Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #493802 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-06-19 20:31 -0500 |
| Last post | 2018-06-20 21:41 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 88 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written
"The Vote is in" by David Weber Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-06-19 20:31 -0500
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber -dsr- <dsr-usenet@randomstring.org> - 2018-06-20 09:23 -0400
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> - 2018-06-20 09:54 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-20 17:26 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-20 18:22 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-20 19:37 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> - 2018-06-21 10:06 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-21 17:13 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> - 2018-06-22 10:32 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-22 17:47 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-22 17:49 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 12:40 -0500
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-20 19:18 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-20 20:15 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-20 20:40 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> - 2018-06-20 15:24 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-20 22:33 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:10 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2018-06-20 17:43 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:22 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber synthius2002@yahoo.com - 2018-06-27 11:24 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber tsbrueni@gmail.com - 2018-07-13 06:24 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-07-13 09:15 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2018-06-21 09:43 -0500
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> - 2018-06-21 15:56 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-20 22:26 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> - 2018-06-20 15:33 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 16:12 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-21 00:05 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-21 01:10 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 21:47 -0400
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2018-06-20 19:16 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:19 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2018-06-21 02:22 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:19 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2018-06-20 17:44 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:24 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-21 17:02 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-21 17:37 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 13:31 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-22 13:35 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-22 15:52 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jerry Brown <jerry@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> - 2018-06-22 17:45 +0100
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 17:00 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-22 17:05 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 17:39 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 14:23 -0400
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 21:08 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Lawrence Watt-Evans <misenchantedpress@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 00:01 -0400
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-06-22 19:46 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-22 13:24 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-22 14:06 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-22 21:27 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie@sometimes.sessile.org> - 2018-06-23 10:08 +0100
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 21:10 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-06-22 19:45 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-06-24 23:14 -0600
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-25 14:15 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-06-24 23:13 -0600
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:28 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> - 2018-06-22 17:41 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 10:43 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-22 21:30 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 05:36 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2018-06-23 10:49 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 18:50 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-06-24 12:25 -0600
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 19:17 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-24 14:11 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 00:47 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-06-24 23:12 -0600
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Ninapenda Jibini <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 05:57 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 06:16 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 10:01 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 10:32 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 10:43 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2018-06-25 17:47 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 11:08 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2018-06-26 00:09 -0600
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2018-06-25 14:42 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber synthius2002@yahoo.com - 2018-06-27 11:22 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> - 2018-06-21 09:43 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2018-06-22 07:04 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2018-06-22 07:21 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber mvp@web1.calweb.com (Mike Van Pelt) - 2018-06-22 23:46 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber MIKEN <burdsman35@gmail.com> - 2018-06-20 18:31 -0700
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) - 2018-06-21 01:46 +0000
Re: "The Vote is in" by David Weber Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2018-06-20 21:41 -0700
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-19 20:31 -0500 |
| Subject | "The Vote is in" by David Weber |
| Message-ID | <pgcapv$rv1$3@dont-email.me> |
"The Vote is in" by David Weber
http://www.davidweber.net/posts/468-concarolinaspetitiondone.html
"Our petition in favor of the policy on guest invitations for
ConCarolinas enunciated by Jada Hope at the closing ceremonies of the
2018 convention is now closed."
"That policy, simply stated, is that ConCarolinas will issue apolitical
invitations to genre-appropriate guests and that guests, once invited,
will not be disinvited because of political hate campaigns waged online
after the invitations are announced."
Wow squared !
Lynn
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -dsr- <dsr-usenet@randomstring.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 09:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <slrnpiklaf.lmc.dsr-usenet@randomstring.org> |
| In reply to | #493802 |
On 2018-06-20, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote: > "The Vote is in" by David Weber > http://www.davidweber.net/posts/468-concarolinaspetitiondone.html > > "Our petition in favor of the policy on guest invitations for > ConCarolinas enunciated by Jada Hope at the closing ceremonies of the > 2018 convention is now closed." > > "That policy, simply stated, is that ConCarolinas will issue apolitical > invitations to genre-appropriate guests and that guests, once invited, > will not be disinvited because of political hate campaigns waged online > after the invitations are announced." > > Wow squared ! Yes, it's amazing how whiny Weber has become. Not completely unexpected, though, as I think it's endemic to elder authors who have become used to getting their own way on everything. -dsr-
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 09:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <robertaw-479639.09544820062018@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #493845 |
In article <slrnpiklaf.lmc.dsr-usenet@randomstring.org>, -dsr- <dsr-usenet@randomstring.org> wrote: > On 2018-06-20, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote: > > "The Vote is in" by David Weber > > http://www.davidweber.net/posts/468-concarolinaspetitiondone.html > > > > "Our petition in favor of the policy on guest invitations for > > ConCarolinas enunciated by Jada Hope at the closing ceremonies of the > > 2018 convention is now closed." > > > > "That policy, simply stated, is that ConCarolinas will issue apolitical > > invitations to genre-appropriate guests and that guests, once invited, > > will not be disinvited because of political hate campaigns waged online > > after the invitations are announced." > > > > Wow squared ! > > > Yes, it's amazing how whiny Weber has become. Not completely unexpected, > though, as I think it's endemic to elder authors who have become used > to getting their own way on everything. > Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. -- "We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement." Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. ‹----------------------------------------------------- Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 17:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #493855 |
On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? > And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to cons, are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? -- Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com Read John Grant's book, Corrupted Science: http://a.co/9UsUoGu Dedicated to ... Carl Fink!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 18:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #493857 |
In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. > >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to cons, >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely hypothetically, didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send any women planning to attend. -- My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/ My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/ My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Carl Fink <carlf@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 19:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnpilb83.5hd.carlf@panix5.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #493866 |
On 2018-06-20, James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote: > In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, > Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: >>On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >> >>> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >>> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. >> >>Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to cons, >>are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead >>be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? > > I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely hypothetically, > didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length > about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be > bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send > any women planning to attend. Thanks. I don't speak for any current con, the one I chaired being on indefinite hiatus, but on my personal behalf: nope. Not going to happen. -- Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com Read John Grant's book, Corrupted Science: http://a.co/9UsUoGu Dedicated to ... Carl Fink!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 10:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <robertaw-FD1D25.10062121062018@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #493866 |
In article <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com>, jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: > In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, > Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: > >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > > > >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? > >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. > > > >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to cons, > >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead > >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? > > I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely hypothetically, > didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length > about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be > bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send > any women planning to attend. First of all, speaking hypothetically, there is a difference between you hearing this individual saying that and a friend who mentioned that a friend heard that this individual said that (or was at least in a room where it was said). And secondly, I have little sympathy of people who are too lazy to do their job properly. -- "We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement." Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. ‹----------------------------------------------------- Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-21 17:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pggmb0$k97$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #493957 |
In article <robertaw-FD1D25.10062121062018@news.individual.net>, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >In article <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com>, > jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: > >> In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, >> Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: >> >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >> >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. >> > >> >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to cons, >> >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead >> >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? >> >> I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely hypothetically, >> didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length >> about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be >> bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send >> any women planning to attend. > >First of all, speaking hypothetically, there is a difference between you >hearing this individual saying that and a friend who mentioned that a >friend heard that this individual said that (or was at least in a room >where it was said). And secondly, I have little sympathy of people who >are too lazy to do their job properly. > How do you feel about the hypothetical case where the person was kind enough to have bragged online that he called someone "Tits"? I do admit I'd expect a concom to put in at least as much effort researching guests as I currently do accepting friend requests on facebook. -- My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/ My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/ My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-22 10:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <robertaw-BFD22A.10325822062018@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #493958 |
In article <pggmb0$k97$1@reader1.panix.com>, jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: > In article <robertaw-FD1D25.10062121062018@news.individual.net>, > Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > >In article <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com>, > > jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: > > > >> In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, > >> Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: > >> >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? > >> >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid > >> >> reason. > >> > > >> >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to > >> >cons, > >> >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead > >> >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? > >> > >> I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely > >> hypothetically, > >> didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length > >> about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be > >> bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send > >> any women planning to attend. > > > >First of all, speaking hypothetically, there is a difference between you > >hearing this individual saying that and a friend who mentioned that a > >friend heard that this individual said that (or was at least in a room > >where it was said). And secondly, I have little sympathy of people who > >are too lazy to do their job properly. > > > How do you feel about the hypothetical case where the person was kind > enough to have bragged online that he called someone "Tits"? > That does indicate a significant level of innate rudeness. Though, still speaking hypothetically, how annoying had that someone had been to the person in question should not be ignored. > I do admit I'd expect a concom to put in at least as much effort > researching guests as I currently do accepting friend requests on > facebook. I am somewhat curious on how much time you spend for that? 1 minute? 10 minutes? an hour? -- "We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement." Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. ‹----------------------------------------------------- Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-22 17:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgjcof$34s$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #494035 |
In article <robertaw-BFD22A.10325822062018@news.individual.net>, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >In article <pggmb0$k97$1@reader1.panix.com>, > jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: > >> In article <robertaw-FD1D25.10062121062018@news.individual.net>, >> Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >> >In article <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com>, >> > jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: >> > >> >> In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, >> >> Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: >> >> >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >> >> >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid >> >> >> reason. >> >> > >> >> >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to >> >> >cons, >> >> >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead >> >> >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? >> >> >> >> I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely >> >> hypothetically, >> >> didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length >> >> about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be >> >> bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send >> >> any women planning to attend. >> > >> >First of all, speaking hypothetically, there is a difference between you >> >hearing this individual saying that and a friend who mentioned that a >> >friend heard that this individual said that (or was at least in a room >> >where it was said). And secondly, I have little sympathy of people who >> >are too lazy to do their job properly. >> > >> How do you feel about the hypothetical case where the person was kind >> enough to have bragged online that he called someone "Tits"? >> > >That does indicate a significant level of innate rudeness. Though, still >speaking hypothetically, how annoying had that someone had been to the >person in question should not be ignored. > >> I do admit I'd expect a concom to put in at least as much effort >> researching guests as I currently do accepting friend requests on >> facebook. > >I am somewhat curious on how much time you spend for that? 1 minute? 10 >minutes? an hour? > I use a default to no system so if I look at their profile and fail to see a logical reason why they'd friend me, I pass. Someone whose profile is blank? Immediate pass. -- My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/ My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/ My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-22 17:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgjcrs$sqh$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #494044 |
In article <pgjcof$34s$1@reader1.panix.com>, James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote: >In article <robertaw-BFD22A.10325822062018@news.individual.net>, >Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >>In article <pggmb0$k97$1@reader1.panix.com>, >> jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: >> >>> In article <robertaw-FD1D25.10062121062018@news.individual.net>, >>> Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >>> >In article <pge61b$41d$1@reader1.panix.com>, >>> > jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) wrote: >>> > >>> >> In article <slrnpil3h8.60e.carlf@panix5.panix.com>, >>> >> Carl Fink <carl@finknetwork.com> wrote: >>> >> >On 2018-06-20, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >>> >> >> And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid >>> >> >> reason. >>> >> > >>> >> >Not sure how you mean that. As a person who used to invite guests to >>> >> >cons, >>> >> >are you suggesting that I should be forbidden to pick guests, and instead >>> >> >be compelled to choose based on some sort of randomizer? >>> >> >>> >> I believe the thesis here is if a concom, speaking entirely >>> >> hypothetically, >>> >> didn't do due diligence and invited a guest who had bragged at length >>> >> about referring to another guest as "Tits", then the concom should be >>> >> bound to honour the invitation regardless of the message this might send >>> >> any women planning to attend. >>> > >>> >First of all, speaking hypothetically, there is a difference between you >>> >hearing this individual saying that and a friend who mentioned that a >>> >friend heard that this individual said that (or was at least in a room >>> >where it was said). And secondly, I have little sympathy of people who >>> >are too lazy to do their job properly. >>> > >>> How do you feel about the hypothetical case where the person was kind >>> enough to have bragged online that he called someone "Tits"? >>> >> >>That does indicate a significant level of innate rudeness. Though, still >>speaking hypothetically, how annoying had that someone had been to the >>person in question should not be ignored. >> >>> I do admit I'd expect a concom to put in at least as much effort >>> researching guests as I currently do accepting friend requests on >>> facebook. >> >>I am somewhat curious on how much time you spend for that? 1 minute? 10 >>minutes? an hour? >> >I use a default to no system so if I look at their profile and fail >to see a logical reason why they'd friend me, I pass. Someone whose >profile is blank? Immediate pass. > Sometimes this backfires. I almost didn't friend a co-worker because I didn't recognize them with my work place cognitive filters off. -- My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/ My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/ My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 12:40 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pge3i7$l1b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #493855 |
On 6/20/2018 11:54 AM, Robert Woodward wrote: > In article <slrnpiklaf.lmc.dsr-usenet@randomstring.org>, > -dsr- <dsr-usenet@randomstring.org> wrote: > >> On 2018-06-20, Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote: >>> "The Vote is in" by David Weber >>> http://www.davidweber.net/posts/468-concarolinaspetitiondone.html >>> >>> "Our petition in favor of the policy on guest invitations for >>> ConCarolinas enunciated by Jada Hope at the closing ceremonies of the >>> 2018 convention is now closed." >>> >>> "That policy, simply stated, is that ConCarolinas will issue apolitical >>> invitations to genre-appropriate guests and that guests, once invited, >>> will not be disinvited because of political hate campaigns waged online >>> after the invitations are announced." >>> >>> Wow squared ! >> >> >> Yes, it's amazing how whiny Weber has become. Not completely unexpected, >> though, as I think it's endemic to elder authors who have become used >> to getting their own way on everything. >> > > Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? > And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. Larry Correia was disinvited from whatever the Origins CON is. http://monsterhunternation.com/2018/05/30/origins-sent-out-yet-another-message-about-me-and-my-response/ and http://monsterhunternation.com/2018/05/15/statement-concerning-my-being-disinvited-as-the-guest-of-honor-for-origins-game-fair/ Lynn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 19:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com> |
| In reply to | #493855 |
In article <robertaw-479639.09544820062018@news.individual.net>, Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote: > >Just how many people have been disinvited from cons over the years? >And why? IMHO, nothing short of criminal charges would be a valid reason. I don't know about *valid* reasons, but "never bathing from one year to the next" and "walking through the halls talking crazy to yourself in an excessively loud voice" sound like *understandable* (even if invalid) reasons. And whether "hate speech" and "uninvited touching" can be criminal charges depends on whether one can bring enough evidence to bring a criminal case against them. In the end, it's up to the ConComm to establish boundaries and publish them, and then to judge any complaints on a case-by-case basis. DunDraCon isn't your orindary SF con; for one thing, it's a gaming con, and for another, the same committee (modulo committee members quitting or dying and other members coming on*) has been running it for the past forty-odd years. We put a harrassment policy up on the webpage a couple years ago, and reprint it in the program book, because it seemed necessary. Our registration system is heavily computerized (all home-grown), and one of the things it has is an option for rejecting a membership if the name is flagged as someone we don't ever want to have on our premises ever again. The set of such people has one member at present, a guy whose known modus operandi was groping underage girls. If he comes in and tries to register, the terminal freezes and a message comes up telling the volunteer to call Hal, or me, or our daughter Meg, or one of our senior Reg people who knows what it's about. Hal comments, "We've never actually used it, because he never tried to register again, and I believe he got into legal trouble in L.A. and is now a guest of the State." But if anybody else acts sufficiently like a jerk, into the database he'll go. ______ Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains: Steve Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars organizer. -- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 20:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pgeckp$qvj$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #493870 |
In article <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com>, Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote: >Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains: Steve >Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars organizer. Huh. I just bought the new RQ. Waiting for the hardcover to review it. -- My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/ My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/ My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 20:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pAn2rI.22Mu@kithrup.com> |
| In reply to | #493872 |
In article <pgeckp$qvj$1@reader1.panix.com>, James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote: >In article <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com>, >Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote: > >>Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains: Steve >>Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars organizer. > >Huh. I just bought the new RQ. Waiting for the hardcover to review it. Um ... the _Runequest_ I'm talking about is an old tabletop RPG, not a book. Are we on the same page? -- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 15:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f4c7374d-b86c-4de8-83df-d85a70f11074@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #493876 |
On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 7:00:07 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > In article <pgeckp$qvj$1@reader1.panix.com>, > James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote: > >In article <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com>, > >Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote: > > > >>Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains: Steve > >>Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars organizer. > > > >Huh. I just bought the new RQ. Waiting for the hardcover to review it. > > Um ... the _Runequest_ I'm talking about is an old tabletop RPG, > not a book. Are we on the same page? RQ 7th edition has been released as a pdf, with the dead tree edition out soon. https://www.chaosium.com/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-pdf/ You'll note Steve Perrin's name is on the cover. I've no idea whether that's because he's still actively involved or whether there's enough legacy material that they have to include him. Most RPGs make their money by constantly coming up with new editions in the hope that their players will go out and re-buy everything. My current game is using Pathfinder, which supposedly has a new edition coming out next year. Pathfinder is very unusual in that it's only had one edition and is ten years old. Paizo, the makers, have made their money in producing adventures paths (campaigns) for it and selling those, rather than upgrading the system. Given that they've produced over of these twenty and we're just about to start the second(*), I suspect we'll stick with it for some time. (*) Strange Aeons, GM'd by me. As you can tell from the title, its very Lovecraft influenced. The campaign starts with the PCs waking up in an asylum with no memories of who they are or how they got there. Then it goes downhill for them. -Moriarty
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 22:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pAn7zy.8FB@kithrup.com> |
| In reply to | #493886 |
In article <f4c7374d-b86c-4de8-83df-d85a70f11074@googlegroups.com>, Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> wrote: >On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 7:00:07 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote: >> In article <pgeckp$qvj$1@reader1.panix.com>, >> James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote: >> >In article <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com>, >> >Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote: >> > >> >>Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains: Steve >> >>Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars organizer. >> > >> >Huh. I just bought the new RQ. Waiting for the hardcover to review it. >> >> Um ... the _Runequest_ I'm talking about is an old tabletop RPG, >> not a book. Are we on the same page? > >RQ 7th edition has been released as a pdf, with the dead tree edition out soon. > >https://www.chaosium.com/runequest-roleplaying-in-glorantha-pdf/ > >You'll note Steve Perrin's name is on the cover. I've no idea whether >that's because he's still actively involved or whether there's enough >legacy material that they have to include him. Neither do I. I'll ask him next time I see him ... which might be next February. (Unlike the rest of the committee, he lives in Southern California, so we don't see each other often.) -- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 16:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA907A49D8E3FCtaustingmail@69.16.179.42> |
| In reply to | #493886 |
Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> wrote in
news:f4c7374d-b86c-4de8-83df-d85a70f11074@googlegroups.com:
> On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 7:00:07 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt
> wrote:
>> In article <pgeckp$qvj$1@reader1.panix.com>,
>> James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
>> >In article <pAMyyA.1u20@kithrup.com>,
>> >Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Of the original DunDraCon Committee, one member remains:
>> >>Steve Perrin, co-creator of _Runequest_ and current Seminars
>> >>organizer.
>> >
>> >Huh. I just bought the new RQ. Waiting for the hardcover to
>> >review it.
>>
>> Um ... the _Runequest_ I'm talking about is an old tabletop
>> RPG, not a book. Are we on the same page?
>
> RQ 7th edition has been released as a pdf, with the dead tree
> edition out soon.
Nearly all role-playing games are published as some form of book,
certainly. Though, among independent publishers, e-books are *far*
more popular than paper editions.
> Most RPGs make their money by constantly coming up with new
> editions in the hope that their players will go out and re-buy
> everything.
>
Historically, the real money is in rule books and expansions for
them, not adventures. Adventures tend to be lower page count, low
price, and often low margin. But necessary, because the market
doesn't much like games with no supplementary material available.
It was my impression that was the whole idea behind the Open Gaming
License when Wizards first started it: to shift the cost and
trouble of creating and publishing the low profit supplementary
stuff onto others, while WotC concentrated on the far more
profitable rule books. (And it worked.)
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hamish.laws@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-20 17:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ab674fb2-4993-481f-bdb5-cf9b6adc91a1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #493906 |
On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 9:11:00 AM UTC+10, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote: > Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> wrote in > news:f4c7374d-b86c-4de8-83df-d85a70f11074@googlegroups.com: > > > Most RPGs make their money by constantly coming up with new > > editions in the hope that their players will go out and re-buy > > everything. > > > Historically, the real money is in rule books and expansions for > them, not adventures. Adventures tend to be lower page count, low > price, and often low margin. That's certainly true for a lot of the games Pathfinder does seem to be a bit different with a 64 page adventure being released each month as part of an adventure path (normally meant to go from 1st level to 15th level or so over 6 modules) and a lot of people subscribing to that (plus free standing modules and pathfinder society scenarios). Generally it helps that the adventures are pretty good They've got subscriptions as well which a lot of people use so people have to take action not to buy an adventure path... > But necessary, because the market > doesn't much like games with no supplementary material available. > It was my impression that was the whole idea behind the Open Gaming > License when Wizards first started it: to shift the cost and > trouble of creating and publishing the low profit supplementary > stuff onto others, while WotC concentrated on the far more > profitable rule books. (And it worked.) > That certainly matches what I heard at the time, Wizards produced very few adventures for 3.0. They also licensed out Dragon and Dungeon (to Paizo who then produced pathfinder once the licence was removed and people were unhappy with 4th ed)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-06-22 10:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA909697E93634taustingmail@69.16.179.43> |
| In reply to | #493914 |
hamish.laws@gmail.com wrote in
news:ab674fb2-4993-481f-bdb5-cf9b6adc91a1@googlegroups.com:
> On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 9:11:00 AM UTC+10, Jibini Kula
> Tumbili Kujisalimisha wrote:
>> Moriarty <blues95@ivillage.com> wrote in
>> news:f4c7374d-b86c-4de8-83df-d85a70f11074@googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Most RPGs make their money by constantly coming up with new
>> > editions in the hope that their players will go out and
>> > re-buy everything.
>> >
>> Historically, the real money is in rule books and expansions
>> for them, not adventures. Adventures tend to be lower page
>> count, low price, and often low margin.
>
> That's certainly true for a lot of the games
> Pathfinder does seem to be a bit different with a 64 page
> adventure being released each month as part of an adventure path
> (normally meant to go from 1st level to 15th level or so over 6
> modules) and a lot of people subscribing to that (plus free
> standing modules and pathfinder society scenarios). Generally it
> helps that the adventures are pretty good They've got
> subscriptions as well which a lot of people use so people have
> to take action not to buy an adventure path...
Yeah, they seem to have carved out an niche that's a very notable
exception to the usual rules. Good for them.
>
>> But necessary, because the market
>> doesn't much like games with no supplementary material
>> available. It was my impression that was the whole idea behind
>> the Open Gaming License when Wizards first started it: to shift
>> the cost and trouble of creating and publishing the low profit
>> supplementary stuff onto others, while WotC concentrated on the
>> far more profitable rule books. (And it worked.)
>>
> That certainly matches what I heard at the time, Wizards
> produced very few adventures for 3.0. They also licensed out
> Dragon and Dungeon (to Paizo who then produced pathfinder once
> the licence was removed and people were unhappy with 4th ed)
>
D&D isn't the all-consuming center of the hobby any more, and
hasn't been for a while. It's hard to tell how much Hasbro really
cares.
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written
csiph-web