Poor Brad Loses His Rag

Brad Torgersen’s failed to bully people into voting for his picks and now he is crying about it quite loudly.

After George R. R. Martin offered an olive branch to Sad Puppies 4 if maybe they could tone down the insults and focus on books, Brad has responded with an acronym-filled and acrimonious response that demonstrates, once again, that Sad Puppies had no enemy more effective at making the campaign look foolish and petulant than Brad himself.

Here is a taste:

I bring all of this up, however, to demonstrate — for George, and any other onlookers — that there have been some horrendously poor decisions made on his “side” of the fracas. And until or unless some accounting is made for these horrendously poor decisions, I can’t see attempts at reconciliation — with the Sad Puppies — producing much fruit. Because almost nobody on the Sad Puppies side has ever received anything like an apology that is worth a damn. Far from it. What Sad Puppies gets, is being blamed for Rabid Puppies, and being treated like the Rabids and the Sads are no different from each other. It’s Putin bombing the Syrian opposition, to get at ISIS. Putin doesn’t give a damn because Putin only cares about Assad, just as the 2,500-member block bombers and CHORFholers only cared about “defending” the Hugos — from people who have just as much right to participation, as anyone else who’s in this field.

Many Sad Puppies find Vox Day and the Rabids to be revolting. It didn’t save any of the Sad Puppies from being treated as synonymous with the Rabids — which is (again) exactly what Vox wanted. And, to be truthful, it’s what many CHORFs wanted too. As long as the CHORFs don’t have to reckon with Sad Puppies honestly — as long as Vox gives the CHORFs an excuse to be zealously hateful toward all things even remotely canine — the CHORFs will happily use that excuse, and hate with a clear conscience.

Hmm, Brad fails to mention that one of the chief sources of confusion between the two campaigns (Sad and Rabid) was Brad himself, nor does Brad make much (if any) attempt to make any distinction between the huge number of different people, groups, types of fans and websites that made up all the many different kinds of people who in some way (and in various ways) opposed the two Puppy campaigns.

Nope. Instead the supposed ‘dignity culture’ plays the victim card again and demands that everybody else show him the standard of behavior he repeatedly fails to employ.

The good news for the Puppies is that Brad isn’t in charge of Sad Puppies 4. Hopefully 2016 will see less ‘crybully’ tactics. In the meantime Brad can continue to rail at the THOUSANDS of fans who he has deemed to be somehow wrong in their tastes and demand that the ‘establishment’ apologize to him for all his hurt feelings.

 

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Poor Brad Loses His Rag

  1. I could have sworn Brad declared he was taking a break from all this. Perhaps he’s now back and feeling revitalised, ready to coin a few more acronyms and such.
    It’s amusing to see the lengths he goes to avoid engaging GRRM directly, almost as if the last few times he tried didn’t go so well for him.

    Like

    1. Indeed – once again going out of his way to alienate the middle-ground. Nobody works quite so hard to defeat the Sad Puppies as Brad does. If they had put a bit of effort in being nice to the old-guard moderates like GRRM they might have done a bit better in the final tally.

      Like

  2. Mark, It is hard to engage GRRM directly (admittedly, Brad could have done) because he locks his comments so quickly…

    I was going to ask him to define a ‘Fan’ more precisely. How many books do you have to read to be a Fan? Do you have to attend cons? If so, do they have to be American cons? What if you were editor of a Dr Who magazine, but didn’t attend cons? Would you be able to nominate Best Dramatic Presentation (short form), or would your non-con attendance make you not a ‘Fan’?

    GRRM has a treehouse. He likes his treehouse. It’s a comfortable treehouse where he and about 3,000-5,000 other people (ex. supporting memberships) could hang out, drinking tea, wearing comfy slippers, and arbitrating on literary taste. Then some pulp writers turned up and tried to get a bunch of smelly readers off-the-street to give them the ‘Best Book in Treehouse’ award. This wasn’t against the rules because it says “Everyone welcome 🙂 ” on the door to the treehouse and no one (on the Sad Puppy side) said ‘you must vote for this’, but – in fact – GRRM doesn’t want a huge crowd of smelly readers in the treehouse. The real rules are that, in the treehouse, everyone has to make tea for a while before they’re accepted.

    I know GRRM doesn’t represent everyone. In so far as he represents a tendency in Worldcon Fandom, he should lobby to make the Hugos a juried or vetted award (or con attendees only). Then it’s explicit/obvious/clear what the Sad Puppies did ‘wrong’. Otherwise, there’s a real question what’s wrong with 52,000 people from Dragoncon becoming supporting members and voting a indie-published Twilight zombie fanfic as Best Novel.

    Like

    1. @Vivienne

      I hardly think 3 days to get your comments in is a bar to engaging with GRRM, and in fact Brad has managed to talk to GRRM directly on a number of previous occasions, it’s just that he didn’t come over very well when doing so. Specifically, he got dinged about his repeated deployment of insults and name-calling, and seemed unable to understand why. As he’s increased the velocity of his name-calling, including his new favourite toy of “crybullies”, he obviously hasn’t twigged yet.

      Anyway, per your questions, GRRM has been explicit about his definition both in previous posts, and in the comments you’re bemoaning the locking of (see his discussion with Mauser).

      Your analogy ignores that the “rule in the treehouse” was “no slates”, and ignoring that is what brewed up the kerfluffle tea.

      Like

  3. P.S. Not saying there’s anything wrong with a good Twilight zombie fanfic, but there seems to be a consensus the Hugos should do something more than award bestsellers.

    Like

  4. Mark,

    AFAIK the guy is still deployed in a war zone some place. And, even if he was on leave, it’s Christmas and he’s religious! I’d hope he was off the internet celebrating with his family.

    GRRM in his comments seemed to be implying that you had to pay your dues and it was about making Worldcon fandom your life. This seemed to suggest that only people who had racked up lots of ‘fan points’ by volunteering to help out at Worldcon or doing ‘fannish’ stuff (outside of reading), should be able to vote.

    Larry Correia also got a fair bit of stick in SP1 & 2 for asking his fans to vote him a Hugo. He’s not the only person to write ‘oh, by the way, I have this Hugo-eligible stuff’ so the difference is probably a) he’s a pulp writer; b) he was more crass about it; and c) his politics. His Monster Hunter books involve lots of gun nuttery. To a Brit, that’s like a Tory writer making all his characters into blood sports and fox hunting.

    Like

    1. Vivienne, he was able to find time to blog on the issue while comments were open (unless timezones are tricking me) but that wasn’t my point. In his blog post, he avoids going after GRRM as much as possible. I believe that is because Brad has become allergic to engaging with anyone who’s previously handled him well, as opposed to his now-favoured approach of repeating talking points in a friendly venue. Specifically, here he knows that GRRM has previously had him bang to rights on (among other things) his appalling lack of basic civility, and as he doesn’t want to abandon his tactic of hurling insults from afar he avoids the confrontation.

      Like

    2. (Following on to Vivienne)
      For me, GRRM was talking about a sense of community, something that anyone may join and add their opinion to the existing community, not something where “joining” means “turning up en-mass and demanding things change to suit them.” If you wish to inform GRRM he was talking about “fan points”, feel free to tell him so.

      Larry Correia is in fact the first person to urge people to nominate him, or others, for purely political motives, and that is what the difference was. But you knew that.

      Like

  5. Dear Dogge, I am so tired of Brad’s whiny ass. As usual, he’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth here.

    Many Sad Puppies find Vox Day and the Rabids to be revolting. It didn’t save any of the Sad Puppies from being treated as synonymous with the Rabids — which is (again) exactly what Vox wanted.

    Really? Because I distinctly remember Brad saying he wasn’t going to “shun” (a term that has its roots in his LDS religion) Mr Beale. Since he was the Puppies’ ringleader last year, all he would’ve had to do was make a statement on his blog, something to this effect:

    As the organizer of Sad Puppies 3, I would like to state for the record that our efforts are in no way approving of, or taking part in, Theodore Beale’s Rabid Puppies slate. In contrast to Mr Beale, I am not urging Sad Puppies to vote for these nominees exactly as they are listed. Mr Beale is wrong for wanting to take over the Hugo Awards in this manner, and I am urging all Sad Puppies to vote for the works they love, whether said works are on my list or not.

    That’s all it would’ve taken, and there would’ve been a lot less acrimony. Of course, the Rabids would still have done what they did, but that’s another subject. And for crying out loud, if Brad knew that’s what Mr Beale (I refuse to call him by that ridiculous name) wanted, why was he so willing to cooperate? It reminds me from a quote from Australia’s Lieutenant General David Morrison (on an unrelated subject, but it still applies): “The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.”

    Like

  6. Brad’s character flaws are manifold and manifest, but the reason he’ll never be able to let this go is basic: he’s a loser. His friends trusted him and he exposed them to disappointment and in many cases ridicule. He humiliated himself and his cronies in front of large numbers of people. Bad enough to be that guy, but to fail at it is a sting that will always throb. It’s the difference between being Cersei Lannister and Florida Man.

    Like

      1. I think you are correct re Toni W, it is certainly the particular focus of his ire right now. It all feeds in to Brad treating the process as an opportunity to pay things forward (and backward). I think you described it as like a chamber of commerce set up once?

        The thing is, I think Toni W sabotaged her own chances with that packet submission and the “we team edit” statement in what’s already an awkward category. I think people would generally consider that Baen is a perfectly adequate, if niche, publisher and that they put out some good authors work – Bujold is the obvious example – and have been prepared to consider her. She still might not have got anywhere as the general opinion seems to be much of Baen’s output is, ahem, lightly edited, but I think that with a statement about which books she primarily edited the result would have been closer, or at least fairly judged.

        Like

  7. James May seems to believe both that:

    1. He needs to get absolutely everything he hates into that first sentence.
    2. He nevertheless needs to write MORE SENTENCES.

    Like

Comments are closed.