How DID the right become SO, SO, SO, incompetent?

So my Sunday morning was taken up with behaviour that neatly mirrored my last blog post title. I’m not going to name names because there is literally an innocent party involved.

Certain parties on the internet decided that I’d been too outspoken or what not and decided that I needed doxxing. Now, personally, I think doxxing is something that can be easily classified as moral bad except in certain circumstances. Put another way you need a very good reason that outweighs the ethical wrong when revealing somebody else’s identity or personal information. The ethics of doxxing known harassers, bullies or people who make threats is where the question would lie. Doxxing because somebody has challenged your party line is straightforwardly wrong.

Put that aside for a moment. Imagine if you had convinced yourself that revealing somebody’s identity online is the right thing to do. Well, you still have a deep responsibility to GET IT RIGHT.

So, some ethically challenged idiot decided to announce to assorted others that they knew for a fact that I’m some person and got it completely wrong. OK, they got the continent right. Aside from that – nope. They targetted some poor soul who I don’t know and who I have never met and who (as far as I know) I’ve never interacted with.

Honestly, it would be funny if it weren’t for the fact that some other person is now likely to be the target of Sad Puppy harassment. Should we be surprised that supposed champions of free-speech try to silence people in this way? Nope, but I’ll try to be disappointed.

 

Advertisement

89 responses to “How DID the right become SO, SO, SO, incompetent?”

  1. If it weren’t likely that the innocent party is going to get a huge amount of undeserved harassment from Puppy-aligned morons because of this, it would be hilarious — almost as hilarious as the time the Puppies insisted that Spacefaring Kitten was Brianna “Spacekat” Wu — in that the ethically-challenged idiot is always bragging about what a sooper geenyus “journalist” he is. It’s not as if you’ve kept your location or your profession a secret — and yet Mr. Sooper Geenyus Journalist couldn’t even find those facts to realize that he has completely fucked-up his attempted doxx by naming someone who lives in a different city and has a different profession.

    It will be a real pleasure, the next time he brags about being a “journalist”, to point out what an embarrassment he is to that profession.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Peer: And let me guess: They dont reallze they are wrong but think you are just trying to deny their findings?

      Well, it’s not as if it would take a rocket scientist to verify that they are wrong — but these people are definitely not the sharpest tools in the shed, and I have no intention of providing the links for them; they can do their own research if they don’t want to look like the total fools they have already made of themselves.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Repeat “oh dear” in increasing levels of incredulity and despair.
      Recall George Carlin. “Think of how stupid the average person is. Then remember that half the population are more stupid than that.” Or Albert Einstein. “There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I’m not certain about the universe.”
      Accept that it’s both depressing and hysterical at the same time.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. “I’m not going to name names because there is literally an innocent party involved.”

    Gee Floppy, letting an innocent man take the fall for -your- bullshit is pretty low, when it would take so little to set the record straight. If you’re Nobody from Nowhereville, why not be a mench?

    Inquiring minds wanna know.

    Like

    • Firstly you wouldn’t believe it. Secondly, we are not talking about rational people here – have you not noticed how nobody is saying *why* they think I’m this other guy – they aren’t interested in facts or evidence. Thirdly I’d have to provide *further* identifying details to corroborate my identity – details that I wouldn’t give out on the net regardless of what name I use. Fourthly why on EARTH would I give a person with a track history of harassing people at work and filing false police complaints the details he needs to do that? Fifthly, it is NOT my job to make up for the moral failings of the right.

      Your pals are the ones maligning somebody on the basis of half-baked rumours. I saw your comment at Mad Genius – so some kudos to you for spotting that it is a pointless exercise. It is literally not harming me in any way other concern for the other randomly picked target.

      Liked by 4 people

    • My favourite line so far from that MGC article? It’s from our good friend Phantom!

      ” I’m proud to be banned from his execrable bog”

      Oh, hi there! I thought you were banned and proud of it. How funny to see that you’re still screaming into the spam filter trying to get senpai to notice you!

      Liked by 2 people

        • For all his vitriol, Phantom is not in it for self-promotion, seems to sincerely believe what he’s saying, and doesn’t advocate hurting people, physically or virtually. He’s the kind of guy you could have fun getting in a flame war with back before all these millennial frog fetishists ruined everything.

          Liked by 2 people

          • I put up with him for a long time because he’d make some interesting points but he increasingly just took to being evasive and changing the subject. Sad, I’d rather have some contrary voices.

            Like

      • Contrary voices are a great thing, but not when they keep on contradicting themselves. It’s also no fun when the goalposts are on wheels to make it easier to shift them.

        My second favourite comment is the guy saying how awesome his English skills are while using the wrong “your/you’re” in his comment, and forgetting to close out a set of quotation marks 🙂 I’m pretty sure that’s an internet rule right? Whenever you’re bragging about your language skills, you fuck up.

        Like

      • I could do some contrary-voicing on a few things I’ve read here but I figure it would just be rehashing arguments that have been had elsewhere, to no effect and without convincing anybody of anything. I’d rather not waste my time that way. This blog makes for interesting reading regardless.

        The funny/sad thing about this is that it’s perfectly clear to me that they are mischaracterizing what you’ve said and trying to use pressure tactics to get you to shut up because they don’t like what you’re saying … which is exactly what many of these specific people have been complaining about being done to them. The “he denies it so it’s true” argument is truly odd: it’s one of the things I’ve learned watching law and politics over the years, that a firm and clear denial of an accusation is the first thing an innocent/honest person does, while a guilty/dishonest party will obfuscate and do anything they can to avoid being pinned down. If you hadn’t denied it, that also would be “proof” that it was true.

        The idea that you have any obligation to prove anything to anybody is even weirder.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. There are linguistic ways to test for author identity, although I’m probably too lazy to actually try any of them. I did a quick look at some of the other fellow’s text (he’s got a good bit of text online) and just to a first approximation, I see what I think are pretty substantial differences.

    Second, the background of this other guy is extremely strong in “foundations of mathematics” philosophy. Camestros seems to be very fond of traditional Aristotelian logic–something I wouldn’t expect this guy to be.

    More effort could get a stronger result, but this will suffice for me.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. What’s the “[childish nickname for Camestros Felapton] approves of doxxing” bit about? I don’t recall you ever approving of someone’s doxxing. I don’t recall your take on the Requires Hate issue, but I feel like Torgersen et al., while they may approve of Requires Hates use of vitriol, probably weren’t upset that her secret identity was revealed.

    I find it strange just how much hate Torgersen, Freer, and some others have for you, as you’re generally one of the mellowest non-pups in the puppy pen in these conversations. You, Greg, and Paul Weimer are consistently not angry or mean (though you are more sarcastic than they). I think, as someone else said on one of these doxx posts, it’s because you don’t get upset.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Since ‘Benjanun Sriduangkaew’ is not her real name either, I don’t think that counted as doxxing. (Someone did reveal her – alleged – real name at one point, but it didn’t get much publicity.)

      Liked by 1 person

        • Kathodus: Andrew – Yeah, I vaguely remember that, too.

          It can be found via Winterfraud, but I think most people generally refrain from linking to it. That was such an ugly business; I can’t believe it went on for so long, and apparently there’s still some of it going on. And I occasionally see defenses on Twitter of the “why doesn’t everyone else who does something bad get condemned as much as RH?” sort. 😐

          Like

          • JJ – my intro to RH was when she attacked Peter Watt in 2012. At the time it felt like watching a child have a tantrum in front of a bemused adult, and I didn’t think much of it. I had no idea she was punching down, as well. It was a very nasty situation, and I’ve tried to steer clear of it.

            Liked by 1 person

      • There really needs to be a separate word to “doxing” for breaking pseudonymity as opposed to posting addresses etc, as the consequences can be quite different. (You could probably say they’re on the same spectrum though, and the one can easily be the precursor to the other)

        Like

    • I think it’s because Cam takes the time to engage with them over at MGC, and when he does so, is so consistently polite and logical that they can’t just dismiss him as a mean troll, the way they do to most of the people who point out their raging irrationality.

      Liked by 5 people

    • There was a thing for a while of claiming that people at File 770 approve of doxxing, because they had revealed that Vox Day was Theodore Beale. This is absurd, of course, since the fact was never secret, though it was de-emphasised at one time, and in any case became widely known during SFWA bustup number 1, long before the Puppy affair started. But people did say that.

      Like

  5. Hello, Camestros, as an interested observer I must say that we really only know you by your online persona. And it’s and interesting persona. Somewhat mild, somewhat reasonable. Never loud.
    But, honestly, we don’t know who it is behind the persona. Really we don’t. You could be anyone. Anyone except DJT, of course 🙂
    So, do we keep guessing, should we? What is your gain from anonymity?
    Thank you

    Like

    • Yes, Virginia, there is a Camestros Felapton. He exists as certainly as satire, analysis, and cat food exist, and you know that these things abound and give us all boundless joy, especially cats. Alas! How stale and monochrome would be our world if there were no Camestros. It would be as dreary as if there were no Virginias, including West Virginia. There would be no cover galleries then, no Timothy, no novel theories or comments upon them to make sport of a too prosaic existence. What matter his “real” name? What matter his address?

      Give a name to Camestros! You might as well try to hang a label on a sunset or attach a price sticker to a dream. You might examine all the IP addresses in the Southern Hemisphere to catch him out, but even if they did bring back some properly formed number, what would that prove? Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that doesn’t mean that NORAD is just making up those blips that emanate from the Northern Pole every Solstice!

      You may choose to pry open a child’s balloon to find out what makes it so very round, but Camestros is nobody’s Granfalloon. Not real? Thank Ghu he is, and will pub in perpetuity, thanks to a mysterious syndicate in Sydney, sworn to eternal secrecy under pain of scratching… but I have said enough. A thousand pages from now, nay, ten thousand thousand pages from now, he is contractually obligated to keep producing this web page, and how much better we all are for it!

      Liked by 10 people

    • Two gains really:
      1. When I started it was clear already that the Rabid Puppies would use personal & workplace attacks to attempt to silence critics. In addition we some sads use such tactics. And the current attacks on the Meadows family confirm that those habits haven’t died.
      2. Bearing 1 in mind some people are more likely to be attacked & have their identity used against them, women, people of colour, LGBTI people, disabled people. I’m not any of those but many people have fewer options around using pseudonyms and hence long term pseudonymity is a choice that I think we should be supporting as an option for others. Even so there are dangers with how it can be misused.
      3. I can write this way and I like writing this way. The meat robot couldn’t write this blog but Camestros can. That’s the biggest one of the three – I don’t know if it works for everybody but I’d recommend it for anybody who wants to write but feels shy or impostorish about it. Get somebody else to be the writer and let them rent out your head! I rarely trash a post or an idea – the blog is straight out of my head a lot of the time and that’s very liberating 🙂

      Like

  6. Thank you, Camestros
    I truly love these comments.

    To answer Contrarius, my parents being who they are, this is actually my real name. I only hope I don’t disappear, too. That would be very disconcerting.

    Kathodus, I am a little more transparent then I would like to be. “What you See is what you get”, is what they say. But, a troll I am not. At least I don’t think so, but that is just one opinion.

    Thank you, kiptw. Very entertaining.

    Thank you, Lurkertype. What is a “glyer signal”?

    Camestros
    I understand each of your points.
    I sometimes wonder if I would be better off being anonymous. I have seen a lot of things online, most that fit into your #1 and #2. It can be upsetting and I worry about mine and others safety.
    My friends say no one likes me because I always take everyone’s side. Devil’s Advocate. Fence Straddler. Apologist, mediator, polemicist, that describes me.
    I gave seen what you describe many times. It seems mean and hurtful and needless. To me it is time wasted. Hopefully it will not turn you against me, but I have seen these things disgorging from everyone, everywhere. In my experience, limited as it may be, innocents are few and far between. I understand the emotions and resulting reactions, but there is not an end in sight.

    What solutions do you see for a better future for us, for them, and for all those in between?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Virginia Dare: What is your gain from anonymity?

      That is blindingly clear, isn’t it? If Cam had posted using his real-life identity, he would be receiving all the threats and harassment that the other poor innocent guy is now receiving. Why should he leave himself, his family, and his employer vulnerable to the abuse and harassment of vile, evil people like the Sick Puppies?

       
      Virginia Dare: What solutions do you see for a better future for us, for them, and for all those in between?

      The solution, of course, would be to prevent vile, horrible people like the Sick Puppies from engaging in doxxing, harassment, and threats. Please do come back here and post when you’ve figured out how to accomplish this.

      Like

    • Hmmm. Oddly enough, there’s a user calling themselves Virginia Dare on Facebook who thinks sustainability efforts are Marxist, thinks the entire Democratic party is communist, and is a big fan of Glenn Beck.

      Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

      Like

      • I went to Best Products one time about a warranty on a tape player, and they showed me a sizable list of people with my name, first and last, who had also purchased extended warranties at Best Products. It’s not really a common name, but there are so many people out there.

        Like

  7. Well now, Camestros
    Am I experiencing some #1 and #2?

    Thank you, JJ. There are no answers for you.
    Thank you, Contrarius. You are true to your name. I have a Facebook account. But I do not use it. I am not as adept at social media as others may be.

    I will await for a somewhat mild, somewhat reasonable, never loud comment from Camestros.
    Thank you.

    Like

    • Hey — There are several people on Facebook who share **my** real name. And, in fact, I figured that the “Virginia Dare” on Facebook who has Eric Flint as a friend would be just as much or more likely to be you as the ultra-right one.

      But this does point out one or two of the prblems inherent in sharing real names, doesn’t it?

      Like

  8. Thank you, kiptw

    Thank you, Contrarius
    Yes, I am afraid that is me. Not much to say or do there. Suggestions are welcome. Maybe I should move into the anonymous world?

    Like

    • I don’t much like Facebook myself. Though I have multiple pages — related to work, home business, personal stuff, and so on — I mostly avoid it. Much too depressing, and a real time suck.

      As for anonymity — I started my usernames (different user names for different fields of interest) many years ago. Something like 15 years for the oldest, roughly 10 years for Contrarius. I don’t really think of them as true anonymity, since these are stable names that I use in multiple venues over time. They are just something to lessen the possibility of annoying or even dangerous personal attacks/harassment.

      I used to do dog rescue, for instance, and even though our policy was to bring dogs to the homes of people who had applied to adopt, twice I had people show up at my house unannounced. This can be quite dangerous, of course, for several reasons — including the possibility of people wanting to steal the dogs. Another time I had accepted a neglected dog that an owner was relinquishing to rescue. But that owner later changed her mind, and when I wouldn’t give her the dog back (she had signed a legal document, so legally I was in the clear) she left a threatening note on my front porch.

      So there are tangible reasons for keeping one’s identity and personal info off the net. Most of the consequences of being outed are merely annoying, but as with that recent SWATting death, sometimes they can be deadly.

      Like

  9. I view anonymity as a form of being in the closet. When you’re in the closet, the world looks a whole lot scarier than it really is. I grew up in an era when gay people protected each other, and those of us who were out went to great lengths to protect those who were not–even to the extent of flat-out lying for them.

    But we didn’t allow closeted people to decide the direction of the movement, and we constantly coaxed them to come out, stand up, and be proud.

    Like

  10. Thank you, Contrarius

    I am struck by the amount of stress emanating from all things, all subjects, all media.
    There is an unnatural chasm between people and groups that, in other times would have a natural affinity. The world of Science Fiction, for example. And the world of Fantasy.

    Most who love these subjects – the books, movies, authors, and more – should be able to share their experiences and loves with excitement. It is disconcerting to me.

    Think about it, about yourself, would you not think that almost anyone would like you if they got to know you? If you love Heinlein or McCaffrey, for example, would not any other lover of those Masters enjoy talking about their works with you?

    Like

  11. We are in a time of considerable cultural change, with a lot of marginalized people advocating for that change and more equality, including a wider and less discriminatory range of art. There are people in turn who resist cultural change and progress in favor of a more discriminatory and controlling status quo. Sometimes they do it for identity issues and power, sometimes for money and opportunity, mostly they do so out of fear and uncertainty that they’ve been taught. The more that they think they are losing ground to progress — or that resistance can be used to retain/obtain power and profit — the nastier they get.

    SFFH is widening, becoming more varied, inclusive and growing — as it always slowly has. There are people who don’t like that or who are willing to exploit those who don’t like it. So in a time of considerable cultural change, conflict and controversy come not only around the marginalized but to those more protected who ordinarily have been untouched and/or oblivious to repression and mistaken it for cultural peace and pleasantry. SFFH fandom is still plenty fun, brings people together and lets them celebrate and talk about what they love — and to do so with more equality than they did before. But that’s because people kept advocating for cultural change towards equality, despite the anger of those who may or may not have come to accept the cultural changes of the past but resist further changes in the future.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you, Kat
      I love reading. Old books, new books, I love them all. I lean to science fiction and history, but I have loved fantasy as well. Politics, romance, mystery, science, religion, adventure, biographies, self-help, comics, and more, I have enjoyed these so very much. The only genres I so far have no taste for is horror and math. Though I have tried.

      I also love conversation. They say I can talk to anyone – and often do. People with different thoughts and motivations energize me. Talking with others helps me understand them better – it also helps me understand myself. How do I feel? What would I do? Where are my boundaries? Where do I end and Humanity begin?

      I appreciate your thoughts and your experiences.

      We live in a remarkable time and place. Every American has access to amazing technologies and opportunities. Every American is able, limited only by their own desire, to rise from nothing up to the pentacle of their wildest dreams. They can overcome any and all obstacles and limitations of birth, place, education, tribalism, or historical prejudice to achieve whatever it is they desire most. I count myself among them.

      For science fiction and fantasy the 60’s and 70’s seem most likely the peak of creativity, freedom and inclusiveness. In my mind there is little that is new socially in the pages of SFF writers today. I love the writers of today, their creativity is wonderful, thought provoking, and very entertaining. But, I am realistic.

      All of history is a description of Changers and Keepers. Changers have brought us many wonderful innovations. Keepers have maintained many wonderful things that otherwise would have disappeared into the mists of time. Some Keepers keep for the sake of keeping. Some Changers change for the sake of changing and having their name associated with the new thing. As usual the answer is elsewhere. There are ways to keep. Healthy ways. Ways that work. Just as there are ways to change. Unhealthy ways. Ways that fail. Unfortunately, those with wisdom are often not the ones who choose which paths to take or their timing.

      You mention “nastiness” and I must admit that today I see it everywhere. There is no group or faction without this on display. It was not always the case. This characteristic has always existed but it has grown exponentially in recent decades and especially recent years. It is a Balkanization of American. A separation and purposeful segregation walling off minds and healthy interactions from each other. Maybe we should lay the fault at the feet of social media, if it had feet.

      There are those who agree in many aspects of life today. And there are those who disagree in those same aspects. Each of these groups are made up of people and they each matter in the larger aspects of Life. This is Humanity. This is Life. Disagreement is natural and necessary for growth and health, is it not? It brings strength and flexibility. “Iron sharpens iron”, it is said.

      How can the prevention of any of these persons from actively taking part in adding their ideas and personalities to the larger whole be healthy? Wouldn’t being inclusive, by definition, require the inclusion of all interested parties? Would not the greatest health be achieved by actively encouraging the greatest interactions possible?

      I realize that history shows us that peace is not a natural condition. It is far more prevalent to provoke and react to provocation, but is peace any less desirable?

      Where does peace begin? Peace is not the lack of conflict. It is a decision to persevere in tolerance and forgiveness.

      When does peace begin?

      Like

      • Virginia Dare: For science fiction and fantasy the 60’s and 70’s seem most likely the peak of creativity, freedom and inclusiveness. In my mind there is little that is new socially in the pages of SFF writers today.

        I think that this is way more a function of the individual — of you, in this case — than it is of SFF. The amount of contemporary music I add to my music library these day is small, because to my mind, most it does not remotely compare to the rock of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. But I am self-aware enough to recognize that this is a function of my formative years and my taste, rather than a statement of what is being produced today.

        I am sorry to hear that you think there is little which is new about the SFF which is being produced today. I find that new SFF works are frequently vibrant and innovative — and that for all their virtues, classic works have all too frequently been visited by the Suck Fairy.

        Like

        • Thank you, JJ

          For better understanding it’s best to include the heart of what was said.
          “…there is little that is new SOCIALLY in the pages of SFF writers today.”
          “I love the writers of today, their creativity is wonderful, thought provoking, and very entertaining. But, I am realistic.”

          Like

          • What do you mean by “socially?” I don’t quite get that. I can imagine several possibilities, but they all depend on your PoV, which I don’t know.

            Like

  12. Thank you, Kathodus
    I refer to the social issues of the day.
    This is most likely what Kat means when she mentions “cultural change.”

    “There is no new thing under the sun.” Most of what is at the forefront of social commentary today and considered “new” has been covered before especially in the writings of the 60’s and 70’s. It is natural for each of us to conceive that history begins at the time of our birth, but it is not so, is it?

    Like

    • Hmm… I suspect the social issues that are being addressed by literature are pretty much the same, at the root, as the social issues that were being addressed in the dawn of literature.

      Like

%d bloggers like this: