Fox and numbers

One of the concerns raised by Richard Fox was that the link to the file he provided to the public Nebula Reading lists may have provided traffic to this blog, which he claims earn advertising revenue for me from people visiting. Fox was concerned that he was providing free content for the entertainment of my readers.

I went back and checked and I can see according to the WordPress dashboard that the link was clicked on 7 times. I guess some of those would have been by me but as I bought the Backblast Area Clear anthology with actual money, there was no loss of income for poor Richard for looking at the file he had provided. In the same time period about 150 people accessed the post where the link was. In short, Fox’s published story does not pull in traffic.

However, while Fox’s published fiction is not a draw, his ad-hoc fiction is extraordinarily popular. The past few days has brought more than two hundred visits to this blog from Larry Correia’s blog alone. The post about his bad faith piracy claims have drawn literally thousands of views. Sadly for me, I don’t actually earn any ad revenue from this blog. It’s a WordPress free blog, any ad revenue goes to WordPress not me. However, I’m sure WordPress are grateful for the free fictional content Richard has provided in my comment section. I’m no sure ‘entertaining’ is the right word but yes, it certainly drives traffic.


23 thoughts on “Fox and numbers

  1. I’m not sure Fox and Correia’s antics are entertaining, but they’ve certainly drawn too much of my attention over the past several days. Like a train wreck does, I guess.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. They have all their culture war milkers who make money off of mostly video screeds on YouTube and livestreams, and then Facebook, Go Fund Me, etc., that they just assume that’s what everybody else is doing. In reality, most blogs in writing and SFF fandom are free blogs people do for fun or to promote written work and they aren’t getting any ad revenue off of it. Even a lot of the podcasts are done for free with no ads/sponsors.

    Covering the Nebula Awards or the Hugos, etc., is content and it can entertain people who visit or follow a blog as useful info, but it isn’t really a money draw, even for a site making ad money, as the information is widely available. It’s more of a public service and people wanting to chat about the nominees (which is one of the big gifts from the award nominations that the Puppies were so jealous about.) And again, it is standard practice for authors who get award nominations for short fiction pieces to make them as widely available for free as possible so that A) the maximum number of voters, whoever the voting body is, get a chance to consider the work for the award; and B) maximum attention from the nomination is obtained from the general public in hope of getting the author’s name out there widely and attracting new readers to their works. That was the whole point of starting the Hugo Packet, for example. Which is why nobody knew that the public file listed at SFWA wasn’t kosher.

    So again, File 770 and Camestros and other authors/fans who have blogs or sites that mentioned the story’s nomination as fandom news and put up what they thought was the official SFWA link to the authorized file of the story, were helping Fox for free to promote his nominated work and his novels. And instead of being grateful for people getting his name out, again for free, as a Nebula nominee, he screamed at them that they were thieves. And tried to claim his own mistake with the file was a grand conspiracy against him, no less.

    If LC manipulated and lied to Fox to get Fox to join a personal vendetta against Mike, because Fox doesn’t know much about the business of the SFF category market, that’s really reprehensible. This was a real opportunity for Fox with fans who are regular and reliable word-of-mouth spreaders. And who very pointedly weren’t going to exclude Fox’s story as a nominee from the rest of the nominees. But now, despite explanations to him both puzzled and then highly annoyed that these accusations are ridiculous, he’s decided that he wants them to all avoid him and not talk about his work as a nominee. And they’re likely going to oblige him on that too in future. It’s not going to be a formal boycott or anything; they’ll just avoid him — as he’s requested.

    We’ve had some real doozies from the Puppy camps, and the Dragon Awards have been a delightful soap opera, but this one might be the winner for sheer WTF-ness.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. So, is this bait for round three? I’ve got to admit, I’m gobsmacked by the sheer number of own-goals Fox is piling up.
    Seriously, how can an adult who’s that clueless about being clueless be allowed out in public without a minder?


  4. “Entertainment” is the wrong word here. Is there a long compound German word for “unable to stop gawking at a car accident on the side of the road?”

    Admittedly that’s 90% of why I’ve followed the Puppy fiasco…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Travellin’ Michael Eochaidh: Is there a long compound German word for “unable to stop gawking at a car accident on the side of the road?”

      Volkswagenfreude? 😀

      Liked by 4 people

    2. The noun is “Glotzer”, so its more of a short word 🙂

      I can say, that Fox can be comforted: After he – a selfpublishing SCI-FI-author- showed that he doesnt know how links work and doesnt want to actually find out , I definitly wont be reading his short story (or anythings else he is written, wether he puts it on google drive or not) – promise!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. [i]Is there a long compound German word for “unable to stop gawking at a car accident on the side of the road?”[/i]

    There’s an English word for it – rubbernecking. I’m afraid I’m guilty.


  6. At last one of the 7 that downloaded it, did give it a quick look, and deleted it, after Fox claim it was pirated. (me) I can garantie Mr Fox that I haven’t read 10 pages of his masterwork. (My reason was that he doesn’t want us to read it, so I don’t have too)
    I did read all the other storys that were up for the Nebula.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. @Paul – That’s interesting. I was a bit embarrassed when I saw a previous response to my comment (“Sticky beaking we say in Australia…”), as I realized I’d said “there’s an English word for it,” which is quite a parochial way of putting it, particularly given this blog is run by an Australian, but also because there are people from all over the world who may read it. What I should have said was “In California, we say rubbernecking.” I’m originally from the Great Lakes Area, but moved West years ago and can’t remember if I’d heard the term before moving out here.


    1. I wasn’t offended – I just wanted to offer up one of the interesting idioms for which Australian English is notorious (one might says it’s ‘choccas’ with them 🙂 ). Rubberneck is also used here, and sticky beak is probably more commonly used for someone being nosy, but my (Australian) husband has definitely used it in the same context one might use rubberneck (specifically someone going to look at an accident).
      I, like Camestros, am an English expat, and I must confess when you said English I assumed you meant from the UK, so I guess we all carry our own assumptions around in our heads…

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I must confess when you said English I assumed you meant from the UK

        I’m Aussie born, but also thought UK; where else is English, after all?

        FWIW, gawking & sticky-beaking are the words I have always heard while living in NSW, WA & SA

        Liked by 1 person

  8. The main reason reading one story for free would stop you from buying an anthology would be really not liking that story. I’ve definitely seen original anthologies have one story online around the time of release to promote them. For example, John Joseph Adams usually features a story on Lightspeed when he puts out an anthology. And reprint anthologies, like the various Year’s Bests, have a good chunk of their stories already online. They must still sell since they keep putting them out.


    1. Yes, that’s why many anthologies will try to have one or two reprinted stories from big names in their anthology. And the Nebula puts out a showcase anthology that has all the short story nominees, plus some of the novelettes/novellas and excerpts from the novels.

      But really, it is entirely up to the author. Fox didn’t have to have his story available for free even to the SFWA members or only for them as he apparently intended. It’s fully the decision of the author and license publisher rights holder. But because people do make the short works available for free for award consideration so often, no one had any reason to doubt that the Google file accessed by a link on SFWA’s site was not such a promotion.

      It’s not the free part that’s the issue. It’s Fox deciding that everyone should know what he himself didn’t even understand he was doing part that’s the issue. And then refusing to admit that he was wrong, he’d made a mistake and overreacted. Twice, apparently. Any damage he suffered from having the story up for free when he didn’t want it was mainly self-inflicted. And most marketing word of mouth goodwill he got for his nomination is done and dusted with this performance.

      Liked by 3 people

  9. Having a reprint collection like Year’s Best means less work. You have a lot of stories in one place and haven’t got to search all over the Internet, pluss a promise that this is the good stuff. There is one novella (I think) that I have 3 times, but the other stories were interesting.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I ended up with 4 copies of Anderson’s Marius, of Niven’s Becalmed in Hell, Plauger’s Child of all Ages, and Zelazny’s The Doors of His Face, The Lamps of His Mouth and A Rose for Ecclesiastes.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Yes, absolutely. I often buy the Year’s Best SFF ebooks. And I’ve supported the Long List Anthology Kickstarter put together by David Steffen for the past few years. Even though I’ve probably read many of the stories already. The good stuff is definitely worth rereading and it’s nice having them collected together.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.