Section B outlines Matthew Johnson’s creative attempt to expand the complaint from a single violation of the Twitter feed guidelines to cover my own blog posts here and at Black Gate, the comments made by commenters on my blog, and comments made by commenters on other blogs.
B. Continuing pattern of actions prejudicial to SFWA
This section of the report examines the evidence on the question of whether Theodore Beale has engaged in ongoing and deliberate efforts to disrupt SFWA’s mission and to undermine the credibility of the organization both among the membership and the general public that did not occur in SFWA controlled spaces or in ways that directly violate SFWA bylaws and policies.
While they may not be in direct violation of SFWA bylaws or policies, they may be taken as evidence that Beale’s actions and continued membership in SFWA pose a significant risk of imminent and serious harm to the organization.
Three general issues will be addressed in this section:
1. Attacks on members
1.1. Personal attacks
1.2. Threats by commenters
2. Attacks on the reputation and integrity of the organization
2.1. Accusations of corruption
3. Effect of Beale’s continued membership on SFWA
Needless to say, as will become clear, the “attacks on members” are, for the most part, responses to their attacks on me. Matthew Johnson mostly omits that minor fact from his “comprehensive” report; even when he does mention that a current board member openly threatened me he attempts to minimize her actions. He fails to mention, of course, that the same member also attacked me in the SFWA channel known as the SFWA discussion forums.
Unlike the previous section, where he never got around to the fifth general issue, Johnson does actually address the three issues raised in this section, none of which, by his own admission, have anything to do with any violation of SFWA bylaws or policies.
Now, there is nothing I could do that could possibly undermine SFWA’s mission to promote the publishing of science fiction as much as the Board’s determination to expand that mission into matters that are of no legitimate concern to the organization. There is nothing I could say that would undermine the credibility of the organization more than the repeated awarding of Nebulas to trivial works of fiction by mediocre authors.
On the subject of SFWA’s credibility, I think the decision to publicly assert that the eminently forgettable sixth novel in the Saga of the Skolian Empire was the Best Novel of 2001 permanently undermined the credibility of the organization as a legitimate writer’s association.
“The beautiful young noblewoman Kamoj Quanta Argali rules a declining
province on a distant planet that has lost the high technology of its
original colonists. To save her people, Kamoj has contracted to marry
Jax Ironbridge, the moody, unpredictable ruler of a prosperous land.
Then a mysterious stranger from another world proposes a marriage that
neither honor nor law will allow Kamoj to refuse.”
The Quantum Rose
#1,989,497 in Books
#323,201 Paid in Kindle Store
2001 Nebula Award winner for Best Novel
SFWA was once an organization that nominated bestselling science fiction authors like Jerry Pournelle and Mike Resnick for its highest awards. Now it is an organization full of mediocre and derivative writers who are openly attempting to drive those authors out of the organization. One cannot undermine a nonexistent credibility.
At this point, not even Hitler can salvage the SFWA’s credibility. Though I do look forward to eventually hearing about the copious new rules, policies, and guidelines that will soon be going into effect in order to belatedly defend it, especially the very important rule about not posting Hitler parody videos that refer to the organization.
§ 107 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted
work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by
any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as
criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies
for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of