New article from Salon shows how sad those puppies really are.
Can you summarize what specific lies you are referring to? I am not going to go listen to the recording or visit that guy’s website, but I am willing to be convinced by your arguments if presented in a rational and coherent manner.
What specific lies? The accusation I have seen is that Mr. Truesdale was engaged to moderate a panel on a specific topic. When he was supposed to begin his moderation, he instead launched into a 10 minute pre-planned diatribe about a different topic. Backing up the claim of pre-planning is that he brought props.
Which part of this is lies, what is a fabrication?
I will wait right here…
The really sad part is that ANYONE thinks this is important. What was that phrase from another thread recently? “The smaller the importance, the greater the passions”?
Organized sf has always reminded me of a barroom full of drag queens slapping each other, all the way back to the Futurians.
Technically, I’m an SJW (I think more diversity is a good thing, and that the puppies want to turn SF into the literature of the same old ideas and lack of imagination). I’m also friends with Dave Truesdale (I review for Tangent, which he runs). This seems far different from what he does with the magazine, and he should know that the changes to the field are good ones.
One issue - on both sides - is the inability to accept that most stories are not written to make a political point (some are, of course, but that’s been an aspect of the field since at least the 50s, and likely before. Neither side is willing to accept the fact that other people genuinely like stories they don’t, or that the stories chosen are reflective of what was submitted.
There are some arguments about how the field is evolving, but “political correctness” is just not affecting the field in any meaningful way.
The prevalence of Asperger’s among fans, and even writers and editors to some degree, would pretty much assure an inability to compromise on viewpoints.
The basic battle between Fans, who see sff as something special and different and thus subject to special rules, and, well, everyone else who sees it as a literary genre that has to accept more general rules is pretty much why I could never stand getting past a very select fringe of aficionados. And we’re approaching 100 years of this BS.
But both sides didn’t start and continue a campaign to block-vote entries, regardless of their actual quality, in an effort to discriminate against writers of a different sex, ethnicity or sexual orientation.
I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit on this. Most of the people (No, not all, but most) in Fandom do in fact know that stories aren’t generally written to make a political point. The people who are constantly talking about how political beliefs are ruining SF, how it has been turned into a way to uplift “half-savage” people like N. K. Jemisin, have labeled themselves Sad/Rabid Puppies.
Jemisin didn’t win this year because of politics, she won because she is a good writer. Gaiman won because he is a fantastic writer. And none if the people who voted for him cared that he was on Beale’s slate.
The people who can’t believe that the other side actually likes what they nominate, are the puppies. But people who aren’t puppies can easily believe that someone likes what the puppies do. Because, from a nobody like me all the way to the head SJW Scalzi, we like some of that stuff too. The stuff that’s good anyway, not the mostly trash they have been nominating.
And that last part, that the stories chosen are reflective of what was submitted? You are smarter than that. Unless you have been deliberately skipping everything about slate nominating/voting and how it distorts the ballot for the last year and a half.
When it came time to nominate the best science fiction/fantasy television had to offer, do you know what the puppies block-voted in, pushing aside so many other more worthy selections?
An unexceptional episode of “My Little Pony”.
True, the SJW voters have been discriminating against straight, white male writers whose political ideologies are to the right of Lenin, for over a decade now. That the Sad Puppies slate last year was far more diverse than the SJW one was a humiliation of epic proportions.
They also know that the Hugo’s weren’t being awarded to authors that did not espouse far-left ideology, regardless of the “quality” of their works, which the Puppies hilariously proved year-after-year. The SJW’s are so panicked that they’re making their political biases explicit rather than implicit.
No she isn’t, but then the Hugo’s haven’t reflected quality for several decades now. And despite the crying and sobbing of the idiots on the left, that’s all public knowledge now, thanks to the Puppies 
True, the people who hated that the puppies were slating were so incensed that they slated themselves. What hilarious hypocrisy 
“My Little Pony” and Chuck Tingle.
'Nuff said.
…you seem to not understand what the word “discriminated” means. The alleged “SJW’s” haven’t discriminated against anyone. They simply voted for what they liked. Do you think there should be restrictions on how Hugo voter vote?
Vox, is that you?
Vox is an idiot.
aliensshow, here are the most recent winners of the Hugo Award for Best Novel. In each case, tell me exactly how it espouses a far-left ideology. If you haven’t read it, say so explicitly. Everyone else, please don’t answer for aliensshow. I want to know exactly what he knows about the recent winners and what he thinks about them, not what other people know and think about them:
N. K. Jemisin The Fifth Season
Cixin Liu The Three-Body Problem
Ann Leckie Ancillary Justice
John Scalzi Redshirts
Jo Walton Among Others
Connie Willis Blackout/All Clear
Paolo Bacigalupi The Windup Girl
China Miéville The City & the City
Neil Gaiman The Graveyard Book
Michael Chabon The Yiddish Policemen’s Union
Vernor Vinge Rainbows End
Robert Charles Wilson Spin
Susanna Clarke Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell
Lois McMaster Bujold Paladin of Souls
Robert J. Sawyer Hominid
Neil Gaiman American Gods
J. K. Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Vernor Vinge A Deepness in the Sky
Connie Willis To Say Nothing of the Dog
Gaiman wasn’t there, but his acceptance speech spanked the puppies with a rolled-up newspaper.
I’m not sure that’s any better or worse than the year the Minneapolis crowd got their con book nominated in the Related category.
If they only voted in one work, there’s a difference, IMO. (I don’t know the details of the incident, so if my interpretation is incorrect, let me know.) The slates nominate enough works to fill out an entire category, while an organized movement to nominate one book will still leave several other spots on the ballot for other works. I’m not a proponent of organizing to get a single work nominated, but it’s not the same thing as filling up the ballot.
Also, I’ll wager that the Minneapolis crowd was at least proud of their work, where I don’t think the Puppies think highly of Tingle or My Little Pony.
Finally, I want to say that this year proved that the Rabid Puppies have been the more powerful slate. Last year, the Rabids won when there was a conflict, but there weren’t many conflicts between the slates. This year, it’s pretty clear that the Rabid Puppies are the driving force. I’m more or less okay with what the Sad Puppies did this year, and it’s not much different from other recommended reading lists. The Rabid Puppies, however, just want to see the Hugos burn. Their list is a mixture of Castilla House self-promotion, shitting on the award (Tingle*, MLP), and works that don’t need Puppy help (Stephenson, Gaiman).
*No offense to Tingle, who has trolled the Puppies wonderfully, but I believe that his nomination by the Puppies was not based on the merit of his work but to prove that the Puppies could nominate anything they wanted regardless of merit.
I am also interested in hearing about the far left ideology espoused by Vernor Vinge.
If he’s part of the SJW cabal, I clearly need to have a word with those in charge of our screening process.
The far right was quite adequately represented by Jerry Pournelle, thank you. He took over one panel, to the embarrassment of everyone else on it.
True, everyone else was embarrassed when they lied about what he said, and he spanked them with the recording he released