Cease Fire Proposal

This is a guest post by Sanford Begley, longtime MGC commentator and Not-a-writer. As a bystander who has been dragged into the inner workings, he’s got a very different perspective. 

Hi folks! Amanda is a bit busy this week so I’m pinch hitting for her. No, nothing is wrong she just knew she would be too busy to give you the loving attention you deserve.

I’m going to do something short and a little less caustic than my normal mode. I am going to call for a ceasefire in the war between the SJWs and the right leaning writers. Actually I’m calling for a unilateral ceasefire. BTW for anyone who hasn’t caught up to the acronyms SJW stands for Social Justice Warrior. Well, at least they have been using that to describe themselves. Lately they are starting to see that it is becoming a term of derision and are trying to distance themselves from it. Simple Jerk Whiners…err excuse me Social Justice Warriors are those who wish to make SF/Fantasy more inclusive by kicking out all the straight white men, and the women who love them. For practical purposes that means any man to the right of Ralph Nader.

Now, as to why I want to call a unilateral ceasefire it is strategic thinking. I’ve been looking at them for a while now and they only get traction when opposed. Larry Correia drove more to their bastion of Worldcon than they ever had before. A certain Frau Buhlert got more traffic driven to her site than she had any experience of simply because she attacked the Mad Geniuses. They are really nothing without someone to rant against and they will use any excuse to rant. I propose ignoring them. When someone attacks a scientist at the cometary landing because his shirt was an homage to the pulp covers of SF/Fantasy just roll your eyes and ignore them. When they call Portuguese men like Larry Correia straight white males with privilege smile at their silly antics. When they call Cedar Sanderson a dried up old biddy laugh out loud at their idiocy and go on with life.

The simple fact is that they are all failures and angry about it. Sarah, Larry, Dave, Amanda, Kate, and eventually Cedar will go on writing good stuff and selling. All the Mad Geniuses have the talent and skill to live off their writing eventually. Life is slowing some of them down but they will be able to live off of writing if they aren’t already. The SJWs? not so much.

That is the goal after all isn’t it? To make money doing what you love? So the next time someone starts screaming about misogyny or micro-aggression just pat them on their little pointy heads and go on with your writing and living. Slugs are below your notice after all


  1. +1

    I agree in spirit, but would add one point.

    A response to correct and for the record is needed. No long drawn out, rolling around in the mud, fights.

    The same advice as is given for those that get a bad review.

    1. This. Also, endorsements of Larry and Sarah when they issue stinging retorts to the usual suspects. Larry argues with … special children in order to provide ammunition and amusement to his readers. Sarah does the same thing. Both of them also do it to let the rest of our tribe know that they’re not alone out there. It’s easy to be intimidated when you don’t have anyone to watch your back, and I’m fairly certain we’ve all been there at some point. A simple, “SJW X is an idiot because P, D, and Q, and I’m not afraid to say it,” will be enough to fulfill all of those purposes without paying their antics greater attention than they’re worth.

      1. I think those might be best served on our respective champion’s walls, thereby denying traffic to the SJWs

      1. The “High Minded Approach” has been nothing but a failure from day one of this Culture War.

        The HMA has been the go-to strategy for decades. Look at where we are as a society and a culture. The HMA is how we got here. It is *not* how we fix this.

        It has never worked. It can not work. Much like commiescumism, it is absolutely contrary to human behavior.

        The HMA has its place in the overall fight, but not as an overall approach.
        The domestic enemy fights in a broad band strategy, we must do the same. Those inclined to use the HMA should do so. Those willing and able to get down in the sewers and gutters should also do so.

        The only competent strategy is to confront and contest on and in every avenue of approach possible by every means possible.
        This isn’t a school house debate. The domestic enemy are neither honorable nor integrity bound. They recognize no boundaries and do not limit themselves to actual true facts.

        This is a fight. It is a fight for everything of value.

  2. Highly endorse! MGC creates. That requires no defense, as it is unassailable. Perhaps others might not like what is being created; in that case, create something of your own. There may at one time been material limitations on what was written (not enough smooth rock, papyrus, sheep skins, whatever) but that is no longer the case. If we are to have a war, let it be a war that turns out literature that people read, not attack writers/others because reasons.
    As Joe Cocker, that great statesman and poet of the masses, once said: “Give peace a chance, and the whole world will rock and roll!” (Actually, it was more like :”Gi pe a cha, anna ho werl wi ro an ro-o-o-o-o!.”)

  3. To be silent can be construed to be assent. Have things reached the point that the last grear minority (single straight white men) must fight any and all incursions? After all we have ceded public discourse and every other form of entertainment. Must we yield here too?

    1. Oh I am not calling for surrender, rather not playing in the mud with the children. Do something to refute them that doesn’t confront them directly. For example, a fundraise/kickstarter to bring Our favorite comet lander to libertycon would be a way to fight them without ever acknowledging them directly

      1. I see your point. It just seems like every time we disengage we lose more ground. If this continues to be “not our hill to die on” we are going to run out of hills. I mean I see your point in not engaging in mud wrestling with pigs but at the same time I have an emotional need to respond as I’ve run out of cheeks. Do you see what I mean?

        1. Oh I understand but, I want to win, that means looking for their weaknesses and quit going against their strengths

          1. Their weakness? Mock them. Mercilessly.
            Don’t ignore them. Laugh at them. Get others to join in.
            Make them run home and cry into their pillow.

            I will not be honoring any ceasefire. For I know that they will not.

            1. Laughter can work, just avoid the screaming matches that are becoming common, their type of fight

              1. Q: How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
                A: THAT’S NOT FUNNY!

                They’re trying to frame things to be about them. Take that and leverage it so that it *is* about them, but in a way that pisses them off and doesn’t leave them good options of how to respond. Let them demonstrate to the world that they lack a sense of humor and any sense of self-awareness.

                Instapundit’s crack about them making a major event in space exploration about clothing drew blood. We need more of that.

                1. I’m partial to the “So, because of how he was dressed, he was asking for it?” argument myself.

                  Same vein, same event, both smack downs turning feminist narrative against them.

                  1. What I would have liked to see was for the individual targeted to get up in front of the cameras and say “On that great day for humanity I chose to wear a shirt glorifying powerful women. No woman depicted on that shirt would have needed to scream for help when attacked, they would just have dealt with it. If you find powerful women scary or distasteful, then there is no place for you on my team and you will do us all a service if you don’t even try to apply. Thank-you all.”

            2. Mock them and as far as possible destroy those that give into them. Cases in point: Mozilla, NASA. Those that fear the SJW to the point of doing their work for them should be taught that there are more fearsome people out there.

      2. Think about what you’re saying and the history of what you state as the proper course of behavior has gotten us over the last half century.

        On every point, the PCists have gained whatever ground they chose to gain. Without fail. Why?

        On every issue, the PCists have won, without fail. Why?

        Our country is being torn apart, from the inside, right in front of our faces, and anyone who challenges those doing the damage are accused loudly and constantly of being the ones doing the damage, and a great portion of the population submits to that twisted bullshit. Why?

        PCism is rampant in our education system. Children and young adults are routinely persecuted if they step outside the bounds of PCism in many of our schools, from elementary to university. Why?

        PCism is openly, aggressively and maliciously attacking the 1st Amend and, in the greater majority of our school systems has replaced the law of the land in its coercive indoctrination, and goes without any real challenge. Why?

        PCism is openly, aggressively and maliciously attacking the 2nd Amend under the guise of “Zero Tolerance Policy” (high schooler wears an NRA tee shirt? Kick em out of school! Child bites off chunks of a pop tart so that it resembles a pistol? Kick him out of school! A child brings an inch tall plastic soldier to school that has a bit of its molded plastic shaped like a rifle? Kick him out of school!, etc and so on in nearly endless lists) by indoctrinating youth into reacting with fear to even a vague representation of a firearm. And this only gets challenged by the individual parents who’s children become the most outrageous examples of coercive indoctrination. Why?

        *Read the quote again and maybe you’ll figure out why.

        Put the “stick to the moral high ground” into military strategy and try hard to justify it.

        Place your forces on discreet and non supporting high points. Watch each high point be surrounded and reduced at the leisure of the enemy. Demand all and everyone follow said tactics, knowing full well that said tactics have resulted in nothing but failure after failure, defeat after defeat.

        The time to actually fight was decades ago when this crap started.

        Right now, it’s easy enough to misconstrue this as only a limited battle in a limited space. It is not. It is all encompassing and for everything of value in our society. The SJWs and the PC drones have engaged in a war to the knife and the knife to the hilt.

        Fight back in every venue with all the savage fervor possible or submit. Those are the only real choices.

        *The quote referenced above:

        “Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
        – Theodore Dalrymple

        PCism, which the SJWs utilize for their dogma, was brought to our shores (US) in the early ’30s by members of the School of Marxism at Frankfurt. It is accomplishing exactly what it was intended to accomplish. And it it doing so because we have refused to fight back.

        The Law of Reciprocity applies.

    2. What Jselvy said. Silence equals consent. Yes, we may snicker at them behind their backs – but hiding it simply means they don’t notice it which (as far as they’re concerned) means it doesn’t happen.

      1. Again, attack on another front, not the screaming matches but somewhere they are vulnerable. We’re smarter than they are, let’s prove it

    3. Not just “can be”– insufficiently loud resistance is frequently interpreted as agreement, by both sides.

      They have to be resisted, but not treated like equals. Treat them like they’re rude, and move on.

      You can’t just politely ignore the crazy person, because they and your supposed allies will start proposing doing what the crazies demand– and because they claim to speak for a group, both sides will talk as if it’s true. Even after you point out that you, a member of the supposedly “spoken for,” have been loudly arguing against whatever for ages you’ll still have people taking the crazies as a valid voice.

  4. Given how the SJWs are still going hell for leather to impose their views in the whole #gamergate thing – calling a ceasefire with them now would have them considering it a victory. The only way with them is to capitulate, anything else is against them. You cant reason with Zealots.

    1. But you can quit fighting by their rules. Like I said in other replies. The screaming matches are their forte, blind side them.

      1. yep – #gamergate has shown that. But calling for a ceasefire plays within their ruleset. Better to ignore them as individuals totally, and go after the structures that support them.

          1. 🙂
            Several structural approaches spring to mind. In terms of private enterprises, simply take your business elsewhere and make sure that not only the business knows why, but other moderates & likeminded folks do to. If you cant do that and its a media organisation, go for their advertisers.

            Government / Academia is a harder nut to crack though, as its so entrenched. Direct confrontation wont work as the SJWs are in positions of power. Peaceful Non compliance is always an option, but its low impact / low profile. Counter campaigns re: voting only work on those who are engaged anyway.

            1. don’t forget to complain to advertisers that you won’t buy products from those who advertise in the Atlantic where the science editor made a scientist cry over a shirt on a day that should have been about the triumph of science

                1. So spread the word to your friends on this side. IBM and Aetna need to be inundated with communications taking them to task for supporting The Atlantic and thereby supporting Miss I’vbeenrapedbyashirt

                2. When people post a link from them, ask if they’ve officially apologized for their supposed “science reporter” talking about fashion instead of landing on a comet, and trying to get the scientist in question fired.

                  Point out that you oppose bullies, and support the victims of bullying.

              1. Advertisers are not the only sources of income for these organizations. There are also investors.

                I don’t have enough financial knowhow to really evaluate the utility.

                Some of them are institutional, and may have rules about the sort of place they invest in. Furthermore, if we can show that GamerGate or something else has had a significant impact on advertisement income, and no changes have been made, there are investors who would find that relevant.

  5. Kryters is right. You absolutely cannot allow them tyo even _think_ that they “won.”
    The “best”way is to refute them using logic and rational explanations, then let them behave irrationally. But, *never* allow them to act unchallenged. I’ve been known to “debate” with irrational atheists, for one reason. _Not_ because I hope to change their “mind”/convert them. No, it is for those who might be *influenced* by them, if left unchallenged. SJW’s, and their ilk _must_ win, because they *must* make the world conform to them. They can not deal with reality, as it is, so they must remake it. That includes fooling people into believing that their nuttiness *is* reality. If they shout it, long enough, and hard enough, people start to believe it. _Unless_ people keep saying, just as loud, “The Emperor has no clothes.”

    1. As I said, not capitulation, sneakiness and outsmarting them. Screaming hysterically is what they do, and they have the practice to do it well. use your smarts to cut the ground out from under their feet

      1. I’ve found mockery is an ideal weapon. They take themselves so seriously that they can’t take someone making fun of them.

          1. Because the poor dears recognize that what you’re doing with your image posts is funny. Funnier than they know how to be. Funnier than you should be as a conservative / libertarian / member of other than one of the anointed victim groups or their sainted defenders.
            This messes with their heads. Their worldview tells them that such should not exist, does not exist, can not exist. And yet, there it is. The weaving, bobbing heads of Super Junior cannot be denied. You are acting wrong, and must therefore be destroyed. Or refuted. Or explained somehow. And they just don’t have the humility to admit that maybe they were wrong about conservatives not having a sense of humor because underneath it all they’re really just lizard people from the center of the earth who want to eat babies or something.

          2. The doodles I do also seem to really piss them off.

            As for sneaky, I’ve done that. I’ve mocked with the aim of mocking the target but also to amuse my fellow Huns. But there are times when you can’t just use mockery and ignore. A case in point would be that person who came to Larry’s blog, saying she was a rape victim, and then used her victim status like a weapon against everyone who argued using logic, and tried to grab the scene to push that they should allow the change the definition of rape to be ‘rape is rape because it felt like rape’, then further used her victimhood as if it made her unquestionable and unassailable.

            Mocking her didn’t work, so instead I let her own words hang herself and when when she revealed too much, I pounced, revealing that not only did she want that women become more victims, she was advocating that men have no recourse to law OR society, and that women shouldn’t be able to defend themselves, not because ‘they don’t have to’, but because she actively chose not to in several key occasions.

  6. I’ve laid pretty low on this (OK, for certain values of low) because of my day job(s). I’m inclined to agree with Sanford. A quick firm correction (“No, having a white lead character in a fantasy set in Medieval Norway is not racist, it is appropriate to the time and location”) and then drop it. If they persist, point back to the original answer. There are other venues (Larry’s Place, Sarah’s, Tom Simons and John C. Wright’s blogs) for extended engagement of SJWs and/or trolls.

    1. Arrrg, that should be T. L. Knighton, not Tom Simons. Not enough tea and too worried about the pending dental work to think or type straight. Sorry.

      1. Thank you for the clarification. Unless there’s someone else actually named Tom Simons (with the extra S) whom you were referring to, in which case I am merely croggled. But my blog is very much a place not to fight bloody wars of attrition against SJWs and trolls. I’m just a poor bloke who has inherited the job of walking about with Diogenes’ lamp, you know?

  7. I’m all for sneakiness (not that I’m any good at it).

    Somehow I have a feeling that they’re about to over-reach. If you take step X, it looks like you’ve gotten nearly everything you want. Take step X+1, everything vanishes into vapor, and you’re left with less than you had before the beginning.

    And making a scientist cry on what should be his day of triumph has to be within spitting distance of X+1. As well as being a perfect example of the spot on the floor.

    1. Which is part of the reason I want to do the old fighting trick of stepping out of the way of the haymaker and let them trip over their own feet. Work smarter not harder

      1. Step inside the arc of the haymaker. Turn to face the same way they are facing as you do so. Your shoulder should now be in their armpit. Lean forward. Seoi-nage FTW!

    2. They are right now also going against most of the things the feminists were trying to achieve when I was young. Back then it was all ‘we need to show that we are tough, independent, we don’t need men to protect us, we can do what they can do as well as they and fit in their clubs’. The idea that a woman could be one of the boys, if she worked with them they would not need to make any special arrangements for her sake (well, except maybe separate dressing rooms and toilets…). And if they did it was an insult to her.

      And now it seems to really be going back to the Victorian. Women are intimidated, women can’t be asked to be responsible, women are weak and need special accommodations, men need to be the responsible ones and always remember to think of the women so that they don’t insult or scare us…

      When you think about it it IS completely ridiculous.

      1. The problem is that the socialists completely took over the feminists, and the socialist were always much more prudish than anyone else

  8. We have tried ignoring the liberal leftist agitators for fifty years and it has brought us to the point where Obama gets re elected and now can not be restrained short of force of arms.

    The ‘silent majority’ remained silent ceding the playing field to the leftists and the news media. The first part about winning is showing up. The second part is preparation. Conservatives have done neither for two generations, and you want us to continue to sit on our hands and do nothing while the political left racks up more wins.

    Whose side are you on?

    1. Have you missed where he suggested to keep fighting, but to hit them obliquely, like by masses telling The Atlantic’s advertisers that they will not purchase products from any company that supports a magazine that permits it’s science editor to ignore the science of the moment and instead focus on what someone was wearing?

      Sanford isn’t saying to concede the ground. He’s saying to fight them on our terms, not theirs.

    2. Who said ignore? I said pat them on the head ad do other things. Fighting their kind of battles is pointless, screwing them over in our kinds of battles will be much more satisfying.

  9. Me, I’ve avoided getting in scraps because I’m not Larry Correia. But when I come across something we need to know about, I spread it around. These people thrive on being able to work quietly and unopposed.

      1. That’s the spirit, and remember, in the immortal words of Bravo Company of the Bronze Battalion. If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying!

        1. Well, playing nice wasn’t exactly selling books, so why play nice?

          Besides, it’s not like any of the SJWs would be interested in reading about a good guy who takes his guns and shoots bad guys in the face and suffers no existential angst as a result. In fact, he feels pretty good about it. 😀

  10. Sanford, I’m all for not letting the silly gits under one’s skin, but I see it as a duty to confront them when they spew their tales of imagined offense, and grievances created out of thin air.
    The thing is, when left alone there is just enough substance to some of their claims to give them a bit of credence with the mundane majority who have no clue as to the inner workings of gaming, SF&F, astrophysics research, or any such exclusive club. So they have free rein to set a narrative that supports their twisted view of reality. When confronted and forced into their preferred mode of hysterical screaming fits their true colors become obvious to the casual observer. So what we must do is poke them where they live just enough to evoke their bat shit crazy personas for all the world to see.
    If we ignore the bastiches we allow them the opportunity to create their mischief unopposed until one day we wake to discover a whole new set of restrictions on speech, the written word, and ultimately their real goal our thoughts.

  11. Nope. Ain’t gonna happen.

    Look at what they’d accomplished while our side remained nice and polite. Look at every single industry where our side remained nice and polite. Now look at what is happening in gaming, where people aren’t nice or polite, and the SJWs are falling apart dealing with people who simply don’t give a crap.

    I started this fight because I entered an industry where most folks even close to my ideology had been cowed and abused into silence. It was perceived that they had all the power, and if you stepped out of line they’d ruin your career.

    They are bullies. The only way to defeat bullies is to stand up to them. Like most playground bullies, SJWs aren’t so tough. So I stand up to them.

    If you’d like to be crafty or diplomatic or whatever, best of luck to you. I’ll keep doing my thing and then we can compare results.

    1. Oh Larry that idea wasn’t for you. I want you and Sarah out front in your shining Byrnies and shields. What I’m trying to arrange is a little modern behind the lines work while you knights engage them and hold them in place. I wanna be the guy with the little knife hamstringing them while they concentrate in you

    2. Hey, it’s a dessert topping *and* a floor wax, guys! No reason we can’t have a multi-front war 😉 Sanford has a point (right on the top of his cute little head!) that what we can really use is more intel. WHERE can we fight back and have an effect? Where are the weak points in their armor/supply chain/process? Peel away their supporters, their funding. Ink-spot tactics. Clear and hold. And the more strategies we have, the harder it will be for them to counteract them all.

    3. I think that as long as there are publishers like Baen, and access to distribution systems like Amazon (and access to the internet), the SJW crowd controls nothing. You publish your book, I buy it. No problem!
      At the MOST, they are in the position of trying to sell umbrellas made of chicken wire. They may TRY to keep to keep control of the weather, but the rain and wind come on in anyway.
      And then the assault Larry makes on the Hugo Award process demonstrates to the world what chickens running around with their heads cut off really looks like. Some of y’all may never have seen that, but that’s what the SJW crowd was doing.
      I do not know whether this battle truly has had an impact on anything other than the way pixels are arranged on screens and ink on paper. Maybe it has, but I find the concept of this war escalating into violence somewhat….risible. Violence, real violence? It is to laugh. Oh, let us encourage them to BRING IT. I just bought my grandson his first firearm for his 10th birthday this weekend. It’s a Marlin Mod 60, with the 20 inch barrel and an 18 round tube. Perhaps, among the SJW crowd there is a tiny percentage of truly dangerous individuals, but our core schedules regular range time at cons.
      So, maybe the ‘fight’ is worth doing because it’s the right thing to resist vileness in any form. And maybe – accountant Larry can probably tell us – there has been a real world impact in terms of lost sales. However, as long as there remains any single access point to the distribution process, I (as a consumer) am NOT under duress. I do not object to identifying idiocy in any form, but I shall not climb into my combat mode because some special snowflakes are drifting.
      Now, y’all leave me alone for a while. I’ve got books to read and reviews to write…
      (It occurs to me if this was written on a special snowflake website I would have to explain that I was trying to be funny….)

      1. Small correction: Many of the SJW’s are dangerous especially in a pack. Our people tend to be deadly.

  12. THANK YOU! I have been thinking this for a while now. There are some campaigns that are not worth the effort to feed, and the traffic might get them the notion that they are important. I mean, come on. All this just helps their publicity campaign.

  13. Contention gets people riled up, and more entrenched in their positions… if they have positions to begin with. I’m reminded of Larry’s statement that internet debate is a spectator sport, and we aren’t doing it for our own benefit, but for the undecided, and those who need our support so they know they’re not alone.

    Once again, I refer to C.S. Lewis’ essay, “Learning in Wartime”. Read this. Replace “Christian” and “Church” with whatever word you want to represent what it is you’re fighting for. Values? Conservativism? Liberty?

    If all the world were Christian, it might not matter if all the world were uneducated. But, as it is, a cultural life will exist outside the Church whether it exists inside or not. To be ignorant and simple now — not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground — would be to throw down our weapons, and the betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. The cool intellect must work not only against cool intellect on the other side, but against the muddy heathen mysticisms which deny intellect altogether.

    That bit about muddy heathen mysticisms is a pretty apt description, IMHO. How else do you describe a worldview that says that women are inherently superior to men in every way while SIMULTANEOUSLY believing that women are being held down by patriarchy run by… those same inferior men? If women are superior, shouldn’t they have defeated patriarchy decades if not centuries ago? Shouldn’t the patriarchy have never gotten started at all? On the other hand, if patriarchy exists, in what sense are women superior? The ideas are mutually contradictory and exclusive of each other.

    You have to make the point, and show where the holes are.

    1. We are never going to enlighten an SJW with logic or facts. The best we can do is humiliate them in front of others with logic and facts, and some well-timed mockery. Hopefully we can inspire others to also play the game the next time they show their faces, until eventually they get tired of mockery and keep their heads low.

      1. Full disclosure: I stole the link from Theo Spark.

        What this article states is that they have found an ad on Craigslist calling for trolls/interns to post messages on social media and blogs, promoting certain causes that bear an eerie resemblance to the SJW agenda. (which, for some reason reminds me of the ads seen last year calling for people and agencies to take care of a bunch of unaccompanied illegal aliens)

        The caveat is whether this is real or a hoax; if real it means that we are not only fighting people with their heart in a cause but interns who are in it for the money and the power. Mercenaries, for want of a better word. (What does this mean, that we are facing an organized opponent(s)?

        1. Thar George Soros and the others that want to destroy America are paying for it. something I think most of us already knew

          1. Many of the right-leaning blogs I read used to be trolled by a persistent commenter many referred to as the Z collective–it was painfully obvious there was more than one of them, and they seemed to have no other web existence (that I could bother finding) than as commenters on conservative blogs. It would make sense that a Soros paycheck was ultimately involved.

          2. Two words: Net Neutrality
            (actually four words, but…. nevermind) Someone like that is out to destroy the internet as we know it, because ScoobyDoo – (“I would have gotten away with it if it hadn’t been for those meddling kids!”).

            1. I will never forgive Glenn Beck for trying to make Net Neutrality synonymous with some kind of Internet Fairness Doctrine.

              I want Net Neutrality so that Clearwire doesn’t throttle my BitTorrents down to dial-up speed, and claim it’s “Peak Hours” (at 4:00 am) but then, in the middle of that throttling, I can still hit YouTube and still have it come in mostly fine. All I want is the ability to use the bandwidth I paid for for whatever purpose I want. THAT’S Net Neutrality.

              1. You don’t want the government to regulate the internet.

                You are not a victim! If you do not like what your service provider is doing then use a different provider.

                  1. Exactly why I oppose net neutrality.

                    I don’t listen to Beck, but if he was pointing out that the method they’re using to claim ability to regulate the internet also gives them the ability to regulate content– he was right.

                    In a more normal person friendly manner: “Hey, you like how that phone company lets you stream music without charging you for the bandwidth? Net neutrality makes that illegal.”

                1. Not an option. I have two choices. Crappy wireless internet, or Comcast, which is worse (Comcast has a history of directly making protocol attacks on people using torrent software. And their bad customer service is the stuff of legends). DSL does not go here, so I’m already at the least of two evils.

                  The problem with the lesser of two evils is it’s still evil.

                  I want the government to THREATEN to regulate the internet to get ISP’s to get their acts together and stop abusing their monopolistic powers to charge more for less. The US, the birthplace of the Internet has costlier and slower internet than frigging ESTONIA!

                  1. Fuck!!!!!

                    Estonia has population of only 1.3 million.

                    Dr. it is not that big accomplishment to build the infrastructure to accommodate the needs of their population.

                    Do you honestly think that your internet is going to be cheaper the more hoops they will have to jump threw?

                    This is the point that is pissing me off about this; our side is always bitching about how big government is or has grown, and this is why because we all have some special exception that we want government to step in and fuck over our neighbors for; because they are doing something we don’t like.

                    Having choices that you don’t like is not for a monopoly make. We either believe in the Free-market or we don’t there is no middle ground in this.

                    1. I just want to get what I paid for. I paid for 4 mbps, not 0.5. They shouldn’t care where the bits are coming from. Consumer protection laws are a legitimate function of Government.

                      I’ve already had a couple of months of service for free as a result of one of several class action suits against my ISP. That should tell you something about them.

                      Competition would be nice, but unless we’re going to build 6X redundant infrastructure, there will not be any serious competition.

                    2. Ok, So you are making a claim that they are defrauding you by not providing a service. We already have protection for this. We don’t need more regulations.

                      Is the serves provider actually throttling by site or is it the more likely that the website you are down loading from has a set limit.


                      As you mentioned BitTorrent your asking a lot for that to run speedily.

                      The slow down could be happing at your firewall when your antiviral software is scanning all those incoming packets. (If this is what is causing the slowdown leave it a lone.)

                      There things you can do to determine where the bottleneck are, and things you can do improve download speeds before you get the government involved in a regulatory fashion. This road never ends well.

                    3. I know exactly where the bottleneck is, thank you, I’ve been dealing with it for years. Hell, I even have screenshots showing exactly how the throttling works (Especially fun is seeing when it resets itself at specific times and a transfer really takes off). They like to call it “Network Management”.

                      Look, if you are opposed to true Net Neutrality (All bits are to be treated equally, not Glenn Beck’s fantasy of a web fairness doctrine) then you are saying that it’s perfectly ok for my ISP to monitor my internet usage and slow down or even outright block my access to sites and services of which they do not approve.

                    4. So, if your hogging all the band width, you don’t think your speed shouldn’t be effected?

                      If you are doing things that are making you a resource hog, then they are going to take steps to insure that you not effecting the quality of service to others.

                      It’s the amount of date that us the problem.

                    5. You don’t read too well, do you? This is happening at 3 and 4 AM. When 90% of the world is sleeping. (probably a greater percentage around the local cell tower, since that’s what they say they judge by.

                      In other words, they’re LYING. And they’ve been caught at it before and sued over it before, and lost over it before. (Aside from the fact that they used to promise unlimited and unthrottled access back when I signed up)

                      And if they’re going to turn around and let a youtube video through and suddenly allow 5 times the bandwidth they were allowing for the transfer, that seems to also put to lie that it’s an issue of bandwidth congestion.

                      I shouldn’t have to restate this, since it was all in my previous comments. I think you’re siding with an Abusive ISP, part of a local oligarchy, simply because you refuse to accept the term Net Neutrality AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED instead of the boogeyman folks like Glenn Beck made it into so that you can continue your posturing.

                    6. Dr. Mauser,

                      “I think you’re siding with an Abusive ISP, part of a local oligarchy, simply because you refuse to accept the term Net Neutrality AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED instead of the boogeyman folks like Glenn Beck made it into so that you can continue your posturing.”

                      I’m not siding with the ISO’s. I’m pro free-market and anti government intervention. If you believe you have a legitimate grievance then take it through current channels, and…

                      “Originally Intended” is a big part of the problem, because what the government gives you is rarely what you wanted or expected. All Glenn Beck was pointing out was most of the Net Neutrality bill are “poorly” written/worded as to give the government control over what data is given preferential treatment; picking winners and losers.

                      For the sake of the argument lets say these ISP’s are not following the current FCC rules and regs, what makes you think they will follow these new rules any better?

                      All you are doing is give legitimacy to the idea that Government has the right to dictate to us how to run our businesses. Instead of just in forcing and protecting property rights.

                    7. “legitimacy to the idea that Government has the right to dictate to us how to run our businesses.”

                      You mean like Contract law? After all, that’s the only kind of law Libertarians respect. Should not ISP’s be punished for dishonest dealing?

                      You really are being obtuse. I’ve already answered the points you’re trying to re-raise here. I’m done mud-wrestling the pig, he likes it too much.

                    8. “You mean like Contract law? After all, that’s the only kind of law Libertarians respect. Should not ISP’s be punished for dishonest dealing?”

                      If they are not living up to a contractual obligation then this needs to be addressed and pursued, no new law is needed. But if as I suspect you signed a service agreement that out lines their policy. Then all you want is for the government to come in and force them to do what you want. To come in and favor your interests over theirs. To pick you as the winner and them as the loser.

                      All you and others are going todo is turn the internet into the next public utility.

                      Obtuse? I know the issue quite well. I talking to you using my smartphone instead of a home computer over the AT&T cellular net work, with an unlimited data plan that gets severely throttled after I use over 3 gigs of data.


                    9. “legitimacy to the idea that Government has the right to dictate to us how to run our businesses.”

                      You mean like Contract law? After all, that’s the only kind of law Libertarians respect. Should not ISP’s be punished for dishonest dealing?

                      Nevermind. For all that you accuse HIM of being obtuse, you’re the one that’s doing so– there is a MASSIVE difference between “enforcing agreements” and “setting requirements.”

                      If you’re so wound up that you can’t recognize the difference– and make that accusation instead of answering why you expect a new rule to work better than contract law does– then you’re too wound up.

                    10. This is happening at 3 and 4 AM. When 90% of the world is sleeping.

                      When 90% of people set their computers up update. Both in business and at home. Plus all the other people downloading large files.

                      I think you’re siding with an Abusive ISP, part of a local oligarchy, simply because you refuse to accept the term Net Neutrality AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED instead of the boogeyman folks like Glenn Beck made it into so that you can continue your posturing.

                      That “boogeyman” that “folks like Glenn Beck” supposedly “made it” is when they identified what the Feds are actually talking about doing.

                      Not some kind of idealized forced equality-of-bits that you– for heaven knows what reason– expect will work when NONE OF THE OTHER LAWS DO.

                      Frankly, I don’t think much of your expertise on this subject when you are either ignorant or ignoring the way that they currently use different rates of transfer to smooth out traffic– the initial download speed is extremely high, and then they slow it down. This means that, yes, someone trying to load a youtube clip is going to get the whole thing, while someone downloading an operating system quickly drops to low priority.
                      Guess which of those two gets frustrated and hits “refresh” if it takes too long, increasing demand on the network?

                      Quick! Pass a Check Out Fairness policy– ban all 10 items or less lanes!

                    11. Your point would make sense if they were throttling based on actual traffic management, but it’s not, they’re throttling based on CONTENT. I could understand my download being cut down to .5 Mb/s if that’s what was available, but the fact that my connection will suddenly jump to 2.5 Mb/s as soon as I click on a YouTube link means that the bandwidth was available the whole time.

                      And now they’re talking about charging content providers to avoid that kind of filtering. “That’s a nice website you’ve got there, be a shame if nobody could reach it.”

                    12. Your point would make sense if they were throttling based on actual traffic management, but it’s not, they’re throttling based on CONTENT.

                      Yeah, same way that the 10 items or less checkout at the store is throttling based on content.

                    13. Dr. Mauser,

                      No! They are not they are throttling by data usage.

                      They are doing it because bit and file sharing are data intensive.

                      They could careless what the content is.

                    14. Ok, So you are making a claim that they are defrauding you by not providing a service. We already have protection for this. We don’t need more regulations.


                    15. There is enough competition here, a local outfit called First Step Internet has stepped up and practically ran Clearwire out of business here locally. Because as you stated Clearwire sucks. Now I could never get Clearwire, so my experience with them is secondhand, but everybody I know who had them hated them, and switched as soon as the option came available. I had satellite internet as my only option, and it was pretty good when I first got it, but it went steadily downhill until it was much worse than you describe. Then First Step put a tower in I could see from my house, and so I switched to it, cheaper, much more reliable, and much faster.

                      Oh, Glenn Beck gets some things wrong, and I despise their stupid slapstick routine they go into whenever there is nothing important in recent events to talk about, but I think he was dead right (if a little over the top on rhetoric, but that is him being his normal self) on Net Neutrality.

                      The government has a strong history of saying, “we’ll make sure you get what you pay for; right after we decide which options you should have available TO pay for. Oh that? It’s no longer an option, sorry.” Why do you think Net Neutrality would be any different?

                    16. Estonia is roughly twice the size of New Jersey, for comparison’s sake.

                      More to the point… who the @#$# cares if 15% of the US population doesn’t use the internet? What business is it of theirs?

                      Does my dad’s only interaction with the internet consisting of having my mom look stuff up have anything to do with the rest of the country? Or my aunt the nurse who spends all day entering medical information on a computer and wouldn’t touch one for fun on a dare?

                      On a side, country that claims that fewer than 4% of their population isn’t using the internet is either defining “internet users” differently or has something else going on. I would suspect that they are using access as a measurement, since the top stories I find on Estonia and Internet mention how they have free, public, privately provided internet all over the place. (IE, if the US used that, being near a McDonalds would count.)

      2. I don’t quite entirely agree or disagree with your post. I agree about mocking them. I agree with Larry as well. I also agree with your idea that this war is a multi-front one.

        What I don’t think is addressed is a massive bunch of very salient and terrifyingly important points. Brace yourselves, I’m going to be blunt, scary, and I know and expect MOST of you won’t believe me. I’m gonna say it anyway.

        One of the things that I notice we don’t really have is a place to submit our intel. We don’t have a secure place which we can post our evidences – which is THE thing they can’t argue against and is ultimately what is one of our best weapons against their propaganda, smears, and lies. They make shit up, but Larry wins because they never are able to cite anything.

        Not an option for most of us. Where do we go that they cannot take out and take down? What information can we make public, and what must be discussed somewhere secure – and I’m not talking about Facebook, or Facebook PM. That shit? Is not secure, and has one of the weakest security infrastructures to the point that it’s considered the ‘beginner scriptkiddy thing to hack.’ How many of us would actively go to a secure place outside of our realm of comfort? And I’m not talking about those pissy little ‘safe places’ that segregate by race. I’m talking ‘digital Fort Knox’ type security.

        The greatest thing that the SJWs use is anonymity. Trolling, cyber-attacks, concentrated twitterstorms, blog-bashing… and then on the flip side of that, dabbling in out and out cybercrime. It is not uncommon for these guys to hack or ddos or hijack sites, opponents’ computers. They like to try erase their paper trails – RH would regularly delete her comments of extensive abuse, after she’d traumatized her victims. We’re familiar with how Clamps will follow Larry, Vox, John C. Wright, myself and the MGC folk all over the Internet. He’s pissant small fry compared to some of the real threats out there. Heck, as awesome as the overwhelmingly positive response for the maker of the shirt was, I saw only one post warn her about locking down the email she had HARD. (And frankly, it’s good she has a hotmail. Believe it or not, that’s pretty secure and yes, MS has good two-step auth.)

        Which leads me to the next point.

        Your post also ignores that the SJWs and their ilk go outside the realm of cyberspace and what is They’re the ones who created the tactics of SWATting, doxxing, etc. – attacks that go beyond online arguments and threaten people’s lives and livelihoods. This shows that they are quite happy to destroy more than just an ephemeral online thing, but are quite okay with seeing political opponents killed for disagreeing. Note how they wail about doxxing and like to claim it’s done to them. And let’s not even start on the lawfare these shits use. How many of you would be able to deal with finding yourselves regularly harassed with spurious lawsuits? Get anonymous reports to Child Services and risk dealing with them?

        How does the average non-Left blogger, writer, etc deal with that?

        What is also something of a blind spot, I think, is the deeply technological aspect of this. How many of the Huns are cyber-security aware? How many of the regulars here know if they’re being DDOS-ed? How many have an awareness of if they’re being hacked, or if something goes wrong with their computer, do they dismiss it as ‘eh, computer/ Windows being shit as usual’ or go “Hm. That’s not supposed to happen.” How many people out there, for example, still use Windows XP when really, they shouldn’t be using it any more. How many of the folks out here can’t afford the necessary computer upgrade to a purely 64-bit setup? Or would consider not using Windows at all and say, moving to Linux-based OSes (and not Ubuntu, but something like Debian?) How many could afford to pay for a regular subscription to say, Norton Antivirus (Yes, I know, historical reputation. Seriously, I use it. NOT THAT HORRIBLE NOW.) Or, for the matter, would deal very well if someone said ‘you’re doing your computer security wrong?’

        My guess is quite a number of people would deal with most of the above very badly. (In fact, I expect to get argued with and yelled at a lot, or any of the above dismissed.)

        And yes, having to know all the above seems ridiculously stupid lots to have to know for folks who just want to write a book that they enjoy writing, and people enjoy reading. But the truth is, we all took our cyber security for granted. Hell, I did. Until I realized there was someone out there who wants my work deleted and my computer swiped, and me driven off the Internet. For mere disagreement.

        I’m now aware that there are people out there who are very much capable of doing that. I’m pretty sure that folks here would be devastated if they lost their work, their writing, their art… and everything else on their computer. Imagine on top of that, losing access to your various email accounts, getting all the password security changed, and the passwords changed and then not being able to get them back. In the meantime, your contacts, unaware this has happened to you, continue to trust the methods of contact you had and the person who’s hijacked it pretends to be you. Draining your bank account. Draining your Paypal, then closing it. Imagine that person getting hold of all your publishing accounts, and deleting your works off the Internet, then trying to get a hold of your friends and families’ information so they can do the same to them.

        And no, I’ll actually say this was not Clamps-related, but an account of what someone else went through that Housemate had to help, rewritten to protect that person’s privacy, and events changed slightly to relate to the writers and artists here, versus being gaming related.

        It is one thing to say ‘we should do this’ but hell, I don’t want that we go into it half-assed. I’m flat out aware that a lot of us here don’t have the resources and capability for this kind of stuff.

        HOW do we talk about how to defend our own backs while going to hamstring the ogres?

        WHERE do we post the public-releaseable evidence of the abuses and tactics of the SJWs to prove that they aren’t the saviours and fighters of good that they pretend to be that they cannot take down?

        HOW MUCH are we willing to change to ensure WE are safe, in choosing to fight this war?

        And most importantly, how willing are we to listen if people say ‘that thing you’re doing is wrong, here’s how to fix it’?

        1. And this is what I was fishing for when I trolled MGC, this is useful stuff to think about and use against the SJWs, and protect ourselves

            1. Alas I must admit a geek deficiency, I don’t watch television so I only vaguely know that it is an Xfiles reference

        2. That is terrifying. I do not have technical know how for that kind of protection. And I can’t protect myself, I won’t be much use in this fight. Which is why I stick to cheering Mrs. Hoyt, Mr. Correia and the others here at MGC on.

          1. Here’s the thing: a lot of this can actually be done by the general user. Doesn’t take much, just a willingness to learn, a bit of spending will be required, yes. Also, and I’ll get this out of the way: The reality is the world is more connected than ever, and because laws are simply not catching up fast enough, consider this the Wild Wild Web, and we’re in charge of protecting ourselves. We don’t want to be the greenhorn that ends up dead somewhere. Remember that the SJWs are just part of the problem – there’s a ton of general cybercrime and predation that goes on out there. Clamps is a script kiddy and ultimately small fry. There are worse people out there than him. And you don’t HAVE to be involved in political discussion or plain ol’ non-Leftist to end up a victim online.

            So this is what we, a mi casa, think are basic requirements for getting online, and keeping yourself safe. I apologize for the wall of text in advance.

            A lot of the vulnerabilities that exist are correctable via some wise spending and listening to some advice. UPGRADE your computer so it can run at LEAST windows 8.1, 64 bit. Norton I know, has a very horrible reputation because of what it tended to do in the past, but this is NOT the case now – it is THE defense we recommend to the customers who come to Aff for system builds and computer cleanups – both Windows and Mac. No, it’s not free, I’m afraid. Upgrade your computer hardware while you can – Apparently, Windows 10 will be free, and the subscription based model will move forward, and will be the future setup for software companies anyway.

            Hard drives: Have your programs, operating system and stuff on a hard drive by itself. DO have a second hard drive (or more) that you store data and save stuff onto. This keeps you from losing ALL your data in the event of something requiring a reinstall.

            Turn on your firewall, turn on Microsoft Security Suite / make sure your firewall is on if you’re running a mac. Also, do not install multiple antiviruses. They cancel each other out, create memory and heuristic conflicts, and result in you thinking your system is protected but actually being as vulnerable as being without a security suite and a firewall.

            Do not use Flash, use HTML5 compatibility instead. A lot of exploits and vulnerabilities exist in Flash and are one of the most common routes of computer infiltration out there.

            Going back to the necessity of upgrading to 64 bit systems – do not run any 32 bit designed software once you do. Yes, it’s bloody inconvenient. A recent discovery is that a LOT of the security you get with a 64 bit system gets lowered when the system is forced to accomodate legacy software that was created to run in 32 bit software. We’ve discovered that a properly set up 64 bit Windows system will run nearly as cool and as fast as a Linux one.

            Yep, color me shocked.

            Moving on to the next point.

            The other alternative is, if one cannot afford to pay for a regular subscription of the security software, one must consider moving to the alternatives. Linux Debian is the one we tend to go with – and is a very good selection for people who use computers mostly for web browsing, general media use, emails, writing documents. It’s stable and secure, and can be set up to look a LOT like windows. I know that it seems scary to jump from the familiar old Windows to something new. I did it in in 2010 or so. It was that, or lose my data to hack attempts. The only thing that saved my ass and my laptop was my shit internet, and Aff’s timely intervention.

            Moving onward: I’m communicating with you (collective you), at the moment, on a laptop that runs pure Debian. No, I didn’t set it up, Aff did, but the first time I made this foray into the unknown, I was living in the Philippines and Aff lived in South Australia. This can be done remotely. In fact, it can be done without the need for you to move your data on and off the hard drive. Libreoffice is what I use in place of Microsoft Office. I use Thunderbird’s Debian fork, Icedove, and Firefox’s brand-stripped fork, Iceweasel. For watching videos, I use VLC player and instead of Winamp, I use Audacious. Despite the seeming deluge of know-how I’ve talked of so far, I’m still just a general user. A lot of the shortcuts follow the same way, and yes, it’s double click, single click, no different from Windows. It’s easier to switch from Windows to Debian than it is to get used to Windows or Debian to a Mac computer. I spent only about a week of learning where things were on my windows to debian switch. I still swear at my mac, and I use it for nothing but drawing, and I’ve had it for a year or so. If Adobe ever makes itself compatible with Debian, I swear, I’m gone. I heard Wacom already has a Debian compatible desktop environment.

            Here’s what my working area looks like. The mac is on the left, with the Cintiq screen in the middle, and I have the work computer on the right. This has since changed since I’ve downsized from three computers to just using two, as I wasn’t using the Windows computer for much except gaming the few games that run only on Windows. Steam has solved much of that for me.

            Speaking of, Steam OS is the Linux version of things for the gamers. It is Debian based – so most Steam games are required to be compatible with Debian. I’m too busy these days to play more than Minecraft or poke my head very rarely into Star Trek Online.

            But that’s enough of the General End User functionality. The TL:DR of that is that Debian, set up with the right desktop environment, will not look very different from Windows. The most important differences are under the hood, where most of us General Users do not wander – and shouldn’t.

            Security? Put on the firewall, turn on updates. That’s it. No installing of antivirus or security suite. If you choose to go the Debian route, pick Debian Stable. We’ve had someone complain about Debian Unstable not being stable. Aff needed bourbon and we didn’t have any that day.

            One of these days I’m going to have to do a post about this, with screenshots, on the affsdiary forums, just to further illustrate that it’s not that bad.

            There are places on the Wired that are inherently not secure. I’ve mentioned Facebook already. Livejournal is not secure – generally, blogs aren’t. For your email, set up two factor authentication to your phone. Right now, Android is more secure than iPhone security, but they’re in the midst of fixing that up I hear so… Ditto Paypal authentication.

            Oh and on a note about the iPhone – if you do get Norton, it’s strongly advised to try get the multidevice thing. It is a very, very good idea to set up your tablet with the same kind of security as you would a desktop, and the same with your mobile phone, especially a smartphone.

            Most of us already practice the rest – the use of pseudonyms, etc, so no, we’re not quite as clueless as all that.

            The ‘Net is terrifying. So was sailing off to the New World, and the early expansion of America to the West.

            Just takes a few basic rules and know-how to at least safeguard ourselves from wolves and mountain lions and bears.

            1. Ok, since this is headed into my day job territory now… I have some quibbles with the above:

              Norton is still a CPU hog, and still misses things that lower priced and free antivirus software can catch.

              Windows 10 being free is still just a rumor.

              You can’t run a media and content creation system without 32-bit applications- QuickTime is 32-bit in Windows, Apple has not deigned to bless us with a 64-bit version. Most stock footage is QuickTimes, and most people you are sending deliverables to are going to be either under OSX, running Avid, or still using a QuickTime-based workflow from when they were doing either of the first two.

              1. Ok, I’ll admit that I don’t use any of those. I’m going to guess that it has to do with videos, from what you say, because I don’t work with that. As such, I’m not aware of alternatives, I’m afraid. =( (I’m almost not sure what the term ‘deliverables’ is supposed to refer to.)

                I haven’t had the problems about Norton and CPU hogging myself. The only time I noticed slowdown on my Mac was when the (stupid Seagategrumble) hdd started to fail. It’s getting replaced so I’ll have a look at it when it gets back (and the only reason I have that mac is coz at the time it was a more secure option than Windows.) It has prevented a number of direct attacks, as well as malicious code from running when going to an infected site, for my computers. When I ran it for my gaming box, it pretty much stayed out of my way. Maybe it’s more noticeable when you’re working with video? (which I’d imagine takes up a lot of the comp’s grunt. That’s just a guess though…)

                Also, wouldn’t that mean that the day job is with a company? I’m talking about the run of the mill basic end user / author-dreamer. As far as I was told that was the case with Windows 10, (being free, and being 64-bit only).

                1. ‘deliverables’ =animations, composites, motion graphics, etc…. poor editors get confused if you try to send them a PNG sequence…

                  (at least I don’t have to dump it to tape anymore)

                  There is (and will be) a 32-bit version of Windows 10.

                  My ‘day job’ (sorta) is as a freelance tech industry writer for a major PC enthusiast site, focusing on graphics workstations.

          2. Like Shadow says, it can be learned, and it’s not a bad idea.

            Folks, I’ve heard from a few folks on our side who have been targeted in various ways. The how of how they know they were targeted involves some stuff I’m not at liberty to discuss, but I believe them. While specifics are probably up for discussion, I think it’s a good idea for all of us to look at our systems and prepare.

            We’ve been discussion offense, but it’s not a bad idea to beef up our defense as well. I can’t upgrade my laptop to Windows 8.1 or anything, because I’m a broke bastard, but I’ll be doing whatever I can to make my system more secure. I can’t continue any offense if I have ignored my defense. It’s not a bad idea for everyone to do the same.

            If you have specific work requirements for certain things, then maybe there’s a workaround. I don’t know. I’m not an expert on this kind of thing. I’m just a guy who runs his mouth on the internet. Luckily, there are people who are. Personally, I’m a member over at the forums for affsdiary.com that Shadow mentioned. I plan on head over there and see what I can do.

            Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of better just because it’s difficult. Any move in a more secure direction will cut off an avenue of attack by SJWs who think the ends justifies the means.

            Just my two cents.

          3. Chill. We must remember Shadowdancer IS a gamer and associates with gamers, where there is a great level of hacking (judging by my kids friends.) Yeah, there is SOME overlap, but most of the SJWs on our side of the fence are college professors of grievance studies. They MIGHT know hackers, but I doubt they know effective ones or will listen to them if they do. (Look at gamergate.) THE level of tech knowledge among most of my field right or left is impossible to underestimate. My husband is an IT professional, and I’m almost IT illiterate. But for the field, with very rare exceptions, I’m an internet expert and IT giant. Dave Freer can second me on this. We belong to writers’ email lists and the level of ignorance is… abysmal.
            Also, something like what Shadowdancer describes requires a dedicated and obsessive stalker (which is why she thinks about it. She has reason.)
            Look, if they were that good, or that devoted to working so hard, I’d already have been hacked, as well as everyone else on this blog, many of which are less secure than I am with my little wordpress blog.
            I’m not advocating going unprotected. We have virus detection/removal software of three kinds running at all time, and have no open network or server in the house. That and secure passwords is just sense. I get bombarded with viruses and worms, they just don’t get installed.
            But extraordinary measures of the kind Shadowdancer outlines will only be needed if you acquire a Chlamydia type stalker. Now you might. And when you do then you should be careful.
            But you shouldn’t be afraid to speak against the SJWs and/or bait them for fear of this type of reprisal. In fact, the more of us who speak up, the less the danger because there’s more of us.

            1. These guys are the “crazy dude with a knife” of the internet– and they’re going to disproportionately target those outside of the US if they live in the US because we’ve got a pretty good (though mish-mash) of stalking rules and right now nailing a real internet assault guy means big news.

              It doesn’t hurt to switch a few details with a friend or six, and if you think a resource is insecure*– use false information. Most data is useless if it’s attached to the wrong person. (I’m still amused to find out I live in Reno, supposedly. I haven’t visited there since… I think a cousin invited me a decade ago? Or was that Vegas?) I’ve been known to have mail sent to a friend or unlisted mail business, just in case.

              Remember in the Incredibles where Mrs. Incredible hands the kids their masks, and tells them to protect their identity? Same kind of thing. Teach your kids that for the internet.

              * there’s an entire area of ethics arguing if giving false and/or incomplete information when it can only be used for illegitimate purposes is lying or not; many people avoid it entirely by giving obviously humorous answers, which has the benefit of being fun.

              1. Another big thing with us using the level of protection Shadow uses is that it will get us the attention of the Federales. They already read my blog (long story) in case we suddenly, you know, create a revolutionary army. Lock our stuff this tight and the alphabet soup will come after us, too.
                I presume the feds read everything I type — may they like spaceships — but it’s better than making them thinking I’m up to something really interesting (I’m not) and come impound my stuff and leave me without the ability to write. In fact, some levels of secrecy are against the law in the US, which, yes, is a p*sser, and I preemptively agree with Statist Josh’s upcoming comment on this — but again, don’t look for trouble you don’t need.

                1. *shrug* Former military, have a clearance, most of my mom’s generation either has the same or is married to the same; I take it as a matter of course that there’s A File that gets updated each time I renew my CC or something.

                2. *blink*

                  Uhm, I’m not sure what happened there, but I’m not talking about doing stuff like use TOR (which got breached by the way, thanks to an idiotic Sydney professor gleefully snapping up 15 seconds of fame, and it’s the news right now for network security – and no, it’s not the poor guy mentioned in the article), or proxying in or obfuscating our IDs or IPs or whatever else has been used against me. I don’t know anything about that – I’m a general end user after all.

                  But rather, I’m talking about making oneself aware of the various available to you security measures, like two-factor authentication to secure things like your paypal and hotmail or other email accounts, and secure things like your smartphone. Using commercially available security software like Norton, or upgrading one’s computer to reduce one’s own vulnerability to things that the general Internet crime peeps exploit isn’t fed-attracting – it actually helps prove that you’re taking the steps needed to protect yourself. I’m only MORE aware of this because I have a crazy stalker, but as time passed I realized a lot of the stuff I took for granted I really shouldn’t, and that a lot of stuff is vulnerable to general internet crime. Things like passwords that the average script kiddy can’t brute force in 30 minutes, changing them at least once every six months, for example, or closing down old accounts and emails I don’t use any more because that’s a vulnerability to my own info security (also if anyone DOES get a stalker this means that they have less things to try look up and break into).

                  I’m also advising against feeling complacent about one’s own security online, because that just simply isn’t wise. About 75% of the stuff I hear about isn’t related to gaming at all, but is related to the general malware and virus crap that passes through Aff’s IT helpdesk thing that I don’t relate because the stories are rather the typical IT helpdesk stuff, and not amusing, such as the time he got called up with the query of “My computer is slow, should I upgrade? From Windows 95 to 98? I have this unopened installation disc…” (And, before anyone asks how this user avoided not having that poor ancient thing get hacked to oblivion, he used it only for emails, and would go offline to play an old real time strategy game. Also no more viruses exist for 95-98 era. This guy was lucky as hell the only thing that broke was Aff’s brain.)

                  But really, most of this is knowing things like what sites are fairly safe to talk about stuff on (again, facebook is not secure for anything remotely private, PM or not – I’m gonna keep saying that) and neither is Twitter, or things like Instagram. People are finding out that things like Snapchat are vulnerable to hacks and leaks despite their advertised privacy promises.

                  I’ll be the first to admit that trying to keep up with network security is like a MASSIVE pain in the ass and most of the stuff I get on the mailing list flies over my head, because there’ll be some days that particular email gets smashed with like 50 different vulnerability announcements – but that’s because it’s like “Hi, we discovered this vulnerability for this program, and would advise you to update it if you are using it” so sometimes it’s not even related to anything I use. Some days pass and nothing happens.

                  In fact, I’m not even advising a mass exodus to Debian – hell no. I’m just pointing out options for people who are still on XP and don’t have the cash to shell out for a new system. In fact if you’re a Windows Vista or 7 user, you’ve got breathing room (just turn on Microsoft’s Windows Security Suite and firewall and keep it up to date, and DO NOT run multiple antivirus software because they tend to cancel each other out – run WSS and one antivirus, that’s it) , but if you’re on XP, I cannot sugar coat the reality that it doesn’t matter if you DO have antivirus software installed, it’s no longer supported in reality by most security and is not supported by Microsoft itself – you’re vulnerable to the scum of the net, no ifs buts or maybes. To sugar coat that would be an out and out lie to spare feelings and I care too much about you guys to do that. And in the same interest of honesty, I’ve ACTIVELY downplayed a lot of the stuff I’ve seen – either first hand experienced, or seen happen to other people / clients – because either legal considerations, or privacy, or the stuff is too technical for me to even relate.

                  I am suggesting – and merely suggesting – that it also is a good idea to look outside of what we’re familiar with for alternatives to what we know anyway. I use Debian because it suits me – I found Ubuntu to be hair raisingly annoying, with an interface that got in my way, and too bloated for my taste. But for a lot of people that works just fine. But as someone myself who DID use nothing but Windows prior to my necessary move to Linux Mint Debian Edition (and from there to pure Debian), it’s not so terrifying as I was lead to believe. Heck, for a number of people, it might work out better for you – it did for me. Like the old, horribly abused laptop I have that’s now five years old is chugging along. It’s still used now, when it was dying under Windows 7 because of overheating issues. On Debian it runs smoother and faster and cooler, extending the hardware’s lifespan. But I also don’t use it for much. Browsing the net, checking emails, chatting, watching DVDs. It’s not tortured as much as before. I quite get the whole “but this works fine, the hardware is still good” – you’re talking to someone who still has one of the first edition eeePC ASUS netbooks (the ones that have 4gb of hard drive space, solid state. Those ancient things) and it struggles, the poor dear, to do anything but word processing. Looking at those alternatives to Windows and Mac may open up options to folks who have old computers sitting around, and give them a second lease on life as say, your offline typing machine that’s safe from the threats of the Internet.

                  If your job requires you use certain software, or file formats, then that’s what you NEED. You don’t get a choice on that one, and I’m not going to beat you over the head with it. Just find out how to secure it better, because you don’t want to lose your livelihood, right? Keep up to date on what security you need for it. If you’re the average user, (and by average, I mean, “I use the computer for my online banking, browsing the net, emails, blogs, writing homework and stories and spreadsheets, and watch the occasional movie on”) then a Windows alternative might work betterfor you – there’s nothing wrong in finding out. Heck, if you play only steam games, we’d even say ‘get a steambox’ – but for the really avid gamers we don’t tell them ‘move to debian,’ we say ‘get windows 8.1.’ If one’s using mostly art software and sound editing software, there’s often recommendations for the use of Macs. This is merely widening one’s awareness of what’s out there, what’s available, what options you have, and being able to make one’s own decisions on what you’re willing to do to secure your self, and what you cannot do. (Like, I can’t NOT have blogging, because then I’d be entirely isolated. But I gave up LJ because it’s too unsecure for my own safety now.)

                  I will disagree with Sarah on one point: the risks I describe do not require a dedicated stalker to run into you and focus on you. Most of the risks I outlined before can be just as easy to have happen through random computer crime. I myself get occasional viruses from en-route email insertion – but it was a Windows-32 bit virus, designed to keylog and phish my credit card details. That’s typical net crime, not a targeted attack. Sometimes it’s us having customers because they had an infected email on their whole mailing list from someone ON their mailing list’s computer, because they got a popup or an image on a site that person was browsing innocently had malicious code embedded in a jpg. A few of them lost email account access and a few got their paypal accounts infiltrated. The paypal accounts had 2 factor authentication and authorization though and attempts to try get money from them failed because the transaction wasn’t authorized. (this was very recent, last week I think.)

                  Heck, just google this kind of stuff. SJW hacktivism aside, this is stuff anyone can be at risk for. This is open source, publicly accessible information. Be more aware. But the point is, we DO need to be more aware. So you can make the assessment of risk factor that you’re willing to take on. Because I’m not going to tell you there’s no risk. That’s a blatant lie, and it’s the wild wild web out there.

                  1. Malware note:
                    Just because you have good practices doesn’t mean you’re safe– our phone numbers got stolen from Facebook because one of our “too smart to worry” geek friends added a really obviously malware app, and it had access to all the information that HE did.

                    Unless you have zero connections with people who can occasionally do something dumb, it’s not really secure.

                3. “it will get us the attention of the Federales.”

                  This. And not just them. There’s been a major prosecutor tendency at all levels to claim that having ANY security on your system means you MUST have known how everything on your system got there.

                    1. I remember that– it was a downloading piracy case where they claimed someone was using their internet without their knowledge, and the guys claiming that having a password meant you had total control were the music lawyers.

                    2. IIRC it’s also been used in child porn cases. Doesn’t matter; the principal is still ridiculous.

                    3. Gads, my sympathy– should’ve told us so we could pray for you!

                      I mean, I know He’s not bound by time, but now I feel guilty.

                    4. When they forced a service conversion, the new device had a wireless router in it, which I disabled.

                    1. More like prosecutors relying on the jury being composed of those who can’t / won’t get out of jury duty.

              2. Oh, that’s the other thing — more than a fan have bragged they have my address (rolls eyes) apparently unaware I can use different ones and do — friends, acquaintances, paid drops.

                1. *big grin* They may have your address, but I have your blankey!

                  … alright, the Baron has it, and even though he’s asleep I’m not going to try for it. But it’s in the same house.

            2. Thank you, Mrs. Hoyt. I was worried but I’ve never had anything remotely resembling a stalker unless you count the dog when there’s food to beg.

        3. Your post also ignores that the SJWs and their ilk go outside the realm of cyberspace and what is They’re the ones who created the tactics of SWATting, doxxing, etc. – attacks that go beyond online arguments and threaten people’s lives and livelihoods.

          Self-Correction: Your post also ignores that the SJWs and their ilk go outside the realm of cyberspace and what is conceivable for us to be ‘sane’ – they will go above and beyond the call of ‘duty’ in the efforts of their cause.

        4. Hmmm… so we need some good information on cyber security, strong passwords, two-factor authentication where we can do it… and I guess I should switch my Linux Mint laptop from the Ubuntu to the Debian base package? (An old Chromebook testbed I muck around with occasionally)

          1. Actually, we should be more like Mossad. The analogy fits after all. HAMAS uses tactics of propaganda, intimdation, and victimhood to ‘gain popularity’. We cannot actually use these things well ourselves, since we already hold the image of being Israel, metaphorically. It doesn’t matter what we do in self defense. It won’t matter if we’re in the right. The screaming, shrieking SJW seals will still hurl themselves against us.

            So we must come up with weapons to lessen that effectiveness. I fear though, the necessity of such will not be popularly adapted by our own, even though they will be necessary.

  14. Sanford, I’m actually quite glad I was too busy this morning to respond to your post, because I got a very different picture of what you meant from your subsequent comments rather than what you originally wrote. What you originally wrote… has problems. A lot of problems. Not the least of which is that you sounded like you were on the verge of Concern Trolling for the SJW side!

    Rather than saying “Hey guys, we should stop doing X” where you don’t actually give any details of the behavior you’d like to see stop (that’s a very SJW tactic: the accusation of generic bad behavior on the part of unnamed perpetrators), you should recommend instead what you would like to see *in addition to* the entertaining smackdowns so skillfully pulled off by Larry, Sarah, John Wright, etc. for those of us who lack their facility with sharp words.

    I have a big problem with the way you essentially tell the MGC, “Hey, you have it made, just ignore the bullies.” It really came across to me like you were arguing that the MGC should essentially enable the emotional abuse and bullying that the SJWs do to others who don’t have financial independence – and it read as extremely naive, to boot. SJWs attack on the marketing front; that could be very, very bad for indie writers, no matter how skilled. How are you going to get a chance to show off your storytelling skills if everyone who’s not a fan hears of you as “that racist/sexist/misogynist/hater/bigoted author” BEFORE they ever pick up a book of yours? It’s going to take more than a mere denial to get out of that Kafkatrap.

    Ignoring them, even by just going “Nuh uh, here’s why you’re wrong,” and moving on, has *demonstrably* failed. For decades. Dialectic is where non-SJWs are strongest; but the thing is, SJWs are TOTALLY IMMUNE to dialectic. We must fight them on the only battlefield that is effective: rhetoric. That’s when coming back and pointing out that the hysteria over the shirt makes women look weak, silly, etc. rather than “empowered” is necessary. When pointing out that the Hugo Awards are biased… causes the SJWs to rally and EXPOSE THEMSELVES as hugely biased. You have drunk their Kool-Aid if you think that the Hugo results were a win for *them*. They got shoved right off their high ground of “these awards are based on quality” and now are having to say “it’s a popularity contest” – which was the WHOLE POINT of the exercise!

    Limited exposure benefits the SJW side because they are *raving lunatics* – but to people who aren’t familiar with their tricks, they can seem like sane individuals and therefore trustworthy when they tell people who haven’t been paying attention that So-and-So is a Super DoublePlus Ungood Person. Drive more traffic to them so that people can see and mock them for their ridiculous behavior. Stacy McCain has been buying a lot of feminist literature; sure this “supports” their sales numbers and such, but he’s doing that to EXPOSE their lunacy to people who might otherwise think that “feminist” means something *other* than “rabid man-hating lesbian.”

    A unilateral “ceasefire” will not prevent them from simply INVENTING things to trigger their rage spirals. If our side is not defending their targets as vociferously as theirs attacks *and striking back* (though with hopefully much higher levels of class. logic, and reasoning), we’re just going to see more and more tearful apologies and more and more people fired and blacklisted for ideological badthought. When the SJWs try to bully someone, rally around and send the people and corporations just as many signals from our side, just as loud, as they’re getting from the SJW contingent. And yes, that’s going to look like a “shouting match” – because they’re screaming in rage and hate, and we’re pushing back with facts, disdain, and well-deserved mocking.

    1. You raise good points. As the comments have shown my intent was for the little like myself use the large voices to hold the SJWs still while we whittle away at them from the back. The whole my kingdom for a horse thing. The thing I want is for us to stop giving the blog hits which they point to to show ho effective they are. A battle with Larry Correia gets them big numbers because most of his supporters will go to look multiple times and add their little bit . Whereas if we smaller fry let Larry, or Sarah or Col. Kratman run those battles we can do other types of damage that they will regret.

    2. Weird – I actually wrote something very similar this morning and it must have gotten eaten somehow – but in either case – HEAR! HEAR!

      The “iterated prisoners dilemma” from Game theory tells us why we cannot cease fire. We can discuss when it may be a good idea to shout, and when reason is OK, but hammer them we must.

      See esr on “sheep” for an example of rhetoric vs. reason.


    3. If the argument devolves into a shouting match then you have failed.

      We need to at least appear to be the adults in the conversation. If both sides come off looking like two pigs rolling around in the muck.

      Stay calm cool and collected.

      Be nice!

      When defending ourselves nothing says we have to or need to get down in the muck with them.

      Who is the uninitiated observer going to choose if we both come off looking like whinny children?

  15. I don’t think that any kind of “cease fire” is going to work. You’re dealing with people that want you dead.

    I believe it was Joe Kennedy that said just two or three months ago that anyone that disagreed with him should be imprisoned. He went a little bit further a few moments later and said that anyone that disagreed with him should be put to death.

    A cease fire allows them more ground to work with. If they really should come to complete power, they will find henchmen willing to get get their hands bloody.

    My feeling on this is we’re in a civil war. It’s started. We’re just not in the bloodshed end of things yet.

    Don’t want it to go that far? Then stand up to them, push back, and let them know what you think, every time they step out of line. Every time.

    Concede ground? We get closer to the bloodshed no one really wants.

    My view on this

      1. I haven’t seen anyone fight “their kind of fight” on any of the “Evil” blogs. They come in, insult, bluster and lie.

        Someone like Lars gives them reasoned arguments and the truth. Cedar might smack them a little bit, but it starts with reasoned truth.

        If you want to add “intelligence” to things, fine. But stopping “shirt fronting” them just allows them to take more ground. You might not see it as ceding ground, but it is.

        We’ll probably have to agree to disagree.

      2. What do we call their kind of fight? We may use some of their tools, but until they will listen to reason, we must deal in emotion, even if they dress it up in the Potemkin village version of logic.

  16. I’m sorry Sanford, but other than ‘how one fights back’ I can’t agree with you. They take a non-response as a victory. They also take abuse as proof you’re ‘evil’ – even if they opened the game with it. The rest of the world needs to know we exist, and there are a lot of us – remember these are a tiny, very noisy minority – thriving only in the very fact we feel sorry for them, and thus successfully bullying their way into control, which is what they want. The little recruiting their being driven into the laager does for them, is easily countered by the heart it gives our ‘side’ (that’s a very loose term. Anyone who doesn’t fit their very narrow bounds is the enemy, or a serf. In reality our side are a herd… of cats.) They don’t deal with laughter, mockery, polite disdain, and logical shredding. They just love death threats (if these were plausible they’d be terrified) or abusive language – which they can then use as recruiting fodder.

    Expect – as Larry, Sarah, and I have had, and no doubt Cedar too will get if she hasn’t had already, ‘made up shit’ and whisper sabotage campaigns. But don’t give them ammunition or any reprieve. They have less honor than they have a sense of humor, and they have less sense of humor than I have finer feelings about Clamps’s ‘art’.

    1. …I’ve got to say, I don’t actually look at Clamps’ artwork, because I was told it was only a shade … vaguely… better… than his ‘writing.’ Spare my eyes. Besides, I have no interest in his stuff, and don’t go there. So… uh. yeah. I don’t know how bad it is. I’m told his landscapes are ‘kinda ok.’

        1. Where can this “art” be found?

          Hey, I run RPGs that often overlap with cosmic horror. I can always find a use for non-euclidean drawings done by a madman.

  17. Reblogged this on The Worlds of Tarien Cole and commented:
    I cannot disagree with this article more strongly. History shows that when one refuses to engage an enemy, the enemy takes what you have given up. Every ground. Every front. We do not POSSESS the ground to surrender any longer. The Media belongs to the Left in total. The average consumer does not KNOW there is an alternative to the SJW position unless we present it. And the idea that the SJW’s are ‘winning’ on #Gamersgate is laughable.

    We don’t need to ‘scream.’ But the idea that juse one or two places to reply for all of us is stating that the rest of us don’t have a voice. We don’t have our own minds. That is the kind of pernicious groupthink I associate with the Left. Not with those who believe in Liberty and autonomy.

    As for ‘driving traffic’ to them, I don’t buy that because again–they control the voices that will be heard by the Mainstream if we do not cry out. If we don’t talk about the stupidity of a woman being allowed to trade horizontal favors for positive reviews, then Sarkeesian’s slander becomes fact. If we don’t propose and act on alternate agendas, then the only agenda is the Lefts. Sure, be sneaky. But don’t JUST be sneaky. You have to have ground to win it. And we’ve lost far too many hills already to offer up more.

    1. I think we should all hit at once, in massed confusion. A giant attracted by a multitude of fleas is going to be in trouble, if for no other reason because anemia. They’re only giants of evil, but….

      1. I agree. That’s another part of the reason I dislike the idea of being silent except for a handful of places. If there’s only 1 or 2 such sites on the net, then the Left can claim it’s just a couple crazy cooks, safely ignored.

        If it’s an army of Breitbarts, it cannot be ignored. Not only should we be fighting. We should be fighting by their rules and hitting back twice as hard. If they break the rules of civil discourse, make them regret it. Mockery, holding them to their own standards, ram the Rules for Radicals right back at them. And do it with a broadside, not just a couple sharpshooters.

  18. What I have discovered is that there are those who will come to this blog and others when we name them or their organization and stamp their feet and cray as loudly as they can that we are wrong. Yet, when you challenge them to respond to the post or comment with facts backing up their stance, they disappear. These are the ones we have to keep after because they are, all too often, the ones who are in positions of influence and who will use that position to push their agenda. But, when we can show that they either refuse to debate the issue or simply cannot support their position with facts, that helps prove the falsehood of their stance.

    Then there are the ones who do the drive-by comments. I’ll give them once or twice to respond with some factual support for their position and then usually ignore them. They go away and sulk. Some will claim victory because we didn’t engage,but they are the same ones who would have no matter what.

    As for the rest, if they come into my sandbox and refuse to play by the rules, they become chew toys. However, if I go to theirs, I try to stay with facts and figures — and the occasional snark. The way I look at it, I’ll convince more folks that they need to at least listen to and consider what I have to say if I don’t act like a harridan than I will if I scream to the heavens about my victimhood.

    But I have stood silent too long, as have many others. I will continue to discuss how I feel about the issues and I will continue to challenge those on the other side to prove the validity of their stances. I guess it is all a matter of tactics. I won’t go pull a “Boutin”. Nor will I go seeking out sites where the opinions are not the same as my own. However, I will defend in my own “home”.

    Hopefully this makes sense.

  19. Sanford: I think that too many people caught the “Cease Fire Proposal” Girded their loins and came out swinging. Your point that we need to ‘not lose it’ but fight with proven tools is the key. I got into this fight on a friend’s Facebook page. One of her friends was pushing the anti-gamergate thing.We exchanged a couple of different points where she copied the standard rebuttal and said how mean talking they were. I stated- “Well, it is their games and their playing field and you’re trespassing. It’s like your neighbor coming over to you while standing in your yard and telling you that you have to paint your house the color they want. Don’t you think that you might use some colorful language before telling them to get off your property.” That was the last comment in that thread. Didn’t have to yell at all. Of course, she wasn’t Rose; but, there are a lot of misguided children out there that yelling at is counterproductive.

  20. Sanford, you sound a lot more like the old Sanford I’m used to in the comments than you did in the post. Frankly if it wasn’t for all your replies in the comments I would be wondering if you had been hacked. Still and all I disagree with you on the whole. Not saying it is a bad thing to have silent people skulking around the edges and providing info and the occasional knife in the back. But you will always have some of them, until you have completely lost. We should be advocating for more leaders in the front, those are what is always needed. The hangers on to “our cause,” term used loosely, will become more numerous, braver, and not fade into the background only if there are leaders that stand their ground and fight, visibly.

    What you are advocating is for potential leaders to fade back into the darkness with the skulkers, which in turn only causes the skulkers to fade back further, because they don’t want to be near the front lines, particularly when it appears that the potential leaders are retreating. It is a strategy on how to slowly and steadily lose ground, and it is always harder to regain ground you have ceded than it is to hold it.

  21. On the side: this is my opinion on Net Neutrality.

    After a chat with the lads, apparently Net Neutrality is already countrywide enforced over here – Constitutional level I am told. Basically “No, a telecommunications provider cannot favor one business over another, or give one an unfair advantage over the competitor.”

    In other words, let the market decide, and no, the government isn’t going to bully the small guy for you.

  22. No, just plain No.

    I don’t do games and all I do in sci-fi is read, but I have been in the trenches for 2A/RKBA (Second Amendment/Right to Keep and Bear Arms) since 1975, and one thing I’ve learned is that you don’t *ever* stop. They don’t: they constantly re-use and recycle debunked “facts” and “statistics” and are always going on about “reasonable restrictions” and “commonsense gun laws”. One cannot ever cease slapping them down.

    A truce is tantamount to surrender. Don’t do it. If you’re not up to the fight, that’s OK. One needs to know one’s limitations, but don’t undercut those who can and do.

Comments are closed.