2017/08/07

A True Culture Warrior

The SF SJWs have responded to The Secret Kings' nomination for this year's Best Science Fiction Novel Dragon Award with a familiar Narrative.

Lamprey Strategy

SJWs always double down. Last year, they tried to DISQUALIFY Souldancer's Dragon win after the fact based on its number of Amazon reviews. Now they're trying to preemptively undermine The Secret Kings, only SK has more than twice as many Amazon reviews as SD did when it won, so they've resorted to the even more arbitrary measure of Goodreads ratings.

They're also whining about how uncouth it is that I'm calling attention to John Scalzi's self-described and very public cuckery. The CHORFs should get used to disappointment, because unlike some genteel conservative, I recognize that Marquess of Queensberry rules are off the table.

This is a street fight. Chicago rules are in effect, and I'm fighting to win.

The CHORFs have done us a favor, though. Because they always project, they can't help telling us how to beat them. Glyer is clearly upset that I devoted half of my previous post to attacking Scalzi. I'll rectify that error by turning over the majority of this post to mocking Tor's golden boy.

You can be sure that pressing the attack is the right move, because contra Glyer's finger-wagging, there's a rich vein of popular disgust for Scalzi that I've only begun tapping into.

Here a just a few of the responses I got when I posted this pic--WARNING! don protective eyewear to shield your T levels!

Scalzi cucking

2017SK1

Answer: register for a free 2017 Dragon Award ballot and vote The Secret Kings for Best SF Novel.

More fan reactions:

2017SK2


But we're not all about negativity. I have the dual advantage of a loathsome opponent and an objectively superior book.


2017SK3

The same SJWs who ruined the Hugos now have their sights set on the Dragon Awards. Winning even one category will be a huge morale boost for them. On the other hand, getting completely shut out will leave them devastated.

Mike Glyer is right about one thing. I'm not in this fight to chase awards for their own sake. Genre fiction, movies, comics, and gaming have been decimated by a cultural war waged by totalitarian social justice warriors.

The SJWs know that I will oppose them, unflinchingly, on the terms they've set. That's why they shadowbanned me on Twitter, colluded to snub my readers by voting me below No Award in last year's Hugos, and are swarming to attack me now.

That's fine. They tried it last year, and their mean girl tactics helped push Souldancer to victory.

The CHORFs gave me some advice, so I'll return the favor. If you want to win, stop your catty narrative-building. Fight clean and stop insulting my readers, or this time it won't just be my people rushing to smack you down.

Of course, the SF SJWs won't take my advice. They can't.

But I can beat them. I'm the only non-SJW, non-Tor author on the Best SF Novel ballot who has a proven track record of punching above his weight enough to bloody the CHORFs' noses.

Don't get me wrong. Richard Paolinelli and Brian Guthrie are fine authors and great guys. But going up against the SJW hate mob can be daunting, especially if you've never faced it before. And it's not either of them who are being singled out for a two minutes' hate by leading CHORF blogs and their mainstream media collaborators.

Cixin Liu is a favorite in some quarters. I loved Three Body Problem, and Liu is a superb writer. We need to face facts, though. Liu is a Tor author, and they're going to throw their support behind Scalzi. The Verge hatchet job using the cover of The Collapsing Empire for its header image is a major tip-off.

Plus, let's not forget the fact that Liu thanked the Rabid Puppies who made his Hugo win possible by publicly insulting them.

The situation is clear: the race for Best Science Fiction Novel at this year's Dragon Awards comes down to me vs. Scalzi. The CHORFs have already broadcast that this is the scenario they most fear.

With your help, The Secret Kings will beat secret king John Scalzi for Best SF Novel.

As I've always said, I'm not out to collect a shelf full of awards. Therefore, my lovely and talented editor L. Jagi Lamplighter Wright will take home Secret Kings' Dragon Award. The book wouldn't be as good as it is without her, and she richly deserves recognition.

Another advantage I just remembered: my entire series costs less than Scalzi's single eBook.

The Soul Cycle - Brian Niemeier

Get The Secret Kings for free through Kindle Unlimited.

Register for a free Dragon Award ballot and vote SK for Best Sci-Fi Novel!


@BrianNiemeier

UPDATE: That was easy.
The other day I announced The Collapsing Empire was a finalist for the Dragon Award in the Best Science Fiction novel category, which was neat. Today, I notified the Dragon Award administrators and let them know I was withdrawing The Collapsing Empire from consideration for the award.
The reason is simple: Some other finalists are trying to use the book and me as a prop, to advance a manufactured “us vs. them” vote-pumping narrative based on ideology or whatever. And I just… can’t. I don’t have the interest and I’m on a deadline, and this bullshit is even more stale and stupid now than it was the several other times it was attempted recently, with regard to genre awards.
-John Scalzi, August 7, 2017
SECOND UPDATE: It looks like the Dragon Con administrators aren't letting nominees withdraw from the Dragon Awards ballot. Welcome to Thunderdome!

And don't forget to vote!

42 comments:

  1. Looks like John has withdrawn Brian. You'll need to think of some other reason why people should vote for your book.

    I still have yet to be informed by SJW Central Command of our grand plot to converge the Dragon Awards. I assume the letter is in the mail.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. People can vote for whoever they want.

      No matter who gets the award at this point, I just won.

      Thanks for helping.

      Delete
    2. The value of an award comes from the status of the award. Do you think this has *helped* the status of the Dragon Awards?

      Would you not feel happier if you had beaten John Scalzi in a simple contest of books? More to the point, given you already have a Dragon Award, would you not want the status of the award to grow in general?

      Just some thoughts while I await my apparently delayed marching orders from SJW HQ.

      Delete
    3. "Do you think this has *helped* the status of the Dragon Awards?"

      Considering what Scalzi did to the Hugos and the wretched quality of his nominated book? Yes, immeasurably.

      "Would you not feel happier if you had beaten John Scalzi in a simple contest of books?"

      No


      Delete
    4. I'll vote for The Secret Kings because I genuinely loved the book.

      Delete
    5. @Pat D.

      I appreciate your support!

      Delete
    6. Yeah, I'll be voting for the Secret Kings because it's great fiction. If you want philosophical/metaphysical depth it's up there with Frank Herbert or Greg Bear.

      Delete
  2. They should vote for the book because Brian is an amazingly talented writer and it's a great story? That's all I needed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YES! If that's what a voter thinks that is exactly how they should vote for something.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for reading, Brenden. I appreciate your support!

      Delete
    3. I voted for Brian on that basis too, but if I hadn't, my vote would have been just as valid. Just like when the SJW's no-awarded Jerry Pournelle because he had the audacity to work with Vox. You do not get to tell others what is or is not a valid reason for a vote.

      Delete
    4. "You do not get to tell others what is or is not a valid reason for a vote."

      That's the difference between tradpub and indie. They try to tell their customers what to like. We work for our readers :)

      Delete
    5. So, Chris, let's break down your comment.

      1) Everyone's vote counts
      2) A majority voted Pournelle below no award
      3) It's not ok to tell others what to vote for.

      So what's the problem?

      Delete
    6. It's ok, just don't pretend you are voting on quality. Admit (like Scalzi did) that the vote was a big fu to vox

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. Chris, please stop telling others what is or is not a valid reason for a vote.

      Delete
    9. Soos,
      You seem to have a reading comprehension issue. I didn't say anything about who to vote for or why you should cast your vote that way. That's entirely up you. I'm just asking you not be a lying ass about the whole thing (yes, I know for an SJW, that might be difficult) and pretend it's about the quality when it really isn't. If people think Vox is repugnant enough to diss an SF legend, that's up to them. Just be honest about it.

      Delete
    10. "YES! If that's what a voter thinks that is exactly how they should vote for something."

      Wow, what a novel idea. Imagine how different the Hugos might have been had people applied that theory. If they had started doing that a decade or so ago, there never would have been any puppies. Good luck changing gears, CHORFs.

      Delete
    11. // Imagine how different the Hugos might have been had people applied that theory. //

      They did. I certainly did.

      What the Pups couldn't cope with is that people did that instead of voting for what Brad T and Vox D said they should vote for.

      :)

      Delete
    12. Sure, you burnt your own city and it was a moral victory. Well done.

      Delete
  3. "there's a rich vein of popular disgust for Scalzi that I've only begun tapping into."

    Vox Day's been at it for years with no effect, but I'm sure you'll do better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brian

      Forgive my innocence but I hadn't realized that there was popular disgust with Scalzi. Is that because he's 'taken' livelihoods from up and coming writers? Or something else (i.e. sucky stories?)
      Also why exactly did he withdraw from the Dragon award? Was it because he'd have his head and other body parts handed to him?
      xavier

      Delete
    2. Scalzi is the poster boy for the SJW convergence of science fiction. He's a decent midlist writer, but Tor keeps trying to push him as an A-lister because he has the right politics.

      He withdrew from the Dragon Award because he was afraid that his book would lose to mine.

      Delete


    3. Thanks. So Scalzi's a decent writer but no Edgar Rice Burroughs or Lovecraft.
      Got

      xavier

      Delete
    4. Scalzi is also the poster boy for how to alienate people on Twitter. Condescending snark-athons are not how you gain fans.

      Which is interesting, since on Facebook, when he is on another author's feed, like, say John Ringo's, he comes across as a normal guy.

      Delete
    5. "Condescending snark-athons are not how you gain fans."

      As Collapsing Empire's lackluster sales demonstrate.

      Delete
  4. You've got my vote. Secret Kings was immensely enjoyable, and it challenges readers to leave the comfort of by the numbers scifi on offer elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just purchased the 3 books in the series from the link you threw up (good marketing BTW). Also signed up to vote (will have to cram reading in so I actually am voting for something I read).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the read and the marketing feedback. Enjoy!

      Delete
  6. Grundstok should pay attention to how Scalzi manages to fulfill his multi-book contract over the next few years and then compare Dress-Man's sales year-to-year.

    My bet is on the data being ... enlightening.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Since the marketing plan for Collapsing Empire was derailed by a quickly made parody, it's possible Vox is doing more damage to Scalzi than is being admitted. The SF community has changed quite a bit since Tor was able to make him a star. Buying him a Hugo won't be enough to push sales enough to justify his advances.

      Delete
    2. I suspect that both of you guys are close to the mark.

      Delete
  7. I admit, I wasn't expecting this. The fact that Scalzi withdrew his book from the ballot suggests a couple of things:

    1. He's afraid you'll beat him, which I consider likely. If you did beat him, he'd have a hard time living down the humiliation. An indie upstart who breaks all the rules collapsed a mighty empire! Can't have *that.* So the book is pulled.

    2. He's not as stupid as he sometimes acts. He knows damned well that if he engages with you, he'll be pulling the Streisand chain in a big way. People who've never heard of you before will wander over to Amazon and take a look at SK just to see what the shouting's about. Bang! Brian has another thousand paying readers and a significantly higher profile.

    3. Given 1 & 2, he may have come to the WOPR conclusion: The only way to win is not to play.

    Pity, in some respects. His self-esteem could use a little recalibration.

    And damn, what're we gonna do with all this popcorn?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Based on how key figures on both sides are talking behind closed doors, I'd say there's little remaining doubt that you're right, Jeff.

      To amplify your point 1 above, there's talk that someone may have given PNH an inside tip on which way the wind was blowing. Not confidential voting data per se, but something along the lines of, "looking at the nominating votes and the volume and velocity of final ballots, it doesn't look good for Collapsing Empire."

      To put it another way, Scalzi is under a multimillion dollar contract that he's behind on, and the first book on the contract underperformed. It's doubtful he made the decision to withdraw all on his own.

      Regarding point 2, you're right again. Scalzi is a master of self-promotion. Declining the nomination was him going into brand protection mode. I'm as surprised as you are that he picked now, of all times, to do it.

      However, like all SJWs, Scalzi labors under a high degree of solipsism. They--as evidenced by some of the commenters here--honestly can't fathom the notion that anyone might have an objective besides winning the award. By withdrawing, Scalzi gave me exactly what I wanted. He can't win, but nor will he face the humiliation of losing. He's satisfied. I'm satisfied. It's the optimal outcome for everyone.

      Delete
  8. This is definitely a interesting development given how HARD the mainstream were pushing Scalzi's book.

    The press in general, (after completely ignoring the Dragon Awards last year) seems to be following the predictions. They tried to downplay the importance of the Dragon's, now they want it for their team.

    Also kind of shocked how many people don't realize author's banting on each other is a time honored marketing technique.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The difference this year is that the CHORFs now realize the Hugos are dying, so they need a ship to jump to.

      After ignoring the Dragons last year, they thought, "A bunch of small-time punks won last year, so this time we'll send in our star players and dominate the field."

      That's why they made sure their buddies in the media were watching to document their victory. It's also why I knew it was crucial to get out the vote and stop the entryists before they got a foot in the door.

      Thankfully, the voters have made it clear they don't want the Hugos 2.0. Scalzi didn't want to lose in front of his friends in the press, so he got out. Jemisin is likewise expected to back out any time now.

      They got the message loud and clear: your dwindling clique doesn't control the Dragon Awards. The fans do.

      Delete
    2. And Jemisin's withdrawl is perfectly predictable: "I found out the Dragon's are frequented by some of the most hateful racist bigots. I couldn't in good conscience remain in the running."

      Social Justice is a script that writes itself, while trying to write Civilization out of existence.

      Delete
    3. Re: Jemisin. We could translate that as "I was advised that there's no way my material could win a Dragon right now, so rather than be seen getting flattened by indies, I'd better refuse."

      Delete