The Mighty Buzzard writes:
So, last night the SJW types over at the Hugo awards decided they'd rather burn the whole thing to the ground than give out an award based on what the readers like instead of social justice reasons:
The members of the World Science Fiction Society rejected the slate of finalists in five categories, giving No Award in Best Novella, Short Story, Related Work, Editor Short Form, and Editor Long Form. This equals the total number of times that WSFS members have presented No Award in the entire history of the Hugo Awards, most recently in 1977.
Here are a few of the people on the #SadPuppies slate that should be quite surprised to learn that they were denied a chance at an award for being white males when they wake up this morning: Rajnar Vajra, Larry Correia, Annie Bellet, Kary English, Toni Weisskopf, Ann Sowards, Megan Gray, Sheila Gilbert, Jennifer Brozek, Cedar Sanderson, and Amanda Green.
takyon: Here are in-depth explanations of the Hugo Awards controversy.
Previously: "Rightwing lobby has 'broken' Hugo awards" Says George R.R. Martin (240 comments)
> I'm pretty open minded,
And the award for the most humorous post of the weekend goes to Runaway!
And, your post indicates that you don't understand the Runaway. You've drawn conclusions about me that are unwarranted, simply because I disagree with your own political leanings.
> And, your post indicates that you don't understand the Runaway. You've drawn conclusions about me that are unwarranted,
I know what you write here.
If your writing has not been an accurate representation of who you are, then you are encouraged to stop lying to us.
And, your post indicates that you don't understand the Runaway
Thus we are faced with a conundrum! Either the Runaway does not understand hisself, (entirely possible, from his postings here), or everyone else who sees the irony does not actually understand the Runaway. I, reluctantly, am going for the first position. Sorry, Runaway! But cognitive dissonance has its price. We cannot both defend Republicans and at the same time claim not to be one. Which side are you on? GW Bush want's to know, you know.
> We cannot both defend Republicans and at the same time claim not to be one
You are either with us or against us!
No I am not! Or maybe both! Why does American politics have to be so complicated? Things are simpler in Greece, even ancient Greece.
Dude, of course one can defend something one's not a part of. The fuck is wrong with you? That kind of thinking is pretty scarily similar to people burning the guy who told them to calm down and think alongside the witch. I expect (and hope) you didn't quite mean it like that, but such lines scare the crap out of me...
So, go back and read it all again. It has obviously gone over your head the first time.
Ah, denial is so, so comforting. Like a warm, fuzzy blanket you can snuggle in.
You know — crazy people never think they are crazy, its always everybody else that is off-base.
You know it so well!
Nah, denial burns like hot brass down the shirt. You can pretend it's not there and push through it but wow does it hurt.