Cower not, fierce reader! This day we have good duty, if not easy. Nay, today's duty will be difficult, but you will be changed by it. This book may be aimed at men, but that is not to say that it is only for men. This book has much in common with mindset books, but it delves deeper into a philosophical approach. Let us examine this text for its crimes!
First, it is aimed at men, and helping them succeed and become dangerous within their realms. Ivan has received statements that it should be a crime to read this book. He's gotten death threats for having written it. As a result of this book, many an SJW takes aim on Twitter, and fails miserably, as though the "creativity" of a brainwashed fool lacking proper vocabulary would be a threat to him. He's overcome much, and shares two extremely difficult challenges that he has faced.
Second, one aim of his book, perhaps a secondary one, is to help the healing process for men that have been injured in heart, spirit, and mind. I could speculate as to the nature of faith that Mr. Throne possesses based on this, but out of respect for his non-sectarian approach, I shall not here.
He advocates for the building of men through community with men, something sorely lacking throughout most of society. In this day, his advocacy is seen as for "toxic masculinity", rather than as building leaders, warriors, and sages of society. He pushes against the idiot male stereotype, and against the aging frat boy through instead the idea of encouragement toward larger and larger goals.
Mr. Throne takes a view of Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopathy that I have not seen before, and while perhaps it underscores many of the mindset/male improvement type book, it is explicit here. These traits are not allowed to run amok, but rather controlled, for each can lead to ruin in their own way.
While some parts of this book may appear to be cosmological hand waving, as I delved further I saw those components rather held together the lessons and methods of thought. Some of these are merely granting better questions to ask of oneself than you may have posed. Others may be routine, but the whole fits together well with them as crucial pieces.
I've read Mr. Cernovich's Gorilla Mindset. While I learned some things from it, there were some reasonings and ideas missing that prevented me from better use of the material. I'm not bashing Mike's book, but Ivan Throne underpinned everything with a structure so that the damaged and introspective might better come to comprehension, and then plan, followed by action. I can say this from experience; I lost my ability to form plans well over a decade ago, when a family emergency prevented me from applying for graduate school. I will not say that it is restored to me, but perhaps, I can start to see a path again. I will be revisiting this text again, as well as Cicero's On Duties, as being essential to productive, responsible, and strategic(non military) thought.
9 of 10 fell deeds
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Monday, January 9, 2017
Sunday, January 8, 2017
Injustice Anthology Review: Forbidden Thoughts
Cower not, Fierce Reader! We must be of resolute mind and steadfast spirit. It is with a heavy heart that I write this review, and will thus abandon my usual format. We should not shirk in addressing the shortcomings of those we admire, in the hope that these issues do not repeat themselves. While my view of the anthology is not as poor as my friend Rawle Nyanzi, he does have a good point. I'll address his review after I address the anthology.
The Bad(let's get it out of the way)
There are stories here which in my opinion, have no place in an anthology set to and marketed to be a successor to Dangerous Visions. This is no slight on the authors, even great authors have off days and stories. I hope that all involved appreciate that I hope for better work from them in the future.
If You Were a Hamburger, My Love by Ray Blank- Completely fell flat for me. I even had to take a second run at it to finish the thing. I know, that part of that is the original work it is satirizing, but I've read better ones than that. I'm confused, in fact as to why "If You Were an Award My Love" wasn't in here instead. That one entertained more.
Graduation Day by Chromium Oxide- Look, I get the point behind the story. But the amount of self loathing required for the narrator of this vignette(there's no conflict) and approval of the hypocrisy of standards within the system just didn't work.
A Place for Everyone by Ray Blank- This has some decent moments, but they did not, make up for the fact that the story ultimately is straight out of O. Henry. Some of it plods, as well, and the lack of TANJ, instead opting for propriety, hurts this story further.
Auto America by E. J. Shumak- Meh. It's better than the above works, and it's short enough to not feel like a waste of time.
Now, there are some questionable editorial decisions as well to address. Some of these, I believe, stem from the fact that Mr. Rennie and Mr. Zwycky have been running SciPhi Journal as a single story at a time project for awhile. It works for that, but other factors come into play here.
The Code by Matthew Ward- This was ok. I would not object, in fact if the rest of the anthology were all stronger than it; every anth. has a weakest piece. Also, I'm unsure if the final point was the evils of CoCs, or that Feminism is Cancer. If both, fine, otherwise, which?
The Social Construct by David Hallquist- I have no problem with this piece. It entertained me. My issue is that it is immediately outshined by A.M. Freeman's story. I'd rather this placed away from it, or better yet, in a different volume; I'm fairly certain there will be more.
Imagine by Pierce Oka- I put this in the same category as The Code. It's not bad, just weaker than the expectations I had.
By His Cockle Hat and Staff by John C. Wright- I make no secret of the fact that I believe Mr. Wright to be the finest writer we have today. Given last year's Iron Chamber of Memory, Moth and Cobweb part 1, and Superluminary, I think this justified. Honestly, I'd rather have one less story and a little more room for Mr. Wright to work. The characters need to exist a bit more. Otherwise, this is fine.
The Good(yes, I think there's still a good amount to like)
Milo's Foreward- This is entertaining, and well informed. Milo continues to show that he knows more than one tune.
The Razor Blade of Approval by Ben Zwycky- This is a good poem, and helps set the expectations for the anthology.
Safe Space Suit by Nick Cole- This was amusing. While it has a few issues, the consequences of tokenism, diversity, etc., is clearly shown in a way to make me laugh. It does need more actual conflict, though.
The Secret History of the World Gone By by Joshua M. Young- This felt pretty good. Not quite to the levels of REH with contemplation or action, but it did remind me of it. Somewhat along the lines of Kull without the violence, which would improve it. Otherwise, GOOD WORK, Mr. Young!
At the Edge of Detatchment by A.M. Freeman- Like I mentioned earlier, this outshone Mr. Hallquist's story. In fact, this may be the best Pro Life story since Philip K. Dick's The Pre-Persons. I do not level that lightly. She brought emotion, action, and revelation decisively and quickly to the story.
A History of the Sad Puppies by Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen- I've read this elsewhere, and have no issue with it's inclusion here. It is entirely appropriate.
Hymns of the Mother by Brad Torgersen- This is ok. I'd like a little more conflict, but there's at least plenty going on.
World Ablaze by Jane Lebak- This was good. Conflicts are all around, there's paranoia that's justified, and revelation that brings peace as it increases tension in the internal society of the story.
The Rules of Racism by Tom Kratman- The colonel puts forth an amusing pair of lists and these do feel true to the establishment versions of the main USA political parties.
Amazon Gambit by Vox Day- Yeah. This was well written, and clever, on top of striking at the female power movement in favor of women's real power. Amusing, as well.
Elegy for the Locust by Brian Niemeier- This takes place within the Soul Cycle setting. In many ways, it accomplishes some of the things Mr. Wright did structurally and seemed to aim for with his characters. Again, needs more conflict.
Test of the Prophet by L. Jagi Lampwrighter- Mrs. Wright succeeded where Mr. Wright did not: the characters are far more realized. Or character, rather. Enough conflict for the tale, and good resolution.
Flight to Egypt by Sarah A. Hoyt- We've got characters, we've got conflict, and a story. Great.
Forbidden Thoughts and Unmet Expectations
Now, Rawle Nyanzi posted his review, and it is scathing. I don't entirely blame him. There's plenty we won't agree on, as I'm less a part of the Appendix N crowd than he is. But, the biggest thing we will agree on is disappointment.
Rawle stated that he felt this anthology held largely the right wing versions of Cat Pictures, Please. I'm not going that far, but he has a point about how formulaic some of this felt.(also, Fat Pictures, Please, which also appeared on Vox's blog would make another fine sub for the burger) Hence part of my criticism being about editorial choices.
Now, Rawle also didn't read everything after the Sad Puppies entry, and that's too bad, because there's more good stuff after than before that point. In many ways, this felt like one of the so-called Year's Best SFF anthologies, where some of it's good, some ok, and some "how'd that get in here", with maybe one great piece.
I do not begrudge Jason the success this has had so far, but I do hope he learns from his critics on this. I've nothing against vignettes, they can make for decent contemplative SFF, but there need to be more STORIES. While part of this may be the current size of the Superversive movement, there's no Tom Simon in here, and I'm sure Dave Freer might have a story lying around. There's a deep bench with these and many more, USE THEM.
Please, next time get us the very best anthology you can. I can only say the good stories justify the price. 5 of 10 fell deeds.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
The Bad(let's get it out of the way)
There are stories here which in my opinion, have no place in an anthology set to and marketed to be a successor to Dangerous Visions. This is no slight on the authors, even great authors have off days and stories. I hope that all involved appreciate that I hope for better work from them in the future.
If You Were a Hamburger, My Love by Ray Blank- Completely fell flat for me. I even had to take a second run at it to finish the thing. I know, that part of that is the original work it is satirizing, but I've read better ones than that. I'm confused, in fact as to why "If You Were an Award My Love" wasn't in here instead. That one entertained more.
Graduation Day by Chromium Oxide- Look, I get the point behind the story. But the amount of self loathing required for the narrator of this vignette(there's no conflict) and approval of the hypocrisy of standards within the system just didn't work.
A Place for Everyone by Ray Blank- This has some decent moments, but they did not, make up for the fact that the story ultimately is straight out of O. Henry. Some of it plods, as well, and the lack of TANJ, instead opting for propriety, hurts this story further.
Auto America by E. J. Shumak- Meh. It's better than the above works, and it's short enough to not feel like a waste of time.
Now, there are some questionable editorial decisions as well to address. Some of these, I believe, stem from the fact that Mr. Rennie and Mr. Zwycky have been running SciPhi Journal as a single story at a time project for awhile. It works for that, but other factors come into play here.
The Code by Matthew Ward- This was ok. I would not object, in fact if the rest of the anthology were all stronger than it; every anth. has a weakest piece. Also, I'm unsure if the final point was the evils of CoCs, or that Feminism is Cancer. If both, fine, otherwise, which?
The Social Construct by David Hallquist- I have no problem with this piece. It entertained me. My issue is that it is immediately outshined by A.M. Freeman's story. I'd rather this placed away from it, or better yet, in a different volume; I'm fairly certain there will be more.
Imagine by Pierce Oka- I put this in the same category as The Code. It's not bad, just weaker than the expectations I had.
By His Cockle Hat and Staff by John C. Wright- I make no secret of the fact that I believe Mr. Wright to be the finest writer we have today. Given last year's Iron Chamber of Memory, Moth and Cobweb part 1, and Superluminary, I think this justified. Honestly, I'd rather have one less story and a little more room for Mr. Wright to work. The characters need to exist a bit more. Otherwise, this is fine.
The Good(yes, I think there's still a good amount to like)
Milo's Foreward- This is entertaining, and well informed. Milo continues to show that he knows more than one tune.
The Razor Blade of Approval by Ben Zwycky- This is a good poem, and helps set the expectations for the anthology.
Safe Space Suit by Nick Cole- This was amusing. While it has a few issues, the consequences of tokenism, diversity, etc., is clearly shown in a way to make me laugh. It does need more actual conflict, though.
The Secret History of the World Gone By by Joshua M. Young- This felt pretty good. Not quite to the levels of REH with contemplation or action, but it did remind me of it. Somewhat along the lines of Kull without the violence, which would improve it. Otherwise, GOOD WORK, Mr. Young!
At the Edge of Detatchment by A.M. Freeman- Like I mentioned earlier, this outshone Mr. Hallquist's story. In fact, this may be the best Pro Life story since Philip K. Dick's The Pre-Persons. I do not level that lightly. She brought emotion, action, and revelation decisively and quickly to the story.
A History of the Sad Puppies by Larry Correia and Brad Torgersen- I've read this elsewhere, and have no issue with it's inclusion here. It is entirely appropriate.
Hymns of the Mother by Brad Torgersen- This is ok. I'd like a little more conflict, but there's at least plenty going on.
World Ablaze by Jane Lebak- This was good. Conflicts are all around, there's paranoia that's justified, and revelation that brings peace as it increases tension in the internal society of the story.
The Rules of Racism by Tom Kratman- The colonel puts forth an amusing pair of lists and these do feel true to the establishment versions of the main USA political parties.
Amazon Gambit by Vox Day- Yeah. This was well written, and clever, on top of striking at the female power movement in favor of women's real power. Amusing, as well.
Elegy for the Locust by Brian Niemeier- This takes place within the Soul Cycle setting. In many ways, it accomplishes some of the things Mr. Wright did structurally and seemed to aim for with his characters. Again, needs more conflict.
Test of the Prophet by L. Jagi Lampwrighter- Mrs. Wright succeeded where Mr. Wright did not: the characters are far more realized. Or character, rather. Enough conflict for the tale, and good resolution.
Flight to Egypt by Sarah A. Hoyt- We've got characters, we've got conflict, and a story. Great.
Forbidden Thoughts and Unmet Expectations
Now, Rawle Nyanzi posted his review, and it is scathing. I don't entirely blame him. There's plenty we won't agree on, as I'm less a part of the Appendix N crowd than he is. But, the biggest thing we will agree on is disappointment.
Rawle stated that he felt this anthology held largely the right wing versions of Cat Pictures, Please. I'm not going that far, but he has a point about how formulaic some of this felt.(also, Fat Pictures, Please, which also appeared on Vox's blog would make another fine sub for the burger) Hence part of my criticism being about editorial choices.
Now, Rawle also didn't read everything after the Sad Puppies entry, and that's too bad, because there's more good stuff after than before that point. In many ways, this felt like one of the so-called Year's Best SFF anthologies, where some of it's good, some ok, and some "how'd that get in here", with maybe one great piece.
I do not begrudge Jason the success this has had so far, but I do hope he learns from his critics on this. I've nothing against vignettes, they can make for decent contemplative SFF, but there need to be more STORIES. While part of this may be the current size of the Superversive movement, there's no Tom Simon in here, and I'm sure Dave Freer might have a story lying around. There's a deep bench with these and many more, USE THEM.
Please, next time get us the very best anthology you can. I can only say the good stories justify the price. 5 of 10 fell deeds.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Saturday, January 7, 2017
Poke a horrior SJW, and they're horrified by you
My friend Brian Niemeier, author of the excellent Soul Cycle, last night posted a reaction to the thing that calls itself Doris V. Sutherland (a 6 ft. tranny) whose original post he archived here. I wouldn't even bring this up, as Brian does a good job fisking the post, except that Doris went off target and after me a bit as well. Brian, being a wise and generous man, didn't touch those sections, but mentioned them and tagged me on twitter. So, let's start on the side rant against me.
My new comments in bold, his(and my quote) in italics.
Here is his reply to my comment about Souldancer‘s lack of reviews online:
Well, you quoted accurately. That's a good start. You realize my rebuttal is three pronged, also true, you're making some progress. Then you think that it bizarre that I think you're crowd might go after our jobs. Seeing as I've gotten threats over my opinions, I don't think it bizarre at all, especially after Brendan Eich, Sir Tim Hunt, and James Watson. And let us not forget Emily Youncis, fired from her pistachio selling gig for having the wrong thoughts.
Fight Club type subculture? Aren't you projecting. I'm mostly a reviewer and commenter on stuff. Some folks like it. It's not like I'm Russell Newquist, with a dojo and a publisher to run. That might be closer in his case. MIGHT.
He then suggests that fans are too busy reading books to leave reviews,
Well, some folks are. Others are intimidated by those writing better reviews than they will. Not everyone has your (or my) idea that their thoughts are relevant to more than just themselves.
an argument which ignores the basic fact that fandom is built upon discussing media as well as consuming it
No wonder "fandom" is filled with OCD liberals that can't stand being disagreed with. You also just explained how most fanfic came into being.
a work that is not being discussed clearly has no fandom.
What? No, it has fewer obsessives. Which is why the mystery genre is healthier than SFF or horror; fans don't do massive cons as much, and stick mostly to reading. So the market can tolerate experiments and reward what works.
But most interesting of all is his third assertion: that I prefer “crappy pastiche of urban fantasy, faerie tales, and World of Darkness fanfic”.
Well, at least you find it interesting.
This irrelevant ad hominem
We agree that it may be an ad hominem, that doesn't mean it ain't true. Truth isn't a logic class. Try harder.
(I was talking about whether a book is popular, rather than whether I personally like it)
That's a little better. But, all the Dragon Award is, is a popularity contest. You and yours didn't show. I thought fandom cared.
seems to be a response to my earlier comment that the Sad Puppies have shown little interest in horror fiction.
Put out good books, and people will read them. Period. And what fool said I was Sad? I'm a Rabid Puppy. Clearly you can't be trusted to tell the truth further than my sister could throw your fat ass.
Genesson is trying to give the impression that he and the other Puppy supporters are actually hardened fans of the horror genre; but as he has no evidence to back up this claim, he settles for simply impugning my own tastes.
So those are your tastes? I never claimed to be a "hardened fan of the horror genre". I read a lot. Some horror gets in, some true crime, some crime novels, some mystery, some theology, biography and more. I like a diversity of stories. This informs my tastes, clearly yours are deformed.
He has no idea where my tastes lie, of course, and so makes a wild stab-in-the-dark involving urban fantasy pastiche and World of Darkness fanfics (a description that, amusingly enough, is not too far from Declan Finn’s Puppy-approved Honor at Stake).
I don't recall a hate for Christianity being anywhere in his novels, nor an annoying and stupid clan warfare bit with drug and sex addled lower classes. His vampires follow theological rules and are individuals, subject to a singular council, not part of WoD clan structures. Again, try harder.
As to your tastes, I'm guessing you might read some Walter Breen.
Behind all of the bluster, Genesson’s post marks an attempt to frame the Puppies as the true custodians of horror fiction, with Brian Niemeier and (presumably) Declan Finn being the toasts of horror fandom. As for those horror fans who do not read Niemeier or Finn, well, they are merely consumers of urban fantasy and other forms of horror-lite. As I have already shown, this is a complete reversal of the truth.
True custodians? That whole idea is what got the Sad and Rabid Puppies started. No genre should have such, as no man is infallible. If Declan and Brian were the toasts of horror fandom, it would be more civilized, wiser, and more attractive to women than you. I didn't call anyone a poser, you did. Stop projecting.
-----------------------------
And then he goes back to bashing Brian, continuing to lie and obscure the truth.
Now, that said, the horror community may indeed be kinder and more civilized than SFF fandom at large. I've indeed heard that from multiple sources. I hope that Doris doesn't represent it for certain, because he employs exactly the attitudes, methods, and lies that we are accustomed to from SJWs in SFF.
Oh, and Doris, if you don't want us to claim this year's Dragon of Horror, better get you and yours to show up. We will be returning.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
My new comments in bold, his(and my quote) in italics.
Here is his reply to my comment about Souldancer‘s lack of reviews online:
Maybe some of us realize how active your type is at disemployment. Maybe we were busy reading books. At any rate, it’s not your crappy pastiche of urban fantasy, faerie tales, and WoD fanfic that you love.Genesson starts his three-pronged rebuttal by suggesting, bizarrely, that people who give positive reviews to Souldancer are in danger of losing their jobs. He seems to expect us to believe that the legions of Souldancer fans have gathered into some kind of Fight Club-like underground subculture that dare not speak its name.
Well, you quoted accurately. That's a good start. You realize my rebuttal is three pronged, also true, you're making some progress. Then you think that it bizarre that I think you're crowd might go after our jobs. Seeing as I've gotten threats over my opinions, I don't think it bizarre at all, especially after Brendan Eich, Sir Tim Hunt, and James Watson. And let us not forget Emily Youncis, fired from her pistachio selling gig for having the wrong thoughts.
Fight Club type subculture? Aren't you projecting. I'm mostly a reviewer and commenter on stuff. Some folks like it. It's not like I'm Russell Newquist, with a dojo and a publisher to run. That might be closer in his case. MIGHT.
He then suggests that fans are too busy reading books to leave reviews,
Well, some folks are. Others are intimidated by those writing better reviews than they will. Not everyone has your (or my) idea that their thoughts are relevant to more than just themselves.
an argument which ignores the basic fact that fandom is built upon discussing media as well as consuming it
No wonder "fandom" is filled with OCD liberals that can't stand being disagreed with. You also just explained how most fanfic came into being.
a work that is not being discussed clearly has no fandom.
What? No, it has fewer obsessives. Which is why the mystery genre is healthier than SFF or horror; fans don't do massive cons as much, and stick mostly to reading. So the market can tolerate experiments and reward what works.
But most interesting of all is his third assertion: that I prefer “crappy pastiche of urban fantasy, faerie tales, and World of Darkness fanfic”.
Well, at least you find it interesting.
This irrelevant ad hominem
We agree that it may be an ad hominem, that doesn't mean it ain't true. Truth isn't a logic class. Try harder.
(I was talking about whether a book is popular, rather than whether I personally like it)
That's a little better. But, all the Dragon Award is, is a popularity contest. You and yours didn't show. I thought fandom cared.
seems to be a response to my earlier comment that the Sad Puppies have shown little interest in horror fiction.
Put out good books, and people will read them. Period. And what fool said I was Sad? I'm a Rabid Puppy. Clearly you can't be trusted to tell the truth further than my sister could throw your fat ass.
Genesson is trying to give the impression that he and the other Puppy supporters are actually hardened fans of the horror genre; but as he has no evidence to back up this claim, he settles for simply impugning my own tastes.
So those are your tastes? I never claimed to be a "hardened fan of the horror genre". I read a lot. Some horror gets in, some true crime, some crime novels, some mystery, some theology, biography and more. I like a diversity of stories. This informs my tastes, clearly yours are deformed.
He has no idea where my tastes lie, of course, and so makes a wild stab-in-the-dark involving urban fantasy pastiche and World of Darkness fanfics (a description that, amusingly enough, is not too far from Declan Finn’s Puppy-approved Honor at Stake).
I don't recall a hate for Christianity being anywhere in his novels, nor an annoying and stupid clan warfare bit with drug and sex addled lower classes. His vampires follow theological rules and are individuals, subject to a singular council, not part of WoD clan structures. Again, try harder.
As to your tastes, I'm guessing you might read some Walter Breen.
Behind all of the bluster, Genesson’s post marks an attempt to frame the Puppies as the true custodians of horror fiction, with Brian Niemeier and (presumably) Declan Finn being the toasts of horror fandom. As for those horror fans who do not read Niemeier or Finn, well, they are merely consumers of urban fantasy and other forms of horror-lite. As I have already shown, this is a complete reversal of the truth.
True custodians? That whole idea is what got the Sad and Rabid Puppies started. No genre should have such, as no man is infallible. If Declan and Brian were the toasts of horror fandom, it would be more civilized, wiser, and more attractive to women than you. I didn't call anyone a poser, you did. Stop projecting.
-----------------------------
And then he goes back to bashing Brian, continuing to lie and obscure the truth.
Now, that said, the horror community may indeed be kinder and more civilized than SFF fandom at large. I've indeed heard that from multiple sources. I hope that Doris doesn't represent it for certain, because he employs exactly the attitudes, methods, and lies that we are accustomed to from SJWs in SFF.
Oh, and Doris, if you don't want us to claim this year's Dragon of Horror, better get you and yours to show up. We will be returning.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Monday, January 2, 2017
Vox's Three Laws on Display
Over this New Year's weekend, I was made aware of a SJW by the name of Rex Douglas Stock, @RexDouglasStock on Twitter. I was on my phone at the time, and don't have a screencap of the tweet he deleted that brought him to my attention. But, the tweet was a photo comparison of the Romanov family of Nicolas II to the Trump family. I replied, with this, and his subsequent reply:
Sorry about the blank space. But, the word may, like the word allegedly, clearly means that I am uncertain. I do not know the man's mind. Or rather, I don't know it well. I do know he is hateful from these tweets:
He also messaged me before blocking me. Here's the message:
Please note, earlier, I did not claim anything. I simply advocated that in his comparison of the Trumps to the Romanovs, that the FBI might have cause to investigate him. I would state the same for his posts regarding others that he has apparently wished dead. The Romanovs, of course, were killed during the Boshevik revolution in Russia, putting the Communist Party in control. Mr. Stock appears to be cut from the same thuggish cloth as the Bolsheviks, in his desire to see his enemies dead.
I have no such desire here. Mr. Stock did me the honor of lumping me together with Mike Cernovich in one tweet, and @andieiam in another. Both of these accounts have far more followers than I, and I have a measure of respect for most of their opinions. As a matter of fact, he has an order of magnitude more followers than I, so why would he take such measures to silence me? I should be seen as no threat whatsoever, unless I am close to the truth. So brave, he has to threaten with libel when the word may is used.
I will not retract. This man has posted vicious statements. He believes the Virginia grid was hacked; it wasn't. He believes the government needs to protect us from Russian hackers, when the law states that companies and groups are not only responsible for their security, but liable for insufficient security. Quit while you're behind, Mr. Stock. I shall pray for you to see truth, and repent.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
He also messaged me before blocking me. Here's the message:
I have no such desire here. Mr. Stock did me the honor of lumping me together with Mike Cernovich in one tweet, and @andieiam in another. Both of these accounts have far more followers than I, and I have a measure of respect for most of their opinions. As a matter of fact, he has an order of magnitude more followers than I, so why would he take such measures to silence me? I should be seen as no threat whatsoever, unless I am close to the truth. So brave, he has to threaten with libel when the word may is used.
I will not retract. This man has posted vicious statements. He believes the Virginia grid was hacked; it wasn't. He believes the government needs to protect us from Russian hackers, when the law states that companies and groups are not only responsible for their security, but liable for insufficient security. Quit while you're behind, Mr. Stock. I shall pray for you to see truth, and repent.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Thursday, December 29, 2016
End of 2016 yeilds more outrage, and other updates
It's not looking like I'm going to get another book review in this year. The book I'm reading is really good, but it's dense non-fiction, so it's taking me more time. Keep watch for my review of Ivan Throne's The Nine Laws.
In other book news, Simon and Schuster announced a book by Milo Yiannopolous today, with Milo obtaining a 250k advance for his work. I personally wouldn't have recommended an advance that large, but whatever. The SJW crowd is going BONKERS over this, including Chicago Book Review. Yes, a major "book review" has announced it's boycotting ALL of S&S books for 2017 if they keep Milo in the mix. Like the Twitter ban, this will make him more popular. As Daddy Warpig stated, "STOP TRYING TO TRICK ME INTO SUPPORTING A BIG 5 PUBLISHER."
Personally I don't think they're that smart. I think they're earnest in the hate they have for Milo, and any words that disagree with their mental illness worldview. I also have to wonder, as a media establishment, as to the integrity of their book reviews. Do they actually read the books they review? Do they just read the blurbs? Do they chat with their buddy SJW author about his book, and then write up his thoughts as a book review? I'm calling fake book reviews.
And I should have had that thought back when Publisher's Weekly "reviewed" Ben Zwycky's Beyond the Mist so badly I had to fisk it. Which leads to the question, how prevalent are fake book reviews? I know they happen on GoodReads(who doesn't care) and Amazon(who does, but owns GoodReads), but what about at the professional level? Have they also descended to the level of making things up, of lying, and going along with the narrative? I can't answer that at this time, and I may never take the initiative to research it. On the other hand, I'm fairly sure my author friends might have better informed opinions of their professional reviews.
In gaming, I got a four player game of Scythe from Stegmaier Games in on Monday, and was just as great fun as the first game, if not more. We played with the new expansion, drew factions randomly, and ended up with 3 new parts in the game. This was a kind of farewell play with one friend, who is leaving for at least 18 months for trade school.
I've seen some posts praising the game for gender diversity, but that's BS. As Bradford Walker would point out, they're just a unique pawn. There's great flavor art and text, but they aren't real, and thus have no sex. I would applaud the diversity of play experience the game affords, though. No two games have played the same, and the final numbers are all that count.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
In other book news, Simon and Schuster announced a book by Milo Yiannopolous today, with Milo obtaining a 250k advance for his work. I personally wouldn't have recommended an advance that large, but whatever. The SJW crowd is going BONKERS over this, including Chicago Book Review. Yes, a major "book review" has announced it's boycotting ALL of S&S books for 2017 if they keep Milo in the mix. Like the Twitter ban, this will make him more popular. As Daddy Warpig stated, "STOP TRYING TO TRICK ME INTO SUPPORTING A BIG 5 PUBLISHER."
Personally I don't think they're that smart. I think they're earnest in the hate they have for Milo, and any words that disagree with their
And I should have had that thought back when Publisher's Weekly "reviewed" Ben Zwycky's Beyond the Mist so badly I had to fisk it. Which leads to the question, how prevalent are fake book reviews? I know they happen on GoodReads(who doesn't care) and Amazon(who does, but owns GoodReads), but what about at the professional level? Have they also descended to the level of making things up, of lying, and going along with the narrative? I can't answer that at this time, and I may never take the initiative to research it. On the other hand, I'm fairly sure my author friends might have better informed opinions of their professional reviews.
In gaming, I got a four player game of Scythe from Stegmaier Games in on Monday, and was just as great fun as the first game, if not more. We played with the new expansion, drew factions randomly, and ended up with 3 new parts in the game. This was a kind of farewell play with one friend, who is leaving for at least 18 months for trade school.
I've seen some posts praising the game for gender diversity, but that's BS. As Bradford Walker would point out, they're just a unique pawn. There's great flavor art and text, but they aren't real, and thus have no sex. I would applaud the diversity of play experience the game affords, though. No two games have played the same, and the final numbers are all that count.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Sunday, December 25, 2016
Injustice Book Review: The Secret Kings by Brian Niemeier
Cower not, fierce reader! Today we have a tale of adventure beyond simple definitions. In fact, a lack of adequacy led one reviewer to coin the term "Niemeierian" to describe the amalgamations that his works are, and truly, I hope we shall see more of this style. On to the charges!
Once again, we have the spectre of a real hell. This implication of real evil and eternal consequence is a primary crime against the Narrative. Even though the religions within are fictitious, they bear resemblance to real religions, that is, there are real consequences, and the deities thereof, even flawed, have eternal goals in mind.
Heroism and sacrifice are once again presented as great things. These things are truly beyond the comprehension of the forces of SocJus. Impossible odds mean far less than doing the right thing.
The flawed characters of this tale indeed present some things that are comprehensible to the light of SocJus. There are betrayals, a drive for revenge, Byzantine plots of treachery, and a will to make all the same. I find this a great reflection of the desire of them to believe in "equality", a thing truly not applicable to different people outside of judgement before God.
There is one more crime against the Narrative that flows throughout this book: redemption. We start the tale with two characters in a state called zadokim, a clear reference to the tzedakim of Judaic traditions and legends. The fact of redemption, and its requisite continued effort, are anathema to SocJus. It simply cannot tolerate the idea of brokenness, sin, and repentance.
While there are many more crimes, and much more to discuss regarding this book, they would require a far more careful enumeration and progressive writing than I am willing to embark on. The scope of this tome is vast, and in reaction, I am limited to broad strokes in its judgement. In some ways, I find this series akin to Mr. Wright's Escahaton sequence, or his masterful Somewhither, in being too vast to give proper attention to in review. My colleagues at Puppy of the Month Book Club are more adequately suited to this task, as they proceed in a more scholarly and patient manner, with only one text per month(normally).
This fragment of the Soul Cycle is ultimately filled with action, fun, and crimes against Social Justice. I wish him the best in his part of the restoration of SFF. 9 of 10 fell deeds.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Once again, we have the spectre of a real hell. This implication of real evil and eternal consequence is a primary crime against the Narrative. Even though the religions within are fictitious, they bear resemblance to real religions, that is, there are real consequences, and the deities thereof, even flawed, have eternal goals in mind.
Heroism and sacrifice are once again presented as great things. These things are truly beyond the comprehension of the forces of SocJus. Impossible odds mean far less than doing the right thing.
The flawed characters of this tale indeed present some things that are comprehensible to the light of SocJus. There are betrayals, a drive for revenge, Byzantine plots of treachery, and a will to make all the same. I find this a great reflection of the desire of them to believe in "equality", a thing truly not applicable to different people outside of judgement before God.
There is one more crime against the Narrative that flows throughout this book: redemption. We start the tale with two characters in a state called zadokim, a clear reference to the tzedakim of Judaic traditions and legends. The fact of redemption, and its requisite continued effort, are anathema to SocJus. It simply cannot tolerate the idea of brokenness, sin, and repentance.
While there are many more crimes, and much more to discuss regarding this book, they would require a far more careful enumeration and progressive writing than I am willing to embark on. The scope of this tome is vast, and in reaction, I am limited to broad strokes in its judgement. In some ways, I find this series akin to Mr. Wright's Escahaton sequence, or his masterful Somewhither, in being too vast to give proper attention to in review. My colleagues at Puppy of the Month Book Club are more adequately suited to this task, as they proceed in a more scholarly and patient manner, with only one text per month(normally).
This fragment of the Soul Cycle is ultimately filled with action, fun, and crimes against Social Justice. I wish him the best in his part of the restoration of SFF. 9 of 10 fell deeds.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Fake news, passing the baton, and appropriate measures
Yep, if you can't tell, this is going to be a fairly pure political post; I'll try to keep things to the proper length, if not a little shorter.
So the biggest Fake news outlet, Clinton's News Network(ht: John Nolte), is currently all in arms over Trump's actions regarding the UN vote on Israel today. Their analysts are making statements along the lines that it is unprecedented for a president-elect to influence current policy. Some have stated that it's completely inappropriate, along the same lines as his taking a call from Taiwan.
Of course, they ignore the fact that if Obama takes actions that Trump will undo, then he will be seen as making empty stands. Also, if Obama takes actions that Mr. Trump has no choice but to reverse radically(such as actions regarding the Russian ambassadorial assassination), then if things go well as a result, Obama not only looks foolish, but bad. Of course, he did already make the foolish move of going golfing after hearing about the ambassador and the German Christmas market attack, but that's more of a non-move in his case.
I honestly believed we narrowly dodged WWIII this week. Hilary's followers are amazingly paranoid about Putin and Russia at this time, just four years after Obama pointed out to Romney in debate that the Cold War is over. I cannot help but believe we would be inching along towards war with Russia if she had been elected, if not already making overt moves toward such conflict.
NATO is a joke these days. Recent wargame simulations have demonstrated that NATO cannot win against Russia in a short enough span to matter. If Russia actually wanted Ukraine, and actively pursued it, we could not have stopped them. Russia recently tested another satellite killer weapon, likely as a rhetorical deterrent to remind certain parties how quickly any advantages they have might disappear.
I do not pretend to know what else Mr. Trump will do as time closes to the inauguration, but the delay of the UN vote on Israeli settlements has for now prevented us from having to undergo a radical realignment on that front. Regaining the confidence of the Philippines should be a priority.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
So the biggest Fake news outlet, Clinton's News Network(ht: John Nolte), is currently all in arms over Trump's actions regarding the UN vote on Israel today. Their analysts are making statements along the lines that it is unprecedented for a president-elect to influence current policy. Some have stated that it's completely inappropriate, along the same lines as his taking a call from Taiwan.
Of course, they ignore the fact that if Obama takes actions that Trump will undo, then he will be seen as making empty stands. Also, if Obama takes actions that Mr. Trump has no choice but to reverse radically(such as actions regarding the Russian ambassadorial assassination), then if things go well as a result, Obama not only looks foolish, but bad. Of course, he did already make the foolish move of going golfing after hearing about the ambassador and the German Christmas market attack, but that's more of a non-move in his case.
I honestly believed we narrowly dodged WWIII this week. Hilary's followers are amazingly paranoid about Putin and Russia at this time, just four years after Obama pointed out to Romney in debate that the Cold War is over. I cannot help but believe we would be inching along towards war with Russia if she had been elected, if not already making overt moves toward such conflict.
NATO is a joke these days. Recent wargame simulations have demonstrated that NATO cannot win against Russia in a short enough span to matter. If Russia actually wanted Ukraine, and actively pursued it, we could not have stopped them. Russia recently tested another satellite killer weapon, likely as a rhetorical deterrent to remind certain parties how quickly any advantages they have might disappear.
I do not pretend to know what else Mr. Trump will do as time closes to the inauguration, but the delay of the UN vote on Israeli settlements has for now prevented us from having to undergo a radical realignment on that front. Regaining the confidence of the Philippines should be a priority.
When you play Social Justice, the world loses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)