Sad Puppies are not calling for any boycotts

I’m seeing this narrative pop up that Sad Puppies is calling for a boycott of Tor, but that is simply not true. Speaking as the guy who started the Sad Puppies campaign, I’m not calling for a boycott of anything. I’m not asking anyone to do anything. As far as I’m concerned this mess is between Tor and its customers. I’ve said very little about it so far, but I’ve been clear about that much.

The Sad Puppies Campaign is NOT calling for any boycotts.

But as we’ve seen time and time again, what I actually say doesn’t matter. It is just whatever narrative they can get to stick. I’m seeing lots of people on Facebook who should know better saying this is Sad Puppies declaring war on Tor. Nope. I’ll explain what it is.

Back in April when some high ranking Tor employees were making some pretty outlandish accusations, I put up a blog post asking for SP supporters not to blame Tor. I respect Tom Doherty. I’m friends with a bunch of Tor authors. I explained how the company was a big outfit with a lot of employees. I told my supporters don’t blame them.
And in the intervening months several Tor employees had to go and make that really hard. A few Tor employees were extremely vocal with some very asinine criticisms, and still, I kept telling my supporters not to blame the whole company.

For this recent dust up, this is how I see it. Tor editor Irene Gallo posted some obviously false, slanderous nonsense, and she did it in a post representing her company’s products. It went viral.

Personally, I am used to being lied about. I volunteered for this. Lots of industry people have been insulting us, or regurgitating lies without question, since this started. It’s been a pattern for years. One of the goals of my original campaign was to expose the political bias that existed in this system, so this particular post didn’t come as a shock.

Only this time Gallo screwed up and tarred not just me or other SP leaders, but she slandered the fans who agreed with us and some unaffiliated authors (some of whom write for Tor!) with some pretty vile stuff.

For many people that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. They got angry. It turns out regular folks don’t like to give money to people who call them Nazis. They started contacting Tor and its parent company, Macmillan. Tom Doherty himself issued a statement that I personally liked. I’m glad he did that. I’ve been told that Tor has implemented a new social media policy, so that when its employees are calling its customers names, they need to make it clear they are speaking for themselves and not their employer. That is pretty standard in the rest of the corporate world.

Then Gallo issued a half assed, ‘I’m sorry you got upset when I called you all racist nazis’, pseudo apology. No retraction. Many people didn’t think that was good enough, so they continued to send emails to Tor. When it leaked that some Tor staff were dismissing all those emails as bots, and not real human fans, that riled them up.

The person who set the Friday deadline for a real apology is author Peter Grant. Let me tell you about Peter. He’s not one of the Sad Puppies organizers and wasn’t involved in the campaign, but I’ve known him for about fifteen years.

Do you know why Peter Grant took great personal affront to being labeled an unrepentantly racist, neo-nazi? That is because he literally fought and bled against neo-nazi terrorists in a blood soaked African civil war so brutal that most pampered Americans can’t even wrap their brains around it. He had many friends murdered, black and white both. He saw real terrorism. He still suffers from the physical injuries and nightmares. So he takes his culture war accusations very seriously.

Those accustomed to knee jerk bitching and bloviating about every possible outrage and trigger warning, quickly dismissed Peter’s taking umbrage against Gallo’s comments with their usual racist/sexist/homophobe accusations. Because obviously, anyone who disagrees with them is guilty of some ist or ism, evidence be damned. Their idea of social justice is forming Twitter mobs. Peter Grant got blown up protesting Apartheid.

After being a soldier, Peter hung up his guns and became a man of God. SJWs are saying that he’s a homophobe because he agreed with Sad Puppies, while in real life he volunteered at a colony for homosexuals who had been forsaken by African society, dying of AIDS. When I first met him, Peter was a prison chaplain, trying to help the fallen and broken, and victims of things you can’t even imagine. Basically, he’s an honorable man who puts his money where his mouth is, and now he’s offended.

Peter asked for a retraction from the Tor editor who flippantly dismissed thousands of fans as unrepentant racist neo-nazis. I don’t believe he’s calling for anything beyond that.

Again, this is between Tor and its readers who feel insulted, not the Sad Puppies campaign or the people who ran it. Yes, those Venn diagrams overlap, but sorry, you can’t blame this one on me. Many normal fans agreed with what Sad Puppies was trying to do, and shockingly enough, they eventually got sick and tired of employees of one of their favorite publishing houses calling them names. I’m not calling for anything, though I can certainly understand why some people are.

If any individual who felt insulted is satisfied with Tom Doherty’s statement saying that his employees don’t speak for his company, good for you. If any individual is unsatisfied and demands further action, that’s also up to you. I’m not going to tell anybody what to think.

For the other side who are saying that Gallo is the real victim here, and she was only speaking truth to power… Yeah, you guys run with that. Anybody with two brain cells to rub together can see she her comments were nonsense. The only thing she is a victim of is arrogance.

To the SJWs saying Tom Doherty is a hateful misogynist because he isn’t letting his employees libel people on the clock anymore? Double down. There might be some people left out there who haven’t realized I was right about you yet.

To the Tor authors I’m seeing post about this, the Sad Puppies campaign is not calling for a boycott. If you are upset why people are angry take it up with your art director about why she’s insulting your customers.

To the Sad Puppies supporters, do what you think is right. All I’m asking is that whatever you do, try to be as civil as possible in your disagreements. Stick with the facts. We’ve got the moral high ground, and the great moderate middle of this debate has seen we’ve been telling the truth all along.

One day left on the Champions of Aetaltis Kickstarter. I've got a story in here.
Somebody sent me a Sad Puppies holster

358 thoughts on “Sad Puppies are not calling for any boycotts”

  1. When I realised that my online presense, on Facebook and my Blog had become more and more involved in politics I did not start saying that my opionions were strictly my own and not my employers I REMOVED mention of my employer from my Facebook Account. But if your online identity is determined by your employer and people go to your site because of that rather than what you post it would create a dilemma

  2. Scalzi weighed into the boycott yesterday. Turns out he’s in favor of it. 😉

    “John Scalzi ‏@scalzi · Jun 17
    @mforbeck I don’t mind utter shitlords not purchasing my books. @ChuckWendig @wes_chu @cstross @eilatan”


    “John Scalzi ‏@scalzi · 7h7 hours ago
    Also, if someone would boycott me because they’re following the lead of some racist shitball, I’m fine with that. Don’t need those sales.”

    You have to realize that while the other side pretends to see the difference between Sad and Rabid Puppies, we are still one and the same in their minds. To them, Sads are just the mindless puppets of the Dark Lord Vox. Doesn’t matter that Larry launched the campaign back when Vox was still a member in good standing of SFWA. They hate Vox, we are distantly associated with him, and therefore Must Be Destroyed.

    1. The helpful person in me thinks Scalzi needs to take lessons on professionalism on social media from Brandon Sanderson. The rat bastard hopes Instapundit joins in a prospective boycott.

    2. I don’t buy Scalzi books because I am a, as Scalzi puts it, a “shitlord”.

      I don’t buy them because they’ve bored me for the last 8+ years. .

      1. Seriously. The man couldn’t come up with an original idea if he was paid to.

        And he is.

        I mean, the books are relatively well-written, but “formulaic” is being… generous.

        It certainly doesn’t help that he appears to be a raging asshole to boot.

    3. Wow. Stay classy there, Scalzi. Oddly enough, I’ve read and enjoyed Scalzi books before. His book Redshirts was the first novel in a decade that I had read and enjoyed that eventually won a Hugo award.

      I really had no intention to boycott Tor at all. Tor and Baen have always been the staples of my bookshelf, and I commend Tor for their DRM free policy. I’ll have to verify that, but if those are real twitter quotes from Scalzi, I might just not buy any more of his books. That’s just a bit churlish there, along with being uninformed.

        1. I second this. I realized quite a few years ago that I’d like his books way more if I pretended his blog didn’t exist.

          1. It’s too late for me: a couple years ago, I read his article where he wrote in the persona of a rapist saying, “Thanks, anti-abortionists: now when I rape a woman, I get to victimize her twice instead of once!” (Can’t remember the article’s title right now, but that was the gist of it.) That one made me so incandescently furious that I basically couldn’t stand to pick up his books now. People might recommend Old Man’s War all they want, and all I’ll be able to think of is what I think of the author as a human being, so I won’t be able to enjoy the book on its own terms.

          2. I saw his blog – stopped buying his stuff, and moved to the bottom of my ‘buy’ list anything that he recommends. But like he says, he doesn’t need the sales. Shrug – he can hardly get peevish if readers do what he suggests, amirite?

          3. Even Scalzi can probably recommend a good book once in a while. Hell, even Liz Bourke likes David Weber. Mind you, I’ve learned to check out the books she hates. She DESPISED Michael J Sullivan’s Riyria series, but I liked them. I now own them all. Thanks, Liz Bourke! 😀

      1. Here’s what we’re up against:

        “Cat on June 19, 2015 at 5:57 am said:

        “… the Puppy tendency to rage against injustices that don’t exist.”


        “… a yearly smattering of casting ballots against the people who had committed the foul crime of being women and minorities.” – John Seavey

        That’s what bullshit looks like, a quote from a guy’s blog who left a moronic comment at Grant’s.


        Being racially review censored is in fact an injustice. These people either ignore plain facts in evidence or make them up out of their heads. There is no flood of quotes from our side about being a woman or minority being a crime of any kind. However there is a flood of quotes from SJWs that do exactly that. SJWs attach me to any police shooting of a black person by calling that cop my “murdering kin” (Mikki Kendall) and then putting the person who said that on convention panels to talk about “inclusion” and “diversity.” I am routinely attached to genocides, colonialism, and apartheid.

      2. I didn’t boycott Scalzi until I started reading his blog. In short, I only bought one of his books. Why give money to someone who hates me?

        1. He doesn’t hate us. But he does front for an ideology which does hate us. Scalzi is too stupid to figure out he’s ideologically gone translesbianblack in perfect agreement with the movement’s black gay icon Audre Lorde who writes about the “gap of male ignorance” and writes white gay feminists are “tools of the patriarchy.”

    4. Vox and the Rabid Puppies are excuses. If he weren’t involved they’d pick or invent some other excuse. Kinda funny that Vox runs the Rabid Puppies but the SJWs are the ones frothing at the mouth, though.

    5. I can happily go on not buying either of those guys and still purchase the books from the Tor authors I’ve been waiting for for a very long time.

    6. I haven’t bought any of Scalzi’s books in years, so it sounds like we’re all cool, then. He went from ripping off Heinlein, to ripping off Piper, to ripping off freakin’ Star Trek. He must be down to Eando Binder and Perry Rhodan by now.

      I am still trying to figure out why a tubby middle-aged straight white dude with a multimillion dollar book contract gets to “speak” for the poor, women, gays, and “writers of color”. Nice racket, if you can get it.

        1. Scalzi better not mess with Perry Rhodan. Redshirts was the first, last, and only book of his that I’ll ever buy. You’d think for a million bucks he could come up with something original. He took decades of good Star Trek and shit on it. His title is probably the reason I bought it. I’ve learned that if it is a Tor title it might be best if you got a recommendation from a friend you trust first.

    7. Even were Vox utterly unassociated with Puppies, another excuse would be found, and if not found then invented (as witness blaming GamerGate for the Pups’ sweep of the noms).

      Defamation is not an obstacle to the True Believers of any given faith, and it is certainly an article of faith that the Puppies are — as Gallo’s defenders continue to insist — racist, sexist and/or homophobic.

    8. John swings a big stick. He always makes fun of those boycotting him. He has whole articles on the subject.

      Says Peter:

      “There are those who doubt that a boycott can achieve anything. I can only reply that ‘doing the right thing’ is important in itself. It’s a matter of honor – and although any mention of honor may be greeted with scorn and derision in these ‘modern’ times, I was raised to value the concept and live by it. I still do.”

      Good for Peter. Glad it makes him happy. The net effect of Peter’s boycott will be negligible but if anything a small increase in Tor sales, IMHO.

      VD says:

      “I will go a little further than Mr. Grant has. Until Irene Gallo and Patrick Nielsen Hayden are no longer employed by Tor Books or, I will not:

      Purchase any books published by Tor Books
      Read any books published by Tor Books
      Given (2), this means that if Ms. Gallo and Mr. Nielsen Hayden are still employed by Tor Books in 2016, I will not nominate any books published by Tor Books for any awards. I encourage those who deem Ms. Gallo’s behavior to be unprofessional and unacceptable to follow Mr. Grant’s lead and join the Tor Books boycott. I am the leader of the Rabid Puppies, I do speak for them, and I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that they will follow my lead in this regard. I am not concerned about whether the boycott is “successful” or not. The simple fact is that if Macmillan is at all interested in the long-term success of Tor Books, it will jettison both Ms Gallo and Mr. Nielsen Hayden on the basis of their disloyalty, their unprofessional behavior, and their repeated violations of the Macmillan Code of Conduct…”

      Macmillan? Really? You can’t make this stuff up. Which leads us back to Scalzi who has encouraged boycotts of himself in the past – from his October 2014 article called “How to Boycott Me, I Mean, REALLY Boycott Me”…

      “I mean, seriously, boycotting just Tor Books? Why limit yourself? Sure, it’s the largest publisher of science fiction and fantasy books in North America and possibly the world, but it’s just one imprint of Tom Doherty Associates. There are several other imprints, including Forge, Starscape, Tor Teen and Seven Seas. You should boycott those, too. That’ll show me!

      But even then, you’d be thinking too small. Tom Doherty Associates is itself just one appendage of the publishing giant known as Macmillan, with offices in 41 countries! It publishes thousands of books a year! What a target! You should boycott all of Macmillan. Man, I’m quaking in my boots just thinking about it. But even then, it’s small potatoes, for Macmillan is just one part of the mighty Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck, with annual sales in the billions of euros. Boycott it all! No doubt all of Stuttgart shall fall into a shambles at the thought.”

      Well… I will enjoy watching although I won’t be boycotting nor buying books in an anti-boycott.

      1. I tend to agree that the boycott won’t accomplish much. But you never know.

        You can tell the Torlings aren’t that confident. Feder started yesterday off with a lie on twitter, there’s a screenshot of it on Bayou Renaissance Man.

        Then the ‘bots started. Having to use bots on twitter to make folks believe that there’s a stampede to buy Tor books? Really?

        Screen shots on that over at Vox Popoli.

        Lots of confidence in Torland. Having to start with a lie, and use bots to convince people lots of books are being bought.

        I agree on one other thing. This is going to be fun to watch.

      2. I can only speak for myself. I’m done with Tor. I might be as insignificant as a single drop of water to all the self appointed powers that be, however; what are oceans but many drops of water?

      3. It looks like to me you are attempting to lower the morale by throwing around some facts about how big Macmillan is. Let me give something else for you to think about Sparky.
        Giants with all those offices in 41 countries have an overhead. With Greece wobbly it looks pretty bad over for the EU. There is going to be a lot of cost going into keeping it afloat and that means more in the EU will be worried about soaring food costs that are already pretty high. Here in the States our economy is stagnate and the average family income has dropped $2K in value and people are working on less hours. There are egg shortages which now go into chicken shortages which are rising up costs here as well. People simply have less money to spend on overpriced books.

        During bad economies book stores and publishers have a very hard time. Borders, Crown is down, Waldren’s is soft fell and Barnes and Noble is limping along and having shorter employee hours. Amazon has already taken a lionshare of their market and are rolling along just fine.

        That leaves Tor with a market competing for left wing liberal book messaging. Lightspeed magazine just published Queers Destroy Science Fiction and before that published Feminists Destroy Science Fiction. They are targeting the same demographic that Tor is. Then there is Ragnarok, and Orbit, and Piazzo who all are after the same pie of people with no where near the overhead. Considering how they treat their writers and fans I don’t think I see the same rosy picture as you do.

        Time will tell. Your false hope that a siege is ended in a single day is folly. These take time to grow. Even after Tor feels the effects and the boycott lets up it takes time to get that big wheel rolling again. I like our odds. The Sad Puppies haven’t even pitched into the boycott and Tor is already freaking out and sending off Tor bots.

        I’d be worried if I were a Tor employee. There will be cuts in the weeks to come. Tor is not immune to the free market.

      4. That is a hell of a lot of overhead there SJW. Printing a lot of books to send to the brick and mortar shops is expensive. With Borders gone and Barnes and Noble shaky that isn’t going to go away anytime soon. MacMillan hasn’t done much to friend Amazon which has gobbled up almost a fifth of the market.

        Your message seems to be designed to deflate morale here. I think with the EU on shaky legs and with the US economy stagnate with the average family income dropping $2K on average and working hours reduced due to Obamacare I think families will be more worried about buying food and necessities vice buying up books.

        Tor has a lot of competition for the same market demographic. Lightspeed just came out with Queers Destroy Science Fiction for instance and last month they had the ground breaking and subscription tanking Feminists Destroy Science Fiction. A lot of resources are focused on the SJW stamp of approval and it just isn’t making business sense so far. Big publications are dying while when you look at Simon and Scheuster they are expanding into conservative markets and are thriving. Their success comes from expanding their customer audience vice Tor’s strategy of shrinking it. Please Tor, double down on that. It worked for CNN and MSNBC in their war against Fox so I’m sure the same model will transfer to publication—not.

        Meanwhile smaller brands and indies are doing fine. Ragnarok is expanding for instance. A variety of writers seem to be gravitating to better brands. Baen is doing fine.

        Will the boycott work? I think it is a little early for Tor to crow success one day into a siege don’t you think? For me I’ll get marshmellow ready for the Tor roasting bonfire coming. There is plenty of fiction out there and I see nothing that just gotta buy from Tor. I’m not boycotting, but their books are meh.

    9. Is Tor not noticing that Scalzi is trying to egg the boycott on? Does this not make them worry that perhaps Scalzi is not their friend? Or, at least, not their competent friend?

  3. I’m not calling for a boycott.

    It’s just that I refuse to give more money to a company that employs large numbers of people who hate me for being things which I am not. Gallo is a 45-year-old toddler who thinks her feelings are the beginning and the end of all things. To apologize for being wrong is impossible for her. But until she does, I’ll find other ways to get money to Sanderson, Brust, and the few other authors Tor publishes that I actually like any more.

    1.         Exactly, Jason.  If Tor/Macmillan wishes to employ the Nielsen-Haydens, Moshe Feder, and Irene Gallo, they may do so.  But I won’t buy books from any company employing them.  I’d dishonor myself, buying from a company that lets its employees call me “unrepentantly racist, sexist and homophobic,” claims I wish for “the end of social justice in science fiction and fantasy,” (whatever that means), and dubs the books and stories I nominate for Hugos “a slate of bad-to-reprehensible works.”

    1. Sadly after consulting with lawyers over the last couple of months, I’m something of an expert on the topic now. 😀 (I’m really just not a litigious kind of guy).

    2. Thanks for staying above the fray on all the recent events. I suspect your politics do not exactly match mine but rather than disowning or insulting your readers you have played it pretty cool. Love your books BTW.

  4. I’m one of those authors/fans who’s decided not to purchase anymore Tor books until they issue an actual apology. My paternal grandfather fought in WWII and was part of the Normandy invasion — he was at Omaha Beach (third wave in the afternoon) and was in the Big Red One army group who liberated Paris (I think) and made the push to Berlin where they helped liberate it along with the Soviet Army.

    I’m also the grand-daughter of two women who started businesses in an era when women were supposed to stay in the home. My maternal grandmother actually divorced her first husband because he was an abusive drunk and she rebuilt her life back in the 1950s in the Deep South (when divorce was scandalous). My uncle, aunt, and mother all started businesses, and several of my other female relatives are business-owners, lawyers, or doctors.

    Lastly, I used to get beat up growing up because I thought it was stupid to hate people for being gay or for dating other races — it wasn’t anything like what happened to Mr. Grant and I won’t pretend to equate a few butt-kickings and never getting invited to any of the cool kids’ parties (which was also because I was a nerd) to what he went through but I’m not a neo-nazi and I resent being called one given my own life experiences and my family history of *fighting* Nazis and oppressive attitudes while supporting themselves and each other without asking for handouts.

    — G.K.

    1. My father grew up with the stories of his family suffering under the Japanese in World War II. He recounted how the Japanese soldiers, seeing a photo of a relative with a military-like uniform, grabbed that relative’s infant son from his mother, tossed the baby up into the air, and impaled him on their bayonet, to punish the father for ‘being in the military.’ The relative wasn’t home, but was working as a security guard. That relative joined the guerrilas immediately afterward, his wife half-insane with grief. My paternal grandfather fought with the Americans.

      I’m frankly of the opinion that Tor doesn’t get the money of the people they hate. Which in my case, is me, for having different opinions than their senior admin, for which they see fit to call me Neo-Nazi, misogynist, racist and homophobic.

      When we lived in Paris, the baker just outside our apartment showed us we ‘dirty foreigners’ were not welcome in her shop by being rude to us, and showing fawning smiles to any white person who came into the shop. One of the customers said to her that we’d been there before he was, and my father and I said it’s okay, and left. She was not the only baker in the street; there were three much further up and down the roads, and we patronized those instead. I was still learning French, but the shopkeepers were pleased to see the effort I was making and when I was getting better at speaking, would be told that I was improving. Their wares were quite delicious so we frequently bought from the three other bakers, one of which specialized in rustic artisan breads.

      We would often have guests, so we’d buy lots of bread and croissants and other baked goods… and on the way back, made a point of stopping outside the window of that racist baker’s shop, where she would glare at us through her window as we smiled with our armfuls of baguettes, bags full of pains de campagne, brioches and croissants.

      Luckily for me, I found that Dan Wells also publishes through Headline Publishing, so I can get his I Am Not A Serial Killer etc. books. I’d been waiting too, for Joanne Bertin’s Bard’s Oath to come out in paperback, so I’ll have to wait till I can find that second hand. There are some other books that I’d like to still get, but we’ll wait until they’re available second hand.

      1. Buying a beloved author’s book by a hated publisher from a used book store has to be the best revenge possible. Stay strong and patronize your local library.

        1. I’m starting to be a fan of buying from the UK publishers if possible, especially when the publisher isn’t a subsidiary of the despised publisher.

        2. I wish there was a way to get the money to the author himself / herself! I just looked at Book Depository and Wells’ The Devil’s Only Friend (?) is only available via TOR. =( Booo~ – I’ll have to see if it’ll come out via his other publisher.

          Joanne Bertin’s other Dragonlord books seems to also be published through Earthlight, but Bard’s Oath is not available from them.

          But I have a 5% off coupon I gotta use up in a couple of days and there’s a nice bunch of books on BD’s bargain books pile, including stories about Victoria Cross medal winners.

          1. I wish there was a way to get the money to the author himself / herself!

            A lot of authors have tip jars on their websites. If you buy their book used, and then leave them a tip on their website that is worth about what Tor would have paid them for the book (50 cents perhaps?), then the author gets paid while Tor doesn’t.

  5. I am self-employed, so I am aware that my online comments have an influence on my business. I don’t self-censor, but I do try and act with some level of professionalism and civility. That being said, I was greatly insulted by Ms. Gallo’s comments and somewhat surprised that her company didn’t have some kind of social media policy. The last company I worked for had one going back to 2007 and they weren’t even a company with a significant public presence.

    I still enjoy authors that are the complete political opposite of me. I don’t require agreement with my views and prefer to read what I enjoy. Despite this, there are a handful of entertainers (I am including actors, directors, and producers) that aren’t content to just make their views known. They also go to great lengths to insult people that disagree with them and otherwise act like dickheads. These people don’t get my money.

    1.         Macmillan has a social media policy, and Gallo, Feder and the Nielsen-Haydens seem to have violated it.  For whatever reason, they have chosen not to enforce it.

  6. I have blogged extensively on this, in part because Peter Grant, who I am honored to call a friend, asked me to weigh in as a businesswoman. I have not been calling for a boycott or even a dismissal of Irene Gallo. It is simply a horrible example of unprofessional behavior, and an opportunity for Tor to show that they do respect their customers and vendors even though there is a lot of evidence that certain personnel do not.

  7. I don’t care about anyone’s politics. I care about people institutionalizing the idea I’m a privileged racist homophobic misogynist for waking up in the morning and calling that “politics.” Even stupider is saying that’s somehow central to a literature about Ringworlds, Hobbits and Dying Earths. It’s an insane obsession by people who’ve signed onto an ideology that is sociopathic and one of pathological lies.

    1. What happens to Tor is of sublime indifference to me. I think there’s only a couple of Tor authors I care about and one of them is KJA – he who was so pleasantly insulted by Gallo.

      I think the last non KJA book I bought from Tor was either Redshirts (which I regretted) or one of Weber’s Safehold books – a series I realize I’ve also lost interest in because I bought the same book twice and only realized I’d read it before about 3/4s of the way through.

  8. I face a quandary.
    I refuse to send any of my hard earned money to anyone that at best considers me a “Wrong fan” and at worst a Racist/Homophobic/whatever is the worst IST of the day. I haven’t looked at Tor specifically either for or to ignore. But, this I have to draw a line at. David Weber is one of my all time favorite authors, yet I sadly discovered his Safehold series is published by Tor.
    Sorry Mr. Weber. but with the greatest respect to you and your works to date, I will not be purchasing the next book.
    On the plus side, this broo ha ha made me look at Jim Butcher. Hot Damn! I bought all 15 Dresden novels in the last month (Bought. Not borrowed. Not pirated. No freebie. Cold hard cash to his pockets, BOUGHT) and am currently mid way thru Cold Days with only Skin Game left to read.
    I. Will. Not. pay people to insult me for no other reason than we disagree.

    P.s. Larry,
    What / When is the next novel from you? Have cash, will read.

    1. Once you finish with Butcher’s Dresden books, go try Codex Alera. And there’s a new steampunk book (Cinder Spires) coming out this fall.

      Larry’s next book is Son of the Black Sword. The eARC (electronic advance reader copy – unedited) is available from Baen; the official version should be out in late October.

      1. I’m going through Codex Alera right now. I found it because people kept saying how awesome Butcher was, but I’m nonplussed by most modern/urban fantasy. The entertainment value was such that I’m likely to try the Dresden books.

        1. Because how can you go wrong with book about planet travelling Romans doing battle against alien invasion with Pokemon?
          Yeah. He is so good he can craft great entertainment from the most outlandish ideas.

    2. David, yeah, I discovered the Freehold books late, too, principally because, “Hey, Tor.” As I said, there ARE used copies, you know.

      1. Odd.
        I got Freehold ( Mike W, yeah?) from the Baen free libray, and bought the rest of that series from the Baen catalog. Flint may be a (literal) card carrying Trotsky-ite, but that crack dealer business model of “The first taste is free” sure gladdens a Capitalist’s heart.

        Alex- You know I bought “Son of ” E-arc the day it hit Baen. 🙂

        Andrew- Yeah, strongly think I’ll be checking those Codex Alera books out for even more Summer Knights (ba-dump ba) goooooood reading.

        1. DOH!
          I think you were talking Safehold (D. Weber) vs. Freehold (M. Z. Wiliamson) there. I can’t claim to be a Good Fan, having state sponsored/regulated/approved Good fun. I am the platonic form of “Wrong Fan, having Wrong Fun”. Because, MERICA! (SJW head explosions are merely an unintentional side effect, I assure you.)

          1. Back in the day,yeah. Got the rights back. They’re gonna be rewritten and republished, by me.

    3. You mean you were waiting to read Hell’s Foundations Quiver until it was published? I have been reading the driblets at jiltanith LOL besides I don’t believe in collective guilt

      1. In theory I agree with you. However; out of the 30+ bucks I’d pay for that next book a chunk (no idea how much) goes to the publishing house, which in turn goes to pay that horrid PC harpy to continue to call me a low brow “Bad Think” Nazi.

        So, no purchase for me, which I believe to speak louder than “no award”.

  9. Peter Grant is a good man. He has a good heart. He probably doesn’t hold a grudge.

    That’s what he has the rest of us for.

    OK, not really, but I really wanted to use that line. 😀

  10. There’s a lot of things I’ll tolerate out of an author, as long as he or she tells a good story. If they wear their politics or other attitudes on their sleeves, fine. If they want to argue about it with me, we’re still OK.

    But when you treat me with open contempt because I disagree with you, well then, go f**k yourselves with a chainsaw. That’s the point I’ve reached with certain authors such as Stephen King and John Scalzi, and now I’m getting there with Tor as a publisher because of the outrageous things so many of its editors and upper-level management are saying about the people who not only buy their books, but even write for them.

    And before anybody comes in here whining, pissing and moaning about Vox Day: A publishing house whose staff routinely throws brickbats at its authors and customers of the sort Irene Gallo, Moshe Feder, the Nielsen-Haydens, Liz Bourke and the rest of the traveling circus do, and who just threw a seven-figure book advance to a spitefully-juvenile Mean Girl hack writer like Scalzi, has absolutely no business complaining about anybody else allegedly being a raging a-hole on the Internet. Especially since Vox has shown himself far more willing to step out of his socio-political comfort zone in evaluating talent than the vast majority of his critics, especially the ones working for Tor.

  11. I gave up on Scalzi circa 5-6 months ago when the Brianna Wu dustup reached peak weird . Gave my copies of his novels to a friend who enjoys him, and emailed him . Got a flip and trivial answer back which was nice as a confirmation that he’s a smug SOB willing to due exactly what he wants to accuse other of: “Otherizing” them/us at the drop of a hat.
    No skin off my back , one less self righteous A** that I have to deal with or financially support.

        1. Pretty much. Oh and if you want an example of ‘exponentially worse’, look up the investigations into Sarah Butts srhbutts.

  12. Some of the puling class over at the anti-puppies are now calling for a counter-boycott of Baen Books.

    Putting aside the stupidity of not recognizing that NO employee of Baen has been in any fashion like the Reprehensible Ms. Gallo, if they’re dumb enough to try it they’ll run into what the Chick-Fil-A protesters encountered: you can’t successfully boycott a business you never patronized to begin with.

    A position, ironically, that I’ve found myself in with regard to Tor Books, as I wrote to Tom Doherty, a man I worked for back when he ran Ace. The output of his subordinates has convinced me that, over all, the Tor imprint is no longer the mark of a book that I want to read. Just as the recent results of the Hugo Awards have convinced me it is no longer the imprimatur of quality science fiction, much less quality literature. So it’s not so much “boycott” as “why bother?”

    I have, sadly, in recent days learned, mostly through the Sad Puppy sites that there ARE Tor authors worth reading. So I have denied myself some potentially rewarding reading experiences, it seems. But my urge to explore them is quenched by the arrogant contempt of the Tor management and some of its self-imagined more elite authors. There are always used copies on Amazon and the hope these authors will someday show up in a more congenial venue.

    1. There are good authors at Tor. I have probably 300 Tor books or so, maybe more. There are a couple of Tor authors where I own 90+% of what they’ve had published in book form. So stepping away from Tor isn’t easy. But it won’t save me as much money as it should, because Tor isn’t developing enough authors that write things I want to read.

      And I’ll probably just spend it on Del Rey, and Orbit, and Baen, and indy.

    2. I am trying to picture a Progressive boycott of Baen it would be like a boycott of McDonalds by PETA Vegans

    3. I loved Ace so much I couldn’t have imagined what it would’ve taken for me to boycott them. Now I can. Having feminists come in and kick out Frank Frazetta and Burroughs cuz they (and I) were racist sexists would’ve done the job.

  13. I’m not boycotting Tor. I’m just not doing business with them until Irene Gallo resigns. If she were a mailroom clerk or a janitor it would still be reprehensible (and she’d probably already be fired) but she is an associate publisher and creative director a face of the company. Obviously, Tor is okay with that level of customer treatment and creative support. Why give them another dime?

  14. You know, Larry, I’m thinkin’ I need to take minor issue with what you said. I’ve watched this evolve since early last year, and I think its safe to say that Sad Puppies has evolved. Its not just about Larry anymore.

    Yes, you started it. But its become a movement, a bit of a rebellion against those that want to tell readers what to read, and writers what to write.

    A lot of people today consider themselves “Sad Puppies”, that you haven’t necessarily annoited as an honest to God Sad Puppy.

    Your site has been fairly quiet. But the battle has raged on at Brad’s site and Sarah’s site. MGC has come in for some flak. Quite a few others have been shocked to have the fight roll over their sites too.

    You’d probably be surprised how many people consider themselves Sad Puppies now.

    Just my take on this.

    1. Of course it isn’t about just me. I’ve tried hard to make it not about me. That’s why I turned down the nomination and refused all further ones. My biggest tactical mistake this whole time was admitting to having actual human feelings when directly questioned by Martin, because then they tried to make it all about me. You have no earthly idea how good it feels to not be alone in this anymore. Sad Puppies is a loose confederation of Wrongfan having Wrongfun. I can’t tell people what to do. (which is what like half of this post is about) At this point, I’m a figurehead and a lightning rod, and whatever I say will be under a microscope to be used against us. That means being strategic and diplomatic. Even when it sucks, or even when it goes against my kick the door in and shoot everybody style of problem solving.

      Trust me. There is no surprise involved here. I’ve been involved in this for a while now.

      1. Well, Larry, one good thing. You can’t be held accountable for what your commenters do and say.

      2. Just the other day on Twitter, Cora Buhlert was saying that Baen authors meant “wrongfan” as an insult of their readers.

        Maybe she just got Baen and TOR mixed up for a moment. 😉

    2. “But its become a movement, a bit of a rebellion against those that want to tell readers what to read, and writers what to write.”

      What’s it about? I don’t think that’s what it is about. The market is pretty plain about what readers want to read and what writer’s will get compensated for writing, yes?

      I thought this was about one particular award that was in large part the award of a club. They are a subset of SF/F readers and they pay $60 per year to join the club. And those that attend the convention had most of the voting power. Larry didn’t like the club and equated it to a political movement, sought allies … and here we are.

      The only realistic puppy goal I can see is trying to change the complexion of one particular club which you might be able to do because the membership is small.

      I don’t think you are influencing the market, do you?

        1. I think you have the effect in proportion to your numbers – which is the effect you should have. With the Hugos your effect can be greater than other more broad based awards. The Hugos is a really small club.

          I live at Goodreads. That’s where I first found MHI. For me the most prestigious award would be the Goodreads’ Choice award. Jim Butcher is a great author and is on the puppies slate. He is 3rd in the fantasy category for the Goodread’s Choice Awards. I don’t think a puppy campaign would move him up at all and certainly not to 1st place which was occupied by Deborah Harkness and “The Book of Life”.

          Those appear to me to be more market driven awards. All one needs to vote is a facebook account. It’s difficult to freep because their are more than 3m people voting.

          1. Thank you. That gave me an idea where you want to drive this.

            The Hugos are pretty small, I agree. And the blogs that most of the people involved read and comment are pretty small too. But this kerfuffle has hit the mainstream news, and I think our disagreement is going to influence things all out of proportion of our numbers. In this case I’m talking about both Puppies and Asps {Anti-Sad Puppies}.

            I think I picked up on File 770 that already the folks that have paid their $40 to vote have doubled from last year. A lot of people that were unaware of the awards heard about the kerfuffle and decide to vote. My opinion, I have no facts to back it up.

            I have no idea what the breakdown would be. I suspect that the unaligned and Asps probably outnumber the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies. But we won’t know until its over.

            As I’m sure you picked up, there’s a bit of a tussle between some folks and Tor. I think I heard somewhere there’s a boycott, and of course Tor has a public answer for that.

            If we had no influence on the market, I don’t think any of the Torlings would be involved in this. Obviously, they think we potentially have some influence.

            How much? Haven’t got a clue. Really don’t have an opinion.

            But one thing I’ve noticed over the last two months, is that there are a lot of people showing up online, not necessarily future puppy supporters, that say they gave up SFF a few years ago and read about the kerfuffle. They would also like to see more story, with either less message or the message buried deeper and more a part of the story rather than forced.

            It might take a while, but I wouldn’t be surprised that a few of the other publishers start looking for different kinds of stories, to fill an underserved segment of the market.

          2. Thanks for the input. I found and read the 770 discussion which is referenced in the thread below. And thanks for telling me what ASP is.

            I guess everyone has a SF/F niche favorite and mine has been time travel, dystopian and recently urban fantasy. Dystopian and Urban Fantasy have exploded so I am not seeing a shortage of material. Sure I loved Tolkien but that is really difficult to reproduce. And I liked the Martian which is straight up rocket ship sci fi. But that is not my niches.

            Given that the market is putting lots of stuff out for me, I don’t see a shortage of material and with my Goodreads friends I am getting plenty of recommendations. For example, I never heard of Hugh Howey until someone told me to give the Wool series a try. Really good dystopian fiction. And like most readers, SF/F is just one genre, and I read lots of other genres. I don’t feel deprived by a message over entertainment agenda that worries many people here.

            If someone is under served as to their niche as you suggest, I would say yes the market will respond.

            None of what I recently read/liked is all that Hugoish. It’s not their thing.

            I am following this recent conflict. I find it fascinating. I went to Sasquan and checked the membership. It is approaching 9500 and I am told this will be the first time there will be more non attending voters than attending voters. Given the $40 membership barrier I am pretty amazed. I have no idea how this contest is going to end. I looked but I can’t find any information on a probable break down. I guess I will have to wait and see just like everyone else. That’s hard for us accountants.

            BTW, I am from Dallas and an accountant so the accountant throwing his boss out the window in MHI #1 had a special appeal for me.

          3. Oh, dystopian fiction and Urban Fantasy. For the moment I’m going to set aside the dystopian fiction.

            I was first introduced to Urban Fantasy before it was called that. Fred Saberhagen wrote an interesting take on Count Dracula, and made it into an interesting series.

            Then there’s the Harry Dresden stuff. That’s really affected everything since it came out.

            Patricia Briggs has an interesting take on things with both the Mercy Thompson series and the “Alpha and Omega” series.

            I think of the MHI series as Urban Fantasy too.

            There are several others I’ve read but haven’t hit the same deep chord. “Kitty”, and the “Greywalker” comes to mind.

            Since I’ve been hanging out on a few of the puppy supporting sites, there are several “new to me” authors I need to try out. I’ve read a couple of excerpts from a couple of Amanda Green’s books, for instance, and have to add them in to this summer’s reading list.

            Thanks for the conversation.

          4. Larry is a former accountant, so that had lots to do with it. =D And when I gifted my brother with the book, he had a boss who was just as insufferable as the one in the book, so he told me he deeply appreciated that I gave him the book to enjoy.

          5. Every person I have read that opening paragraph of MHI has them hooked immediately 🙂 I got my dad started on it a couple weeks ago, and he was an accountant before his retirement.

            I’ve read some urban fantasy like dark suns daughter and looking forward to eventually starting the dresden books.

            For dystopian, if you haven’t read Vampire Earth from E.E. Knight, check it out. There are a lot of novels if you enjoy it.

  15. The only time I’d cut myself off from the opportunity to purchase something is if I was convinced the money would be used to harm me.

  16. I honestly don’t understand why it’s so hard for someone to say, “I was wrong. I’m sorry.”

    1. Depends on the personal investment. Suggest a bad new restaurant to a friend and it’s easy. Define your worldview in terms of opposing the vile filthy racist evil x-phobes? You have to disrupt quite a bit of your “self” to apologize for it, and that is hard.

      1. I think I understand Correia’s comment better now. Once he made it personal it became about him. It gave them something to focus on and to point and screech their rage at. I think Andrew you nailed the problem. Now that they are invested in their mob mentality it is harder and harder for them to jump ship. Look at how they rage at James Doherty.

        1. This is a good point. It seems they are marinated in group think. So when someone like Larry shows up as an individual, it’s an easy target for the group.

          They also like projecting, so I guess that kind of explains how they like to tar and feather everyone in the “broad brush”.

          Maybe they are incapable of comprehending people as individuals, such as Larry, Brad, etc. That would by why when VD says something, they think everyone else has to defend it.

          1. It’s in their Bible, Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

            RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

            When your strategy and tactics are based on cruelty, nothing we’ve seen is a surprise. All Larry and Vox have done is make the personalization easier, but if it hadn’t been them. it would have been something else.

  17. I have to say that I really liked Tom Doherty’s letter. He distanced himself from Gallo, which is PR 101, but he went on to provide one of the most succinct summaries of the Sad Puppies/Hugo situation. It isn’t perfect, but if you’re looking for a good place to start, start there.

    1. I liked it as well. And I don’t think it was “taking sides” and favoring Sad Puppies at all. He merely said that certain things were not true and that Tor publishes everyone and that Gallo’s words did not represent the company. It was an incredibly bland corporate statement and about what anyone would expect.

      1. I liked Tom D’s statement too. It inspired me to email this to him as part of the Peter Grant email campaign:

        Dear Mr Doherty,

        I was very glad to read your statement on last week. It gives me hope that I will someday identify the Tor logo as a mark of quality
        in the same way that I find the Baen logo to be. Sadly my own recent experience right now is that the Tor logo is a sign that – except for certain, mostly bestselling, authors – I should skip the book in question and look for something published by someone else.

        Worse, the attitudes on display from a number of senior Tor editors on various social media sites suggests that they dislike both these bestselling authors and their legions of fans. Thus before your
        statement there seemed very little chance that this opinion would change.

        I am looking forward to Tor “bringing readers the finest in science fiction – on a broad range of topics, from a broad range of authors.”


  18. Since I sorta started down the path, maybe I should finish it with some who I think are Heroes of the Rebellion.

    I have to start with James May and calbeck. I can no longer keep up with a fast moving, confrontational conversation. So I admire those that can. James May and calbeck were outnumbered vastly by the asps at Eric Flint’s recently, and held the swarms off. Greatswords flashing, heads, limbs and blood flying at every stroke. They did well.

    R. K. Modena. She had an absolutely classic blowup on Brad’s site and let all of the asps there know just what she thought, and then some. Shortly there afterwards, she set several traps that unsuspecting trolls walked into, fell down, and still haven’t gotten up.

    Her article about the use of the term Nazi is just golden. Mandatory reading for any freedom loving person.

    Brad. I doubt he counted on as much backlash as there has been. But he’s dealt with a lot of abuse, and gone forward. He’s gone to both Eric Flint’s and GRRM’s site to answer their charges and questions, bible in one hand, sword in the other. He left both site, head bloodied but unbowed. Being a broken sigma, I’m not much into following, but I’d follow Brad to hell and back, shield at his back.

    Sarah has stood her ground, no matter what the asps throw at her. Just the other day she fisked Glyer, after Glyer more or less seemingly insinuated that Sarah was homophobic. Maybe not the smartest move, but certainly brave and heroic.

    Tom Knighton, definitely learning the fine art of the fisk. Amanda Green has proven worthy of the fisk too, and is solid under fire.

    Cedar too, solid.

    I really have the greatest respect for her guy, Sanford. Not only solid, but he held fire when it was obvious he so badly wanted too. My regards Sanford.

    Kate Paulk is having fun with this now, and I look forward to what comes next year.

    Can’t end this without mentioning Dave Freer, the battler.

    My compromised memory probably has forgotten many. My thanks to all of you.

    My apologies to Larry, for mentioning this here.

    1. No apologies needed. You have no idea how much I love not being the lone voice in the wilderness. 🙂

      1. I figured that since a good chunk of my ‘net time prior to this was being fairly conservative and pro-Israel in online discussions, I thought ‘oh well, I’ll never be published.’

        Then I got introduced to Sarah A Hoyt, Mad Genius Club… and indie… and here… and there ya go.

        I also discovered today that my essay was referenced over in American Thinker a couple of days ago. I am over the MOON with delight!

        1. To be honest, this would bother me as an executive as much or more than the boycott – authors provide the product. If authors view your house as a politically biased toxic swamp, how easy is it going to be for other houses to poach authors you want to sign just by pointing that out to the authors? “You want to sign with Tor? Let me show you how they talk in public about their authors”. How many bestsellers or potential bestsellers have you missed? How many more are you going to miss?

      2. Sadly, after watching “Serenity” and enjoying River Tam kicking ass, I remembered Peter Grant and his wife Dorothy. They may not identify themselves as Sad Puppies, but they seem to be sympathetic.

        And by tomorrow, Peter will be doing the same thing as taking on town hall.

      3. I’ll be honest. If it were just about the award, I’d have thrown my hands up in disgust and let them have the increasingly meaningless thing well before now.

        The amount of anger and lies being spewed over this goes well beyond what any award is worth, especially one with essentially no monetary value for the winners.

        So why stay?

        At the risk of sounding pretentious, the best way I can explain it is to reference the battle of Helm’s Deep,

        Theoden: What can men do against such reckless hate?
        Aragorn: Ride out with me
        T: For Death and Glory?
        A: For Rohan. For your people.

        So I stay, not because of the antis or the prize but because of the puppies. I stay because I believe in telling stories that entertain first and foremost and making people’s lives better, even if only in a small way. I stay because I care about the genre and the readers.

        I stay because Brad is an honorable man and a kind one, and because I can say the same about Sarah or Larry or any of the others I have had the pleasure to interact with, in however small a way.

        Death and Glory are poor reasons to do anything. For Rohan? For my people? Yes, those I can get behind.

        I may only be an S list author at the moment, but if I let that stop me I suppose I’d never get anything done.

        (Oh, and just to be clear, I am _not_ comparing the antis to the Orcs. This isn’t about them, it’s about us.

        1. At a certain point, you simply have to say, “Here I stand. I can be nowhere else, do nothing else, without betraying myself. Let’s dance.”

          But I’m half Scottish and all Virginian – its kinda our thing. 😉

          1. And I’m Irish/Scottish/English and probably viking. And all Texan. Remember that little dustup at the Alamo. We took a drubbing and lost the battle. Santy anny lost the war and Texas.

          2. Exactly Jon. We are in the perfect position. We are surrounded and swarmed. You can point in any direction and blast em. The difference is we aren’t losing.

          3. Yeah, I get that Geodkyt. My family is Dutch, they only left Holland after WWII. They helped build a country on the coast. Below sea-level. On purpose. Anyone not stubborn got the heck out long, long ago.

        2. I somewhat prefer this:

          Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden! Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter! Spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered, a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises! Ride now, ride now! Ride to Gondor!

          I am one of those who slumbered, and is now awake. Unlikely to go back to sleep, too.

    2. Thank you. And it was worth it all. Still is. Good people here. How can I not stand with them, join them?

    3. Hahahaha. Calbeck was great. He used simple common sense and they acted like they were stung by bees. This isn’t really working out for SJWs. Calling us “shitlords,” “racists” and pointing out we’re nuts hasn’t and won’t work. They got no quotes. Anita Sarkeesian is now being routinely dismantled in public and become a laughing stock. Deleting and banning has proved to be their worse enemy; they have no debating skills. My favorite one lately is where they call us racists for saying award nominees are affirmative action and then us showing 40 quotes where they call for affirmative action. And Larry’s common sense is so straightforward they can’t understand it. We have accurately predicted every goofball hysteria these feminists and the stiffs they call “allies.” They are as predictable as machines because their minds operate much like one. “I know you are but what am I seems to be Scalzi’s main tactic. I wonder what would happen if Christopher Hitchens were still alive.

      1. Are you as much of a white supremacist who supports the burning of minority neighborhoods as is Glyer?

      2. Well, Sarah seems to think he did. It looks like he did to me too. You’re mileage might vary, but I suspect you have a reading comprehension problem.

        Attacking a woman without provocation makes him a sexist misogynist doesn’t it?

      3. Oh you mean like Glyer doesn’t insinuate that we’re all basket cases either? Or cherry picks things in a way that appeals to his reader base for more easy dismissal?

        Please. I knew he would quote only the part where I was already angry in my essay and made it easier for him by caps-locking certain parts. And yep, there was that ‘Oh, caps lock. Nothing worth reading there by RK Modena, now or ever.’ Didn’t disappoint at all.

        If you ASPs were really going to be fair, you’d be reading more than the quoted bits, but we don’t expect it of you any more, especially once your side started calling Brad Torgersen a racist even after discovering he’s in a mixed-race marriage.

        1. Whether by design or ignorance, Glyer has effectively memory-holed the feminist ideology behind all this. Without that, it makes us look like baboons who invaded Okinawa in 1945 for a lark.

  19. Tor still produces great work – I am reviewing work by both Mary Robinette Kowal and John C Wright this week, and enjoyed all of it very thoroughly. But as an organization, I don’t feel I can trust them to give me a fair chance – or professional treatment – as an author.
    Unfortunately, the story I’m writing would probably fit the lineup at Tor better than elsewhere; it’s a hard-science-steampunk “Les Miserables” paired with “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea” and magic.
    I’m glad to see in all of your comments that I have other options: Orbit, Del Ray, independent (of course) – and Baen (if they’ll take me). Any other publishers the authors here would suggest?

  20. Hey Larry, I had a long response, but apparently the site ate it. And it’s not the first time. Do you know if there’s something going on there? This post is partly to tell if it’s intermittent or consistent.

    1. I don’t know if this is a related problem, but I keep seeing “Error establishing a database connection” when I try to load Larry’s blog. Hitting refresh two or three times eventually gets through. Could be that the site is getting a lot more traffic than normal, and the database connection pool is getting maxed out. If your response happened to land in a moment when no database connections were available, then that might have gotten your comment lost.

      For safety, I’m copying and pasting this comment into Notepad (well, actually into GEdit since I use Linux) before hitting the “Post Comment” button. That way if the database eats it, I can try again.

      1. The increased traffic over the last couple of days has uncovered some serious problems with our new host provider. I’ve implemented something that I *hope* will help, but it will take 24-72hrs to go into effect. In the meantime, I’d suggest following Robin’s advice and hit refresh as necessary. I apologize for the inconvenience! (FWIW, it annoys and affects me too- possibly more so…)

        1. Would it be possible to also restore comment permalinks? It’s useful in threads where the comments get into the triple-digits… or more.

      2. It’s not just here that it seems to be happening. I strongly suggest to everyone that longer comments be copied to Notepad or similar programs (I use Pluma myself, Robin =D ) before hitting post, because it’d be a shame to lose all that effort.

        1. Could you please take out the “strongly”? I felt triggered for a minute there. – signed, Admiral Halsey

  21. Jerry the Geek here, and i don’t do WordPress. So if this doesn’t make the cut it must not be very important.

    I’ve been reading SF for 60 years and I have more books than a stray dog has fleas. I don’t buy them because it’s a good idea, I buy them because if it’s worth reading once it’s worth reading again.

    My interest in this little pissing contest is tangential at best. I’m going to buy the books and save them and read them no matter what happens. I’ve tried to ignore the hair- pulling contest you girls are putting on (and no, I’m not pointing fingers just at the authors, who GOD knows are the Creative Artists that make the boys jump up and shoot) but this shit has got to quit disturbing my equanimity.

    If you write SF books, I’ve got you on my bookshelf and I’ve read every book more than once because HEY! I READ FASTER THAN YOU WRITE!

    I wander into this wilderness, Larry, because I have respect for your talent. Also Scalzi, Drake, Stirling, Ringo, Kratman, Williamson and a host of other talented authors whose expertise I admire. And whose books I BUY .. not borrow from the iibrary.

    I urge you to get this shit straightened out. I try to avoid posts about the evil publishers, or whatever, but this shit has got to stop or I will end up reading Tami Hoag all th time and I will not be happy with this.

    So here’s my thing: You guys got problems with your publishers? Work it out amongst yourselves. In the meantime, quit giving m all these angst moments. I’m retired, living on social security and I can’t afford to start a new bookcase with Kellerman and Martini and Hoag et al.


    Get over it. Go write something that I will BUY!

    Jerry The Geek

    1. You’re missing the point. This one’s not an author fight, it’s one taken up by fans like me, who are tired of being told what they can and cannot read and who are maligned by authors, Twitterati, and publishers. And I’m finding that I have far better uses for my money than to give it to an organization that apparently doesn’t want my business.

    2. Skimmed until offended….
      Concerned that “Your doing it wrong”…

      Its almost like I’ve seen this check list before.

    3. In your brilliance you have failed to realize Larry is not published by Tor. You’ve also missed the title where he indicates he is not calling for a boycott of Tor. Go make up something new to get irritated about.

    4.         I will not pay money to a business whose employees insult me and lie about me, unless there’s the equivalent of a gun against my head.  As long as the Nielsen-Haydens, Feder, and Gallo work for MacMillan, I won’t purchase any products Macmillan turns out.  End of discussion.

    5. Your intent seems to create division between author and fan. I don’t see why Larry has to “straighten my shit” and although I’m a fan of his, he ain’t my mamma. You’ve been reading books for 60 years over and over and perhaps you should take the time to work on your reading comprehension. Correia is encouraging people not to boycott if you hadn’t bothered to reread his post and have it registered to your gray matter (not your hair—your Geritol pickled brain I mean). I sure wish I had your reading problem. It would be fun to read the MHI series as if it were brand new.

      As for disturbing your “equanimity” I find it difficult to believe that a seasoned old cuss like you has to be baby walked through the realities of the world. People bicker on politics or do you remember the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, or 90s? I agree with the fellas who posted to you that you sound like a freeping Scalzi plant. I’ll buy what I want, read what I please, and I’m not boycotting per se, I don’t see much from Tor that I like anyway. Sure, they have a writer or two I like, but if any new writer or book so much has a whiff of leftist progressive crap then it stays on the shelf. Understand? I’m fighting these pencil necked Geeks with words and money and a Hugo vote. Get over it! Go read a book about Teletubby’s or something. Get some therapy!

  22. One would think they had more important things to worry about this week.

    But who am I kidding? I just saw a post on Facebook arguing that “Jurassic World’s” success at the worldwide box office proves that this is what “The Puppies” will do to mass market SF…make it really dumb and repetitive.

    (Because so many of the authors nominated worked on that fi-…oh.)

    Anyway, I haven’t seen anyone posting anything about an organized boycott. Just an individual here and there deciding for themselves to abstain from purchasing future books and hit the libraries and used bookstores instead. Which means at some point money will be exhanged, just not theirs. So I don’t see a problem.

    Now, here’s hoping they pay attention to the alarming, depressing things happening in the real world. It’s kind of important. 🙁

  23. “After being a soldier, Peter hung up his guns and became a man of God.”

    And THAT was quite likely the “straw that broke the camel’s back” for the SJW crowd.

    Christians are (in their twisted world) automatically guilty of every ist and ism they can throw accusations of.

  24. I’ve had it with TORheit (meaning “foolishness” in German). Until the latest stunts I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. No longer. “The jar will dunk into the well until it cracks.” (Dutch proverb). Mine has cracked.

  25. This kerflufle is highly annoying to some of us who care about the books and the stories and not the politics of the authors. Ok, so I’m a flaming liberal. I also love MHI and Grimnoir. I love Scalzi, Butcher, and oooooh, Connie Willis. The list of authors who’s books I love is huge, and now y’all are spending time arguing instead of writing books?

      1. I think because the medium through which we speak is a poor communicator. We say on the internet things we would not say in person. It is easy to separate societal controls when we get on a computer and become impersonal. Ray Bradbury warned us of this in the 50s. We are seeing it in play now.

    1. I gave you a thumbs up on that post. I have liberal friends who are also big time Correia fans. I was introduced to MHI by one of those liberal friends. During a BBQ my friend Bob said, “I rarely laugh out loud when I read a book. Don, you gotta check this out. ” His wife Lynda was agreeing with him (she is a conservative) and wondered what had tickled him so much. Paul (a conservative gun nut) was passed the book first and was in hysterics after reading the first chapter and bought a copy on his Kindle and then passed it to me. I was hooked from then on. Bob kept pestering me on when I got to the elf part (I’m a slloooowww reader by comparison). My wife (a conservative and super fast reader) was curious about what had me giggling and read it too. I could tell when she got to the elves just when I heard her cracking up in the bedroom. My son (who is “above” politics but reads like his mom) is an avid MHI fan too. My family, friends, and aquaintances run the spectrum of politics but this book is truly a good book.

      Why must we concentrate on our differences and not our humanity Jennifer? I’m with you. I read a book and I don’t care a wit about the politics. A good book is stands on its own. I have never read a book and then said that I cannot allow myself to like it because the author is a liberal. Brains don’t work that way.

      The nature of SF/F is that we see things that we cannot talk about in public. It is better for everyone if we could talk about things but the genre serves as a soft influence on the people who read it but it is very powerful.

      1. Noticing differences are something hardwired in us, I believe. Even animals categorize (prey, food) the trick is in enjoying things we truly love together. Reading, movies, sports, worship. There are plenty of things humans bond over 🙂

  26. When Larry Niven’s Ringworld came out a long time ago there was apparently a flurry of letters from fans about how the mechanics of the structure could be made better and I believe he incorporated those suggestions in later editions of the book.

    There was nothing about how much “agency” women had or whether the “vampires” were thinly disguised “PoC.” There was also nothing about supermarket distribution centers and NASCAR.

    In the last several years we’ve not only seen the entry of people into SFF dragging weird race-gender obsessions into an inappropriate space, but who also act as drama queens who are clearly bored with their own genre. One thing you repeatedly see from SJWs in a disinterest in SFF which puts the actual literature in the back seat. To me personally it’s as weird as a new group of people entering a church congregation and making sure half the time is devoted to fantasy football.

    This is Laura Mixon, the wife of the sitting SFWA president:

    “I anticipate that this groundswell of efforts to boost the voices of the marginalized will continue and I have every intent to help promote those efforts wherever I can… By speaking when she did, in my view, Irene was doing what other thought leaders in our field like N. K. Jemisin, John Scalzi, and the Nielsen Haydens have done: guarding the health and well-being of our SFF community by standing up against hate speech.”

    To me, that is not only a bizarre obsession, but one which is operating in the precise opposite direction of reality. Let’s forget the idea that reading her all too common words about affirmative action and commenting on them makes me a racist. Let’s instead notice how promoting race-gender hateful dehumanization theories to power that affirmative action is considered anti-hate speech.

    A few years ago we saw the entry of this race-gender freak show which wanted to turn SFF into a civil rights reality show which never shuts up. In claiming to fight racial and sexual discrimination SJWs have proven themselves to be left alone on that field in practicing overt collusion to attack and discriminate against straight white men who have no names, just race and sex.

    So here we sit, with a cult which is far more interested in their own race and sex than they are SFF and plenty of useful idiots more than happy to think of anti-white racists who call for reading less straight white men as some kind of Martin Luther King.

    It suits the purposes of this pack of liars to imagine that us wanting to read actual SFF rather than shitty affirmative action stories with no SFF as tantamount to being in the KKK, because SJWs started their stupid crusade with that as a given in the first place. That’s Scalzi’s Squirrel Theory in action: the more we resent having rocks thrown at us and no one else, the more confirmation it is only we neo-Nazis are standing in the way of turning SFF into a noble genre of award nominated stories like “Wakulla Springs” and Hild which are heavy on Jim Crow and lesbians but without the slightest sign of a Ringworld to argue over.

    To say SJWs are pathological liars and self-contradicting morons is an accurate statement. I have thousands of quotes to back that up. The only thing SJWs have are scare quotes and meaningless skewed demographics and marketing initiatives which reflect who is actually interested in SFF. SJWs have turned that into proof of a working anti-female Jim Crow because they are both paranoid and stupid. If these people represented a race-gender supremacist movement (and they do) which entered the NBA and had their way, they’d destroy basketball in short order. That comparison not only highlights how useful idiots are doing the dirty work of racist feminist supremacist ideologues, but how nuts the whole SJW crusade is.

    1. A question about the context of Ms. Mixon’s comment: is she referring to the current controversy with Irene Gallo, or was this in reference to something else? I’m really, really hoping it’s the second one, because someone who honestly believes that calling Jim Butcher and John C. Wright “bad-to-reprehensible writers” is an attempt to “guard the health and well-being of our SFF community by standing up against hate speech” is simply not operating in the real universe.

      1. The first quote predates the second by some months and is her general view of SFF and affirmative action initiatives. The second is specifically referencing Gallo.

          Quote: “A noisy few but they’ve been able to gather some Gamergate folks around them and elect a slate of bad-to-reprehensible works on this year’s Hugo ballot.”
          How is that NOT saying what it says?
          edited to add: Oh wait- lemme guess. Just because their WORK is bad to reprehensible doesn’t mean they’re bad to reprehensible writers. Am I close?

        2. She said that the Sad and Rabid Puppies are: ” A noisy few but they’ve been able to gather some Gamergate folks around them and elect a slate of bad-to-reprehensible works on this year’s Hugo ballot” She never shows support or specifics. In her view we recommended them and that they appeared on the ballot so our choices are “bad-reprehensible”. I think when you argue her point is better to ask her or their supporters for specifics. They can’t show them because they probably don’t read them.
          And surely you aren’t contending James that the left should be silenced. Does a wrong make a right? They can’t defend themselves with their irrational thinking and if we demand their silence then we are fighting irrational thinking to irrational thinking. Have faith! Reason will win the day.

          1. SJWs believe they should be silenced. I believe in live and let live. However when this specific group sets standards like threatening to boycott WorldCon over a TV personality who did exactly nothing, then SJWs will be held to the standards they themselves have set. SJWs threatened to boycott the SFWA in regards to an expulsion over a thing their own heroes have done many times: stipulate the moral and spiritual inferiority of an ethnic group. John Scalzi to this day boycotts any convention which does not live up to his own sexual harassment standards. Those standards mysteriously never include straight white men. John Green (among others) boycotts all-male or all-white panels, a thing he would never dare do to the starting five of an NBA team or a middle-weight boxing card. Lightspeed Magazine has a reviewer who openly boycotts white men for no other reason than birth. There have been similar calls to not read or publish authors by reason of birth.

            This is a sick sociopathic ideology hiding behind the words “social justice” like the KKK hides behind hoods.

          1. not sure how this comment ended up here, but was no intended for the above chain.

    2. Honest to gawd… no one opposes “boosting the voices of the marginalized”. It’s when it seems only able to happen by punishing those deemed (by some magical accounting) to need to get their butt out of the pie eating contest because there is only one pie that people fuss.

      Calling people on their “privilege” theory bullsh*t isn’t the same as opposing efforts to make people feel welcome. In fact, going on about white privilege is the opposite of welcoming anyone. “Hey, come on in, the water’s warm! It’s also full of white men who hate you!”

      Yeah, that’ll work.

      1. I agree, Correia brings his own brand of true social justice in his fiction. What his detractors are saying is they want their message central in all writing.
        Here i s the link:
        The idea that putting diversity into the characters and in world building isn’t a bad idea but what is scary is they later say:“While I appreciate the optimism, that’s a trap I don’t want to fall into,” she said. “You have to remember that it takes active participation from every single person to make sure we keep this momentum going. That’s why social media has become so important.”
        The line that is chilling to me is “active participation from every single person” and “Social media has become so important”
        If this came from a less highly charged company I would shrug but since it comes from an article from Tor talking about what positive things they speak of it is chilling.

        I am not saying that character diversity in fiction is wrong but I don’t think it is right to demand that every writer bows to Tor’s brand of social justice considering the recent spurious charges that Tor editors have flung my way. These guys should not be the thought police nor the gatekeepers in our society. They haven’t the maturity. If a writer brings me into the dark spooky woods and I meet up with some elf with a thinly veiled diatribe about how much America and people who share my values suck—-I’m done reading. If Tor wants to produce that fiction—let them. I am at present hard pressed to even consider a Tor book. I’m not boycotting but there is a lot out there to chose from and I vote with my pocketbook. Tor has no business exterminating our thought or our fiction. To show that they approve of people who want to enforce this in all the comics proves that Tor is partisan as a business.

        1. Frankly, as a Filipina, I would find highly insulting that my writing or any work be praised because of the color of my skin or my ethnic origins or the body parts I possess, or who I sleep with. It’s highly condescending, because it has overtones of ‘oh look, the monkey learned to pick up a paintbrush and whack it against a canvas!’ One does not use one’s privates to think or write with (and if anyone does… yikes) nor does one’s sexual preferences determine one’s capabilities or talents.

          It ultimately boils down to if I am truly considered an equal human being with human agency and free will by another, they will judge me entirely by my character, work, and merit, things which are something I have control over, as opposed to things that have nothing to do with it.

          1. You, I, and Michelle Malkin would agree on this. Those were amazing comments. I could only give you one thumbs up though.

            I think the liberal notion is that affirmative action builds self esteem. If their goal is aimed at building true self worth then they are going about it all wrong. True work, character, and merit are the foundations of true self esteem. Affirmative action destroys self esteem because success won’t mean a thing if it is handed out like a T-ball trophy. That which is fought for and earned is what is prized. It is their inept world view that shoots society in the foot.

          2. I like Malkin. She and I aren’t too different and I admire her for her ability to have kept this up for even longer than I could imagine.

            Like her, I have gotten repeated death threats (aimed at my children and family), from a dedicated online stalker, who’s a regular over at File 770, using Alauda as his username there.

          3. I dig Malkin. She is such a class act. I’m sorry that you have to deal with all that. They are such cowards. I know all groups have a cook fringe but their philosophy seems to attract a great number of them and bigger than a normal population would. They have some whack jobs that are calling for voluntary human extinction for crying out loud.

          4. My response to the voluntary human extinction movement is: “Well? I thought you were going to kill yourself. Show me the courage of your convictions! After all, if you wish for others to follow your path, you must first walk it!”

          5. Lol, I agree. Maybe they could feed a polar bear or something constructive when they do it.

          6. Hey! I just now got around to reading your blog post about your dad and your stance on Sad Puppies. It was incredible. I’ve been slugging it out on Black Gate with some Austrian socialist about Irene’s comments. I mean for hours back and forth. He absolutely won’t budge an inch from Irene’s statement.

            Your dad was incredible. Seriously, you have a hero’s bloodline in your DNA.

            In my world travels if someone would ask me to tell them what a stereotypical Fillipino was like I would say that they are the happiest people on the planet. I have seen them in every country that I’ve been to and they usually had a bright smile. I swear it is true. The only place I didn’t see them smile was in Saudi Arabia. The ones I saw were maids and butlers and I did not know it at the time but their Saudi boss had taken their passports away and sometimes beat them. They were pretty much slaves that had been suckered to work there to send money back home. They were also working to get their freedom back to go home. One of the guys in our group spoke Tagalic passably because he had a Fillipino wife and had spoken to them. That is how I know. I heard that a Fillipino family of Christians had been beheaded in Saudi Arabia for evangelizing. I don’t know if it was true or not but I prayed that it wasn’t the people I saw there.

          7. It is true, about Saudi Arabia. Dad would pray he would never be sent there because he would be powerless to help anyone. He said it would destroy his soul.

            Thats why I said that Israel would be the one place in the Middle East he could stand.

            I’m glad you enjoyed the essay. Thank you for the praise. But you really should read about Peter Grant’s story. He too is a real hero, whose tale merits more attention as well.

          8. The worst side effect of AA is that it demeans the achievements of those who have worked and achieved through merit.

          9. What’s more, the offer of extra special respect for you for being non-white and female is doubly poisoned — not only does it imply that being non-white or female is inherently inferior, but it also comes with the proviso “as long as you agree with us on everything.” Notice how quickly they turn on someone, such as Sarah Hoyt (or yourself) who doesn’t agree with them, on the excuse that they are betraying their groups (or, more accurately, their assumptions about how members of their groups “should”) think?

        2. Those people are frightening. They remind me of those kids in Village of the Damned. Tor’s influence in SFF has been as destructive as Ace and Ballantine’s was positive in the ’60s. Imagine having a Scalzi and Hayden instead of Wollheim and Lin Carter; scratch one revival of Burroughs, Lovecraft and Howard. Try and imagine what the Ballantine Adult Fantasy Series looks like with the ideology of Kate Millet and Andrea Dworkin trying to solve the male gaze and the gap of male ignorance.

          1. That is a good point. That is exactly what common core does with its literature. It eliminates conservative thought with liberally biased text and erases from history Ronald Reagan or any other conservative icon.

        3. In addition to that is the enormous amount of hate speech these people generate, and if you even blink back you’re a racist. Most of the time you were a racist just existing anyway, so it’s not great leap, but presumed.

          1. If you’re automatically a racist, then nothing you can do can change it. Therefore, you’re free to do anything you like!

    3. The phrase “thought leaders” creeps me the hell out every time I see it. North Korea has “thought leaders”. So did Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, and Pol Pot-era Cambodia.

      1. Really? I liked that one a lot, it somehow felt like part of the times with all those 70’s disaster movies.

    4. In the last several years we’ve not only seen the entry of people into SFF dragging weird race-gender obsessions into an inappropriate space, but who also act as drama queens who are clearly bored with their own genre. One thing you repeatedly see from SJWs in a disinterest in SFF which puts the actual literature in the back seat. To me personally it’s as weird as a new group of people entering a church congregation and making sure half the time is devoted to fantasy football.

      What’s more, they don’t know the history of the genre, and self-righteously lecture on it to people who do. For instance, the claim that women have were before around 2000 previously marginalized as science-fiction or fantasy writers is absolutely absurd: some of the biggest names in science fiction were female authors!

      1.         Kristine Kathryn Rusch has been blogging about an anthology of ‘lost’ science-fiction by women authors.  She noted that the big reason for this myth of ‘no women’ was because sf&f used to revolve around magazines and anthologies.  Although there were many women writers in the genre magazines from the beginning, for some reason most didn’t get anthologized.

        1. I’ve never analyzed that but the earliest 5 anthologies Judith Merril edited from 54-59 have very few women. At some point I think you just have to chalk it up to the demographic actually there, which was itself very small.

  27. Gallo, Hayden, Feder, Bourke, Meacham.

    They all have to go.

    They compassionately and publicly support an ideology that is endemically hostile to my very existence. Promote SFF. If you’re compassionate about race-gender crusades then join some group somewhere and stop dragging your insane bullshit where it’s inappropriate and not wanted.

    Tor is a public, supposedly neutral, arena. If they want to be seen as anti-straight white male central then that is how they will be treated.

    1. Let the Tor dinosaur die. Their veneer of being neutral is a sham and their brand is looking like crap. No one is forcing you or anyone to buy their stupid junk.

    2. By their own standards, they have to go. They censure the Sad Puppies because of Vox Day and he isn’t part of Sad Puppies. By those standards, Tor must be held responsible for people in their employ regardless of whether what they say “officially” represents Tor.

      1. Oh but, they’re above those rules! Because reasons. e_e Excuses really. Reason has nothing to do with it.

  28. Has any high-ranking employee/director/editor at Tor (similar in that regard to Irene Gallo, Moshe Feder, or Patrick Nielsen Hayden) come out as a vocal supporter of Sad Puppies, or as strongly opposing Irene Gallo’s “neo-nazis” statement?

    I’ve been thinking about the issue along the lines of a balance/scale. On the one side, we’ve got Gallo’s “neo-nazis” statement, and Moshe Feder’s & PNH’s continuously repeated puppy-kicking statements. On the other side we’ve got Tom Doherty’s statement – but while Tom Doherty is a significantly more substantial metaphorical weight (based on their relative positions at Tor) than the others (at least individually, maybe even collectively [at least in the past]), his weight (statement) is much closer to the fulcrum (neutral) than theirs are. Hence my question above – is there any other employee/director/editor at Tor that can be seen as an opposing balance? John C. Wright could maybe be included, but if he is then Scalzi & several other Tor published authors would also need to be included on the other side And as authors are a different category than employees, I’d say it makes more sense to just exclude them & not clutter up the metaphorical scale. Either way, based on what I’ve seen, the scale is tipped to one side, it isn’t at all close to being balanced.

    Personally, I’m a very strong proponent of free speech. Even in cases of ridiculously obvious falsehoods, like Gallo’s “neo-nazis” statement, the solution to bad speech is (more) good speech – not trying to ban the bad speech. Looking at the conversation on the internet as a whole, with everyone else’s response to Gallo’s “neo-nazis” statement, I’m reasonably satisfied that the good speech is outweighing the bad speech. In particular Peter Grant & R.K. Modena’s responses are just absolutely brilliant & powerful. But looking specifically at Tor, the scale really seems to be tipping to the bad side, unless I’m missing something.

    I’d really like to see someone at Tor be at least as out-spoken as Irene Gallo, Moshe Feder, or Patrick Nielsen Hayden, but speaking on the side of truth opposing blatantly overblown emotional hyperbole (neo-nazis FFS). If I could point to someone at Tor opposing them, then I’d actively oppose any boycott of Tor, even w/out any proper apology or retraction. Peter Grant has said he’s spoken w/ at least 2 Tor employees who do personally oppose them, but they’re not speaking out openly for fear of losing their jobs. While I can understand that, and I don’t want to demean them, I still wish someone at Tor were brave enough to match Gallo/Feder/PNH’s vocalness. And if Tor did fire them, after not firing Gallo/Feder/PNH, then at that point I’d actively support a boycott. As it is, I’m really ambivalent on a boycott.

    1. The problem is we’re now seeing literal segregation. A Lightspeed reviewer won’t review white men, John Green (with the connivance of Penguin) boycotts all male or all white panels. Tor review boycotted a VD Hugo nominated story last year. We have a racially segregated room at WisCon. The more they get away with that the bolder they’ll become, because no one is saying “no” to them, no matter how insane they have acted to date. They like boycotts? Fine.

      The fact you never hear “no” or opposing voices at Tor or their site shows they either don’t exist or keep quiet out of fear. What’s the odds a site so interested in feminism has no negative critiques of it? No one?

      Sure the solution is more good speech, but it’s banned outside the very institutions promoting this rancid hate speech. There is no balanced dialogue at the Tor site – none. They’ve made it clear by their deletion policies and lack of counter-voice they have no interest in debate of fair play.

      But the truth is I have no interest in seeing that kind of debate permanently enshrined in SFF. Do these people have no idea what a genre is? Lesbian feminism, race and gender and privilege theory have no business taking over a genre and having such a central place. The idea “privilege” is somehow a natural fit for SFF is only believed by medicated feminists, racists and naive middle class asshats bored out of their minds by SFF and looking for some crusading drama. If SFF doesn’t do it for you – fine. Get out and find something that does and stop polluting the well. Who needs Jim Hines peering into too-white photos of past WorldCon chairs and Scalzi making stupid pronouncements about white privilege indistinguishable from Kate Millett in 1970, a woman who was sent to a mental hospital?

      1. And they successfully threatened to boycott WorldCon last year to get rid of Jonathan Ross, a guy who had done exactly nothing. It’s not men like Ross who have to go, but this racist cult.

      2. I disagree with what you say in part. From an egalitarian perspective it is better that all viewpoints are allowed to be voiced. You’ve never read a book and said, this is good but I cannot be allowed to like it because the author is a liberal have you? From a business perspective it would be better to cast a wide net of perspectives and not limit your fiction. Tor is betting on the strength of their brand name will continue to be profitable by presenting their liberal fiction. Let Tor the Dinosaur die. Let them be shredded in the gear works of capitalism. They hold a false assumption that the Sad Puppy minded are an insignificant minority. Let them. Patronize the brands that promote the fiction that people have. Already there are markets opening to conservative fiction. Weird western and sword and sorcery were believed to be a small market and unworthy of publication at one point. GRRM despite a horrid chance of getting published turned out to be a gold mine for his publisher. Now with Kindle and eBooks those markets are opening to a wide niche audience. The novella was almost extinct in print but now thrives on the epublication venues. Most of the left wing publishing is dying as a result of Kindle and the crash of bookstores.

        I think when you silence these extremists you risk frustrating them and ginning up their rage. Look at what they did to us. Did it make us go away or did it drive us to fight? Their oppression strengthened our resolve. Now they are doubling down on their stupidity.

  29. I have a proposal. Why don’t we create a Sad Puppy – Tor charity drive to benefit the victims of the recent shooting in Charleston or Wounded Warriors or some charity that promotes literacy? Instead of the focus during the Hugos being the negative fighting between the camps there can be a focus on something positive about the SF/F fandom. This would also inject our positive nature vice feed the negative. I don’t think Tor could meet the challenge. I know that the Sad Puppies have an audience with charitable hearts. What do you all think?

    1. What you’re suggesting was actually done during World War II. If you google “Armed Services Edition”, you can see what the program looked like (and you can buy some of the books on eBay). Basically, publishers agreed to create free versions of their books that were shipped to the troops overseas. The list of titles was quite long but was noticeably short on SF/F titles. The program was widely considered to be a success, but it doesn’t seemed to have carried over to any subsequent wars.

      1. We need to revive it then. I’d have confidence that the Sad Puppies could outmatch the Tor group in charity. After all their hearts appear to be Grinch sized, and our values are invested in big hearted and true compassion.

    2. Operation Baen Bulk 2015 ( ) is already in the works. They took a pause last year but in 2013 raised over $5K and used it to buy ~80 kindles (that Baen and a couple of other publishers then donated 500 titles for)

    1. Might you have sent the wrong link? I skimmed through that discussion and didn’t find anything about Hugo voting there. I might have missed it, but I don’t think so.

      1. I think he is talking about E Pluribus Hugo also known as SDV-LPE.

        Basically it is a nomination system where each voter gets one point. Nominate as many as you want. If you nominate four, each will receive 1/4th point.

        The nominations go through an elimination phase. The two lowest point totals are compared. The one with the fewest nominations is eliminated. Here we are talking about number of ballots not number of points.

        Now we do it again. And the process repeats till the voting ballot is determined. Aren’t computers wonderful?

        However, your points get reallocated on every round of elimination. Let’s say for example you nominated Dresden #20 and MHI # 10. Each got one point. During one of the elimination rounds Dresden # 20 gets eliminated. Now your nomination is only MHI #10, and it gets a full point – not half a point. Your ballot will represent a full point in every round unless all your nominations are eliminated.

        So you can nominate one or ten. Up to you. Personally, I like it and expect this or something like it to be enacted. This has been under discussion for a long time.

        What about strategy? Here is a Q&A on that point:

        20. So what kinds of strategy should I use when nominating? Is there a particular number of works I should nominate?

        Under SDV-LPE there’s no reason to use any strategy at all. The system was crafted specifically to make most strategies irrelevant. For example, suppose you wanted to give your full support behind one work that you really feel strongly about. You can do that, particularly if there isn’t anything else you feel is Hugo-worthy. On the other hand, you generally won’t hurt your candidate by nominating something else that you feel is worthy. If your one work gets eliminated, then your full support will go towards the remaining work. In general, the best strategy is simple: nominate as many works as you feel are worthy.

        21. Why are there two phases (Selection and Elimination)? Couldn’t you simplify it by doing it all in one step per elimination?

        The selection phase looks for works with the fewest points, and the elimination phase eliminates the one with the fewest nominations. Looking at the two different measures of popularity adds robustness to the system. With non-slate nominations, as occurred with most of the Hugo Awards to date, the works with the fewest points will tend to be the same ones as those with the fewest number of nominations. But while it might be possible for strategic blocs to manipulate one of these two measurements (as occurred in 2015), it would be very difficult to manipulate both in the same direction. A strategy that focuses on nominations for the elimination phase (such as bloc voting) will be stymied by the selection phase; a strategy that focuses on points for the selection phase (such as nominating only one work) will turn out to be counterproductive in the elimination phase. While no voting system can be completely strategy-proof, this two-step approach makes this system as close to that as possible.

        Here is your link:

        1. “this two-step approach makes this system as close to that as possible.”

          Nonsense. The more complex the rules become, the more opportunities there are for exploiting them. If they think that the straw man objections they’ve put forth are the only potential exploit in that steaming pile of rules-lawyering…heh.

          2017 is going to be pretty interesting if they actually manage to get that passed.

  30. Jack:

    I got several Internal Server Errors before comments would load. On my phone this afternoon, I had several failure to connect to database errors.

    1. Hopefully the changes implemented late Friday should be in effect and you’ll see them less (or not at all, which would be nice)

      1. Will the social login stuff start working then, or is that a different issue? I can’t login to post with FB, Google or Twitter, even those are all listed as options, and its not recognizing my being logged into wordpress anymore either.

        1. First I’ve heard of that so I’m going to go with ‘separate issue’. The changes implemented have helped a bit, btw, but not as much as hoped. More drastic measures might need to be taken.

          edited to add: I’ve looked into the social log in and while it won’t be all that hard, it *will* require some efforts from the ILoH and I working in conjunction. (This means we’ll do it, but not until Larry gets a “free” hour or two…)

  31. “¿ǝuuǝıɹpɐ ‏@adrienneleigh · 1h1 hour ago
    @Pixelfish @Halftongue Right? (He’s one of the very worst of the Baen crowd, not just as a racist but as a homophobe & misogynist.)”

    Some random haters talking about Michael Z Williamson. Now, considering his very first novel stars a strong bisexual woman of mixed race, that kinda torpedoes all three claims with a single blow, doesn’t it?

    1. Not entirely. There’s always my ‘disagreeing with me on drug policy is racist’ argument. Which of course has the obvious counter of pointing out that my views on drug policy are so far from mainstream that such usage utterly debases the word racist.* Plus, we all know that Mike’s politics are extremely coherent and strongly held, and it is entirely absurd to suppose a secret purpose behind that one issue.

      His actual views on sexual politics are what make the homophobe and misogynist claims absurd. For there to be any basis, modern feminism would have to be understood as being inherently misogynist.

      His actual offense is most likely being outspoken and refusing to kowtow to anyone.

      *Almost exactly like calling Mike a racist does.

    2. Facts don’t matter! Unless they’re trying to defend their own side. We’re not allowed to use the weapons of the patriarchy, because reasons!

      1. Yep, they never seem to let facts that counter them to interrupt their narrative. I’m sure there is a Forest Gump quote that fits this.

        1. I just saw the same Twitter feed with the exact same post. There must be nine or ten of these with the exact same wording: “Since the Puppy boycott of Tor Books is on I just bought three ebooks from Tor and preordered two more ” Do they think we are idiots or that the public is stupid? I think they are banking on the public being stupid. Watch out! Put your BS shielding up to max! The Tor bots are swarming.

      1. Lol David, I think the Apaches had the right idea. They had no concept of a fair fight. Common sense confounds them, truth hurts them and humor is just too much fun to resist. I’m laughing at their bleating and hand wringing at being called CHORFs as if that would even equal what the Tor editors have called us. They need to get a grip. I like GRRM but he is huffing and puffing about puppy kickers being used. Really? What about the puppy piddling jokes and the puppy nipping stuff? Who cares?

    3. “Tokenism… sock puppetry… cultural appropriation… straight white males can’t understand or write PoC characters.”

      Unroll as necessary, wipe, flush.

    4. Those are not random haters but well-known sources of racial incitement and incitement to hate men the upper echelon SJW “allies” draw on for their ideological marching orders and sometimes interact with on Twitter. Did you really think Jim Hines invented terms like “cisnormative” and “genderblindness”?

  32. Through research and education we have established that SJWs either hate us or are well-meaning but daffy do-gooders who have adopted a paranoid feminist ideology that hates our very race and sexuality.

    SJWs are a majority influence in all of SFF’s old core institutions. They repeatedly vilify us for being white, male and heterosexual. They ask us to #JustListen to feminists in the face of sick rape hoaxes and fake statistics. Award-winning authors repeatedly remind whites of their privilege and lie about racial murders in a way that reverses actual FBI statistics. They repeatedly launch affirmative action initiatives based on lies and then lie even more in calling us racists for documenting these initiatives.

    The more I have documented SJW quotes the more I realize what sick and damaged people these are and how for them SFF is only a toilet. The worst of them aren’t even writers.

    What kind of person would enter comics and then say it has issues that are “part of the larger global issue of women-hating” and that “White male privilege cares ONLY about white male privilege, and there is no goal except maintaining that position of power.” I can’t wrap my head around that kind of sheer hatred trying to pass itself off as the hatred of millions of others with no faces other than white and male. Even worse is trying to pass that canard off as social justice and anti-racism.

    Forget “toxic masculinity,” Tor has repeatedly shown it has no problem with endorsing and shielding a toxic ideology which hates us for waking up. They have bloggers who call us “cis-scum” and say white male authors of epic fantasy have racially colluded to maintain their centrality over the course of 100 years. They have bloggers who laugh at the conformity that will come with an all-white Table of Contents that would be called “racist” in reverse, write SFF is “a genre predicated on white cis men doing hero stuff.” and then have podcast interviews where goofy feminists say modern epic fantasy is by “white guys writing white guy power fantasy” because the readers are raised on media which “embraces white male power fantasies… in which, y’know the white guys do everything”

    Multiply that by 10,000 and then wonder why you have ever spent one single nickel on anyone who would support that drainage ditch of pure garbage. Tor needs a wholesale housecleaning to send a strong message. Failing that, they can do without my money.

    1. Epic rant James! I wish you would give me some quotes of who said what and where you got it. I go to their blog sites and I’d love to have more ammunition.

    1. Bwahahahaha…pant, pant, Bwahahahaha…
      Cheshire Cat ain’t got jack on my grill!

      The thing I tend to notice about these kool-aide drinking true believers on the Left is that they do, in reality, the evil, hatey, hate, hate activities they accuse those on the Right of doing.

    2. Just proves the saying that if you want to know what the SJWs are up to, take a look at what they’re accusing US of…


    So, apparently the boycott of TOR has completely backfired . . . in slightly less than 24 hours? That’s what this article claims. After all, a whole three people on Twitter (and a host of bots) have said they’re buying TOR books. Well, that settles that! Also, Peter Grant is said to have “issued a list of demands on behalf of The Puppies” which is a damned lie. They even claim Wright endorses the boycott (he flatly stated he didn’t). Lies, lies, lies . . .

    1. See, this is one time where their normal spin and lies will not be of any help.

      We won’t know if the boycott has worked or not for weeks and months. Fake accounts saying they bought Tor books might sway anyone who is on the fence about a boycott, but honestly how many are in that camp that will see the news? If anything loudly announcing the boycott has failed will get people asking ‘what boycott?’ ‘why are people boycotting?’

      Either way though those fake accounts aren’t actually buying Tor books, which does nothing for the bottom line that is actually at risk here. Furthermore the people saying loudly that they support what Tor employees have said only offset the boycott if they buy more Tor books than they already were going to. Sure a bunch of them will buy Tor, but were they going to regardless?

      Then there’s the critical questions – how thin is Tor’s margin, and how many people are in each respective camp?

      Personally I didn’t call for a boycott, but I am dismayed that Tor appears to be ignoring all of the continuing comments from their customers.

        1. They are banking on the perception that everything is cool and Tor has thwarted the boycott. They are trying to gin up support and they resort to their greatest weapon–the Facebook/Twitter mob and bots. They are in a serious fight.

          I suspect they are losing. GRRM tried to tell them that they were alienating fandom and I don’t think he is wrong. At minimum they are shaving off a percentage of their customers and there is the real possibility that their marketing campaign will fail and they might topple.

          I say if you have read an actual Tor book and the book was actually bad then write an honest feedback about it on Amazon. If you print something false then you engage in the tactic of the left wing mob.

          Here is what Moshe Feder wrote on Facebook:
          “As you may have heard, certain scoundrels have declared a boycott of Tor, starting today, to protest the efforts of some Tor employees to defend the Hugo Awards from attack. In response, some of our friends have declared today “Buy A Tor Book Day.” ”

          “I wouldn’t have the temerity to ask you to buy a book just because some idiots have declared war on us. But if there _is_ a Tor Book you’ve been meaning to get anyway, buying it today would be a a gesture I’d appreciate.”

          “[As always here on Facebook, I’m speaking for myself and not the company.] ”
          So we are a bunch of idiots eh? I’d say that he does have the temerity to ask people to buy a Tor book. I’m debating on posting there and saying that I didn’t see anything I liked or that had caught my interest. I think it would be transparent though. Instead, I’m thinking of asking them what sort of fiction they would recommend that is sword and sorcery, non message driven, and waste the hell out of their bot master’s time.

          1. Funnily enough, the craziest feminist ideologues among them believe exactly that. See: the poststructuralism of Jacques Derrida to Judith Butler – the “performative” and “agency” in French Queer Theory.

        2.         They can hope what they want, but I’ll carry this to the grave and leave it for my heirs in my will.  No business can insult me in that way and get more money from me.

    2. I quit reading after they indicated that VD is a Sad Puppy.
      The entire article falls under the “make shit up” rule lol

    3. It is arguably falsehoods, but may not be lies.

      What you describe being said about Peter might possibly be a result of extreme reading comprehension failure.

      I have seen certain comments of John Wright. It is plausible to me that a really poor reader may misunderstand them, especially if they make the mistake of thinking he isn’t honest and very careful in his wording.

      1. More like the fool thought he was smarter than John. C. Wight. I wouldn’t back Einstien in that fight, let alone a random, progressive internet troll.

  34. Let’s take a time out for a laugh at Damien’s expense. The equally gay Milo with a platform no stronger than Walter’s Guardian has amassed as many Twitter followers in the last month as Damien has in total. Milo’s well over 50,000 now to Walter’s 5,000. it’s not like Walter didn’t have his shot. Making stuff up that’s easily pulled apart doesn’t really appeal to people. Watch Milo debate sometimes. Not only does he not avoid it like SJWs do, he loves it. That’s the secret Damien. Instead of deleting people, stand up and make your case. Turns out you have none, like all SJWs. Come over to our side, we actually have fun… and facts. Plus I guarantee you we get more [gendered slur] than the average bear.

    1. Milo makes a much better modern Wilde than Damien ever did.

      (Is he gay then? Actually didn’t know one way or the other – or care.)

      1. The only reason I mentioned Milo is gay is because I figure that makes Walter fume more than anything else.

        Walter needs to reverse course and get on board with reality. I’d feel different if this was a close call but it’s not – not even close. You have to be insane, a bigot or insanely naive to believe in SJW ideology.

        I think I’ve gotten pretty good at figuring which one’s are the naive, have medicated personality disorders or just hate men, whites and heterosexuals. There’s no in-between; these people deal in unreality, not facts. We have systematically shredded their arguments. There is not one SJW in all of SFF Milo wouldn’t tear to shreds in a 10 min. live debate. I particularly like the way Larry debates them because he has a humorous directness that is rather rare and which SJWs have no answer for.

        At the head of Adam Baldwin’s Twitter feed he has “American Individual,” which has that same combination of directness and humor that I think SJWs find confusing. They can’t imagine anyone would actually like being an American or an individual.

        What I like about Milo is he is far more well-read and informed than most people give him credit for. His humor makes him all the more dangerous. If he is a mere polemicist like Christopher Hitchens and only riding Gamergate for fame, it’s kinda hard to detect. He seems to have a genuine revulsion for SJWs.

        1. I think the question was in reference to Damien. Is Damien gay? You said “the equally gay Milo” – which leads to the question, whose gayness is Milo’s gayness equal to? The only possible candidate in your post is Damien, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard that Damien is gay (and like Jared, I don’t care).

          1. IIRC Damien Walter said he was gay back during Sad Puppies 2, when he was writing slander and libels against Larry Correia.

            Milo is openly flamboyantly gay and he’s quite delightful as he is. That he’s able to take down SJW arguments with facts and reason and skewer every single FEELS! excuse is glorious. That he had feminists crying about misogyny losing a public open debate to a gay man on Twitter was probably one of the more entertaining things to happen recently.

          2. The Breitbart article Milo wrote after the Gamergate gathering in DC was disrupted by a bomb threat – after that idiot from Salon spent an entire day whipping up a SJW lynch mob against it on Twitter – was hilarious: “Hey, thanks dude! You got me laid!”

            But according to the SJWs, people like us want to burn people like Milo at the stake. You know, like ISIS is actually doing to gays right now, but for some reason the SJWs can’t be arsed to care about *them.*

    1. Ironically, even though this is obviously aimed directly at us, it doesn’t really affect us:

      “How does this eliminate slates? It doesn’t, not completely — nor should it, as slate proponents have as much right to representation as any other voter. However, by nominating a full slate of works, they have weakened their votes by spreading their points out among the five works on the slate. Since the rest of fandom is slowly increasing the points given to their choices, it’s not possible for slates to control the -entire- ballot. It is very likely, however, that they will get some of the final ballots slots — and again, this is entirely fair and appropriate, since a large number of people are supporting those works. In the end, it is the final ballot that will determine the winner — and the voting system for the final winner is completely unchanged by this system. With this system, a significant fraction of the final ballot will have been determined by independent members of fandom.”

      As you can see, these changes don’t actually interfere with our aims and objectives at all. We are trying to broaden the range of nominated works and get some of the sort of stuff we like on the ballot, and there’s nothing here that stops us doing that. If they want to waste their time pushing this through, they can knock themselves out. By the way, I find this part of the proposed FAQ hilarious:

      “One of the members of the group is a retired US Naval officer, a combat veteran, a certified Navy marksman, a Christian, and considers Robert Heinlein to be the greatest science fiction author who has ever lived. In short, he is exactly the Puppies’ demographic.”

      Is it just me, or does that seem just a tad labored?

      1. It might be a bit labored. But you are correct. This isn’t going to keep you from getting something on the list. I don’t think they want to do that. You pay your $60 and you get your one vote.

        I actually like the way it works. Since my one point (vote) gets divided up each nomination is weaker than one vote. But if one of my nominations is eliminated, each of my remaining nominations are now stronger by some fraction of one vote. When only one of my nominations are left, it carries my full one vote or one point.

        1. “But you are correct. This isn’t going to keep you from getting something on the list. I don’t think they want to do that.”

          Well, yes, they do state in several places (including in the passages I quoted from above) that this proposal isn’t aimed at eliminating any and all influence the puppies might have on the ballot. However, I don’t think this proposal would exist if not for all the rhetoric about our true aim being to force anybody who isn’t ‘like us’ off the ballot. So, in that respect, I think it’s funny that it doesn’t really affect us.

        2. Are you kidding? Sixty bucks for a vote? How about $5 as a bronze membership and $40 for a ticket to Worldcon in a gold membership. Making voting easier for fandom and a broader number of voters is the better way.

      2. I don’t go by some generic demographic, I go by hate speech and those who support it. I don’t give a shit about whether they hunt, fish or eat Suzy-Q’s.

        1. I’m not in that “demographic” (except for that bit about Heinlein, and even there I’d tack a few caveats on), and I know a lot (perhaps even most) of my fellow puppies aren’t either. While I’m certainly not claiming that the particular person they are talking about doesn’t exist and isn’t more-or-less as described, the phrasing did make me think of the ‘lifelong conservatives’ that the media always somehow finds to interview at left wing protests.

      3. “One of the members of the group is a retired US Naval officer, a combat veteran, a certified Navy marksman, a Christian, and considers Robert Heinlein to be the greatest science fiction author who has ever lived. In short, he is exactly the Puppies’ demographic.”

        Reminds me of a troll at one author’s blog (sorry, I don’t remember which one at the moment) who started by saying, “I’m a lifelong Republican, Heinlein and Card are my favorite authors…” Sarah Hoyt pointed out that no actual Republican would identify himself that way–and for that matter, no actual fan of Robert Heinlein or Orson Scott Card would consider being fond of their books as proof of conservative credentials. Almost certainly, it was a SJW who knew that Heinlein and Card are both considered evil by his group, thus surely they must be full of conservatism and Republican worship.

        Similarly, that “Christian, Heinlein-worshiping Navy marksman” sounds like what someone would come up with a stereotypical “puppy,” assuming that person had never actually met a supporter of Sad Puppies–or for that matter a Christian, Naval officer, or Heinlein fan.

        1. “Similarly, that “Christian, Heinlein-worshiping Navy marksman” sounds like what someone would come up with a stereotypical “puppy,” assuming that person had never actually met a supporter of Sad Puppies”

          Not to mention that it’s possible to be all those things, and still be slightly to the left of Mao. In fact, weren’t Heinlein’s socialist years almost immediately after he left the navy?

    2. If I make it to the con (which depends on my health), I’m planning on sitting through the world’s most boring rules meeting to oppose all of these changes. I think the current system is imperfect, but it’s the best system we’re going to get. Voting for a slate has been possible for decades under the current rules. It was only when people did it–and other people didn’t like the result–that the need for “reform” arose. I don’t know how the Hugo awards are going to turn out this year, but I think the nominations process next year is going to be a train wreck of competing slates from various groups. I foresee an arms race over the next few years from different groups, and I don’t see any sort of “Can’t we all just get along?” moment in all of this. As a fan, it’s depressing to watch. For me, the appeal of WorldCon is that I get to go to one convention and see all of my favorite authors. Ideally, I’d like to be able to get books signed by both George R R Martin AND Larry Correia. That’s obviously not going to happen, and I think we’re all a little bit worse off because of it.

      1. I think the $40 ticket to vote is absurd and eliminates a lot of fandom from voting. Most who attend the event are people involved in fiction and there is only a sliver of fan representation. Broadening the vote by dropping the price of voting to $5 would bring many more fans of SF/F and cast a more accurate picture of all of fandom.

  35. Three years of daily non-stop racial incitement and incitement to hate men has gone into a memory-hole at Glyer’s. That’s not hard to fathom when the people actually doing that don’t see their hate speech as hate speech but instead the complete opposite. That’s easy to do when your definition is anything which attacks straight white men is never hate speech no matter what.

    However it is hard to fathom how a guy like Glyer who supposedly has his finger on the pulse of SFF could miss 3 years of this.

    It’s pretty obvious from the comments at 770 and of Eric Flint and GRRM that they’re mostly just unaware this has even been going on. The irony there is it is so crazy no one believes us when we tell them, especially the part about its even more insane gay feminist origins.

    “radical lesbian feminists focus on the problem of heterosexuality as the pivotal core of women’s oppression… By the late 1970s black and Third World feminisms emerged as a critique of the white privilege inherent in feminist theory itself.” – The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World

    Trust me, I didn’t write The Oxford Companion to Politics of the World, nor did Rush Limbaugh. However I can read; that and tens of other books.

    The problem remains what if any solution there is to be had. Gamergate is making big strides by using a startling weapon: the truth. The fact no SJW would bite on my own challenge to show just 5 authors from the supposedly racist-sexist 1912-75 SFF era that is as ideologically on the same page as only the five 2014 Nebula winners shows SJWs have no interest in the truth. Nor will they comment on my reverse racist quotes for the simple reason they don’t know who made them and are scared. Of course they think the quotes are racist; they dare not admit that.

    Essentially John Scalzi is saying anyone opposed to racist and sexual incitement to hate is a lord of shit. That right there explains why so many people detest that guy. The combination of Scalzi’s stupidity and arrogance is like Wile E. Coyote: Genius when he fought Bugs Bunny. Scalzi is a genius in a way. He’s elevated himself into premier status as an SF author when there are easily scores if not hundreds of SF authors better than him barely making a wave. Even his uplifted affirmative action crew is as good or better. On the other hand, maybe you think an alien ritual of vomiting water on startled humans as a symbol of good faith in closing a deal is funny and edgy. It would’ve been… in 1902.

    1. Thank you for posting that. I’m going to try and kick in to it also. Of course I love Larry’s novels, but I also really enjoy all those from Forgotten Realms 🙂

    2. Oh, man! I used to love Elaine Cunningham’s Arilyn and Danilo stories! Thanks for posting this! 🙂

  36. SFF editor and Publisher’s Weekly review editor Rose Fox: “White parents of White boys, your most important task is countering the culture that wants to turn them into racist, misogynist killers.”

    Same: “Hate is default White male behavior in America. Has been for a long time. Teach your boys better before they hurt/kill someone else’s kids.”

    Same: “American White male culture is racist and sexist. If that offends you, as a White American male, go do something about it.”


    And who’s in her “you may also like” area? Other quote factories:

    N. K. Jemisin

    Catherynne ValenteVerified account

    Jim C. Hines

    Amal El-Mohtar

    Elizabeth Bear


    And here’s a few retweets so you’re not confused:

    Dandy MxFopperson retweeted
    Ryan Dalton ‏@capetownbrown Feb 27
    We must understand white supremacy as:

    1. Institutionalized system of domination

    2. Internalized ideology

    3. Not exclusive to extremists

    Dandy MxFopperson retweeted
    Ryan Dalton ‏@capetownbrown Jun 18
    White people, white supremacy was designed by white people, it benefits white people. We—white people—must be committed to its dismantling.

    Dandy MxFopperson retweeted
    Ryan Dalton ‏@capetownbrown Jun 18
    You—specific white person—didn’t create white supremacy, but we—white people—all benefit from its institutionalization, like it or not.

    Dandy MxFopperson retweeted
    Ryan Dalton ‏@capetownbrown Jun 18
    If we—white people—aren’t actively, intentionally fighting systemic racism and white supremacy in America, we’re actively perpetuating them.

    Dandy MxFopperson retweeted
    Ryan Dalton ‏@capetownbrown Jun 18
    White supremacy is always irrational and violent. Our silence is complicity. Our apathy is complicity. Our indifference is complicity.

    1. I’ve come to realize over the past year that SJWs are deeply boring, deeply depressing people.

    2. Of course, they are probably the real face of white supremacism in our country.

      Who just burned down a bunch of property in Baltimore that will most adversely impact minorities? It wasn’t the right. It was the Left, and they even peddled a bunch of falsehoods about it being part of fighting racism. Yeah, maybe a white guy did fund the agitators. Mosby apparently identifies as black, and she was and is a key player in the apparent lies that sparked things. No, she helped fan the spark into a flame. Again, I am reminded about the lies about rape that were used to ignite the 1921 Tulsa Race Riots.

      If ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’ were written today, it would be about either a lawful police action or a druggie dying as a result of drug use being sold as police brutality. (It’d probably also be a weaker story.)

      Yes, maybe after years of careful searching they have finally found the HoRaWa nutter they’ve been wanting. a) creating the appearance of national instability brings /every/ flavor of violent political lunatic out of the woodwork. b) At 21, there is some chance of mental health issues that have very little to do with ideology. If these issues make someone violently disturbed, such minor intervention as these ‘psychiatrists’ prescribe for everyone can be worthless. c) Just the bare facts of the matter suggest he was raised in a permissive environment. There are ways a permissive environment can help break a kid so that they are more prone to senseless violence.

      I grew up on stories from a Republican who did not support what he called race prejudice. One of them was about narrowly escaping being murdered by what must have been a Democrat. As a teen, other family lore shaped my impression that those generations of Democrat were white supremacist, and being a Republican was taking a stand in opposition to that. Local stories of atrocity may have also played a role. When I first registered to vote, I was convinced that being a Democrat would be a white supremacist act for me. To fight white supremacism, I have voted Republican ever since.

      In theory, I might vote for a Democrat in a partisan election under the same circumstances I might vote for a Nazi; if a genuinely good person, good enough to offset their poor taste in parties, is running against someone so horrible that they must be defeated. I have met Democrats who I think are not white supremacists, and seem to honestly disapprove of terrorism and murder.

      1. I would caution against that idea of voting against someone so horrible that they must be defeated. This happened in the last Philippine presidential elections. The top runner was the known corrupt Estrada, versus Noynoy Aquino. Afraid that we’d see a repeat of Estrada’s presidency, the ones who had no intention of originally voting for either, voted for Noynoy to keep him out of the Palace.

        Within a few months, I was hearing bitter mutterings of deeply regretting voting Noynoy in, and ‘at least with Estrada, we knew what would happen.’ These days, I hear the regret expressed because at least Estrada would NOT have been giving away chunks of the country to secessionists in questionable ‘peace talks.’

        1. I have to agree with Shadowdancer. Hitler was seen as the better alternative to the communists in Germany if you recall and look how that turned out. Also remember that political left-right spectrum wise Nazi are a short for National Socialists. It is what happens when socialism goes wrong. Our Democrat party of the 40s would have been to the right of the Nazi party. Yet whenever they smear Republicans it is because everyone says that the Nazis were right wing extremists. The truth is that in the spectrum of left and right with the bookends being communist and socialist then people should be calling Nazis and neo-Nazis, Democrats. Between a socialist and a squishy Democrat, I’ll take a Democrat.

        2. I haven’t yet found a Republican so bad running against a Democrat or Nazi so good. I haven’t even found something worth abstaining from voting or voting third party.

          It is bad for a Party to have votes they cannot alienate. They take votes for granted, and get lazy and stupid.t For that reason, I am a little troubled by the practical reality of having no reason not to vote a straight Republican ticket nor easily anticipating such a reason.

          I think the Democrats have a proven track record, as an organization, of internal terror and internal murder. I also think that Republicans have both a track record of fighting internal terror and murder, and not fighting so hard they destroy something more important. (This last is why I can forgive the squishes a little.) It would take a proven track record for both candidates to overcome this.

          How much proof would you need that someone is a good person if they are running as a Nazi? How much proof would you need that their opponents are much worse?

        3. I agree. Germans voted for Hitler because he looked like the reasonable alternative to communism. You have to champion people that are better than Hitler or the scoundrel who is there. Sometimes taking out the head of a radical group makes a bigger problem. Look at Osama Bin Laden and ISIS.

          Calling for the heads of Tor makes me think where will these guys go? They might learn from their mistakes and go out and rebrand with a more subtle and insidious brand. At least we know what Tor really is.

      2. “Yes, maybe after years of careful searching they have finally found the HoRaWa nutter they’ve been wanting. ”

        If by “years of careful searching” you mean “blaming the nearest conserative or mere Republican for whatever newsworthy tragedy or atrocity occurs as soon as the news breaks, going all the way back to the Oklahoma City bombing if not the JFK assassination.”

        And if by “HoRaWa nutter” you mean “the world’s first emo-anarchist white supremacist.”

        Funny thing about Roof: He looks just like Elliott Rodgers, or Jared Loughner, or the moron who shot up Virginia Tech, or the other moron who shot up the movie theater in Colorado a while back. They all have vaguely emo looks and empty eyes and bowl haircuts and beliefs in the most outlandish things because when it comes down to it they believe in absolutely nothing at all because morality’s relative and the most important thing in life is their feelings and their justified butthurt at whatever.

        Which is why most of these stories get dropped by the SJWs like hot potatoes: The killers end up looking a lot more like angry leftists than GOPers, if only because they’ve gone only a little bit further off the rails than the typical SJWer.

        1. Wes, yes, exactly.

          The cult of Obama says all opponents are racists, and if they can’t find a legitimate example they devote their full power to creating the appearance of one.

          I’d add to your list Brown and Martin, also products of a permissive environment, even if they were not spree killers. I suspect the roots are drug use and other products of a lack of parental engagement.

    3. For what it’s worth, if it’s worth anything, the comments after an article about how a woman was so excited she was having a girl-nerd and had bought all sorts of fun sci-fi baby stuff to raise her girl-nerd to be a kick ass sci-fi geek girl… found out she was having a boy and was suddenly freaked out about how to teach him not to be a Bad Person…

      The comments were nearly uniformly… “You’re an abusive horrible person that should never be trusted with a child.”

      I honestly am beginning to think that someone in the back ground who is raking in money from these “click bait” writers, keeps them on and encourages them to be supremely idiotic in public. Hiring someone who can be counted on to enrage the general population by being a hateful idiot and posting stupid hateful things is good for the bottom line.

      Who gets the most page hits? The person who posts things like “all white baby boys are naturally racist killers.” Will Publisher’s Weekly take a hit? Why? It was just a BLOG.

      Sort of like the Tor Blog, come to think of it. Not the company so don’t be MAD…

      1. I agree this is happening. People like K. Tempest Bradford are being used as freaks like in a carnival sideshow.

  37. Personally, I am used to being lied about.

    At some point, the lies and slander require a response…

    Tor has implemented a new social media policy, so that when its employees are calling its customers names, they need to make it clear they are speaking for themselves and not their employer. That is pretty standard in the rest of the corporate world.

    Actually, no. If you make an offensive comment on social media, YOUR ASS IS FIRED even if you never connected yourself with the company on social media and always said they were “personal comments”. It is enough for people to know you work for the company, for the company to take action against you.

    In any event, I’m boycotting Tor. They hate me, so the heck with ’em.

  38. Most casual observers group all the Hugo SJW opposition into a single entity. So when the Rabid Ones go boycott crazy, it gets read as “Puppies are boycotting”. It is hard to get the point across that there is a spectrum of opposition. And the RPs are really all-in on the boycott too – suggesting that a general boycott would hit good authors with friendly fire got me multiple flame attacks in return. Did not even get into the idea that boycotts never work. The only thing about them that does work is company fears of negative publicity. 10 or 20K in lost profit is a rounding error for huge publishers. Stories about fan protests over employee behavior? That gets attention.

    1. It can be hard to follow for someone who isn’t closely watching. From what I can see there are:

      Sad Puppies – Larry started the whole thing with SP1.

      Rabid Puppies – I honestly don’t know where these came from, but it’s always kind of bugged me how they cribbed the name and logo. I like to go over every now and then to see whats happening, because these guys are always entertaining 🙂

      Friendly wandering puppies – I made that up but its for people like Peter Grant who get so riled up they begin and entirely new front.

      This is just my observation, there is possibly even more going on than this.

      1. Sad Puppies was originally started by Larry Correia as SP1. He freely admits that he did it out of spite, which I have no problem with, as I think this is a perfectly good reason to organize against an organization that you think is behaving unfairly. Coreia did SP2 last year and decided that he had made his point, and he was planning on quitting there, but Brad Torgersen offered to take over and do SP3.

        The SP3 slate was constructed by Torgersen with input from pretty much anyone who wanted to get in touch with him. The slate is here:

        Note this statement: “If you agree with our slate below — and we suspect you might — this is YOUR chance to make sure YOUR voice is heard. This is YOUR award (as SF/F’s self-proclaimed “most prestigious award”) and YOU get to have a say in who is acknowledged.” That’s not a explicit statement that you should actually read the works on the slate before nominating them, but it’s fairly obviously implied. Also, several of the works were part of Larry Correia’s ongoing “Book Bomb” efforts to promote new authors, so there’s a fairly long “paper trail” that shows an effort to get people to read the nominated works.

        Rabid Puppies is a totally different situation. RP is a slate that was organized solely by Vox Day. His slate is here:

        Note this statement: “They are my recommendations for the 2015 nominations, and I encourage those who value my opinion on matters related to science fiction and fantasy to nominate them precisely as they are.” So there’s a BIG difference here. Vox Day was asking people to vote for things just because he said so, whether you’ve read them or not.

        I think most people who identify themselves as “puppies” mean “sad puppies”. I’ve seen numerous people call themselves “sad puppies”. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone other than Vox Day identify themselves as a “rabid puppy”. I think that anyone who’s talking about the topic should be VERY clear as to whether or not they’re talking about the sad puppies, the rabid puppies, or both. I pointed this out on GRRM’s blog, and he conceded that it was unfair to conflate the two groups.

        1. It is worth noting, however, that Vox didn’t post his list (or announce a parallel Rabid Puppies effort) until after the last date to purchase a membership that would let you nominate for this year.

          In other words, any of his Ilk who saw the RP post and decided to do as suggested would not have been able to nominate, unless they were already Sasquan members (or Loncon members) before that point. He couldn’t have inspired any “extra” nominators based on that post, because it was made too late to sign up for Sasquan.

    2. But SP, RP and Pete Grant are quite aware that this is a PR thing. It is pretty clear that any financial effects would take a long time to show, and would be dependent on Tor being in poor condition. Is Tor’s accounting good enough to even capture the effects of a major boycott?

      1. Sure. It’s sales. But it can’t capture a minor boycott offset by a anti-boycott. Look at the sales of some of the major Tor writers. These guys have followings. The Southern Baptist boycotted Disney for 8 years and gave up looking foolish. This will have less effect than that, IMHO.

        1. I doubt either the boycott or the buycott will rise above the ‘noise’ in Tors sales figures. Boycotts are a lot like online petitions: minimal-effort protests that usually have minimal effect.

          1. I’m not boycotting but if anything has so much as a whiff of SJW in it I’m not taking the chance on new writers from Tor. I’ll keep on with those that I do. know.

            I read Lightspeed from time to time. They have two titles that I’m not sure make it past the monitors but it is So-and-so Destroys Science Fiction series. Those are easy to avoid. It isn’t that I’m not open minded to new writers or the thought of a trans hero or something. Tyrion for instance is central to the story and a sympathetic hero. Dinklege rocks the house with Tyrion. Bruce Jenner is a tragic figure in my mind who I have sympathies for. Bring out a character of Tyrion’s stature in a good story and I’ll read it. The problem is that a lot of Tor’s literature is bad writing and it is often meshed with its political thought.

            Tor has to compete with publishers with the same narrow minded political literature. They are not immune to the market equalibrium. I’m waiting for more Baen like brands. Tor also has a huge overhead that they have to work. With national economies weakening people have less disposable money to spend. People will become more selective in what they buy. I have been burned by a lot of Tor rubbish. I think that will be their downfall.

          2. I disagree. Ditching 5 anti-male anti-white bigots compared to several thousand readers which may grow and grow to an unknown extent is an easy call. The fact those five cannot shut their mouths or stop banning their own customers shows they are obsessed with a thing that has nothing to do with SFF or business. Why should Tor coddle the personality disorders or naivete of morons?

          3. James May ask: “Why should Tor coddle the personality disorders or naivete of morons?”

            1. Because they don’t see it (the comment) or them the same way you do.
            2. Because firing 5 people is a really big deal.
            3. Because she apologized (See Jim Butchers comments)
            4. Because they would piss off more customers if they did and they have already pissed them off as a number think Tom Doherty threw Irene Gallo under the bus.
            5. Because you are a tiny number of people so you don’t have much sway.
            6. It is analogous to paying off a terrorist and thereby incentivizing future boycotts over this, that and the other which is what fans already think about Tom Doherty initial message on the subject.
            7. The boy-cotters don’t really seem to have a cause other than a criticism in the form of a range between right wing and neo nazi and many of us think that range is correct.

            I actually think the Sad Puppies cause is damaged by this. LC is trying to keep out of the fray but many of the others are following along like they are on a choke collar pulled by Vox Day. And Vox is a despicable person. Witness the exchange between Martin and Brad Torgerson.

            Above Larry says… “I’m seeing this narrative pop up that Sad Puppies is calling for a boycott of Tor, but that is simply not true.” But I read the comments and I am not convinced he is correct.

            Anyway – that’s the perspective of this Social Justice Warrior.

          4. ” Because you are a tiny number of people so you don’t have much sway.”

            Said the SJW.

          5. And like pretty much the entire left, you can’t imagine that the majority of the public disagrees with you and doesn’t think like you. You SJWs are in fact insulting the rest of us, and we definitely notice it. Sad Puppies isn’t calling for a boycott of Tor, but individuals (yes, we are individuals and can think for ourselves; many on the left seem unfamiliar with the concept) are saying that they will no longer buy Tor products until Tor does more than provide “bandaid” lip service to disciplining the virulently despicable things its employees say routinely. In order:

            Your 1 – you may be correct about this. If so, Tor is making a big misjudgment.

            Your 2 – yes, it is a big deal. It’s also necessary if Tor is to recover the trust of a large number of its former customers.

            Your 3 – no she didn’t. She issued the leftist-standard non-apology apology: I’m sorry if my comments offended anyone. That isn’t an apology for the comments. No one is fooled by this.

            Your 4 – You’re only listening to your cohort again. The only way this could be true is if Tor has ALREADY lost the customers who were offended by Gallo’s remark. If that’s the case, they’re already on the road to oblivion.

            Your 5 – see 4. If you really believe this you’re REALLY not paying attention. Why do you think your side is so apoplectic about the Hugo nominations? It’s because many more people were supportive of the SP’s position than of yours.

            Your 6 – see 4. You really aren’t understanding what the world outside of your SJW ghetto is saying.

            Your 7 – see 6. Repeat as necessary.

          6. Just to your Response 3 – see Jim Butchers comment on this.

            “Sad Puppies isn’t calling for a boycott of Tor, but individuals (yes, we are individuals and can think for ourselves; many on the left seem unfamiliar with the concept) are saying that they will no longer buy Tor products until Tor does more than provide “bandaid” lip service to disciplining the virulently despicable things its employees say routinely.”

            Sorry – it is a distinction without a difference to me and I do nuance – I am a liberal. Again see the discussion between Brad R. Torgersen and Martin.

            “You SJWs are in fact insulting the rest of us, and we definitely notice it.”

            Then you are too easily offended, IMHO. I think VD counts on that.

            At any rate our perspectives on this matter is radically different and I am good with that. I just gave you mine. It isn’t gospel.

          7. Hey SJ

            I think you’re actually referring to a comment that Larry made. Mr. Butcher made a quick comment and left.

            Maybe I’m a little delusional, but I recall a fellow two months ago on The Otherwhen Gazette who’s “voice” is nearly identical to yours that professed to being a conservative. He, like you, could argue with several at the same time and not raise a sweat. I think at one point he was keeping a dozen people all twisted up.

            Last week, I’d swear we had another encounter, this time at Brad’s place. Your handle was greg something, a bunch of numbers behind the greg. My guess is that neither Shadowdancer or myself offered much of a challenge, so you left early.

            I don’t think you’re an SJW. On the other hand, I do think you can argue with the best of them. And like I said at the Gazette, I think your wasting your time arguing with puppies. As good as your writing is, you could easily make a great career writing.

            If its a challenge you want, you’d do better at Glyer’s place. There’s a half dozen or so guys that seem fairly formidable there.

            Thanks SJ

          8. Hi Angus Trim. You and I have been discussing and it has been enjoyable.

            I embrace the SJW title not really knowing all it implies simply because I am a real life liberal. I don’t mean progressive. I mean liberal. If you ask me about President Obama I will tell you I was a delegate for him twice but that he is a centrist and is a bit right wing for my taste.

            I am not a writer. I am an accountant. I hope one day to be a retired accountant. I love books and I love politics although I don’t allow politics during family gatherings at my place because it causes hard feelings.

            I am not Greg and have not been on the forums you mention. Most of the time I live at Goodreads and other then in SF/F forums, I seldom touch on politics. SF/F will be tinged with politics till August and then I doubt there will be much. I have seen some locked threads over this Hugo business however.

            Thanks for reaching out to me. Our politics may be different but you seem like a good guy and I have enjoyed chatting with you.

          9. A liberal is not an SJW. Do you really think people get this angry about something they’ve lived with all their lives? If you’re not pushing trigger warnings and white privilege you’re not an SJW.

          10. If you consider Obama centrist and a bit too “right-wing” for your taste, you’re not a liberal, you’re an extreme leftist.

          11. “you’re not a liberal, you’re an extreme leftist.”

            Which sounds a lot like a certain facebook comment that has you up in arms…. Hmmm. But I am not offended. See how that works. Give it a shot.

          12. That sounds nothing like what a certain Facebook comment said. The two comments were not comparable at all SJW. If he gave a groundless charge by calling you a pedophile or something then you could make that claim. It is good to see you bear up under the “withering” fire of being called an extreme leftist. Most SJWs would be shrieking and fainting by now.

          13. If you equate being called “an extreme leftist” with being called “a neo-nazi,” it really calls your ability to correctly parse simple English phrases into question.

          14. Quick followup. Angus said: “I think you’re actually referring to a comment that Larry made. Mr. Butcher made a quick comment and left.”

            My apologies. I was unclear. I read so much. Butcher has tried very hard not to get dragged into this. So almost doesn’t talk at all. Here is what he said about Gallo’s apology:

            “I don’t know if Ms. Gallo’s apology was sincere or insincere.

            I don’t know that, because I can’t read her freaking mind.

            And neither, presumably, can anyone else.

            I work with words professionally. I know exactly how powerful they can be. I am also well aware of their limits–and when it comes to expression complex thoughts in emotionally tense situations over the goddamned internet, the magic of written language has little power.

            How can it? It’s missing too much. You can’t read tone of voice, or the expression on a person’s face when they’re making keys click. Pretty much all you get is “clickity click click.”

            I’m also an English major. So I’m very aware of how skilled human beings can be at reading all kinds of absolute horse manure into other people’s writing, and then declaring it “subtext” or “internally consistent logic.”

            But it isn’t. It’s you, guessing. And your guess is probably prejudiced to one degree or another, most often by projecting things into it that were never meant to be there. Or, put another way:


            Maybe Ms. Gallo wrote the apology with a smirk and a cigarette hanging off of one lip while reciting nasty twitter quotes at every individual member of Science Fiction Fandom. Or maybe she was crying and upset and genuinely trying to make amends. Or maybe she was just numb and exhausted. I don’t know.

            Neither do you. That’s kind of my point.

            But maybe it’s simplest if the curtains were fucking blue, we take her words at face value, and extend a bit of human courtesy and trust to a fellow science fiction nerd. Because she is one, whether that pleases you or not.

            Deep breaths here, guys. Her comment was out of line and made a lot of people upset. She apologized to those people.

            The curtains were fucking blue.

            Can we just get on with life, please?”

            Now Butcher’s plea isn’t having much effect. I think he did it wrong. He should have first drawn a circle, moved his desk into the circle, touched the circle imbuing it with his will and pronouncing the words “voce, voco, vocius”. Then typed his message.

          15. No she did not apologize. She accused me of vile practices then did not apologize or retract. I did not see, “I’m sorry, you are not a neo-nazi, racist, homophobe and I was wrong to lie about that.”

            What I read was, “I’m sorry that you were offended by what I said.” In other words, “I’m sorry me pointing out you’re a neo-nazi racist hurts your feelings.”

          16. Butcher is calling for reason and asking that we give the benefit of doubt to Gallo. Some will and some won’t. I think that she has had nothing but time to clarify her apology. My perception is that Tor doesn’t like wrongfans and wrongwriters. I could be wrong but maybe the curtains are freaking blue. I am more like Peter Grant who says that one is an anomaly, two are a coincidence, but if you have three, four, or five, it is an attack. I doubt my perception of Tor is wrong.

            SJW75126—voce, voco, vocius made me laugh. It must be Butchers fault!

          17. Oh please. Her “apology” was a near textbook example of the standard leftist non-apology apology. Pretending otherwise only makes you look (more) foolish.

          18. “Distinction without a difference…”

            Really? Then we are perfectly correct to lump you in with the likes of Farrakhan, Black Panthers, ISIS, Bahar Mustafa… That is, people that want to kill us. Yep, there’s a distinction – that WE make – between those nutcases and you, even when you say SOME of the same things that they do.

            Do you truly want to go down this road? When WE also believe in self-defense?

          19. If you can’t recognize the difference between individual descisions and diktats from some authoritarian group (here’s a hint, none of us would ever accept such diktats), you really aren’t aware enough to have a valid point in this conversation.

          20. Sad Puppies are not calling for a boycott of Tor. For anyone you’ve seen saying they won’t buy Tor any longer, have you seen any trying to tell anyone else that they need to boycott Tor too? Stuff like… “Guys, this won’t work if we don’t stand together…” etc? Well, I haven’t. I’m not boycotting. Mostly I don’t buy Tor books anyway but there is at least one author I’ve been waiting for for a long time. He doesn’t deserve to have been screwed over by Tor (long story) finally get his book on the shelves (with an awesome cover) and then get screwed over again. So if there HAD been anyone pushing any sort of “and you should to” I probably would have noticed.

            That’s not to say that I don’t understand the feelings involved.

            Tor *blog* has been awful for a long time. But that’s not Tor the company so don’t punish them for it. Tor *editors* have been awful for a long time. But that’s not Tor the company so don’t punish them for it. The only “and you should too” types of things published have been from Larry or Brad or John Wright, imploring Puppies not to punish Tor because their many employees (Wright named names, including Gallo!) work hard for the authors and don’t deserve to be punished for someone else’s argument.

          21. Straight white males are over 100 million Americans, so Tor loses that fight. And of course Tor doesn’t see it my way. Why do you think we’re pushing?

          22. You would like to think we are a minority. This Sad Puppy thing is in its infant stages. Conservatives outnumber liberals by a good margin. Calling someone a neo-Nazi is calling someone Hitler and it doesn’t charm me one bit to buy Tor books.

            You think your comments can flag my morale? I’m a combat vet not an SJW liberal daisy. I just don’t feel compelled to buy their books. Their marketing scheme alienates and repels me . Scalzi and Irene Gallo need to treat their potty mouths and hate with a breath mint. There is so much better stuff out there to choose from.

            I plan to favor the writers I like with praise and with purchasing their books. Vox Day printed Crevald’s book on fourth generational war. It is a damn good theory. If anything their attention on him has made me curious to investigate. I don’t agree with his views but I like Crevald’s book and the Red Horse will probably be my Hugo pick because it is an excellent illustration of fourth generational war and entertaining. I’m an avid military sci-fi reader and I never knew who Peter Grant was. I picked up “War to the Knife” and I’m wondering where the hell this guy has been hiding. All my military sci-fi reading buddies have been notified—-get this book. They are the same ones that introduced MHI to me.

            You are an entertaining somewhat SJW but this crowd ain’t the buttercups that you find on Tor or Martin. All we have to do to spin them up is to vote for a Hugo award.

          23. You know, Peter Grant specifically said that he isn’t calling for firings or resignations over this, just public reprimands and apologies. But anyway, I doubt that Tor will actually lose “several thousand readers” over this, at least not permanently. Boycotts are not usually very effective.

          24. Did you see the VD followup. He is. And frankly Peter’s demands are so extreme he might as well be. Very few people are going to take either seriously – again, IMHO. And again, this is a SJW perspective so take that with how ever many grains you think.

          25. With a mine full of salt.

            As for Peter Grant’s demands, how are these extreme? Especially in an age where people are routinely fired for wearing the wrong shirt or saying the wrong thing.


            “… please be advised that I look for the following actions from Tor … :
            Tor should publicly apologize for the efforts by all, repeat, all of the persons I named … to demonize, denigrate, slander and lie about the ‘Puppies’ campaigns;
            Tor should publicly reprimand those individuals for stepping over the line (including misusing company time and computer equipment to do so);
            Tor should publicly indicate that it is putting in place policies to prevent any recurrence of such issues.
            Please note that I am not demanding the dismissal of, or resignations by, the individuals concerned.”

            How is this extreme?

          26. I don’t reprimand employees publicly. I don’t even reprimand employees in front of employees. And if they are really good i don’t reprimand at all but rather coach. Gallo is really good by all accounts. It’s just silly.

            Also see points 6 and 7. Again.. IMHO.

            I do wish I had better data as to numbers. Similarly with data regards to the make up of Worldcom voting members.

            Now getting even more speculative… consider how random things are. SF/F isn’t a big pond. I read a little SF/F and I know who Tolkien is and Ray Bradbury. And I found out about Jim Butcher all though after his TV show was defunct; and from their I found Larry Correia and Benedict Jacka. I saw the interviews with Deborah Harkness so I found her. But I didn’t know who John Scalzi was. Never heard of Hayden. Didn’t know anything about Flynt. Never heard of Vox Day. SPI1 and SPI2 was under my rador. But then SP3 splashed up and now I have this blog and just added 770 and Scalzi’s Whatever blog and I am discussing the Hugos which I never gave a rat’s ass about. And from that I have purchased my first Scalzi book.

            That’s how this works. I bought Elizabeth Warren’s book because of my politics. I am a SJW. But I don’t normally buy my brain candy because of my politics. I didn’t buy MHI because of my politics. These campaigns are probably going to last one more cycle and then be done but their are going to be lots of random effects. I don’t think they are all going to be to the advantage of whatever you are championing in SF/F. And I really think this mess was a big mistake for Larry. IMHO. But carry on.

            I admit I am now fascinated by the politics of it all. It’s like watching Survivor on TV. The tribe has spoken.

          27. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing just by saying “because I said so.” Because your answers had nothing to do with my question, nor did I ask what you would do.

            The people who are rallying around Tor in defense of Gallo and Feder are in many cases the same who agitated successfully for the removal of Jean Rabe, Mike Resnick, and Barry Malzberg from the SFWA Bulletin because the latter two, in reminisces of earlier times, happened to mention that a female editor they knew from fifty years back was hot. Compared to that, a public disavowal of Gallo, and more importantly, Feder, and a change in social media policy is not extreme.

          28. You asked me how it was extreme. I told you. It’s worse than extreme. It’s silly. All other personnel actions by whatever membership group to the contrary.

          29. The only “tribe” I know about is the one I was thrown into by a yowling pack of feminist racists with personality disorders: straight white male.

          30. So you agree that it was acceptable for a scientist to be hounded by the public into tears for wearing a shirt they didn’t like, and that it was okay to hound another scientist for a joke? That it was okay for Jonathan Ross to be hounded off of LonCon for a joke he *might* make?

          31. Why do you assume that “whatever you are championing” is something other than more involvement and more entertaining books?

          32. “Don’t allow your employees to publicly libel your authors or your customers without consequence” is extreme?

            That’s an interesting use of the English language.

            And BTW… it’s *libel* when it’s materially damaging and not in the realm of opinion but concerning matters of fact.

          33. Then obviously, her comment was not libel. It may have pissed you off. But it wasn’t libel. Personally, I don’t think you should get pissed off.

          34. “Personally, I don’t think you should get pissed off.”

            Well, that settles everything, doesn’t it? I’m sure glad you told me the right way to feel about this.

          35. Why do I get the feeling SJW wishes us to think it’s rain that’s spattering on our legs?

          36. So, Jim Butcher is a bad to reprehnsible writer? If so, why did Tor agree to include one of his works in the Tor published anthology Dangerous Women?

            Also, I think you should feel upset on our behalf, since you think you have the right to tell us how we should feel, we similarly get that right.

            Oh wait, you mean you don’t think of us as equals, that’s why you get to tell us how we should think and feel, not the other way around? That’s racist and misogynist, especially addressed to this Puppy, who is a minority woman.

          37. You don’t think I should be pissed off? I’m sick of being demonized. I’m sick of people I care about being hurt in this tribal warfare that the left has against us. I’m sick of the abuse and obvious incivility being unchecked and unanswered. It has been my experience that you confront bullies and push back. The bully finds easier targets to menace. When bullies tribe up then you have a problem and you either tribe up yourself or you get crushed.

            It is alarming how much hatred your side has for us SJW and to what depths they sink. I’m not going to just let aggression “slide off my back” until you guys on the left do their own version of Krystalnacht and Dachau. It is bad enough that we have to contend with the IRS targeting us due to our political beliefs. Your tribe is starting to sound like a bunch of radicals. Seriously, white supremacists? Racists? Neo-Nazis? Because of a vote for a Hugo award? We are the ones who are irrational and should remain calm?

          38. Don,

            She answered a question on her facebook with a range that from my perspective and reading is correct. You can parse how you want but the shoes you walk in are the ones you choose to put on.

            My advice would be to choose to apply her words differently or not apply them at all. If I got upset by whatever wingnut had to say about my political tribe I would be upset all the time. It’s a meh.

            But I like your first few sentences. I really see this whole Hugo thing as a political culture struggle. And as I read LC response to Martin that’s what I see as well. All the other discussion about this kind of SF vs that kind of SF I see as just cover. That’s really my interest at this point. Seeing how the American Culture War effects this tiny convention and its club members who are world wide. I am reading all the blogs.

            For VD, it’s just marketing… at Larry’s expense.

            Thanks for your perspective.

          39. So, you don’t understand what “libel” is, among the many other things you’ve demonstrated a misunderstanding of. No surprise there.

          40. “So, you don’t understand what “libel” is, among the many other things you’ve demonstrated a misunderstanding of. No surprise there.”

            Well I am an accountant – not a lawyer. But I can tell you the facebook comment in question is not libel by the wildest stretch of the imagination. To libel someone you have to reference them. You can’t just reference a group with a range and be guilty of libel. It’s silly.

            But hey – Tor has lots of money. Go sue them.

          41. Why is it so difficult to understand that VD is not a Sad Puppy. PG is not a Sad Puppy. You are in a topic titled Sad Puppies are not calling for a boycott.

          42. Frankly all it does is prove that SJW there is too much of a coward to either engage Peter Grant OR Vox. It’s typical of the ASPs; because they’ll go everywhere but the source.

        2. So. Baptists aren’t an entire racial and demographic group. And neither is that group an ideology. We have the moral high ground and the buying power. You think some daffy feminists power SFF sales?

          1. I don’t know. I never thought about it. I dispute you have the numbers but that is an interesting question about feminists power SFF sales. Hmm. Again, look at the Goodreads Choice Awards for 2014.

            In the fantasy category, the winner is Deborah Harkness for the third in her “All Souls Trilogy” (which I read). The runner up is Sanderson and third is Butcher. Harkness got more votes then both combined.

            For Sci-Fi, “The Martian” was in 1st place and Scalzi’s “Lock In” was second. Again, Harkness got more than both combined.

            That doesn’t answer your question about feminists (daffy or otherwise) powering SFF sales. But my inclination having read the work is that they probably do have a lot of influence. I mean “The Martian” was a major big deal in terms of buzz. Did you hear anything about “The All Souls” trilogy?

            Hard to say. I guess I will say probably but I don’t know.

          2. I’m pretty sure All Souls Trilogy dominated because it was the big PNR series and it got traction among the literary crowd. I personally didn’t read it because my friends that like PNR more then I do trashed it pretty bad.

            The Martian won sci-fi because it had hella general appeal, over 1/2 my coworkers have read that book. It’s sci-fi yes but it’s more of a space thriller ala Apollo 13. Lock-in got second, which makes sense I havn’t gotten to it yet but reviews from friends are good, and while Martian pulled in lots of non readers that like Science stuff, Lock-In pulled in a bunch of hardcore readers that weren’t hardcore SF readers but more general. Both books have generally positive reviews from people I trust.

            Basically it comes down to if you want general appeal add Romance and or Thriller, not that either of these things are bad it’s just a fact that the books that win big awards like that are ones with general appeal that get the people who read <10 books a year to enjoy them.

            It's the same way with anime the most popular series were while they were running Naruto/Bleach/One Piece, and basically anyone that watched lots of stuff would routinely shit on them for being bad or just okay and running entirely too long. While the series that were generally considered the best by the hardcore fans were generally the ones that had the highest ratings on review sites not ones that won a popularity poll.

            The Hugos are more of an award for hardcore fans. Even the SP campaign isn't pulling in non hardcore fans it's pulling in a different clic of hardcore fans. Overall I'm happy because the adversity and drama attracts more people to the genre overall I feel.

      2. Hi SJ {I dropped the W because you don’t strike me as an SJW}

        I enjoyed the discussion too.

        Re: Butcher’s statement, that’s from Eric Flint’s blog, I’m sure. That wound up a roiling to do too.

        Re voice and recognition: I did say that I might be delusional. I hope you don’t mind my keeping the rest of my counsel to myself

        Re current politics: I don’t really give a shit for labels {please excuse the language}. About forty years ago, I was a classic liberal with an obsessive love for the First and Second Amendments. Today, though my outlook hasn’t changed that much, I find most seem to consider me libertarian. Whatever.

        It does look like you’re capable of keeping several people going.

        Have a nice evening.

    3. Certainly doesn’t help that Beale keeps using the Sad Puppies hashtag instead of launching his own Rabid one.

      1. I honest to dog don’t care what he does. People need to grow up instead of having contests to see who can prove their in-group bonafides by being the most easily offended and most vocally upset by Beale.

        Particularly when they turn around and say that Puppies shouldn’t feel unwelcome in fandom just because they’re routinely vilified and their favorite authors and books are used as examples of what needs to end… like “frontier fiction” or “colonialist fiction” or “manly men doing manly things” or “humans take over the universe HooRah” or a farking barbarian chick in a chain mail bikini.

        Do you know why *military* science fiction and alternate history science fiction is so popular? Because someone made it out to be morally “problematic” to write or enjoy stories about discovering wondrous planets full of interesting aliens or just about any other non-dystopic version of human diaspora.

        1. “Because someone made it out to be morally “problematic” to write or enjoy stories about discovering wondrous planets full of interesting aliens or just about any other non-dystopic version of human diaspora.”

          Nah. No one has that much power. “The Martian” won the Goodreads choice award for best Sci-Fi. That’s pure rocket ship fiction. James Cameron did a whole movie in 3D about a wondrous planet full of interesting aliens. Your sub genre is there. It just has to compete.

          1. There are no aliens in “The Martian.” There is no conquering of Mars in “The Martian.” Of course, it’s not problematic, since all the problematic elements are not there. James Cameron did a whole movie in 3D about a wonderful planet full of interesting aliens *that humans were trying to destroy*. Ie… *dystopic* disapora. Please point to an approved of *NON* dystopic human diaspora published recently.

            I’d say Lois Bujold did fabulously, though even she didn’t have any aliens. It was also the 1980s when she did it.

          2. “Please point to an approved of *NON* dystopic human diaspora published recently.”

            I don’t even know what that means. You did get the part where I am an accountant? Also, I perceive there is a complaint here. What in the world is it? Buy what you like. If enough people agree with you, the market will provide.

            As to Avatar, some humans were trying to destroy. Some humans were not trying to destroy, yes? We can’t have bad humans?

            And “The Martian” doesn’t count? Geez. Tuff crowd. If you are a rocket ship kind of SF/F person and “The Martian” doesn’t count, not sure what to tell you. People were ga-ga over that book.

            Anyway, rocket ships and aliens are not my thing. I think Star Wars and Star Trek wore me out. I understand Star Wars VII is out for 2015 but I have no desire to see it. That doesn’t work for you?

            My thing is time travel (“11-22-63”, “Time Travelers Wife”), dystopia (“Hunger Games”, “Handmaid’s Tale” “1984”), urban fantasy (“Dresden Files”, “Buffy The Vampire Killer”). And then a bunch of other things that are not SF/F. We just have different taste. The market is doing fine in providing me with material.

            Probably my favorite all time SF/F book is Stephen King’s/Peter Staub’s “The Talisman”. And I don’t even know how to classify it as to a sub genre. I just call it fantasy. It isn’t horror.

          3. So… “I don’t understand what that means” is equal to “humans can’t be bad?”

            “Non-dystopic human diaspora” are all English words with ordinary meanings.

            No story is interesting without heroes and villains, not usually. Fantasy readerships have grown while science fiction readerships have shrunk. Fantasy allows heroes. Mil-SF allows heroes. Exploration or colonial SF, the sort of gosh-wow look-what-people-can-do SF? It’s hard to find. Not because it’s not popular. People re-read old classics. But there aren’t new modern versions that can be counted upon to deliver. Avatar was about horrible humans with one guy who “went native” and discovered how horrible humans were. It’s impossible to tell before you start if a promising looking book is going to leave you with a triumph or an anti-human lesson.

            Actually, counting on a strong anti-human undercurrent is usually a safe bet. Trying to explain this, it’s also generally a safe bet to expect to be entirely misconstrued, after all, people ARE bad, right? Humanity destroys anything it touches, right? Like a cancer on the universe.

          4. “Trying to explain this, it’s also generally a safe bet to expect to be entirely misconstrued, after all, people ARE bad, right? Humanity destroys anything it touches, right? Like a cancer on the universe.”

            I suppose that’s right. Humans have been around for about 150,000 years give or take. We have been reading and writing since about… 5,000 years? The earth is about 4.5B years old. And has gone through somewhere around 5 mass extinction events. The last wiped out the dinosaurs that romped and stomped for some 65 million years. Compare that to man’s puny existence. That last event was about 66 million years ago and allowed the rise of mammals of which man is one. So we have been here but a blink and sure you might say we are screwing things up. Will we survive as long as the dinosaurs? I doubt it. We may be in the 6th mass extinction event now.

            “No story is interesting without heroes and villains, not usually.”

            I think the market might disagree with you. Did you read “Gone Girl”. Who was the hero? Similarly I just finished “The Dinner”. Great book. I don’t think there are any heroes in it. But sure we often like a hero to root for.

            ” It’s impossible to tell before you start if a promising looking book is going to leave you with a triumph or an anti-human lesson.”

            I agree with that. But I like anti-human lesson books just fine. I didn’t mind bad humans in Avatar. The Sigourney Weaver was a good human. I don’t think it was about humans as much as corporate greed. As I recall, Sigourney Weaver was a good human in Alien as well but also was facing corporate greed. Got a Hugo for it. Seems like a common enough theme.

            “Fantasy readerships have grown while science fiction readerships have shrunk. ” Yes, I read Brad R. Torgersen lament about it. It was not very convincing. Westerns are down as well. Not seeing a lot of musicals these days. So what?

            “Exploration or colonial SF, the sort of gosh-wow look-what-people-can-do SF? It’s hard to find. Not because it’s not popular. People re-read old classics. But there aren’t new modern versions that can be counted upon to deliver. ”

            I just gave you “The Martian”. It is textbook gosh-wow- look-what-people-can-do SF and you didn’t like it because it didn’t have aliens in it. But in general there is not as much space exploration because it’s not that popular. If it were, writers would write and publishers would publish. How many Star Trek films did we go through before the Enterprise just rusted away?

            And there is more competition now. Not just fantasy but paranormal romance is exploding. It’s just the market.

            You are on Larry Correia’s site. He isn’t writing space exploration. It isn’t because someone told him not to do it. He has found another niche that didn’t really exist 25 years ago.

            In the final analysis, you like what you like. Fine. So does everyone else. They just may be different things. There is no conspiracy to deprive you of what you want to read.

          5. Oh fer gawds sake… I never said I didn’t like the Martian. I said that it wasn’t a counter example to what I was talking about.

            My premise is simple enough… people who (unlike you who like them) don’t care for an anti-human message don’t buy books that they think have a high risk factor of having an anti-human message. They buy something else that is reliable, like fantasy adventures or military science fiction… both of which I like a lot and both which nearly never have a downer message and both of which seem to sell quite well. So people do buy what I am arguing that they want to buy.

            Brad’s been utterly ripped one side and the other for trying to explain (apparently there is so much “no” going on that no one can understand an extremely simple distinction) that one ought to be able to judge a book by it’s cover and when you learn through hard experience that you *can’t* judge a book by its cover, people stop taking risks with their money. If you’ve lost the ability to guess with some reliability if a book is going to be anti-human or not, you leave it on the shelf even if it was exactly what you wanted. And then marketing people go… oh, spaceships don’t sell, everyone knows that, but urban fantasy is on the rise.

            Paranormal romance is an *excellent* example, btw. Readership there is exploding because it delivers adventure, sex and romance, and the guy gets the girl, or the vampire gets the guy, or the leopard shifter gets the tiger. Upbeat happy endings as evil is defeated and love prevails. Start slipping in downer endings, the couple doesn’t get together after all but move on, the thing they were fighting for doesn’t work out… I don’t even know how many times that would have to happen before the average reader of paranormal romance would start to avoid books with animals on the cover, no matter how badly they wanted a new one.

          6. If you want to say “it’s just the market” then look at what does sell. Paranormal romance, urban fantasy (some of that dystopic, but people know where to look for it), fantasy, high and low, military science fiction, and a variety of alternate history and humans-deal-with-disaster. If I pick up something in Eric Flint’s Grantville universe, my heroes are going to strive and prevail as they work to ideologically transform Europe into something they can live with. If I pick up Steve Stirling’s Change series the humans are going to find a way to meet every challenge… there is no accepting defeat, even if comrades fall along the way. If I pick up MHI, not even the gates of Hell can prevail against our heroes. If I pick up David Weber I know that the Good Guys are not going to loose the final battle.

            But suddenly… suddenly… anything set in the future really ought to show how destructive and horrible humans are because that’s what SELLS? It obviously doesn’t sell. Not to anyone.

            Am I only supposed to care about this if it was on *purpose*?

          7. Sounds to me you don’t like what you consider anti-human message. OK. And you want rocket ships with exploration and good humans and bad aliens. OK.

            Same two words – the market.

            The people got rooked by the cover of the book stuff doesn’t work for me. People have more information about what they are buying then ever. I just picked up Scalzi’s “Lock In” at a good sales price and the cover doesn’t tell me Jack. But the Goodreads Choice Awards, Amazon reviews, and my Sci-Fi group sure do. Cover is meaningless.

            BTW, it is set in the future. Maybe it will follow your pattern and show human fault as you say anything in the future suddenly does. Maybe it won’t. I will let you know in a couple of months. We already know if it sells, yes? Really – I have no idea what you are driving at here. It’s just – the market.

            Good luck on Human Wave SF. I read a bit from Sarah about that. Not sure where that is headed but if you like it and they sell then that’s good.

          8. At no point did I say “bad aliens.”

            At this point I’m done. Thanks for your time.

          9. Getting rooked by the book cover doesn’t bother you? I’d say the marketers know exactly what attracts my attention with precision and excellence. Their fish lure covers promising me things gave me a lesson for sure. I wonder how this bait and switch cover stuff led to the downfall of Borders? Do you have to judge what sort of world a thriller or mystery or a western is going to be? The covers usually match right? But when you have never been to Feminazi fantasy land or Planet White Priviledge then you wouldn’t have a clue as to what the story might be right or the world look like? It is easier to get burned by SF/F covers.
            Now I have to do research for a book! Instead of impulse shopping, which was kinda fun, I have to go through a sea of book review which is lame. I guess I have left my impulse shopping on my Kindle. Is that good for the mom and pop bookstores SJW?

            I definitely like Human Wave SF and military SF. Should I seek therapy? Should I just give up and give in to the Body Snatchers?

          10. Jim Cameron made Aliens decades ago. Humans are the good guys; aliens are the bad guys. He’s done it already. With the same actress, in fact.

          11. There are a lot of movies where humans are the good guys. Most of the Marvel stuff, actually. Makes TONS of money. Interstellar *didn’t* have an anti-human message. Neither did the um… bah… something Tomorrow with Tom Cruise. NO anti-human message.

          12. “Edge of Tomorrow” By pure coincidence, I actually watched that last night, sitting there with my fingers crossed that it wasn’t going to be yet another case of some Hollywood moron thinking it would be ‘cool’ or ‘edgy’ to have humans secretly behind the Mimics all along. (insert *gasp!* *orchestral sting!*) SPOILER: They’re not. They actually are a malevolent, implacable alien invader, not some diabolical plot by the military-industrial complex or an eeeeeeeevil corporation.

          13. Avatar had a bit of a different bent, what with ripping of Dances With Wolves and everything.

          14. This is why some fans and authors are trying to promote the idea of Human Wave science fiction. Writing about angels would be boring. Writing perfect heroes would be perfectly awful. Rising above challenges is interesting. Heroic sacrifice is interesting. “They thought that because we were criminals we wouldn’t care if they blew up the Earth,” is interesting.

            If something is “Human Wave” the end of the story should invoke something closer to “let’s build a spaceship and go” instead of “I think I should do my part by not reproducing.”

        2. Beale would fade away if his enemies just ignored him. Instead they go out of their way almost every day to vilify him and blame him for everything they don’t like. In doing so, they have made him into a very powerful figure.

          1. Beale, you have to admit, pegged them when he said (paraphrased) ” SJWs lie, they employ social media frenzied mobs, they employ Saul Alinsky tactics”. The ASPs can’t debate him. If one of them could and were to beat him in a debate they would be heralded as heroes for slaying the dragon. They have no Beowulfs in their ranks, just Scalzi, Feder, Gallo, and PNH. None of them had the brains to ignore him or dismiss the nominations. That would have deflated Beale. If he gets an award they will go bat crap crazy. If he loses they will reenforce that the Hugo is the sham that it is. Instead of welcoming the Sad Puppies they instead went to war against us and are paying for it.

            The ASPs (anti sad puppies) don’t get is that gamersgate’s fight against corrupt gaming journalism was pretty big deal. It may have been a hairball melee flamewar that was very uncivil but in the end gaming journalism was destroyed. The ASPs don’t understand that corruption when defended and not exposed creates doubt in everything. So good gaming journalism suffered right along with the corrupted gaming journalism. Designers did not cow to the SJWs. This trend has already happened in this scrap with Tor. It puts a lot of publishers in doubt. Had they not made a cow about it the whole thing would have gone on like any other year.

    4. Interesting that when the noms were announced several news sources came out with false stories about the puppies. Now that it’s clear Tor editors are repeating the slander in lockstep and no publications like Entertainment are picking it up. I mean you’d think vile slander, non-apologies, and the threat of a boycott would be news. But no, not a word.

      1. If you want EW to cover it, send them a press release, and tell them how to get in touch with the people involved so that they can do interviews. They aren’t going to come looking for you.

      2. But if the mainstream media picked up the story, they’d be saying what the Puppy kickers are saying: that we’re all he-man woman-haters who want to get rid of Ms. Gallo because she’s a woman. Her offensive remarks would be ignored or downplayed.

        1. Chris, the media is getting its ass handed to them by Fox. When they leave CNN or MSNBC they aren’t going to another lefty they are going to Fox. If the left really wanted to destroy Fox they would allow right wing competition but instead they are using methods that don’t work. The left wing publishing is facing the same thing. They are shrinking the market and competing for the same group. With epublications they are losing the customers they alienated who now have a thirst for more. The longer they deny market equilibrium the worse they make it for themselves.

          Social media fight can be won too. When Gallo says something uncivil the best thing to do is tweet and retweet. Sure, the SJWs will applaud but more people will be repelled.

  39. SJWs can call us shitlords and say we’re nuts all they want but the truth is hate speech and racial incitement are things which have definitions and are illegal all over the world outside the free speech protections of America. There is a well-established moral and legalistic philosophical framework behind the objection to saying a lack of empathy or hate is baked into the very identity of a racial or sexual group. The existence of GLAAD and the ADL is further proof of that. The question is why any adult in 21st America would need to point that out at all let alone be called a “shitlord” for doing it.

    The fact John Scalzi, Tor and Publisher’s Weekly have complete double standards when it comes to such things is precisely the point. One side gets fired, the other does not. SJWs understand incitement just fine when it comes to church killings but not at all when it comes to cops assassinated sitting in their car or dead cartoonists. In fact in SJW theory those cartoonists committed suicide via racism. There shouldn’t be any misunderstanding what power/privilege punching up theory is – it is hate speech itself disguised as anti-hate speech.

    It’s no surprise the SJW movement arose a few years ago when a cultish ideology took hold which decided to revisit the very meaning of racism and sexism itself to its own advantage and turned out to be those very things itself, again disguised as anti-racism and anti-sexism. Prior to this feminist movement, no one in SFF now or in the past had ever formally spoken out as a group to racially or sexually boycott anyone, quite the contrary. But in fact, that is exactly what SJWs do. They are brutally stupid and dishonest people, and that’s not including the ones who are mad.

    You don’t have to be a genius to see that the SJW movement works in the opposite way of our Constitution. They don’t want equal rights, they want equal outcomes, and they demonstrably throw the idea of equal rights and fair play out the door in order to satisfy their silly ideas about oppressions. SJWs commonly take one man and multiply them into out of context fake institutions and non-existent murderous trends while taking their own actual ideology and institutional presence and pretending it just happened by accident.

    Let’s be honest here: no old-school SFF editors and authors shit on their own readership because they were involved in bizarre cults. If they had they wouldn’t have lasted. Tor has been doing this only a few short years and they’re about to get a wake up call. I do not read SFF to be called names or enrolled in a woman-hating KKK by daffy gay feminists, some whom are so nuts they claim to be neither men nor women. Fine – take it outside, as they used to say.

  40. I sent this today. The final two straws were:
    1. Claims that emails such as this are “bots”.
    2. A Tor “supporter” repeatedly, in so many words, telling critics to basically **** off because they probably don’t buy many Tor books and they won’t be missed. With “supporters” like these, Tor hardly needs enemies.

    Just sent this to Tor books.

    From: B H
    To: “”
    Cc: “” ; “” ; “” ; “” ; “” ; “”
    Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2015 10:11 AM
    Subject: Unprofessional and Insulting Treatment of Customers

    Sirs and Madams:

    For the most part I’ve refrained from getting involved in the current ideological dustup ongoing in the SF community. It is a bit dismaying to see such behavior overtaking a genre I have loved for around 40 years. I have been a voracious reader of SF since checking out a battered paperback copy of Harry Harrison’s “Deathworld 3” in the mid 70s. I have also been a voracious consumer of books, and outside of necessities like food, rent, and childcare expenses, books are likely my number one expense.

    Tor books always figured prominently in my collection, and I held them in the same esteem as Ace, Del Rey, and Baen books. If I didn’t lend out or donate my SF books they would easily fill an entire room — floor to ceiling, not just the walls. I will continue to be an avid consumer of SF books, but those published by Tor will not be among them.

    Whatever one’s opinion of either side of the debate, it is quite obvious that several of your high ranking employees have been engaging in some seriously unprofessional behavior. Not to mention deeply insulting. Having served in the Marine Corps, having two parents who endured Luftwaffe bombings as children in Britain, having two grandparents, several uncles, and a father-in-law who served in WWII, AND having myself worked as a teacher for six years in an urban New Jersey school, being called an unrepentant neo-Nazi and racist — and lets not bandy semantics here please — is quite simply something which I will no longer quietly abide.

    What actually pushed me over the edge was not the constant barrage of insults, however, but the incredibly tone-deaf and arrogant manner in which your employees and supporters responded to what I consider legitimate criticism. Namely, insults and doubling down on their borderline libel. In almost any other industry such treatment of customers would never be tolerated.

    I was also dismayed by reports of your employees trying to pass off emails such as this as the work of bots.

    I am not a “bot” and will be happy to provide evidence of my actual personhood. I am not a racist. I am not a misogynist. I am not a neo-Nazi.

    And I am not a Tor customer.

    And by extension no longer a customer of any Macmillan publisher.


    Brian L. Hurrel

  41. “Daniel José Older retweeted
    Christopher Hayes ‏@chrislhayes 18h18 hours ago
    Allow me to gently note that part of the killers’ ‘radicalization’ was immersing himself in stories of ‘black on white’ crime something that certain media outlets just happen to have a creepy obsession with.”

    There are no brains or awareness in that social justice culture – none.

    SJW Twitter feeds do exactly that: immerse themselves in white on black crime ONLY. That is not an opinion but an easily proven fact. That in and of itself is racial incitement. Cartoonists die, policemen are assassinated and we can’t count the dead, at least not from the mainstream media. People like Hayes are the mainstream media, and they are a memory-hole.

  42. People at white supremacist sites who don’t like blacks exaggerate crime statistics to make blacks look bad, and it is a tendency – in similar but different forms – which is also seen in the SFF community by intersectionalists and their “allies” to smear immorality onto the straight white male. In the SFF community this ranges from indulging in the same use of crime statistics as white supremacists, to urban myths about mid-century SF literature and its institutions, to gerrymandering history so it encloses all forms of European colonialism while neatly eliding any empire-building by those SJWs designate as “PoC.” It is racial lying. In SFF even definitions of “racism” are carefully enclosed in semantic gibberish to make the obvious seem muddy.

    Intersectionalists spent the days following the May 2014 shootings by the half-Asian Elliot Rodger attacking white men on a variety of forums including Twitter hashtags like #NotAllMen and #YesAllWomen. Here is an example of the double standards and bizarre obsessions in the SFF community. The president of the SFWA Steven Gould retweets this for our attention:

    “Retweeted by Ink-Stained Wretch daisy ‏@ElleryMitten 18h yo”

    That brings you to text that says:

    “‘White men make up approximately 36% of the population, but commit 75% of mass shootings. What would be called terrorism by any other skin tone is suddenly some mysterious unnamed disease. We as a society are perfectly happy to further stigmatize mentally ill people, who are far more likely to be victims of violence than commit violence in the service of protecting white supremacy and male entitlement.’ – The ‘Mental Illness’ We Refuse to Name: White Male Entitlement.”

    SFF author Veronica Schanoes has a cuter retweet that ups the ante to 87% and unknowingly asks in principle why all black men shouldn’t be spied on, because if 36% is doing 75% then it seems 7% of blacks doing 50% of crime is much worse. Throw in raw numbers and it’s worse yet. Simple comparisons and intersectionalism are enemies because intersectionalists are racists who stretch statistics in any direction that points at whites and away from non-whites.

    “Veronica Schanoes retweeted Aamir | KASHMIR @aamiryatoo · Feb 11 87% of U.S. mass shooting are committed by caucasians 13-56. Why don’t we spy on this community? #ChapelHillShooting”

    Aside from once again seeing typical stupidity which somehow intersects with SFF literature, it’s hard to know where to begin to unpack such stupidly racist quotes. Mass shootings are relatively rare. They are almost always by people with obvious mental health issues and are not terrorism under any definition I’ve ever heard, nor an offshoot of being both white and male as the swinish Rose Fox suggests.

    Note that any presentation of black male crime statistics is considered racist, or race-baiting – which it is not – while a statistically skewed little racist tract is somehow considered by Mr. Gould to be wisdom to pass along. Now let me play Devil’s Advocate and show you what the SJWs will never retweet:

    Black men make up approximately 7% of the population, but commit 50% of all murders in America, and which surpass “mass shootings” in raw numbers by many, many times. According to USA Today the “toll from mass shootings exceeds 900 in 7 years” in America. But murders in Chicago alone in the last 7 years amount to 3,222. 75% of those were done by blacks.

    So Gould thinks it’s important to know mentally ill white men murder about 700 people over a 7 year period in all of America but sit on his hands about 2,300 murders by black men in Chicago alone over a 7 year period. That number blooms to about 50,000 total murders in 7 years by black men who are 7% of the populace and 50,000 by white men who are maybe 34% of the populace.

    “Of the offenders for whom race was known, 52.4 percent were black, 45.2 percent were white, and 2.4 percent were of other races. The race was unknown for 4,077 offenders.” – 2011 FBI Expanded Homicide Data: Overview.

    Considering blacks are about 13% of the population and whites 65-70%, that’s rather stunning. Black folks are committing the majority of murders in the U.S. Here’s the actual FBI breakdown by numbers. Out of respective populations of about 40 million and 230 million, blacks managed to outstrip whites 5,486 to 4,729 in known offenders. There’s no reason to think the 4,077 unknown offenders would break down any differently. In terms of interracial murders in 2011, blacks again outstrip their demographic by killing 448 whites as opposed to whites killing 193 blacks. Both show an exact reversal of the lies around the Trayvon Martin case about whites hunting down blacks.

    Gould also needs to read this eye-opener by Heather Mac Donald titled “Distorting the Truth About Crime and Race,” which is about stop and frisk in New York City. The truth is social justice warriors lie – they lie through their teeth. The truth is blacks are stopped less than whites according to how their demographic is involved in crime. In short, there is no racial profiling, quite the contrary.

    The funny thing is it’s okay when Gould does this, and it’s okay for Rose Fox to smear a madman onto over 200 million whites, but I’ll be called a racist for presenting accurate statistics and in context. That’s because in SJW land, all roads lead to whites. If you go to a white supremacist news site that that has a sidebar of articles which single out blacks with stories about flash mobs and white people being sucker punched, it’s obvious black folks are going to come out on the wrong end of that news 100% of the time. Turn that sidebar around and that’s what you have on the Twitter feeds and blogs of SFF’s SJWs. The fact SFF’s intersectionalist kool-aid drinkers see themselves in the center of those two extremes shows how delusional and in denial they are.

    The truth is SJWs are as capable of writing “people of color have done more than their share for this country” or even “built this country” as they are incapable of applying that same principle to crime, a thing easy to do when one is in possession of no principles.

    When people want to lie, and lie racially, that is how it is done, and that’s why so many people see SJWs as little different from a white supremacist group combined with naive people who have trouble making simple comparisons or understanding english; almost nothing SJWs say makes any actual sense, is based on a principle or follows facts; what is a good idea for one racial grouping is a bad idea for another; “good” follows race or sex, not “idea.” Take my one example of racial stats and spread it over mid-century SF or the history of the world and you have intersectional theory and history promoted by no less than the last two presidents of the SFWA. The self evident fact is that the SJW community will come after white men hooks and tongs over made up fantasies and crimes and not only show no willingness or interest in using that exact same mechanism of thought about non-whites, but forbid it. That tells us again and again, that there is no philosophy even remotely resembling principle in play here. Identity is god – race and gender – and it is only ever one race and one gender that is at fault. That is a pistol with a single target.

  43. I have an idea for a crowdsourced SF space opera novel that would better expend our energies towards what we love: our genre. The idea is that the most pro authors would combine with any other authors to write individual chapters, maybe more than 100, short or long, as the writers choose. The most pro authors would write the most chapters in order to keep the project on a steady course. The project would be implemented across several websites. It would also serve to boycott this endless arguing for many months. There could be 30 or so writers in total.

    The basic outline is a human space habitat that developed enough of its own resources to leave Earth orbit 150 years prior to the start of the novel in 2650 with a fleet of asteroids it used for resources. After many years it gradually arrived to Martian and Jupiter space where it established a permanent presence beyond the reach of Earth. It left because of the presence on Earth of two oppressive and aggressive but less technological empires that craved this habitat’s tech.

    Now, with the development of new high acceleration tech, the hostile empires are arriving to Martian/Jupiter space. In the midst of this is evidence of ancient alien bases whose tech could make or break one side. The race is on to find that tech or hide and defend what is already found. The novel begins there.

    This could be multi-generational, multi-dynastic or could take place over 5 years. It would be made up as it went along. That’s part of the fun – challenging the next chapter writer, maybe even writing them into impossible cliff-hangers.

    Wars, space-battles, intrigue, betrayal, poisonings, spies, alien tech, alien booby traps, martial arts, assassinations, betrayal, love, family, mystery, etc… of course.

    There is also this idea to add to the fun: chapter writers would be encouraged to base their chapters off of phrases from William Blake’s America: A Prophecy, such as the following:

    rise in silent night
    lifted in heaven
    furrows of the whip
    over the heaving sea
    his glowing eyes
    between the gloomy nations
    round the orbed heaven
    fire fierce glowing
    banners dark and towers
    like the planet red
    terror like a comet
    planets three flew round

    On the other hand, writers could use the titles but ignore them as inspiration. They could choose to either directly follow a preceding chapter or start an entire new episode with new characters. Obviously one can start only so many new episodes with new characters. The novel would be written one chapter at a time in sequence and everyone allowed to critique, but there would be one committee of 3 or 4 who would ultimately decide when a chapter is accepted and the next started. In some cases a chapter might have to be edited by the committee or perhaps rejected and rewritten one or two times by the next writers selected by lottery or the committee itself which is there to keep the ship on course.

    For obvious Lusophone reasons, I propose the world-building would be based on the Portuguese-centric culture of my novel Britetown Races. But since I did that for fun (think jarring peaches) and am not a writer, I would otherwise take no part in the novel. Or the project could use its own world-building, but a lot of that work has been done and would make it easier to slide into such a project rather than starting cold.

  44. BTW, at LibertyCon, I was given a photocopy of the anti-SP editorial appearing in this quarter’s SPX Magazine, by Dave Langford (of Ansible Fame), and it’s full of the usual crap, conflating SP/RP, and so on, and finishing with a deniable advocacy of NoAwarding.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *