Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Larry Correia, Once Again

Yes, I am aware that Larry Correia has once again responded to me on MONSTER HUNTER NATION. Thanks to the hundred and forty-two of you who emailed me to point this out.

(Some of you, I fear, just like the smell of blood. 'Hey, let's you and him fight.' Pfui).

Anyway... no, I am not going to reply to his reply to my reply to his reply to my posts. This is not a fifteen-round title bout, thank you. We have reached the point of diminishing returns on this. The discourse has, I think, been revealing, and I appreciate that both of us have kept the tone relatively civil, but I sincerely doubt that either one of us has swayed the other an inch.

Larry has been declared the winner by a knockout on Monster Hunter Nation. Yay for him.

I have been declared the winner by a knockout here on my Not A Blog. Yay for me.

Have any minds been changed? Was it worth all that time, all those words?

I have no bloody idea.

I could say, "it was fun while it lasted," except it wasn't.

Mr. Correia and I will just have to continue to disagree.


Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
James Young
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:36 pm (UTC)
And let's see how Vox Day tries to twist this into an inflammatory post on his blog....

Although I have found this debate extremely interesting, I feel as if the arguing over the Hugos is just one vicious cycle, with no clear solution that can be immediately implemented to fix the problem. As you have somewhat insinuated in your past blogs Mr. Martin, I think the Hugos have been changed forever, and there is no saving them.

It's time for people to step back on both sides of the argument and realise that no minds have been changed, although it was definitely not a waste of time.
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:39 pm (UTC)
On Intent and Results
What is lost (and sometimes purposely disguised) in all of this is *intent*.

The intent of the Hugos and those that run it are based around providing awards through a bureaucratic and well-intended system. It may have migrated towards favoring a faction, but the *intent* has centered around SFF fandom and the SFF community.

No question - the *intent* of the Sad Puppy and Rabid Puppy slates has been to harm. To break and deny the Hugo Award system based on . Vox Day is vocal and unapologetic about that intent. Larry and the SP movement have been less truthful about the harm they intended to cause and the harm to average SFF fans and authors in this process.

As one of those many SFF fans in the middle, it is tough to support a cause with that goal in mind and those results accomplished.

Attend a con and to help change it from within...or to choose another con if that change is not forthcoming. Build and support and discuss with the *intent* of making our SFF family better.
Apr. 16th, 2015 12:30 am (UTC)
Re: On Intent and Results
> No question - the *intent* of the Sad Puppy and Rabid Puppy slates has been to harm.

how do you decide that there is no question about that? why is it not possible that the intent was to get works that they thought were worthy on the ballot

> Attend a con and to help change it from within

Isn't that what SP is doing? purchasing attendence to worldcon and voting.

At this point, everyone who purchases a con membership is a part of the convention, right? or are only some people part of the convention and others are still outsiders? how many years do you need to be part of the convention before you stop being an outsider?

or are you only part of the convention when you agree with everyone else?

If this is the case, then Larry was right when he said that the Hugos were an insider award, not an award representing all science fiction fandom
Re: On Intent and Results - rhapsody11 - Apr. 16th, 2015 03:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
Re: On Intent and Results - admnaismith - Apr. 16th, 2015 05:20 pm (UTC) - Expand
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:41 pm (UTC)
Been there and done that on Facebook with the same guy. Better things to do with my time. Like storytelling. Full stop.
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:44 pm (UTC)
Good idea
There reaches a point of diminishing points with any argument. If neither side shows any proclivity toward changing their point of view, it's probably best to just accept that your point has been made and his point has been made and leave it at that.
Andr Costa Silva
Apr. 16th, 2015 09:17 am (UTC)
Re: Good idea
I was going to comment exactly "we have reached the point of diminishing returns on this" even after only reading the title. But I was going to add that that point had been reached a couple of posts before. I believe it only kept going because this discussion is much more emotionally than rationally-based.
For someone watching all this from the outside in, it's clear this is a waste of time and patience. The usual
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:49 pm (UTC)
The most surreal part of this whole "controversy"
...is that the people who claim to be underrepresented largely argue that it's due to some sort of super-secret, conspiratorial cabal (made up, no doubt, of hippies, sodomites, Marxists, and ne'er-do-wells).

If that were even remotely true, how the hell were they able to hijack the process so thoroughly?

Is it possible that ostensibly-broken process somehow worked exactly as described? And that's how they knew how to "rig" the system in the first place?

All of this behavior strikes me as incredibly immature and absurd. It's akin to a small child who knocks over the checkerboard when the game isn't going his way. Or rather, a child who knocks over someone else's sand castle because he can't win at checkers, which is what he really wants.

Also, the Hugos might die, and they might not die. It would be sad if they did, but time changes all things. The important part in all this is that the Hugos were never actually about the rocket prize or the balloting process or even the authors. It was about fans of science fiction getting together to celebrate science fiction.

As long as there is always science fiction, as long as there are always fans, and as long as those fans continue to celebrate science fiction, then the true spirit of the Hugos will never die. They may have a different name, a different process, and a different award, but the sentiment will remain the same.

And all the while, years after this ridiculous escapade has passed, the hatemongers and the hijackers will have only their pyrrhic victory and their terrible, poorly-written science fiction. Assuming they actually read science fiction at all.
Apr. 15th, 2015 10:51 pm (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you, Mr. Martin - for facilitating a good discussion.

I come from the pro-GamerGate side and was happy to see thoughts on the Hugo awards. I may not have agreed with all your views, but I did learn a lot from your perspective. It makes me sad that creative mediums like books and video games are being turned into battlegrounds.
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:02 pm (UTC)
First constructive and respectful discussion between opposing parties that I've seen in this whole thing so far.

Hasn't changed my pro-SP opinion, but I at least understand the other side a whole lot better now. Thanks, GRRM and Larry.
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:02 pm (UTC)
I read Mr Correia's post and I don't think it would be rewarding or effective for you to respond. In his previous post he had made a lot of sweeping claims about fannish behavior and you asked him to back them up with specifics. In this post, he alternates between 1) apologizing for not being able to remember details; 2) trying to withdraw non-specific personal attacks so that he won't have to personalize them; 3) accusing you of McCarthyism for trying to force him to name names - when it was he who'd made the claims in the first place.

No, there's no point in pursuing this any further.
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:03 pm (UTC)
While I was not expecting everyone to change their minds on SP's position and reasoning, I was hoping that some out there would take a look from their point of view and see some of the behavior that they are complaining about. I'm not claiming victimhood for these guys, but from where I sit I do see instances of what they are talking about. I don't think this is only a Hugo problem, but one that affects a lot of thinking throughout the western world.

I don't believe there to be a secret cabal of people whose only aim is to take down conservative authors, or those particular ideas. I think it is just a popular knee-jerk reaction to side with those who accuse others of every -ist and -ism. Nobody wants to be around somebody that is hateful, plus you don't want to be associated with someone who has that label applied to them. Conservatives are racists and misogynists and hate the poor. Libertarians are all nutsos. Tea Party folks are the worst of the bunch.

Well guess what, a good chunk of conservatives are fairly religious people who follow the word of Christ and help those around them no matter the circumstance. Those who preach hate are a pretty small, but vocal group. Libertarians want to be left alone and most often go by the golden rule in their interactions with others. The Tea Party movement grew from a belief that the Constitution should be upheld and that everyone is created equal. Sure, we can find the exceptions and those people very well can be the -ists and -isms that we hear a lot about. But it is far more likely for you to bump into one of those people and have more in common with them than differences.

Watch the news from the major sources and see what they tend to cover and not cover. How the stories are presented. Just remember that when watching or reading any narrative, you are more likely to agree with someone that says the same things that you often think. When you feel that you are a normal, logical human being... your opinion must be correct. Meet someone with another opinion that is the polar opposite, it is terribly easy to think them dumb/misguided/evil. All we can hope for is that you take the time to perhaps find some common ground with that other person (especially if they are willing) and see things from the other side.
Apr. 16th, 2015 12:00 am (UTC)
Re: Unfortunate...

I'm just glad Mr. Martin has decided to let it go. Too many good writers have been spending too much time on this topic rather than writing good books. As a reader, I find that appalling.

Mr. Martin -- get thee to your keyboard and write the good stuff! ;)

Edited at 2015-04-16 12:02 am (UTC)
Re: Unfortunate... - dragonborngurl - Apr. 17th, 2015 08:16 pm (UTC) - Expand
Vera de Ferran
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:25 pm (UTC)
At a certain point, the only solution is agree to disagree
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:29 pm (UTC)
it was helpful for me
Hello Mr. Martin,

First time commenting on your blog here. I came to your novels through HBO and have had a great time both reading your books and reading about them via the ASOIAF online community (Leigh Butler's "A Read of Ice and Fire" on Tor is a lot of fun and a good way to review something I read 3 books ago!).

Just wanted to drop in and say that your posts were valuable to me, especially since I am a more casual sci-fi/fantasy fan that's never been to a Worldcon. I was a bit confused by the whole Sad Puppies thing, but reading your thoughts about the Hugos and the people that make them work clarified things, and I found your conversation with Correia helpful because it was filled with concrete examples.

I get that this has to be frustrating for everyone, but I learned a lot by coming here, so thank you!
Qadreya Abdulraheem
Apr. 15th, 2015 11:41 pm (UTC)
no matter
Im glad you decided to stop this
Some people will never change their minds no matter what, even if they realize they are wrong they will still bark, just look at the GOP
Wish you the best,
Cheers from Dubai
Apr. 16th, 2015 12:10 am (UTC)

It was a hundred and forty THREE of us! Why are you oppressing me by leaving me out?
Apr. 16th, 2015 12:34 am (UTC)
I would like to thank both you and Correia and everyone else bitching about this...because the important thing is that PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT BOOKS.

Well, they're talking about politics and books and cons and books and personal history and books and no one (in this debate) ever really really strikes me as talking about the meaning of the books or their content or their style in anything more than a codified rhetorical way...

But that's a step toward talking about books.

Long time fan of yours, and now you've introduced me to Correia. I'm becoming a fan of his as well.

Who cares if all sides destroy the Hugo if it actually inspires people to get involved and read and discuss? I dunno, I always thought that's what the Hugo was about. And sometimes you set the flag on fire to celebrate your freedom. I hope you don't, because I want my own Hugo one day, but I don't care, from the naivety of nonameville, who gives it to me, or nominates me, and I suspect there are many nonames out there thinking the same thing, and I can't be the only one you, Correia, and everyone else involved have inspired.

So thank you.
Apr. 16th, 2015 01:14 am (UTC)

We all love smell of blood muahahahaha

Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>


George R.R. Martin
George R. R. Martin

Latest Month

April 2018


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner