Mad Genius, John C Wright raise their shields

At the Mad Genius Club, a blog I’ve linked to many times before on matters of Hugo-related Sad Puppiness, Spacefaring Kitten has not been sort of banned* but has also had a post written about them:

Some Housekeeping

The apparent reason is that in an earlier thread Dave Freer tried to win a rhetorical point by demanding Spacefaring Kitten use their real name (pseudonymous posts are fairly common at MGC) which escalated into one of Dave’s special rules which tend to appear under certain circumstances.

I’m sure said kitten will give us their own take on events. My general reaction is that it’s their blog and their rules and every blog (including this one) needs to moderate its comments. Having said that, obviously people are going to look at what does get moderated and what doesn’t and draw their own conclusions.

Meanwhile, John C Wright is also pondering people who may need banning:

Policy Question for the Readers

I’d stopped commenting there awhile back but recently re-started after this general invitation:

A General Query to all Panphysicalists and Radical Materialists

Think back to the day when you first discovered that you were a meat robot without free will, without freedom, and without dignity. Did the discovery fill you with awe, rapture, wonder and gratitude?

What’s a meat robot to do in that circumstance? And there are actually quite some good comments in that post and the one that followed.

Anyway, more generally, looking at the great puppy trajectory I think it is fair to say that Puppies of both stripes really don’t want to engage with their critics much anymore. Puppy ‘outreach’ (i.e. Puppies of either kind posting on non-Puppy blogs) pretty much dried up last year. The inverse (people critical of Puppies posting on Puppy aligned blogs) is being treated even more unwelcomely than previously.

Advertisements

45 comments

  1. Paul Weimer

    ” it’s their blog and their rules and every blog (including this one) needs to moderate its comments.”

    Which is why I said as much to John on his blog. Not that I was expecting anything less. If you find people noisome, well, you don’t let them in the door.

    I used to think that the closing of communication channels between the Puppies and Not-Puppies was a bad thing. I still do to an extent, but if it only brings ire, not understanding, then its more harm than good.

    Like

    • camestrosfelapton

      Indeed. I still think that some frank exchange of ideas would be useful but for awhile the Puppy blogs have tended to a kind of doctrinal purity were discussion is only possible if you accept the premise of the discussion even if it is sharply at odds with the facts.
      Ho hum.

      Like

  2. Mark

    Welp, that’s just silly about SFK. Much of the actual exchanges are gone but I did scroll past some in the last few days. Amanda is now claiming to know who SFK actually is, which seems unlikely b/c Dave was blatantly fishing a few days ago, but if so that implies their main problem is _who_ SFK is, not _how_ they post.

    (Oooo, mysterious! Is SFK secretly Scalzi in disguise? Or Jim Hines? Or do we just not care!)

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Lee

    Funny, I have yet to discover that I’m a meat puppet without free will, freedom, or dignity. I’m going to be snarky here and suggest that my having abandoned religion has a lot to do with this, since I no longer have a Higher Authority insisting on these things.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. RDF

    My God, Wright is showing his overweening arrogance in those threads – making basic errors of definition and then whining people are being unfair and not playing by the rules because they won’t use his false premises. I would put my 2 cents in and point out his stupidity, but he requires registration and given Puppy preferences for doxxing, Homie don’t do that.

    To take the most blindingly obvious example of Wright’s inability to grasp an argument save that he try putting in a false premise as the basis for it:

    ” if panphysicalism were true, and all things were merely matter in motion and nothing more,”

    Alas for Wright, that’s not panphysicalism. Panphysicalism is “the theory that holds that all human ideas and acts are determined by physical laws; “that the procedures of physics are the only scientific method of all branches of science. It denies that any essential differences exist between the natural sciences and the sciences of human action.”

    Wright displays his ignorance quite successfully in reducing the term “physical laws” to “meat in motion”. Which goes to show he hasn’t kept himself aware of developments in physics past, oh, 1948 or so. To give his much demanded practical example, training an artificial neural network to perform handwriting recognition must involve representation of abstract forms for letters.

    Then again, Wright being an arrogant fool over matters far beyond his shaky grasp on reality isn’t exactly unusual…

    Like

  5. RDF

    It’s also worth noting that I had a fun time a little while back when Torgersen was waffling about not censoring people except when they insulted him simply by deliberately quoting (and ONLY quoting) him which showed some… inconsistencies… in his statements. So he started censoring on the spurious grounds I wasn’t giving a valid email address (see Puppies, doxxing etc). So I gave a throwaway but valid email address. And he continued to censor.

    The important thing is not the censorship – who cares? It’s that I know and he knows that he’s a coward who won’t face up to his hypocrisies. That must rankle.

    And now you know too, if you needed any reminding.

    Like

    • snowcrash

      Ah yes, I saw that. And how how he proved your point by effectively publicly outing where your IP address was from.
      Torgersen, moreso than MGC, has pretty much lost whatever interest he had in any sort of outreach. It’s effectively going insular all the time for him now.

      Liked by 1 person

      • RDF

        Ah yes, I saw that. And how how he proved your point by effectively publicly outing where your IP address was from.

        Amusing that, particularly.

        Like

  6. RDF

    How do you people read the MCG posts without falling asleep halfway through their long, rambling and UNSTRUCTURED waffle?

    Like

  7. thephantom182

    “Puppy ‘outreach’ (i.e. Puppies of either kind posting on non-Puppy blogs) pretty much dried up last year. The inverse (people critical of Puppies posting on Puppy aligned blogs) is being treated even more unwelcomely than previously.”

    What a thing to say, Camestros! Particularly after the warm welcome I always get here. (Hi Grog! Long time, no RAAAACIST!!!!)

    Liked by 1 person

    • camestrosfelapton

      You give as good as you get Phantom from other commenters – and I try and treat you fairly.
      I’m certainly not going to demand that you dox yourself or follow some bizarre rules, nor am I going to edit your comments so it looks like you said something else.

      Like

      • thephantom182

        “You give as good as you get Phantom from other commenters – and I try and treat you fairly.”

        Your rules are less bizarre and capricious than some, which I appreciate. Also the editing thing, I’ve experienced that elsewhere, it is very irritating. I am not aware that it was done at MGC, I’m sure you didn’t intend to imply that it was.

        But then this is -your- blog, you get to have it your way. You’ll no doubt agree that I’d be a great fool indeed to deliberately transgress your rules, and then whine I was poorly treated when you kicked me off.

        As to the “puppy outreach” thing, it’s what goes around, comes around. Wooden assterisks last year, dis-invitations to SJWs this year. Mockery of Brad Torgersen’s wife last year, Brad Torgersen’s a bit cranky with people being lippy on his blog comments. Personally I think Brad is a saint.

        You kick the dog hard enough and long enough, the dog bites you. Amazingly unexpected, right?

        Like

  8. RDF

    Personally I think Brad is a saint.

    Thank you for your opinion. Rest assured we will give it the full and due consideration it, and you, deserve.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. iamzenu

    Re: “wife and children were nothing but hostages to your racism?”

    Zero have said that. “Nothing but”… nope. No one ever said that.

    Re: Wright’s blog.

    Whatever. He doesn’t have that much traffic now. If he wants less traffic, get rid of the people that drive discussion. With the puppy wars over, traffic and interest is going to dwindle anyway. No reason he can’t help it along.

    Like

    • thephantom182

      iamzenu said: “Zero have said that. “Nothing but”… nope. No one ever said that.”
      Hampus Eckerman said: “Exactly how many people have said that?”

      I see a collective case of Alzheimers has set in. No one remembers the truly disgusting comments made by many at several big-name SF blogs about Brad Torerson’s wife, her race and his use of her as a human shield for his racism?

      RDF said: “Echoing Hampus, exact cites and numbers, please.”

      Do your own research, lazybones. Won’t be hard, just google “Brad Torgersen human shields”, and read down a bit.

      You people absolutely slay me sometimes. Do you think history starts fresh every morning? It’s the Internet! Nothing -ever- goes away.

      Like

      • Mark

        Phantom, because I’m a sucker for checking what you say, an actual invitation to google was just too tempting.

        Guess what? Lots of articles by puppies bemoaning that Brad had been insulted, but absolutely no “big name blogs” doing the insulting. The original one (1) instance of someone making that remark on twitter is in the results, of course.
        So, are you going to do the googling yourself and prove me wrong, or are you going to admit you were making up these “big name blogs”?
        (Ha, who am I kidding? You’re going to run away and ignore this thread, then pop up again elsewhere making up different nonsense, same as always)

        Like

      • thephantom182

        Mark said: “The original one (1) instance of someone making that remark on twitter is in the results, of course.”

        Oh look. It actually happened! But it didn’t happen. Right Mark?

        I can’t help it if that remark got copied, pasted and agreed with all over the SJW-sphere… but you can’t find it. I can’t help if you don’t know enough to search for “Brad Torgersen, black friend” and other similar.

        I also can’t help it if you lack the courage to admit that whole thing really happened, that a lot of fellow travelers of yours acted -abominably-, and you are going to continue to pretend history started at 9AM this morning. It got said, it got said a lot, everybody remembers.

        You can try to parse, nit-pick, fold, spindle and mutilate your way out if you like. I can’t help you with that either.

        Because I’m sure not going to do a bunch of work for you, and then be called a liar anyway when the evidence is there in black and white in front of you. It’s a pattern you follow, Mark. You’re going to call me a liar no matter what. Better I should make -you- do the work.

        And on the topic of this thread, that being “… I think it is fair to say that Puppies of both stripes really don’t want to engage with their critics much anymore…” This thing that you’re doing with me right now, that’s why Sad Puppies don’t outreach no more. You want to know why Vox Day has loyal minions dedicated to peeing in your cornflakes every chance they get, just have a look back up this thread a ways for your answer.

        Like

      • Mark

        Phantom: I admit that I was wrong! I predicted you would run away and instead you doubled down. On this particular point, I am the wrongest it is possible to be.

        You, on the other hand, are wrong on the specific claims you made. Shall we review them?

        1) “people … said your wife and children were nothing but hostages to your racism?”
        2) “comments made by many at several big-name SF blogs about Brad Torerson’s wife, her race and his use of her as a human shield for his racism?”
        3) just google “Brad Torgersen human shields”

        I suspect you’re calling time on (1) as there’s no sign anyone ever said it and you’ve dashed onto (2). Well, I used (3) to check (2) and guess what? You get Arthur Chu’s original comment about shields on twitter, plus lots of donning of sackcloth claiming that “everyone” had been saying it. But no actual signs of “everyone” saying it. I’m sorry, but I can’t help it if your google-fu-by-proxy is weak.
        Were there more comments of that nature? I imagine so. Were they by “big-name SF blogs”? Well, google says no. Scalzi didn’t say it. GRRM didn’t say it. Etc, etc. You can go find out who else said it, if you want, and show that they’re “big name SF blogs”, if you want, but I really doubt you’re going to.

        “This thing that you’re doing with me right now, that’s why Sad Puppies don’t outreach no more.”

        I totally agree. The thing that I’m doing right now is fact-checking you, and Sad Puppies hate facts.

        Like

      • thephantom182

        Mark said: “You, on the other hand, are wrong on the specific claims you made. Shall we review them?”
        1) Parse.
        2) nit pick
        3) fold, spinde AND mutilate.

        The full Monty! I give it an A for completeness.

        Like

      • thephantom182

        Speaking of rules, Camestros:

        “That’s what I thought, you idiot. One person, once on Twitter and you blow it up to “several big name blogs”.
        And when you get called on your lies you tell other people to “do their homework”. Is it any wonder pEOPLE aaumw BY DEFAULT that whatever you say is a lie, you weasel?”

        Is this sort of thing allowed for one side of the conversation but not the other? Point of order, you understand. I don’t actually care, I just wondered.

        Like

  10. iamzenu

    If Mark says he found it, I guess he found it. But I still wonder if he found something that referred to the wife/children as “nothing but” which would smear directed at the wife/children. If someone made a comment about Brad using his wife/kids as human shields, yes, I can believe that. That would be directed at Brad.

    Like

  11. iamzenu

    @Phantom

    I don’t understand why non puppies would want to “engage” with puppies. Now – I understand why one might poke fun of the other. But really engage? What’s the point of that. You have been engaged for some time now. And that helps how?

    Like

    • thephantom182

      iamzenu said: “I don’t understand why non puppies would want to “engage” with puppies.”

      Yes, we know. Your lack of understanding is abundantly clear.

      “You have been engaged for some time now.”

      Ah, I see. You don’t understand the meaning of the word “engage”. The word you are looking for is “malign”, zenu. We have indeed been maligned by the aptly named Puppy Kickers for some time now.

      I hope this clears up your boggle, citizen.

      Like

  12. Mark

    After a bit of reflection I’ve decided that continuing to engage with Phantom is entirely futile. At one point long ago he was engaging in a semi-reasonable way, throwing some actual evidence into the mix etc, and that history was colouring my decision to engage with him at times. However, he’s not put together a coherent argument or provided credible evidence of anything for several weeks now; all we get is this preemptive martyrdom shtick where he yells that we’re not going to listen so why should he bother?
    In short, he’s degenerated into full troll, and just needs ignoring.

    Liked by 2 people

    • thephantom182

      “However, he’s not put together a coherent argument or provided credible evidence of anything for several weeks now; all we get is this preemptive martyrdom shtick where he yells that we’re not going to listen so why should he bother?”

      Mark, do you remember when I used to post at Glyer’s, and link all kinds of evidence? Do you remember when I posted that Cat Valente was a puppy kicker? Because, of course, she was. Duh. I held off posting evidence for a while, because I’d learned that there is no evidence where you people are concerned. Then I finally did, and the chorus sounded “THAT DOESN’T PROVE ANYTHING!!!” and then they started saying The Phantom is a liar!!! Just like I expected. And it’s on Google, oh yeah. Still there, still available for anybody to see.

      Now here you are, giving me the same guff. Mark, everybody knows Mr. Chu called Brad T’s family human shields for his racism. Everybody knows that got repeated and remarked on approvingly at Vile, at I09, at MarySue, that retarded zine that Steve whatisname runs, MakingDark, Twitter, it was everyplace. Everybody knows who was paying any attention to Sad Puppies, pro or con. Widely disseminated, as were the scathing replies.

      You know all this. You were there. I saw you there. You and Krampus Heckerman. Your names came up, dudes. For you boys to sit here and pretend it is somehow incumbent upon me to -prove- what everybody watched happen a few months ago is really quite something, I must say.

      Camestros took a tiny step toward basic common decency today by tilting the playing field a leeeetle bit more toward level, erasing RDF’s rather uninspired personal attack on me. Credit where it is due, that is THE FIRST TIME I have -ever- seen a blog owner do that on a Left wing site. Ever.

      And that’s why I don’t bother with “credible evidence” where you’re concerned, Mark. Because you demand evidence of “the sun sets in the west,” and if I say ‘look out the window” you call me a troll. So I’ll just be a troll, and you can never address me again. Because why the hell would I want to bandy words with some guy who won’t admit the sun sets in the west?

      Like

  13. Lurkertype

    I don’t recall anything except one guy calling Brad’s family human shields. And the worth of one guy saying one thing on Twitter is so small that our best electron microscopes cannot find it. Other blogs may have reported it, but only to scold about it not being nice or fair. The comment was disliked by everyone on all and no sides.

    Of course, I am boggled why Brad’s wife is still with him, since he’s buddy-buddy with a guy who’s REPEATEDLY said that BT’s wife and children are subhuman because of their skin color. I’d have taken the kids and gone to a friend’s house or a shelter or home to Mom if my husband ever showed us such disrespect, and not returned till a full and complete apology and retraction was made, with some counseling too. I’d have put her and the kids up myself if she’d asked.

    Like

  14. JJ

    What I recall is Brad actually using his family as human shields for his racism: “I can’t be racist, because I’m married to a black woman, and I have a child with her! You’re claiming that I married her just so I could use her as a defense against being called a racist!”

    Which is of course total bollocks; racists do sometimes marry black people (just as misogynists do sometimes marry women), and no one ever claimed that Brad only married his wife to avoid claims of being a racist, as he keeps pretending they did.

    What is amazing, though, is the way that Brad, and Phantom, and quite a few other puppies have tried to morph this into other people making Brad’s family “human shields”. He did that all by himself — repeatedly.

    Like