got the entire Wheel of Time on the ballot in the first place), but it was there.

I expect that’s one reason Brandon mostly stays out of politics.

Herb
Guest
Herb
2 years 3 months ago
They’ve been pushing the message that nobody would mind the SPs, etc. at all if only they weren’t “assholes.” I.e., you can be a conservative or a Christian/Mormon so long as you never, ever speak of your beliefs. But that doesn’t run both ways. I see shocking and offensive statements from authors in my Twitter feed daily that pass uncommented on, presumably because they fit with the views of the Left. Heck, Saladin Ahmed compared Israel to Al Qaeda and the US Supreme Court to the Iranian Ayatollahs. I only saw those tweets because other authors retweeted them.
Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Moar concern trolling, in other words.

Julaire
Guest
Julaire
2 years 3 months ago

“I wish they would mix the narrative up a little and accuse me of something interesting.”

Can I accuse you of murdering Mr. Boddy in the Transporter Room with the lightsaber?

Daddy Warpig
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Larry shot JR. This is known.

(Whoah! I’m 40 years too late with that ref.)

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Larry ALSO was the guy at the Grassy Knoll. And the shadowy figure behind John Wilkes Booth.

Also, Shakespeare got it wrong: Julius Caesar’s last words were ACTUALLY “Et tu, Larry. . . .”

Ted N
Guest
Ted N
2 years 3 months ago

Harumph. It was in the Shuttle Bay, with the hydrospanner.

Guest
palaeomerus
2 years 3 months ago

It was on the walkway across the Krell machine cooling shaft with the soft weapon. I accuse.

Alan S.
Guest
Alan S.
2 years 3 months ago

Larry got Firefly cancelled.

Herb
Guest
Herb
2 years 3 months ago

And here I thought there was nothing nastier than calling someone all the things he’s already been called.

Alex
Guest
Alex
2 years 3 months ago

Line for the lynch mob starts here.

Julaire
Guest
Julaire
2 years 3 months ago

You, sir, win, sir. I don’t believe I can top that.

Alan S.
Guest
Alan S.
2 years 3 months ago

Larry got Lucas to have Han shoot second.

Larry’s Wendell is the core idea for Jar-Jar Binks.

Larry first said “Snakes on a …” no, I can’t go there.

Don
Guest
Don
2 years 3 months ago

Damn you’re just taking all the skeletons out of the closet and proving how grotesquely horrible they actually are.

Arwen
Guest
Arwen
2 years 3 months ago

Having just been introduced to Firefly that may be the worst thing Larry has done. 😛

Javaed
Guest
Javaed
2 years 3 months ago

Some of us would thank him for that =P

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago

Burn the heretic! 😛

ravenshrike
Guest
ravenshrike
2 years 3 months ago

No, no. First we shun him. After a long enough period of shunning we trick him into Candy Mountain, knock him unconscious, and steal his kidneys. Then, and only then, do we burn him.

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago

CHARLIE! let’s go to Candy Mountain!

Patman
Guest
Patman
2 years 3 months ago

1. Watch the time stamp on this post from Alan S.
2. Check Making Light, et al.
3. See how long it takes for a post to appear about Larry getting Firefly cancelled.
4. Cackle maniacally.

Wes S.
Guest
Wes S.
2 years 3 months ago

He took the sky from me? 🙁

Fritz
Guest
Fritz
2 years 3 months ago

Oh no you didn’t! Larry…How dare you kill firefly. You inhuman monster!

Combtmissionary
Guest
Combtmissionary
2 years 3 months ago

[SPEWS FANTA ALL OVER MONITOR]

The Childlike Author
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Long was an understatement.

gibreaux
Guest
gibreaux
2 years 3 months ago

Oh come on people…. how has someone NOT responded to The Childlike Author? Fine… fine… I’ll bite that bullet.
To The Childlike Author…That’s what she said!

Leon
Guest
Leon
2 years 3 months ago

I have been following the kerfuffle to the detriment
of my own work.

Finding it an interesting time to be sitting on a
completed book of SF short stories.

Figuring out what to do with it now has become
more complicated than I thought it would be
when I started it as a winter project last year.
Interesting times.

Alex
Guest
Alex
2 years 3 months ago

You could always take a few of the short stories, try Kindle Unlimited with them, and sell the whole book separately (not under KU). From what I’ve heard, KU works with shorter fiction much better than longer. Run the numbers for yourself.

It’s an interesting time when the gatekeepers are losing more and more of their power.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Yeah, KU is great. I have a 99 cent Novelette and when someone with KU/KOLL borrows it, I get more than the cover price from the pool.

I made a whole $14 and change last year. But when I give it away for free, MAN it moves….

T.L. Knighton
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Same here.

If you’ve got low cost work, KU can make you a good bit of money.

Achillea
Guest
Achillea
2 years 3 months ago

I’m planning to put mine up on KU when I get it finished. Don’t know how big it will be yet, depends how much the characters run off with me.

david mills
Guest
david mills
2 years 3 months ago

Me too. I met Larry and Toni, and some of the Baen crew last year, got excited, and now I have short stories, 2/3rds of a novel, ideas galore. But there be sea monsters in the water.

JustAGuyOnTheWeb
Guest
JustAGuyOnTheWeb
2 years 3 months ago

In 1997, Elizabeth Moon was nominated for a Hugo in Best Novel with Baen Books.

Joe in PNG
Guest
Joe in PNG
2 years 3 months ago

And the children born on that day are now of college age…

JustAGuyOnTheWeb
Guest
JustAGuyOnTheWeb
2 years 3 months ago

So how many of Bujold’s books do we take off the list because they’re from that year or before?

I agree with you, I was just pointing out there was another one.

Craig
Guest
Craig
2 years 3 months ago

Yep, that was the last (absent two Resnick Short stories).

Between that, and Locus having only one Baen novel on their list for the last three years combined (again, Bujold)….

Michael Z. Williamson
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Larry–you forgot that Tor has new stories published this year by Requires Hate/Binyanun Sridankew or whatever her name is.

So no, they have not only not disavowed her, they’ve rewarded her with money.

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

It’s Benjamin Frank23Skidoo.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago

The old school publishing pipeline is at least 1 year long, sometimes much more.

Let’s give Tor a shot to prove itself.

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
Rants? There is no need for me to rant since everything I react to is caused by and backed up with actual documentation. A rant implies a certain level of mindless rage based on unreasoning fears. I have one issue and one issue alone: hate speech laughed off as not being that based on absurd double standards and stupid definitions. I have never used the word “cliques” nor do I care about nepotism. I have never once said or implied there are secret conspiracies. How can I know about secrets? You notice I have never commented on behind the scenes… Read more »
Daddy Warpig
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Wait… I got called out as a “violent bigot”?

Presumably there’s some evidence of…

NOPE!

My regard for the SJW clique grows daily.

(Yes, I WILL use that word. Especially after Freer this morning.)

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Self-defensive words against random SJW libel is trigger-worthy violence … their headmates say so!

Jordan S. Bassior
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

The SJW’s apparently think that harsh words = violence, when it’s done against them; and that even violence is merely harsh words, when done against those who disagree with them.

David L. Burkhead
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

The SJW’s apparently think that harsh words = violence,

You don’t even need that. Simple disagreement is sufficient.

(Incidentally, my email provider was down since yesterday afternoon so I’m only getting these notifications now.)

Combtmissionary
Guest
Combtmissionary
2 years 3 months ago

Correction: Failure to endorse hard enough = violence.

david mills
Guest
david mills
2 years 3 months ago

1. your personality is set when you are nine years old.
2. you always think other people are the same as you.

JP
Guest
JP
2 years 3 months ago

Really? Because I’m not very much like I was at 9.
I also don’t have a problem believing that other people are different from me.

Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

It’s true for SJWs, who tend to regard the world through the same lens as do 9 year olds. (Not joking. 9YOs are still young enough to believe in the “Mommy, fix it!!” theory of universal justice.)

See also my ‘failure to mature’ theory which I posted in another thread.

Guest
hlvogel
2 years 3 months ago
I can’t speak to point number one, but point number two is only true for people who have no clue and no imagination. I never assume people are the same as me unless we’re talking about very specific areas of interest and a setting which indicates a similar interest. For instance, anyone I see playing an RPG (or playing in an RPG I’m running — I’m talking pencil and paper here, not video games) I’m ready to assume they share my interest in RPGs. If I see them reading a science fiction book I’ll assume they share my interest in… Read more »
James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Really? I guess that’s why SJW morons spread Southern Jim Crow over all of history. It’s actually called provincialism, or parochialism. SJWs actually think there’s such a thing as a “PoC” person in Nepal.

Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

My personal fave, from around 25 years ago, is when on the NBC Nightly News I saw Tom Brokaw refer to a black native resident of Africa as an “African American”.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

I’m not sure how you manage to keep track and index all of this stuff. It’s almost scary.

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

It’s nothing like that. It’s no different than bloggers running a “find and replace” on their own site. There is no index. These people have hive-minds which drone like insects. They are their own set of keywords, like when someone keywords a photo on a stock photo site so clients can find it.

Wes S.
Guest
Wes S.
2 years 3 months ago

I’m thinking that on a future episode of A&E’s “Hoarders,” we’re going to see tearful friends and family members begging James May to pare down/part with his massive collection of SJW hate quotes.

😛

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
There’s no hoard. I data-mine my own writing. The vast majority of this so-called “hoard” is actually just sitting on the internet. The “hoard” is the vast collection of insane rants the internet never forgets. It’s not like it’s an act of genius to Google “mansplaining” and an influential name in SFF. It’s no different than anyone who wants to read about anything. Google “Mamluk Sultans” and “1001 Arabian Nights” and then start reading. What it’s really about is not doing what these assholes do at the Guardian and The Atlantic. I’m not going to say stuff I can’t back… Read more »
Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago
On the bright side, as repetitive as you get, at least you write better than Jemsin. I think that was the turning point for me, to un-Gafiate, when it dawned on me that the clumsy hot mess of an SF novel that everyone was talking about (and trust me when an SF novel filters down into the heart of Mundania, you know there’s an ungodly amount of “push”), the one I gave up on after half a dozen tries (and I’m a book slut) was that Jemsin? Huh. And half suspecting that The Middleman got cancelled because of the creator’s… Read more »
Dave Freer
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
(dryly) I doubt if George is better at foretelling the future than those who never dreamed Sad Puppies would even exist, let alone get 1 book on the slate, a mere three years ago. Maybe you won’t ever get Hugo, because you didn’t play nice, as he says. I may also be a terrible soothsayer, although I’ve looked at enough entrails. My bet is he hasn’t thought about what that challenge will do to your fans. And because I am a bad man who notices details these are the people he thinks got excluded: ” and who is out? James… Read more »
Ron
Guest
Ron
2 years 3 months ago

Man he’d be done with GOT if he wrote his books like he blogs about you.

Brian
Guest
Brian
2 years 3 months ago
“You have lived in a house made of gold bars since this has been a thing, so you might not be aware of how the Flaming Rage Nozzles of Tolerance operate. Their actual status in the publishing world is irrelevant, because the goal of slander is to toss out as much as possible to see what sticks. Throw out some racism there, sexism here, a little misogyny on top, complete strangers hear it, don’t think about it too hard, and then for the rest of your life your name is connected to these vile things in their minds.” I thought… Read more »
The Writer In Black
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

So, Mr. Martin has to ask who’s calling Larry a liar and so forth?

Could he think if a more definitive way to admit that he’s spouting off without even trying to see what’s going on?

Guest
2 years 3 months ago
“Could he think if a more definitive way to admit that he’s spouting off without even trying to see what’s going on?” I can think of one: using ME of all people as the example of someone who puts a lot of messages in my fiction. I have openly boasted that I put no messages in my fiction, so that no one can tell what I wrote when I was an atheist or what when I was a Christian. Whether I have succeed or failed at my attempt to hide my personal opinions and get out of the way of… Read more »
David L. Burkhead
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

I didn’t see a lot of Catholicism in the stories in “Awake in the Night Lands”.

Just sayin’.

Tarl
Guest
Tarl
2 years 3 months ago

If there’s a message in Count to a Trillion, I missed it. Guess I should look harder. Since you’re a Christian, i.e. a racist misogynist homophobe, there must be a racist misogynist homophobe message in there somewhere…

(that was sarcasm, in case it isn’t obvious)

BigFire
Guest
BigFire
2 years 3 months ago

As a lapsed Buddhist (currently unaffiliated), I’m not the least put off by the world in Count To A Trillion. Albeit, I understand that Mr. Wright have to severely curtail the Witches in the next two novels since the real life counterpart is so extreme that they’ll be unbelievable in his world.

DB
Guest
DB
2 years 3 months ago

Are you asking us to believe that it’s not possible to tell that “Yes, Virginia, There Is a Santa Claus” was written by a Christian??

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago

Poor fellow. He actually imagines that failing carrying water for the Concern that Deeply Concerned Goodpeople write about isn’t a message.

Why that’s the vilest, most hateful message fic of all, and if you won’t join me in the chorus of denunciation, all the Goodpeople will make sure everyone knows you’re just as bad.

Suburbanbanshee
Guest
Suburbanbanshee
2 years 3 months ago

Yup. Because if you really want to know who’s been calling Larry a liar, you go to a search engine, or you start looking around.

Interestingly, it looks like a lot of older dates on archived sites aren’t showing up right now, even with benign search terms. I wonder if search engines have been changing their algorithms lately, or if some older sites have gone away.

JDJ
Guest
JDJ
2 years 3 months ago

Naw, GRRM is saying, “I’m not calling you a liar, Larry, but please prove someone actually called you a liar!” How many times can GRRM cast aspersions on Larry’s credibility?

Alex
Guest
Alex
2 years 3 months ago

Google has started down-scoring sites that aren’t mobile friendly, with an eye toward eventually de-listing them. Similar to what they did with Flash sites a few years back.

(Hint, hint, Larry. May want to have your Correiatech guys look into a responsive [mobile-friendly] WordPress template.)

Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
I think it’s that he can’t actually see it, because this kind of hate-spewing is the everyday language of the left. Case in point, there’s a hatefest going on Another Forum[tm] and I called for looking fairly at both sides and that if you’re speaking in goodwill, don’t assume the other person speaks in hate. This was decried as a personal attack, while all around me were mindless repetitions of the current party line. I think they honestly don’t hear themselves anymore, because it’s like anything that’s become ordinary — when everyone does it, it has no impact. But when… Read more »
Guest
palaeomerus
2 years 3 months ago
Wow. Mr. Martin spent most of that blatantly trying to gas-light Mr. Correia into thinking he imagined being called a ruinous evil backwards shitlord and trying to remove Mr. Correia’s license to use or invent clever terms to mock the tendencies and flaws of his would be tormentors. Worse Mr. Martin keeps harping on the historical glory days of the Hugo’s while ignoring that many of those old timers would be in the shitlord/pissbaby penalty box today, or that some of the more froth-mouthed SMOFs openly speak of being embarrassed by the old masters, seeking to wipe away their malevolent… Read more »
James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Yeah, cuz I personally helped sack Tenochtitlan.

That Cortes – what a guy. Pretty frisky with the gals if you know what I mean. His breath smelled like a goat’s.

Guest
palaeomerus
2 years 3 months ago

Well, to be fair, in a past life, or rather animist manifestation, I was a sentient planetoid with a quasi-phallic shape that crashed into that planet with the sessile walrus-made-of-a-cheese-like-substance creatures slumping all over it. Since I was unable to guide myself or produce any sort of thrust being only able to think and exist, I tend to blame gravity for that collision, but we all know Newton was as patriarchal as they comes so…

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Cortez, and a large army of natives who were sick and tired of being used as herd animals by the cannibalistic Aztecs, crushed an empire based on rounding up victims from nearby tribes, sacrificing them to the sun god, and then eating them afterwards.

The tribes Cortez recruited were damned happy to be promoted from livestock to serfs.

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Cortes really liked bowling.

Chris
Guest
Chris
2 years 3 months ago

“If I could clap my hands and make everybody play nice, I would, but I do not have that superpower.”

If GRRM said, “Every day that someone posts something unkind about an SF author on the internet is a day I will not work on The Winds of Winter”, I bet a lot of people would get more polite real fast.

T.L. Knighton
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

That would probably work, but since they’re already saying it’s Larry’s fault that the next book is coming out, they’d just blame us for it anyways.

We were asking for it. Just standing there, looking all puppy-like.

Andrew
Guest
Andrew
2 years 3 months ago

While I hope not, I’m betting Brandon Sanderson get’s another Relief Pitcher job.

Guest
palaeomerus
2 years 3 months ago

Paging Dr Pangloss, Paging Dr. Wormtongue, please pick up the non-white, because white is racist, courtesy phone at the front desk in the lobby.

Achillea
Guest
Achillea
2 years 3 months ago

From now on, whenever I see the acronym ‘PoC,’ I’m going to read it as ‘Phone of Color.’

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

I always oppress my beige colored phone whenever possible.

Combtmissionary
Guest
Combtmissionary
2 years 3 months ago

Anybody else feel like getting an Olive rotary dial phone and smashing it, just because they’re EEEEEEvil? 😀

William Underhill
Guest
William Underhill
2 years 2 months ago

My phone is black.

OH NOES I SAID THE BAD WORD I MUST NOW REND MY GARMENTS IN PUBLIC

Feh.

Kain Yusanagi
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Good read, thank you Larry.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

When will Larry put these up on Kindle for $0.99 each?

Jared Anjewierden
Guest
Jared Anjewierden
2 years 3 months ago

Yep. Decision time. Is the Hugo for the best of SFF, or is it for one small con. If the former I will keep paying my money in to have my voice heard. If not, my money goes elsewhere and they become irrelevant to me and many others.

Faceh
Guest
Faceh
2 years 3 months ago

It is just that simple.

They can’t continue to claim its the best of Scifi as picked by scifi fandom and yet OPERATE as a small, insular clique.

They want the prestige without actually accepting the implications of the position.

M. Kupari
Guest
M. Kupari
2 years 3 months ago
You know what part of the problem is? Liberals don’t think they have ideology. They think they’re just pragmatists. They’re full of shit, mind you. Everyone who has an opinion about anything that matters has an ideology. It’s nothing more than you combined values and beliefs. But the left thinks they’re above all that, that they just want to do what works. Their lack of self-awareness is sometimes hilarious. It makes them nearly incapable of spotting any kind of left-wing bias, because they think that their beliefs are just “common sense”. Mr. Martin is a fine example of this. The… Read more »
JustAGuyOnTheWeb
Guest
JustAGuyOnTheWeb
2 years 3 months ago

Your first paragraph makes things a lot clearer for me.

Thanks.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

If they had to think about what they “Believe” they’d discover all the contradictions and inconsistencies, and that would bother them quite a bit. Thus they don’t, and they get quite annoyed when we try to point them out for them.

William Underhill
Guest
William Underhill
2 years 2 months ago

Thinking is not required, Citizen. It is doubleplus ungood.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago
Please, the problem of not questioning ones assumptions and experiences and realizing that they are not shared by all people is hardly unique to liberal ideologues. I have experienced this first hand from Southern Baptists, Tea Partiers, CHORFs, Atheists, Liberals and Conservatives. Questioning ones assumptions is hard and constant work. Liberals Think…. the left thinks…… If you don’t want to be treated as a single unified group with everyone on your end of the spectrum (like Vox Day) I suggest you try not treating everyone else on the other end of the spectrum. Its not hard. I don’t take issues… Read more »
Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

In actuality, stereotypes exist for a reason. They demonstrate the general characteristics that the stereotyped group exhibits. Do all members have all those characteristics? Of course not. Do those characteristics exist in the majority of those in the stereotyped group? Definitely.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago
While this is true in some situations, once politics and ideology get involved, the stereotypes become more like caricatures. This is because so many people have an interest in painting “the other” to be horrific. They do it to build their own power. They do it because they enjoy putting others down. They do it because they can’t stand disagreement. This happens on both side. The net result is that the “stereotype” winds up representing not the typical but the worst ends of the spectrum. Your average liberal is not a self-hating bleeding heart who can’t function for all due… Read more »
Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

I think you need to research the meaning of “stereotype.”

Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

Oh, and by the way, your “stereotypes” that claim that conservatives are racist and liberals are tolerant aren’t true stereotypes, as they are quite at odds with reality, while most true stereotypes are descriptive of the stereotyped groups in general.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

No true stereotype huh….. My argument is that all stereotypes aren’t true. My argument is in fact that “stereotypes” can be at odds with reality. Your opening statement left no room for that.

We have also descended into the logical fallacy of no true scotsman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

We don’t have a problem with non-stereotypical leftists … in fact, we nominated a bunch of them.

The stereotypical leftists are the ones whining the loudest about Sad Puppies.

MarkKB
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
Gererally, there’s two problems at hand when it comes to stereotyping, though. The first is that groups on the same ‘side’ of the political spectrum are often conflated together. Going with AnotherTruFan’s examples, all too often I hear people attribute the most illiberal things to liberals, because they think ‘liberal’ = ‘the Left’. The second is whether or not it’s “the majority” in the first place. In some cases it’s really just a small band of really loud people. In other cases people make assumptions based on the people they’ve encountered online, which is often a result of non-random circumstances… Read more »
Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Precision in speech is always good.

To be precise, the people we are pointing and laughing at are the ones who’s opinions and actions fit the CHORF-set general description.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago
Nope. Because the left live in an echo chamber, and the right, unless they go completely off the grid (in which case how would you know anything about their assumptions?) cannot. The mass media: news, book, movies, radio, TV, magazines, comics… All show us over and over and over what are the beliefs, assumptions, and values of the left. Only on the Internet, can one indulge in a conservative thought bubble. And even here, at a purportedly right wing site, not so much. So we on the right are all truly, madly, deeply aware of how our starting premises differ… Read more »
M. Kupari
Guest
M. Kupari
2 years 3 months ago
I stand by what I said. Everyone does that, yes. However, not all worldviews insist that THEIR view is merely pragmatism. This quote is from Eric Alterman, writing in the 150th anniversary issue of “The Nation” magazine: “The primary difference between liberalism and conservatism, at least in theory, is that the latter is an ideology and the former isn’t. Conservatism, as Milton Friedman argued, posits that “freedom in economic arrangements is itself a component of freedom broadly understood, so economic freedom is an end in itself.” Liberalism, however, as Lionel Trilling observed, “is a large tendency rather than a concise… Read more »
Sean
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Larry,

I can lurk no more. Should you care to amend, Dave Freer presents a superb breakdown of how very badly the last 10 years or so have drifted to the left. I posted the same link over at grrm.livejournal.com, but I don’t know if it ever made it through moderation, and even if it did, it would have been deeply buried in the post, “Where’s the beef?”

http://madgeniusclub.com/2014/08/25/a-very-surprised-looking-sperm-whale-and-a-bowl-of-petunias/

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago

Larry – that closing line? Not hyperbole.

If you end up delaying the next book in ASoFaI, I will murder you. Well, your kneecaps. If I can jump that high. 😉

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Careful, we bought him a Tetsubo.

James the Wanderer
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
I’m going to be glad to escape some of this; work is calling me to go out of state for a while, and I’ll probably be too busy to pay attention to all this for about six months, off and on. Larry, you have my sympathy, support (financial when cashflow allows) and respect for not going postal on some of those people. I wish you the best while I’m gone, and hope you manage to convince some fence-sitters to use their brains as well as their ears and eyes; not everyone who says they are for justice is, and sometimes… Read more »
Brad R. Torgersen
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
I beat this analogy to death, but it’s the best one I’ve got. Trying to explain to a liberal that there is liberal bias in a think — such as the publishing industry, or the Hugo awards in particular — is like trying to explain to a fish that the water is wet. The fish just stares at you goggle-eyed and exclaims, “But sir, that is the nature of the universe!” The great majority of America’s liberals think they truly do represent the “middle” and that conservatives are this crazy, deranged bunch of fringe-dwellers. Then they have the nerve to… Read more »
Darrell
Guest
Darrell
2 years 3 months ago
What is particularly odd is that by and large it seems that political liberals enthusiastically embrace concepts such “checking your privilege”, micro aggressions, never blaming victims, and victims of abuse (psychological, economic, physical, etc) often ignoring or even hiding abusive situations because of the lack of power that such situations present. However, when these concepts bump up against a person whose testimony that they do not like they appear to completely ignore all of these previously held convictions. Either micro aggressions are real and problematic or they are not. Either privilege blinds you to experiences of people radically different from… Read more »
AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

I actually pointed this out over on GRRM’s LJ already.

http://grrm.livejournal.com/420090.html?thread=21110010#t21110010

Trying to explain to many (but certainly not all) Tea Partiers that Fox News has a conservative slant can be a really tough sell as well. Getting people to challenge their preconceptions and look at something from another viewpoint is HARD. For all people. Not just liberals or conservatives.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

With all due respect, check your meds.

I am Tea Party member, and I know that Fox News slants Right.

Everyone knows it, and that is why the Left hates Fox with their typical, predictable, boring yet all-consuming and mouth-frothing irrational hatred.

I have met rightwingers who regret that Fox is not more to the right, or more solidly or more predictably, but, no, I have never once met a Tea Party member who said Fox was not on our side.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago
Really, you are going to start a post against me with an ad hominem attack by implying that I need meds? I linked where I critiqued GRRM for accusing Larry in the post you responded to. I am clearly not here to tell Puppies that they are terrible. I freely agree with many of their observations. I am here to try and forge a common language between the Fans on both sides of me so that we can have an honest discussion about things without descending into insults and attacks. First off, I freely admitted that some tea partiers acknowledge… Read more »
Suburbanbanshee
Guest
Suburbanbanshee
2 years 3 months ago

I’m sure there are some people who also believe that all Fox newswomen are naturally blonde, and that the lack of redheads and brunettes is totally a coincidence.

These people are not considered the majority, or even the preponderance, of viewers. One does not normally mention such people as an example of normal majority opinion. .

Most Fox viewers treat it as a running joke, or an annoying Murdochism, but not as an act of nature or a reflection of the percentage of blonde women in the US.

Lea
Guest
Lea
2 years 3 months ago

thought that their viewpoints were obviously correct and needed no justification

Everybody thinks their viewpoints are correct, that’s generally why they hold them.

My only real concern is if people are capable of politely having conversation about differences of opinion or if they scream insults at you and run away lest they hear any badthink.

Joshua
Guest
Joshua
2 years 3 months ago

To be fair, Fox News is the arm of the Establishment Republicans in much the same way that most of the rest of the media are the arm of the Democrats/Marxists.

To the extent that Tea Partiers represent the third great school of thought in American politics, the classical liberal of the Thomas Jefferson mold, they don’t really have a media arm, unless you dig a bit deeper. Maybe Breitbart is at least sympathetic, if not necessarily as closely allied.

A.Nagy
Guest
A.Nagy
2 years 3 months ago

The Blaze(Radio/Tv) is more tea partyish. For the Record is pretty darn great investigative journalism.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago
Tea partier here. Also, embedded in a “purple” populist rural community where Tea Partiers both left and right (surprise! There are both. If you got you info from primary sources instead of the echo chamber, you’d know that) all consider Fox news right wing. Now some of the Fox crew are too lefty libertine, and some are too squishy RINO/establishment republican, and some aren’t libertarian enough.. And compared to the US as a whole they’re just barely center right. But compared to all the other TV news sites: conservative. I’m going to have to call BS on this claim that… Read more »
Stan Bundy
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
ATF: You’re kind of lacking in historical perspective. The reason why so many papers (especially the small ones on the local level) have so many political terms in their names (the occasional Republic/Republican, the MUCH more common Democrat, Progressive, etc.) was that prior to WWII, political party affiliation was the primary reason many of them existed. The false notion of “impartiality”, and the competition of radio and TV news, eventually stripped the markets down to where most locales no longer had room for competition. The only place I can think of that still has both left and right newspapers is… Read more »
Achillea
Guest
Achillea
2 years 3 months ago
Trying to explain to many (but certainly not all) Tea Partiers that Fox News has a conservative slant can be a really tough sell as well. As various others have said, with varying degrees of civility (more on that anon), virtually nobody needs to have it ‘explained’ that Fox News has a conservative slant. I suspect where you encountered the pushback was when you tried to leap from that to ‘and therefore is a bunch of lying liars who lie.’ This ‘Faux News’ notion is an article of faith on the left. Blind, unreasoning faith — an unchallenged preconception, in… Read more »
AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

You don’t need to convince me that their are rabid leftists, rude leftists, or leftists that are so far into a different dimension that physics seems to work differently there. Unless I picked very carefully on your drinking challenge, I would not need a designated driver, I would need an ambulance.

I can say the same thing about many on the right.

windsong
Guest
windsong
2 years 3 months ago
This is something I’ve been running into as well, and it drives me a little crazy with how illogical the thinking is. We all have biases. Every one of us. This is not necessarily a bad thing. It can be–especially if a person refuses to see acknowledge their biases. Even bringing up objective facts (timelines, for instance) isn’t good enough. Either they ascribe motives they would have to be psychic to know or they ignore them and fall back on rhetorics. Lamenting that some are too set in their way of thinking to pay any attention to the facts. :/… Read more »
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

“We all have biases. Every one of us.”

It is only your bias that makes you think so.

All men are sinners, but not all men have biases. If that were true, no reasoning could be trusted.

windsong
Guest
windsong
2 years 3 months ago
I would say we have our biases (even if it’s something as benign as a preference for strawberry ice cream over chocolate) because we’re human. As you say, we’re all sinners, and I would add, at this point in time imperfect. (Perfection being the value for a creation that is not yet finished.) There exists pure truth and knowledge that is independent of human foibles and perception. Maybe my use of the term ‘bias’ was too broad. Trying to think through a headache right now, so a better term eludes me at the moment. 🙂 Regardless, so much of this… Read more »
windsong
Guest
windsong
2 years 3 months ago

Although ice cream isn’t a good way to illustrate bias. >.<

Meredith L. Patterson
Guest
Meredith L. Patterson
2 years 3 months ago
“not all men have biases” What? No. There is no human mind immune to recency bias, the availability heuristic, the curse of knowledge, and all the other cognitive biases that flesh is heir to. They are artifacts of our biological organisation, shortcuts that the mud that is Man takes out of necessity in the face of how very much more information there is in creation than he can process from moment to moment. Even so, we do trust reasoning, and we can. Cognitive biases are effort-saving measures, and we can consciously resist them if we so choose and have time… Read more »
Joshua
Guest
Joshua
2 years 3 months ago
“We all have biases. Every one of us.” So what? Are you saying that nobody is able to come to conclusions based on a due consideration of the evidence? Or that if you do, it then becomes a “bias?” That’s a meaningless statement. Stop acceding to your opponents attempt to define terms for you. Conservatives in general, have been way to accommodating, and allowing liberals to always frame the discussion in the manner of their choosing, and then conservatives spend all of their efforts on meaningless defense. Don’t you get it? We’re in an existential struggle for the very soul… Read more »
windsong
Guest
windsong
2 years 3 months ago
No. I was acknowledging something that a lot of people (who tend to be extremely progressive) don’t see. Although, looking back with a clearer head, I recognize that bias was not quite the word I was looking for. Yes, I do believe people can come to conclusions based on due consideration of the evidence. (I do not consider that biased.) If everyone did that, it would be awesome. That’s not what I was talking about. I was speaking specifically about people who are so lost in their own bias that they can’t see it. (I haven’t been arguing, per se,… Read more »
deadcenter
Guest
deadcenter
2 years 3 months ago

“But no one I know voted for Nixon.” – Pauline Kael

Geodkyt
Guest
Geodkyt
2 years 3 months ago
Exactly. What’s funny is (as others have noted), liberals *have* a mantra to describe this effect – ‘splaining. Mansplaining, whitesplaining, etc. I frankly hate that construction, because it gets abused as a cop out to end an argument as often as I have seen it used appropriately (that is, when actually justified) these days. However, since the purpose of language is communication, and you cannot communicate without common language (be that as crude as a point and grunt), it fits here… Mr. Martin, simply because you do not personally experience something that wouldn’t be directed at you anyway, and just… Read more »
Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Hugosplaining… it’s a word, now…

T.L. Knighton
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
Recently, the New York Times ran an article about a woman’s lawsuit against a Silicon Valley venture capitalist firm for sexual bias. She lost the suit. Yet, the Times article included numerous quotes about what this first allegedly did, etc…yet not one quote showing the other side of the coin. There had to be more, because she lost, but they only presented one side of the story. It was such a hack job of biased reporting that I didn’t think I’d see the like…until I saw the Entertainment Weekly story a short time later. Yet most liberals with argue that… Read more »
James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

They have the certainty of fanaticism and the intolerance that goes with that. They cannot be reasoned into accepting a level playing field for mutual discourse and understanding. We speak two completely different languages in a country fundamentally dedicated to having one principled language with which to sort these things out when it comes to racial and sexual groupings.

Guest
Joe Miller
2 years 3 months ago

Mr. Torgersen

Thank you for that list of books you posted during all this. Because of it I have bought and read and enjoyed books by people I’d never considered before. Again thank you and Mr Correia for all these new (to me) authors and stories.

RKW
Guest
RKW
2 years 3 months ago
I recall one conversation with a liberal friend from years ago. We were having a disagreement about something, I don’t recall what, and at one point he said (paraphrasing, obviously,) “the problem is that no matter how much evidence I show you, you could still just discount it because you don’t want to believe it because of your biases.” I responded with “I’m willing to admit that as long as you admit you’re susceptible to the exact same problem. I could show you equally convincing evidence from equally prestigious sources and you could just discount it because of your biases.”… Read more »
AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

No you can’t. Thank you for not extending this from your one liberal friend to the rest of us on the left of the spectrum.

Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

But it is a characteristic that is quite common among the left.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

Seriously, what were you trying to do here except start a fight?

Some people are crazy and you can’t argue with them. This is true. This is true for every permutation of every alignment of any thought ever.

Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

I’m responding quite calmly. From observation, those on the left are almost always unwilling to examine their premises, and assume their own moral and factual superiority as articles of faith.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

Let me ask you a question. Am I doing it now? If so how? I am honestly interested.

Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

So far as I can see, you’re not doing it at this moment. Which doesn’t change anything about the argument RKW made, of course.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago
Let’s see if I can break this down. First of all, I’m going to have to define “bias.” You could mean by the term a worldview, a working model of how the world works, which is unexceptional. The older, more experienced, and better read you get, the better your model gets. OR you mean a type of prejudice; an unexamined belief that informs your worldview. I’m going with the latter. 1. You claim that every one has a bias, I.e. At least one or more of this kind of prejudice. 2. You will acknowledge that the wider one’s experience: of… Read more »
David William Lawson
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

First, I’m a big fan of both GRRM and Correia. That said, does it seem like GRRM is punching down? I thought punching down was verboten. I’m so confused.

Zsuzsa
Guest
Zsuzsa
2 years 3 months ago
By SJW standards, he certainly is. He’s a White male telling a (forgive me, Mr. Correia) Person of Color that his experiences are illegitimate and that he didn’t really experience the discrimination he thinks he did. Flip GRRM and Correia’s politics and this is a classic case that the SJWs would jump all over. Fortunately for GRRM, we don’t play that game. From the perspective of “big name author picking on smaller writer,” I don’t think so. GRRMs initial post was on the Hugo controversy in general, something that he definitely has an interest in. Larry responded, then GRRM responded… Read more »
Jim Little
Guest
Jim Little
2 years 3 months ago
“I was also clear that I thought [the Hugos] were supposed to be a prestigious big deal, and not just a popularity contest for a couple little groups of insiders. ” ** Wright is nominated for 6 Hugos this year. Vox Day is nominated for 2. All 8 of those nominations were the result of Vox Day openly stacking the deck, to benefit himself and/or his publishing company. – If you are against “popularity contests” to benefit a “little group” of people, shouldn’t Vox Day’s nominations have outraged you? Where’s your outrage? But no: “As for Rabid Puppies, there is… Read more »
Wilson
Guest
Wilson
2 years 3 months ago

I guess they weren’t that little.

Faceh
Guest
Faceh
2 years 3 months ago
Vox day is completely honest about his intentions. Outrage is exactly what he WANTS. The whole problem with the previous status quo was lack of honesty and openness. Either the Hugos are a silly game dominated by cliques or they actually represent the broader fandom. The SP position is that they are the former. Vox Day’s actions actually show that to be truth. Now if the ‘other side’ will simply acknowledge that the problem has existed for years now, there can be a conversation on what to do moving forward. Instead, that side is interested only in attacking with lies… Read more »
windsong
Guest
windsong
2 years 3 months ago

This is a huge part of the deal for me. Generally speaking, I may not agree with you (general you) and I might even find some of your views deplorable, but I will have more respect for you if you’re upfront and honest about it than someone who hides or lies about their true intentions.

There is no honor in deceit.

S1AL
Guest
S1AL
2 years 3 months ago

1) Vox is accused of gaming the Hugo’s

2) Vox is insulted by this accusation

3) Vox declares he’s going to game the Hugo’s

4) Vox games the Hugo’s

5) Most of us laugh at your consternation

People really just DO NOT get it.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

If people of the right were as violent and totalitarian as the SJWs accuse us of being … well, the results would be horrific for them.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago
I voted for Wright more than 6 times and I only voted 1/2 the puppy slate. That’s because I am a fan girl. Sad puppies had two effects. It let fen like me know we could have a voice, and it expose wright’s superb short stories (most of which are more than Hugo worthy) to a much wider audience, who agree completely with me, if the goodreads and amazon reviews are any judge. We wright fen are positively thrilled at his overdue and thoroughly deserved noms and I don’t understand why you insist on pissing all over my happiness. Do… Read more »
Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

I think you’ve hit on something — that some of the “unlikely” nominees resulted from a sudden gush of fandom rather than some nefarious vote-mongering.

Doctor Locketopus
Guest
Doctor Locketopus
2 years 3 months ago

Vox didn’t “nominate” anyone.

The voters did that.

“And you’re supposedly mad at Scalzi… why?”

Oh, I get it. Behind-the-scenes campaigning to get more Hugo nominations in ten years than Arthur C. Clarke got in fifty is perfectly okay. It’s only when it’s done in public in a single year that it becomes bad.

Interesting moral calculus you have there.

William Underhill
Guest
William Underhill
2 years 2 months ago

You’re the one who has a problem with it, so why does Mr. Correia have to be the one who’s outraged?

Khazlek
Guest
Khazlek
2 years 3 months ago

James SA Corey is two people, Daniel Abraham, and Ty Franck.

JSchuler
Guest
JSchuler
2 years 3 months ago

“It’s history that gives the Hugos their prestige”

In common parlance, Mr Martin, this is called “resting on one’s laurels,” and it is the beginning of institutional rot. It’s not something that you brag about. “Oh, we gave an award to Arthur C. Clarke once” is not a reason why we should take the nomination of the next variation of “Identity group-slang really likes contemporary cultural phenomenon” seriously.

Jim Little
Guest
Jim Little
2 years 3 months ago
BTW, if I do vote “No Award” in each and every category, you won’t have to guess at my message. I’ll tell you now. It will be because, in my opinion: (a) the nominations were corrupted this year by the open, self-interested manipulation of Vox Day, and (b) I won’t stand for corruption to win even the slightest of victories. My actions will have very little to do with what the Sad Puppies did or didn’t do. It will be all about Vox Day. As an aside, (c): I do not agree with you that in previous years, noms were… Read more »
James the Wanderer
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

” or indeed, in my mind, any manipulation.”
(1) I did not observe any manipulation
(2) Therefore, no manipulation occurred.
(3) I need a way to dismiss John Wright’s 6x noms without diminishing Mia Grant’s 5x
As a free bonus,
” I won’t stand for corruption to win even the slightest of victories.”
(1) I politically dislike SP
(2) I will find an excuse to NA them so that they cannot win if possible, without regard for the content of their nominee’s stories

Great, we know where you stand. Do you need a mirror to see how biased and prejudiced you are?

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

I personally don’t think they vote for corrupt selfish intentions but because they are an unknown combination of flat out racists and naive do-gooders. The point is that from the outside it looks the same – like one giant KKK or White Privilege Conference.

Fuck it. Fuck the whole thing. Last year was a disgrace. The Nebulas too. Why not call it the “Anti-Male Honkies Award”? That way maybe so many people wouldn’t be duped, because that’s what it was.

Santa
Guest
Santa
2 years 3 months ago

The nominated works made it on to the list within the rules. To vote NO AWARD without reading the works and judging them on their merits, would show a complete lack of ethics.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Doing so is within the rules, and they have a right to do so.

If they manage to No Award everything, they will have made a statement, but not the one they intended.

And we will tailor our response to that statement. This is not a problem, but an opportunity.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago
So, let me see if I understand your position. We are complaining that the Hugos have been manipulated for years by people who vote for the political correctness of the stories rather than the quality of the stories. We were called liars and told to field our own slate of writers, to get more voters to vote, and so on. We did so, and won beyond any expectation of success, so great it shocked even us. So to prove your point that it was wrong of us to do the exact thing we were told to do to influence the… Read more »
Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

Of course it will prove you right. But as many have said, the left is generally incapable of recognizing its blatant (to everyone else) biases.

tweell
Guest
tweell
2 years 3 months ago

And the No Awards will also prove Vox Day right. Then Rabid Puppies will No Award EVERYTHING.

Wes S.
Guest
Wes S.
2 years 3 months ago

The Hugo chicanery has already started, if Vox is right:

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2015/04/john-c-wright-work-disqualified.html#comment-form

Seems one of John C. Wright’s stories was DQ’d from the Hugo ballot on a dubious technicality – it was “illegal” because JCW posted it on his blog – but when John Scalzi actually self-published one of his stories this same technicality curiously never came into play.

Must have been another one of those sooper-sekrit “gentlemen’s agreements,” I suppose.

Apparently liberal trolls are also infesting Amazon’s reviews again.

Vlad G
Guest
Vlad G
2 years 3 months ago
Actaully I always thought that Mira Grant is possibly one of the best examples of the awards being based on things other than storytelling Consider the amount and types of nominations for Mira Grant and compare them to the nominations for Seanan Mcguire. I maybe missing a few nomination but all of Mcguires nomination are for shorter stories or related work while Grants nominations are primarily for best novel and in one case novellette. This is odd as they are the SAME BLOODY PERSON and Mcguire has a new novel in print at least every 6 month under her own… Read more »
Khazlek
Guest
Khazlek
2 years 3 months ago

McGuire invented Grant so that readers in the two markets would know what to buy.

McGuire struck gold with the Feed series, and if you haven’t tried them, they aren’t just about zombies, but also about the way their presence remade the world.

I never tried the other McGuire until she got McGuire stories on the Hugo ballot. I didn’t find them very interesting at all.

Masterdude
Guest
Masterdude
2 years 3 months ago

“Both sides here feel they are being attacked, and the war of words just seems to keep escalating, and all that can come of that is mutually assured destruction.”

Why would the sad puppies side get “destroyed” when they are the side with the momentum and getting stronger every year? More and more people will be involved in Worldcon and choosing the Hugo awards, and standards will rise; isn’t that great news for the either SF/F community?

Brian Niemeier
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
“…I think my own ‘Where’s the Beef?’ blog post pretty well demolished the Sad Puppy claims.” This is the false-to-facts assertion which, contra Mr. Martin, demolishes his whole special pleading-fueled spiel. Social and artistic movements don’t happen for no reason, Mr. Martin. Try Larry’s thought experiment, and chalk his experience in Reno up to a psychotic episode. Now explain the 350+ people who voted for SP/RP nominees. Were they hallucinating too? Explain the backlash when SP2 only got one nominee per category. Who complained and why is a matter of public record. Blaming Vox just makes Larry’s point for him.… Read more »
Rich
Guest
Rich
2 years 3 months ago

I *still* say: “Screw the Hugos. Make way for the Wendells!” Sooner or later, it will catch on, be the mark of Allfandom Excellence, and produce a tradition that promotes inclusiveness and supports true diversity in fiction.

Andrew
Guest
Andrew
2 years 3 months ago

I would opt for “The Laika Award” if pushed.

Combtmissionary
Guest
Combtmissionary
2 years 3 months ago

Larry could always create the “Toru’s.” Sounds all-inclusive and pretty tolerant to me. 😉

Jaxon Jensen
Guest
Jaxon Jensen
2 years 3 months ago

This whole fiasco has me wondering if my short stories will be rejected due to being politically-driven alternate history that’s not “Kennedy was never shot” or “MLK becomes President”, but something more hilariously complicated from that era. I know I can always fall back on indie, but what if I couldn’t? The fact that I wonder is itself refutation of the idea that there’s no SJW or more broadly liberal bias. I wouldn’t wonder if there really wasn’t.

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

I hope not, but everything I have read and experience say that simpler you can make your pitch the better.

Game Of Thrones -> War of the Roses with Dragons

Star Trek -> Wagon Train to the stars

Curse of Chalion -> Spanish Reconquest with Dragons

1632 -> West Virginia miners meet 30 years war.

The Guns of the South -> Terminator style meddling in the Civil War

Princess of Wands -> True Belief gives you the power to kill demons. (Also Baen writers may summon demons)

If your pitch involves the phrase “complicated” I am pretty sure it will get canned.

Ted N
Guest
Ted N
2 years 3 months ago

Gotta have a great Elevator Pitch.

tweell
Guest
tweell
2 years 3 months ago

Curse of Chalion has dragons? May I recommend reading the novel before stating what it is?

AspiringTruFan
Guest
AspiringTruFan
2 years 3 months ago

Yea that was supposed to be Spanish Reconquest with Gods and Miracles. Sometimes wires get mixed between brain and keyboard.

I assure, you I have read the book and the sequels. They are some of my favorite stories. Can’t say I care much for most of Bujold’s other fantasy. Love the Vorkosigan books though.

Jaxon Jensen
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Well, my premise is “Nixon as President in 1960 was JUST BETTER IN EVERY WAY”.

It’s providing me a huge reservoir of creative ideas and story plots, but, well, I can’t lie and say it’s not a politically driven alternate universe.

Based on recent Hugo news, though, I’m limiting my bloggings about the AU to plot stuff and backstory and historical discussion and no posting of drafts in progress or completed, hopefully I’ll attract some alt-history buffs eventually when I have ten or twenty posts up.

William Powell
Guest
William Powell
2 years 3 months ago

I’ve been a voracious reader of SF since about 1956. I’ve read nearly all of your novels, but not one of GRRM’s. ‘Nuff said.

Guest
Joe Miller
2 years 3 months ago

And here I thought I was alone in never having found his stuff interesting.

SumDood
Guest
SumDood
2 years 3 months ago

“Sandkings” was very good. “TUF Voyaging” was pretty good. “”Nightflyers” was pretty good.

Buy them used.

Zsuzsa
Guest
Zsuzsa
2 years 3 months ago

I’d add “A Song for Lya” to that. The man can write when he has a story to tell and only so many pages to wrap it up.

Wes S.
Guest
Wes S.
2 years 3 months ago

For my money, “Fevre Dream” and “The Armageddon Rag” were GRRM’s best.

Alex
Guest
Alex
2 years 3 months ago

I bought GoT the week it came out. Hated it. Well written, but nihilistic and high squick factor. Subsequent books have actually gotten worse.

(OTOH, we eventually donated that book to the library. I nearly choked when I saw what first editions are selling for now. So, GRRM gets the last laugh.)

No question GRRM is an excellent storyteller, but Larry tells better stories.

Carbonel
Guest
Carbonel
2 years 3 months ago

Second that.

Song for wassname didn’t suck, but we’re in a bit of a golden age of children’s spec fic, so the bar is pretty high. Back when a kid could read ever SF&F book in a largish regional library, I might have been impressed.

WHMorgan
Guest
WHMorgan
2 years 3 months ago
I thought perhaps I was the only one who was thinking “Who the heck is George R.R. Martin? I suppose I might have read something of his in the late 70’s but it obviously didn’t thrill me enough to read anything else. Like someone else said, I haven’t had time to plow through all the sci-fi out in the bookstores, so I’ve mainly been a Baen product purchaser (it helps that most of my favorite authors publish through Baen), so I suppose I may miss out on some really good literature. But I’m happy with my system, so please continue… Read more »
grendel
Guest
grendel
2 years 3 months ago
Larry, I own all your novels and some of your short works. You signed my kindle in Seattle. I disagree with you on Vox Day. Disavowing him because he’s said some things you find icky smacks of political correctness. And comparing him to Requires Hate is atrocious. Requires Hate is a buddyfucking troll who used multiple aliases to sow discord among friends. Vox Day is loyal as a dog, and he acts in the full light of day and signs his own name to his posts and comments. He’s never said a bad word about you even though you’ve been… Read more »
Pat Patterson
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
He didn’t equate Vox Day with Requires Hate. He admitted Vox says stuff he doesn’t like, but Requires Hate is horribly worse. His point in this was to restate AGAIN that he is NOT responsible for Vox Day’s opinions,but is being treated as though he is. VD says and does the things he says and does, because he has reasons of his own, and not because Larry is pulling his strings. And disavowing things that VD says because Larry finds them icky is not political correctness; it’s integrity. PC would be disclaiming things he secretly agrees with, to avoid being… Read more »
grendel
Guest
grendel
2 years 3 months ago

GRRM has been claiming moral equivalency between Vox and RH, as though the left’s sins are all paid for because Vox. So when Larry said I’ll see your Vox and raise you RH, it seemed to strengthen the equivalence GRRM was drawing between the two. The reality is that they are in no way alike. That’s what led me to comment.

grendel
Guest
grendel
2 years 3 months ago

I retract these comments. I made an emotional response when I should’ve taken more time to think things through.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

Whenever you find mere words making you angry, always take a break for a cortico-thalamic pause, integrate yourself, and then carefully analyze the statement that made you angry.

You might learn something about yourself as well.

VD
Guest
VD
2 years 3 months ago
While I appreciate your instinct to rise to my defense, Grendel, I don’t consider either Larry or Brad to be acting as if I have fleas. Both of them are simply pointing out the entirely obvious to people who are very, very eager to try to tar them with responsibility for me. I don’t speak for them. I don’t answer to them. I am not a tame wolf. Larry doesn’t agree with everything I write, say or think. Neither does Brad. And neither do any of the Dread Ilk. That’s just a simple fact. I don’t object in the slightest… Read more »
JP
Guest
JP
2 years 3 months ago

I’ve read several of your books, Vox, and while I have a hard time accepting an AI that believes in God, the books that I have read were good otherwise.

And speaking as an atheist, I actually really enjoyed the book about the looming religious war with the Elves (sorry, I don’t remember the title offhand).

I also think that a lot of what you have to say on your blog is pretty interesting.

But honestly some of your comments about evolution get on my nerves.

VD
Guest
VD
2 years 3 months ago

Some of the trains of thought I find myself riding get on my nerves too. But I just follow the logic wherever it goes. I am under absolutely no illusion that I define either the truth or reality.

It is astonishing how many people seem to think their feelings do.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

“and while I have a hard time accepting an AI that believes in God…”

Please read ARCHITECT OF AEONS.

BigFire
Guest
BigFire
2 years 3 months ago

Still waiting for it to show up on my Kindle.

Robert
Guest
Robert
2 years 3 months ago

and while I have a hard time accepting an AI that believes in God

Why? A true AI would be able to believe many things, including things that are wrong. And machines are not infallible; give them the wrong input, and they will spit out junk, just like anything else. GIGO, as it were. 😉

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

“Paul_Cornell @Paul_Cornell · Apr 4 How about we go to Amazon, having read these nominees, and review them? #hugoawards”

grendel
Guest
grendel
2 years 3 months ago

My post was off the mark and I’m not too proud to say so.

Joshua
Guest
Joshua
2 years 3 months ago

But you can be proud of the fact that you are able to own up to a mistake and change your mind.

Way too many people can’t do that.

Pat Patterson
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Larry, lower your standards and include lots of nekkid wimmin doing nasty things, and HBO will pick up yer series, and you can get bluidy RICH~!

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Hey now. There wasn’t a breast in the Season opener for sixteen minutes. HBO is obviously easing up on the nakkid womenz.

The Writer In Black
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Zsuzsa
Guest
Zsuzsa
2 years 3 months ago

That’s…far, far too accurate.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

HBO started out with microwave antennas being used to beam sports events into people’s homes during the day, and softcore porn at night.

No one is ever going to get HBO to stop broadcasting tits.

JR
Guest
JR
2 years 3 months ago

But then they doubled down with the nekkid necking dudes, so does that bring them back up to “GOT Nekkid Quota”, or are we holding out for more boobies?

🙂

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Men don’t count. If you don’t like that and you are uncomfortable, you’re obviously a bigot. duh

Fossegrimen
Guest
Fossegrimen
2 years 3 months ago
I am a Sad Puppy. I have never been to a Con, nor do I plan to go at any time in the future. Also, my politics are mostly what you would call ‘rabid left’. On the other hand, I’ve set aside a room in my house to keep my sci-fi and fantasy collection which just recently passed 3000 novels and 7 shelf-yards of periodicals. I read a LOT. Up until about 1995 or so, I eagerly grabbed all the Hugo nominees as they hit the store shelves. These days, if I pick up a book and I don’t know… Read more »
Herb
Guest
Herb
2 years 3 months ago
It’s good to hear some support from the other side. When I first went to Worldcon (2 years ago) and first voted for the Hugos (last year), without being involved or really cognizant of Sad Puppies, what first struck me was how mediocre the nominees were. The SP should really see more support (or at least a rival, non-SJW slate) from the Left. Even if you largely agree with the politics (I don’t) and even if you like message fiction (I do), the SJWs are the death of good or interesting message fiction, because they require it fit into such… Read more »
David W.
Guest
David W.
2 years 3 months ago

Honestly I am kind of upset both MHI:6 and Winds of Winter were postponed due to Sad Puppies.

I mean GRRM easily wrote enough for 3 or 4 POV chapters and Mr. Correia wrote enough for about 3 epic explosions.

Lily Valley
Guest
Lily Valley
2 years 3 months ago

Harlan Ellison’s protege was Octavia Butler. A writer OSC admired enough to model in his book on writing after her exposition style. “Speech Sounds” is one of the most disturbing stories I have read since “The Yellow Wallpaper”.

I don’t understand what my community is doing right now. This type of vitriolic childishness is the reason I ran to the SFF community in the first place. I am very sad to read this post today.

Kristophr
Guest
Kristophr
2 years 3 months ago

We just nominated a bunch of authors.

We aren’t the folks spazzing out here.

James May
Guest
2 years 3 months ago
America is a young country and one that until relatively recently evolved quite rapidly in terms of its pop cultural expressions. Look at the difference in SF and film in the ’30s compared to the ’40s as opposed to the last 10 years and the previous 10 before that, in which there is very little stylistic shift. So we don’t have a lot of data to go by because America hasn’t really retreaded historic cycles. But some people have observed that revolutions tend to become the thing they revolted against. In the case of the SFF community it’s pretty clear… Read more »
Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Speakin’ as a flyover-country redneck myself, I beg to differ on that characterization. The key trait of rednecks is nonconformity. The redneck response to something unusual is likely to be “Well, will ya look at that! Let me try it,” and then putting their own spin on it. The reason there are so many redneck jokes is because rednecks are chaotically creative, so the crazy never ends. But conformist? Them’s fightin’ words!

[I know you didn’t mean anything by it; just sayin’.]

Guest
Doug Loss
2 years 3 months ago

From Tennessee, here. What are the most common last words on redneck tombstones? “Hey y’all, look at this!”

Reziac
Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Montana back atcha 😀 The other common epitaph: “Hey, hold my beer a moment.”