Skip to content

Tripping the SFWA Fandango

Not so long ago on my blog, I gave the sad history of my association with the organization that purports to represent all the Science Fiction and Fantasy writers of America.

If you don’t feel like clicking on it, (but you should!) I started out wanting into SFWA, was told it only accepted professionals.  Eventually I viewed my acceptance (after 13 years of trying) as a sign that I was a professional.   It was a badge of validation, too hard to come by in writing.  Also, they had pretty good suites at cons, back when cons were necessary for keeping in touch with publishers who bought your work.  And I heard they would mediate should I have problems with agent/publisher.

Yay, SFWA is a really good bargain

So I was like:

Then time went on, I found out that my publishers and my agents were also members, and it would take a lot more than funky quantum statements where the PRINT RUN changed (and not upward) every time to have SFWA even speak impolitely to my publisher.  After all all the members worked for this limited pool of six publishers (ah, the good old days) so they couldn’t afford to offend anyone.  And the health insurance thing never materialized and essentially I was paying 90 (?) a year for a directory of other SFWA members.  Since at the time this was almost all of my professional colleagues, and the only way to contact them was to have their email address, I continued being a member.  And hey, SFWA did go after small-press scumbags and put out warning lists for the real bad ones.

So I thought, okay, fine.:

Whatevs. SFWA. Something.

Then… well, then the last five years happened.  I started looking into indie, and having friends who wrote indie. Then I started publishing indie.

Somewhere in the middle of this I find that SFWA has inserted itself in a dispute between Amazon and a distributor, on the side of the — small, lit and lit — distributor to the point of removing the buy through Amazon buttons from their member pages.  And I went “wait a minute! The organization that won’t mediate flagrant abuses by the people most of us have to work for is going after the most profitable indie outlet where people are finally making a living from writing?

Maybe I’ll let my dues go a while, to see if this is corrected.

And so I let my membership lapse, you know?  I was tight on money and well…

Which is too bad because I missed the grand exit when SFWA went after Malzberg and Resnick for swearing in church saying Lady and referring (in the most respectful tones) to a beautiful editor they’d known.


This meant I was also not able to resign in response to their kicking out a life member for getting in a p*ssing contest with someone who was just as rude and stupid (more so, if you consider speeches in which she does things like claim all of Australia is racist or where she claims it’s now legal to shoot her down on sight in the US.  Yes, someone can be ruder and stupider than Vox who is a shock-blogger and a shit stirrer.  Take for instance shooting her on sight… even if it were true that people could be killed with impunity in the US (it’s not, for those outside the US) people would have to KNOW she was black.  Guys, younger son or I (if I got a perm) would have a better chance at death in those circumstances.)  I’d have been sort of okay (not really, life membership is life memberhsip and after all some of the SFWA members earn membership WHILE IN JAIL FOR MURDER, but) with SFWA kicking them both out for conduct unbecoming of anything above kindergarten.  I’d still protest kicking ANYONE out for thought crimes. But as it was she had the badge of self-identified minority.  So she’s feted and treated as important, and he’s kicked out.

Take that with the Resnick thing and I was going “Um.”

And I missed quitting when they were all over social media bragging about giving the Nebulas to all females to make up for the years and years where females didn’t get awards, because, you know, people like Connie Willis, for instance, aren’t female.  Apparently.

With the help of a fan, I did a compilation of all the women who won SF awards before then.  (Yes, there are some males there — most notably China Mieville, I think, because the fan put in ambiguous names, and I only weeded MOST of them out because it was late, I don’t get paid for those articles and my keyboard was being funny.)  But it’s still impossible to ignore how many women there are, particularly in the Campbell.  So claiming you’re giving the award to an all-woman slate, even if there are better males to compensate for past injustice is just…

I mean, wait. You’re practicing sexism to make up for sexism that didn’t actually exist, but that’s okay because all of society is sexist, so you can be sexist and that will make it non sexist? Ow, my head hurts.

Since then I’ve watched from a distance while figures with influence over SFWA beclown themselves in various interesting ways.  Not watched too closely mind, because I have work and I’m not that invested in the seriously misnamed organization.

this is me not caring.

At the same time, I watched friends indie publish and make way more than I did with my first few books.  And I published my own indie novel.

And then yesterday Amanda sent me this link.

For those not on the book of faces, here is the announcement in its amazing … amazingness:

In a referendum with a third of voting members participating and over 6 to 1 in favor, the membership of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America has approved bylaw changes that enable SFWA to accept self-publication and small-press credits for Active and Associate memberships in the organization. We are using existing levels of income but are now allowing a combination of advances and income earned in a 12 month period to rise to the qualifying amounts.

SFWA President, Steven Gould, states, “Writers write. Professional writers get paid a decent amount for what they write. For the past five years it’s been apparent that there are ways to earn that decent amount that were not being covered by our previous qualification standards. Though these changes took a substantial amount of time, I’m grateful to everyone who worked toward this end.”

According to SFWA Vice President Cat Rambo, “I’m very excited to see SFWA moving forward and adapting itself to the changing face of modern publishing. SFWA will be much richer for the influx of knowledge and experience that the new members who have focused on independent and small-press publishing will bring with them.”

Specific details will be posted at by the first of March, but the basic standards are $3,000 for novel, or a total of 10,000 words of short fiction paid at 6 cents a word for Active membership. A single story of at least 1,000 words paid at 6 cents a word will be required for Associate membership. Affiliate, Estate, and Institutional membership requirements remain unchanged.

Self-published and small-press works were already eligible for the Nebula and Norton Awards, SFWA’s member-voted genre award, and will remain so.

SFWA will open to applications from small press and independent publishing qualifying members on March 1, 2015. Further information will be available at that time here:…/join-us/sfwa-membership-requirements/

For membership questions not answered at the link above, please contact Kate Baker, at For information on SFWA or the Nebula Awards, or to request interviews or other information, please contact Jaym Gates, at

So there you have it, ladies and some gentlemen who don’t hold any objectionable-by-the establishment opinions.  You’ve worked hard.  You made it (probably way more than 3k per book, if you’re like my friends.)  And now you have your reward.  SFWA has unbent from its Olympian height to say that yes, you’re a real writer and you can have your trophy.

You’re jumping for joy and breaking your neck to pay dues to an organization that will slander Amazon and make a spectacle of itself over correcting injustices that never happened, right?  No?


I’m not saying they won’t get some people.  Some people need validation.  Hey, I did once upon a time.  And some people — fewer in indie — can get brownie points with their employer (mostly if it’s a college, which is more usual with traditional authors) for being a “professional writer.”

But for the rest of indies, I’m going to guess joining an organization that confers no benefits other than a directory that has been superseded by social media and the approval of people who view SFWA as an organization for politically correct little girls and the men who wish they were politically correct little girls is something that holds little to no appeal.

SFWA’s ladies, girls, politically correct sewing circle will continue doing their dance.

Yay, SFWA and right think. And SFWA

But my guess is most indie authors will be going:

I’m so interested I could zzzzzzz

Yes, it could be different. Yes, SFWA could still redeem itself by finding the guts to challenge the increasingly more horrible contracts of traditional publishing, ditto the increasingly more horrible statements. Or they could try to get some sort of distress provision going for writers who work in one of the most unpredictable professions in the world. REALLY any sort of benefits. I’d settle for burial benefits when I die with my hands on the keyboard. ANYTHING but being a mouth piece for Marxist concerns over problems that either don’t exist or which they couldn’t fix if they tried.

Racism? Sexism? Other isms? You had ONE job SFWA…

But of course the problems they can’t fix are so much more fun to rail about because, well… they can be heroes and no one expects them to fix anything or do anything real.

That’s nice… I guess. But here outside SFWA writers write, and this hybrid author is late on two books, and her indie friends are pounding keyboard like crazy.

So we’re very grateful — don’t get us wrong — for SFWA’s condescension to us, the unwashed, but we would rather not partake if it’s all the same to them. Indie is hard, and we save our money for things with real value.

Nothing but love… but we’re sort of busy. So we’ll go do real stuff, okay? You women, ladies, girls, people of vaginitude and those cowed by them carry on, okay? I mean, when we have time, we like having something to laugh at…

  1. Pat Patterson #

    You know, if they gave you a HAT, it might be worth joining. The National Rifle Association gives you a hat. Why not the SFWA?
    I think all the indie writers should hold out for a hat.

    February 4, 2015
    • No, we’re writers. Give us a pen! And not just any ol’ bic from the shelf, hold out for a fancy-dancy one. 😉

      February 4, 2015
      • Christopher M. Chupik #

        “I joined SFWA and all I got was this lousy hat”.

        February 4, 2015
        • Pat Patterson #

          Maybe the hat could have glittery hou-has on it.

          February 4, 2015
    • Hats make everything a little better!

      February 4, 2015
      • “Und a plan vere yu lose your hat iz?”
        “A bad plan?”
        “Right again!”

        February 4, 2015
    • CF #

      Well, why shouldn’t they give out hats — they already sing the same songs, and have lists of “people we are going to visit at three in the morning”….

      February 4, 2015
      • Luke #

        They should all receive beanies. With propellers.
        Then they could all wear them to Cons to show solidarity with each other.

        February 4, 2015
  2. The SFWA is “a mouth piece for Marxist concerns over problems that either don’t exist or which they couldn’t fix if they tried” AND a stealth corporate tool who purports to be for “the little guy.” Sounds like AARP and the insurance companies. Or the whole freaking Democrat Party. At least the GOP lies about being pro-business as it screws over small business at the behest of big business.

    February 4, 2015
  3. Christopher M. Chupik #

    Sarah, you are the gif that keeps on giffing.

    February 4, 2015
    • f #

      WINS a gold plated Internet!

      February 4, 2015
  4. Uncle Lar #

    I’m guessing here, but isn’t SFWA an organization that elects its officers by vote of the membership? I propose “Sad Puppies Unchained: The Reconing!” where we get enough indie writers to join to elect our own slate of officers. Hell, I’d even file the serial numbers off a couple golden age stories and repackage them just so I qualified to get in on the action.
    It would leave a burning question. Who do we stick with the job, Sarah or Larry?
    Does bring one visions of teams in full hazmat suits cleaning up the residue from all the exploding poopy heads, don’t it now.

    February 4, 2015
    • If this happens, you have to give it to Larry. Let the accountant loose! And watch the traditional publishers go ballistic when he asks them to explain the royalty statements they put out.

      February 4, 2015
      • I LIKE it.

        February 4, 2015
        • Luke #

          Like? LOVE!

          February 4, 2015
      • Matthew #

        Wait – wouldn’t that cut into his writing time?

        February 5, 2015
    • This would sooooo get the “It’s not the votes, but who counts the votes, that really matters.”

      February 4, 2015
  5. You know me. You know I am not a SJW. So I hope you will hear me out. Membership organizations like SFWA are directed by their membership. I am a member. I worked for years to get the new qualifications passed, because it was obvious that SFWA was becoming irrelevant.

    I have been an association executive three times in my life, once as the President of CorgiAid Foundation, and twice as an officer of the International Society of Automation. I am an author and editor of science fiction and fantasy. I have some cred in this matter.

    Here’s how it works. SFWA, as SFWA, has no politics, no point of view. The politics come from the members. If you don’t like what they are doing, and you are not a member, you have no voice, and no say or stake. SFWA is an organization that is member directed. Want to change the direction? First you gotta be a member. We worked very hard to allow people who were frozen out to become members, just so we could change the direction of the organization. I don’t think your point of view is helpful. Understandable, but not helpful.

    If you want an organization that is responsive to the needs of indie writers, and has things like health insurance and retirement annuities, and stuff, you have to have the membership vote to do those things. If you don’t like the demographics of the organization, either age or political, you need to recruit members who are more in accord with your opinions and desires.

    I happen to think that it is worth something to have an organization that is supposed to look after the state of writers in the genre, and I work to make sure it does that. I want to have SFWA audit the real numbers that Kathryn Rusch and others talk about. I want them to do a lot of things. I want them to step up and be a professional organization.

    Of course, you can always badmouth SFWA in favor of not having an organization, for whatever reason you want. But that won’t get you the things SFWA _could_ provide.

    So, I want to invite you to rejoin SFWA and invite all the indies and others who don’t belong to SFWA to join and make it the organization it _should_ be. If you want the Nebula awards to be more welcoming to Human Wave writers, you have to be members to nominate and vote.

    You can complain, you can ignore SFWA, or you can actually get off your ass and do something to improve the situation.

    Your choice.

    February 4, 2015
    • Pat Patterson #

      I vote for ignoring the SFWA.

      February 4, 2015
    • sanfordbegley #

      Or they can all be Voxed as soon as they don’t toe the leftist line. No problem for anyone already a leftist but a large percentage of the indies aren’t

      February 4, 2015
    • You are right, it could be done this way. But do you suggest we be upfront about it, as mentioned in the above comment, or be dishonest the way that progressives do it? And if organizations like the SWFA deny membership to people who they find politically distasteful and/or disruptive, wouldn’t that give lie to the claim that it is not political in nature?

      February 4, 2015
    • Eamon J. Cole #

      I happen to think that it is worth something to have an organization that is supposed to look after the state of writers in the genre, and I work to make sure it does that.

      I have seen nothing, past or present, to indicate this organization will ever fulfill that mission statement.

      It’s not integral or necessary to the success of writers, particularly indie and particularly now, so where is the benefit in fighting an entrenched attitude in hopes of steering the organization toward things it has shown no inclination to do? For the prestige?

      Barring shifts which, you’re right, are unlikely to happen absent extensive involvement I don’t see any value-added benefit in membership. In the absence of any benefit I don’t see the extensive involvement manifesting. People will spend their time more wisely, I suspect.

      February 4, 2015
      • Synova #

        I think that making it so that indi authors can qualify is an “indication” of movement in the right direction. I think it is important to be clear about that.

        Granted, it’s a first step and not an end goal.

        There are still the abusive traditional contracts and earnings reporting practices of the big publishers. It’s at least possible that an influx of indi authors will lend some backbone now that not every single person in the organization doesn’t dare piss off their publisher.

        There’s still legal help and insurance, if they do any of that or could do it better.

        And of course there’s still the issue of unequal enforcement of civil behavior (or the fact that SFWA feels it must do this at all.) And the stupidity of the notion that a “professional” organization ought not have campy sci-fi/fantasy covers on it’s newsletter. (Not having a barbarian in a chain bikini on the “professional” publication for SFWA is like prohibiting pictures of cows from the cover of the Cattleman’s Association or, as RWA was trying for a while, Romance to stop having bodice ripper covers.)

        February 4, 2015
    • Walt, I’m sorry but not only no but hell no. It has been a very long time since SFWA has proven that it looks after writers. If it did, it would be fighting tooth and nail to get better contract provisions for its members. It wouldn’t be siding with the publishers each and every time they go into contract negotiations with Amazon. It wouldn’t remove links to Amazon in support of those publishers. As one of those indies who have made more last year, by far, than is currently required as an advance from a “real” publisher and yet I have been unable to join the organization that so clearly has little care or concern for “my kind”, why should I now start giving it financial support?

      But I will take it one further. I have been a member of RWA. I may one day renew my membership with that organization. Why? Because it recognized that publishing was changing and took action. It didn’t wait around, sitting on its thumbs until it was too late. It also has resources that actually are useful to the day-to-day life of the members. It encourages new authors and helps established ones. Sure, there are problems with it but it doesn’t seem to have the junior high mentality of SFWA.

      Finally, any respect I might have had for SFWA disappeared with the Resnick/Malzburg/Rabe incident. Oh the howls of outrage and calls for heads to roll. Why? Because a couple of “old white men” and an editor who was doing her job didn’t bow down to the gods of political correctness. Science fiction is a place for everyone and yet SFWA has become a clique of only the right-thinking folks. Sorry, but I have enough drama in my life without dealing with those who take pleasure in trying to ruin careers of others just because they don’t fall into goose-step with those who scream the loudest.

      February 4, 2015
    • Walt, I’d be tempted to simply quote the Sage of Brantwood, Groucho Marx. I’ve followed SFWA politics for, oh, 30 years. I’ve been a professional writer — I get paid for it — and editor — I get paid for that too — for a good part of that time, aqlthough it turns out my metier is non-fiction, so I’ve never qualified for SFWA. But I’ve followed it.

      Here’s the deal: one might, in the 50’s, have said “Hey if you don’t like the Communist Party’s positions, you can always vote to change them.” Or “If you don’t like the Ku Klux Klan, get more liberals and black people to join.”

      Of course, there’s a point beyond which it fails to work: you pipe up with a sufficiently different point of view, and they simply expell you, if not take you out and leave you bleeding in a ditch.

      When that point arrives, ethical people, and people with a reasonably developed sense of self-preservation, get out.

      Now, Vox Day, who I’ve noted before is obnoxious and disliked, was nonetheless a fully qualified life member of SFWA; he was also nonetheless expelled for crimethink.

      Now, I’m not suggesting SFWA is just like the Klan. It’s more like one of those obnoxious community theater groups, or a homeowners association, or a couny planning advisory board, in which a few aspiring fascists take over and use it to exert their authoritah.

      But there’s a time at which you have to ask “Should this group be getting my money?”

      SFWA made a tiny step here by allowing indie-published writers in, grudgingly, but it also has spent much of the last couple years taking official positions inimical to indie publishing.

      So why should SFWA get indie-published writers’ money?

      They’ve spent a good bit of the last several years taking official actions against people more “conservative” or “libertarian” in political positions, from Vox to Scott Card; hell, the just past president of SFWA came right out and “volunteered” to “help” writers who committed crimethink sexual harassment “destroy their careers.”

      This is doubly troublesome when they’re reaching back for examples of saying “wow, she looked great in that bikini” as an example of harassment, and when they include in crimethink Scott Card’s religious objection to non-traditional marriage. I don’t recall SFWA taking any position in favor of Scott’s right to his own opinion when the “Boycott the Ender’s Game movie” movement came out. In fact, quite the opposite.

      So why should SFWA get these more conservative writer’s money?

      Now, they’re encouraging the notion that one’s writing skill, one’s skill as an artist, isn’t as important as what’s between your legs. Beyond the fact that it’s just stupidly ignorant, since as we showed in the BPF piece, women have hardly been under-represented in awards or publications in the last 30 or more years, there’s the other point, which is that frankly if you’re paying attention to the authors lack of balls in real life, you’re neglecting whether the actual writing has the cojones to be a strong story.

      The manuscript is little black letters on white paper; it doesn’t know what sex the typist is.

      So why should SFWA get the money of any writer who cares about the art and craft of writing?

      At some point, you have to recognize that you can no longer support what a group is doing, no matter how democratic the charter may be. In SFWA’s case, when they made it clear they were no longer an organization focussed on writing, but rather on being the right kind of person, they passed that point.

      February 4, 2015
      • IF I tried to save SFWA it would be for the sake of the GOOD people of all political orientations who still think it worthwhile: Esther Friesner, Jerry Pournelle, Dave Truesdale. I’ll note none of these gave me the smarmy “if you don’t like it, join and change it” which was a favored tactic of communists in my youth and which they only said of organizations they had full control of.

        February 4, 2015
        • Eamon J. Cole #

          It must also be noted, as a professional organization, membership can be seen as an imprimatur of the organization and its policies.

          As a business decision (Get paid! Money flows to the writer. Etc.) that membership has to be evaluated according to how it might impact your brand. Most readers don’t know or care anything about SFWA but, as the current crop of darlings has made such a point of airing the laundry for acclaim, people are hearing things. They have no reason to delve into the inner-workings to see who’s on which side of what fight. They’re just reading the headlines.

          I can’t imagine the value of attaching your name to those headlines. Not for writers wishing to entice readers with good stories.

          February 4, 2015
    • Why not just ignore SFWA and make our own version of it, then watch as SFWA dries up and blows away? Which seems very likely, given that you’re kicking out competent writers to protect no-talent hack racists like N. K. Jemsin from having her panties bunched.

      February 4, 2015
      • Tradain liMarchborg #

        Who else got kicked out?

        February 4, 2015
        • No one, because we didn’t rejoin in order to be kicked out. Considering the SJWs think I’m the world’s worst person and that they wish people like Jerry would die, the chances of my joining are less than those of a snow flake in hell.

          February 5, 2015
      • Mary #

        eh, what would our own version do for us? Are we in a position where forming an organization would aid us? Bear in mind that there are legal restrictions on what such an organization could do.

        Perhaps we should stick to movements, which are freer and consume fewer resources.

        February 6, 2015
    • Well, said. And, in a perfect world, where the playing field is level and everybody operates by Marquis of Queensbury Rules or Robert’s Rules of Order, but we must remember Conquest’s law of organizations. Any organization which does not have an avowed rightist purpose in its DNA will inevitably become leftist over time. This is a fundamental truth which we in the Right cannot afford to ignore.


      February 5, 2015
    • masgramondou #


      I know you wrote this from the best of intentions but I’m sorry to say I think you are wrong. I’ve seen any number of organizations that end up like SFWA (appears to be from ourtside that is, not being a member, maybe there’s some secret inner bit that is different but it doesn’t seem like it) where the people running it and organizing it are in it for that/them not for the stated mission of the organization. Jerry Pournelle calls it the Iron Law of Bureaucracy, but I think it is more like the Iron Law or Organizations. It happens everywhere from HOAs and Parish councils to trades unions and giant corporations. The people who rise to the top are the ones who have the time to politick and lobby and kiss ass while the people who are actually doing stuff don’t and so end up in junior roles and then ignored.

      It gets worse. If you join to change then you have to be active in the organization – which will of course kill your productivity in the actual paying work area – and you have to have a large number of other like-minded people with you. If you do that, then you and your fellow reformers will (if they succeed in getting to positions of power) end up having to sanction all the previous regime for their failures and that will lead to even more civil strife because these political weasels won’t take that lying down. Eventually you’ll probably end up with a schism anyway, but one where both groups get a portion of the organizations assets and the lawyers you’ve both engaged get the majority. I don’t see this as helping anyone

      February 5, 2015
    • You can complain, you can ignore SFWA, or you can actually get off your ass and do something to improve the situation.

      That’s nice and all but why? What possible benefit do I gain from the rather considerable effort to try to improve, let alone “save”, SFWA?

      Considering that SFWA has already crossed the Rubicon of booting someone for having “incorrect” views (yes, they fig-leafed it being about misuse of of SFWA resources, but considering the number of people who did the exact same “misuse” without being booted, that fig leaf is rather caterpillar gnawed), well, the first one is always hardest.

      I also was a member and remember what happened every. damn. time. someone suggested reforming the organization to better serve the needs of working professional writers. Every time. It does not leave me sanguine about any additional attempts. This Time For Sure?

      That’s the risk side. What’s the benefit? What goes on the other side of the risk-reward to counterbalance, to make taking that risk worthwhile?

      February 5, 2015
  6. SBP #

    I thought about asking in the comments over there whether they had a cheaper membership that didn’t include the “lynch mob” and “Marxist reeducation camp” benefits, but figured they’d just delete it.

    February 4, 2015
    • Kate Paulk #

      Those are core features. You have to certify you’ve successfully completed reeducation camp before you get to pay extra for author benefits.

      February 4, 2015
  7. Not having my first book published, let alone earning $3k, I don’t have skin in this game. But it sure doesn’t sound like an inviting place for indies. But someone has to bite the bullet and start the movement toward changing it, or else the Nebula is lost to us. And if we could resurrect that award, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

    February 4, 2015
    • No. The one thing SF writers were never any good at was judging each other’s work.
      Also yeah, sure “someone has to start” — but SFWA officership was always a career killer and that one would be a doozy. If I never wanted to write again, sure I’d do that. But working writers don’t have time. Hence…

      February 4, 2015
      • Uncle Lar #

        Quite relieved that you obviously recognized that I was joking about voting you or Larry in to head SFWA.
        You have three priorities:
        First, care for yourself. Get healthier dagnabit.
        Second, care for Dan, the boys, and the extended family.
        Third, write until your fingers bleed. We await patiently. (sure we do)

        February 4, 2015
  8. SBP #

    “If you don’t like what they are doing, and you are not a member, you have no voice, and no say or stake. ”

    Sure you do. You can refuse to join. Voting with your feet always counts.

    I won’t be joining (e.g.) the Nazi Party so I can have a “say”, either.

    February 4, 2015
    • I am not a politician. I am a writer. This organization is competing for my money. They’ve not convinced me they’re worth it.

      February 4, 2015
      • Tully #

        ^^^that right there

        February 4, 2015
  9. Uncle Lar #

    There I was of an evening, ready to kick back, just thought I’d check Facebook real quick then some mindless TV. Happened to find a desperate plea from a close on-line friend that she was under a deadline and needed some basic research done. I just happen to be fairly good at that sort of thing so I dove in.
    The basic data for both Hugo and Nebula were available in a format that allowed manipulation and editing, so step one was easy. Parsing the data by gender would have been a straightforward task of researching each and every name on the lists, probably taken a couple days. I had a couple of hours, so I went for the best guess approach.
    Total turn around time for the Hugo list was about 90 minutes. Had the Nebulas done about an hour after that.
    I was a bit surprised to see that my rough inputs were incorporated more or less as I had collated them a couple of days later in an article over on PJ Media.
    The clear message from the gathered data was that female writers have certainly been holding their own for the past 30 odd years or so. In some areas they are a clear majority. Since the facts are irrefutable, all the SJW critics have to grouse at are a few cases where I guessed incorrectly over an ambiguous name.
    Note to that on-line friend: next time I’m gonna double my fee young Portagee.

    February 4, 2015
    • It woulda been cheap at four times the fee.

      February 4, 2015
      • Uncle Lar #

        Funny man.
        Next time I’ll divide by zero and crash the internet.

        February 4, 2015
        • You’re just jealous that I outbid you.

          February 4, 2015
    • Join to be co-opted or silenced, eh? SFWA has demonstrated what it does with its disapproved and if I must exit through any open window I prefer it be at the hands of an angry husband. At least I will have had more fun that way than reading and talking about the tiresome tripe that is so much of your product.

      I’d rather vote to continue SFWA’s growing irrelevance to the field and its former noble aims.

      February 6, 2015
  10. SBP #

    “But someone has to bite the bullet and start the movement toward changing it, or else the Nebula is lost to us.”

    Building a reputation, though difficult, is a lot easier than recovering it once lost.

    My personal opinion is that a new award would be a better idea than trying to remove the tarnish from the Nebula.

    February 4, 2015
    • But what would you call the award from the International League of Hate? The Tetsubo?

      February 4, 2015
      • McChuck #

        The Golden Finger? You could have fun designing the trophy, and of course the Bond puns would never end.
        The Golden Pen? The Bond puns might still work, and the trophy would be simple.
        The Brass Cog? The trophy could be all steam-punky..
        Or talk to Joss Whedon and license the logo for the Evil League of Evil.

        February 4, 2015
      • The Looking Glass? The Hubble? *Playing with some ideas* Sad Puppies Made Happy?

        February 4, 2015
      • SBP #

        +1 for Tetsubo, especially if the statuette is of Mr. Correia holding one.

        February 4, 2015
        • That’s what I was thinking 😉

          February 4, 2015
      • Pat Patterson #

        A Happy Puppy humping the leg of a SJW.

        February 4, 2015
        • lonejanitor #

          Doesn’t seem like it would be happy, then

          February 5, 2015
      • The Inanimate Carbon Rod?

        February 4, 2015
      • Patrick Chester #

        The Spawn-Camping Manatee?

        February 4, 2015
      • The Claymore.

        Tetsubo is good, but too Japanese and not explodey enough.

        February 5, 2015
        • I like it. And it can look like a sword for the fantasy writers, and a landmine for the sci fi writers.

          February 5, 2015
        • Tetsubo not explodey? You gotta swing harder. OK, maybe splashy…

          February 6, 2015
          • Guest starring Dokuro-chan?

            February 6, 2015
    • The Nebula has become the Medal for Valiant Labor” of fiction, and those who win it happy little Stakhanovites eager to inform on their coworkers and neighbors.

      February 6, 2015
  11. SFWA should have known better than to piss off a bunch of writers!

    February 4, 2015
    • Christopher M. Chupik #

      They don’t need writers. They have social justice warriors.

      February 4, 2015
      • Looking at the steady decline in quality of the award-winning SF, and rise in quality of the unawarded SF, that’s a very true statemnt.

        February 4, 2015
      • Sam Hall #

        Let me fix that for you: social justice whiners

        February 4, 2015
        • masgramondou #


          February 5, 2015
  12. But of course the problems they can’t fix are so much more fun to rail about because, well… they can be heroes and no one expects them to fix anything or do anything real.

    Don’t you know, Sarah? You’re not SUPPOSED to fix the problem. 😉

    February 4, 2015
    • “I don’t want to stop crime, I just want to Fight it!”
      — The Tick.

      February 4, 2015
  13. Back when I was a member of SFWA there were, in theory, a few potential benefits. While insurance never happened, there was the “Emergency Medical Fund” which offered zero interest loans to members who had major medical issues. I recall there also being either discussion of creating or actually existing a similar legal fund. There was “griefcom” which, for a few people (or so I have heard) actually got them relief from some abuse by publishers. And the entertainment value of the online fora. Oh, and you could recommend works and vote for the Nebulas.

    After a while I looked at my annual dues payment. And I looked at the expectation value of the benefits. And even with the “entertainment value” it just wasn’t worth it. In fact, as SFWA sank further and further into SJW-dom that entertainment value became negative. So, no quitting in high dudgeon. Not even low dudgeon. Just let me membership quietly lapse.

    Now? I have a few piece I’m selling indie*. I’ve made a few sales. Not enough (yet) to qualify for the new SFWA indie membership (although I’m already qualified thanks to professional magazine sales), but I’ll get there. And, putting on my Indie Hat (as opposed to my Indy Hat–held on with staples 😉 ) I look at SFWA dues. I look at the value SFWA provides. And wonder “are you serious”?

    February 4, 2015
    • Pat Patterson #

      What? You get a hat for being Indie?
      And SFWA provides NO hat?

      February 4, 2015
      • yep! A hat and a whip.

        February 5, 2015
        • Christopher M. Chupik #

          DOO-DOO-DOO-DOO! Crack that whip!

          February 5, 2015
          • snelson134 #

            “Where there’s a whip, there’s a way.” — The Orc Band

            February 5, 2015

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Everybody Wants To Change The World | According To Hoyt

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: