fabricated SFWA fascists

Ignorance is unbecoming to everyone. Last night, there was a list of "SFWA Fascists" posted on Twitter. To the person who compiled that list: You keep using that word, but I don't think it means what you think it means.

Just because someone does not agree with your viewpoint does not make him or her a fascist, or a communist, or a socialist,* or even politically correct.

Likewise, treating other people like human beings worthy of dignity and respect is not fascism--it's called ... well ... being nice. If we were all nice to one another and treated one another like professionals, then we might just get along and quit acting like a hoard of raging hemorrhoids.

It's possible. Think about it.

Meanwhile, please stop calling people who do not agree with you "fascists," because if you persist, people who know what that word really means will think you're stupid.


*As a side-note: No one is a fascist/communist/socialist. That creature cannot exist except in a most Sybil-like manner and it would devour itself in rage, because all three of those things are antithetical to one another.

Skyhorse/Start acquires Night Shade Books

I spent the month of April deciphering contracts, contract law, and intellectual property law, not because I was bored and wanted to snarl my brain. It was in April that authors received the news that Night Shade Books was being purchased by Skyhorse Publishing and Start Publishing. This led to one massive brain hemorrhage as we all tried to comprehend what this meant for our books and any future novels tied with those contracts.

Thanks to Kameron Hurley, a Google group was set up and information started to flow. Some of this information was good, some of it was bad, some, well, ugly in that it wasn't what we wanted to hear, but it was the truth.

One of the biggest benefits that I received from being an SFWA member is the ability to participate in the SFWA forum. If you are in utter and complete publisher meltdown, that is the place to go. I received clear-headed assessments of the situation from experienced members. Several kind people emailed me off the grid with details that tipped the balance of my decision.

On the surface, the issue with Night Shade Books appeared as if the SFWA was coddling the publisher. As April progressed, my anonymous email advocates armed me with facts that simply could not be made public for many reasons. Once I possessed all the facts, I realized that the SFWA did the right thing.

Kameron did an awesome job as moderator of the Google group and I thank her and Mary Robinette Kowal, who really spent hours and hours of her personal time going to bat for us. Mary couldn't have done her job without the weight of the SFWA behind her, and for that I am very grateful both to Mary and to the SFWA for taking a part in these negotiations.

For a long time, everyone was between a rock and a hard place, and some authors still are. I am hoping for the best for everyone.

I only the briefest of statements about The Bulletin and the SFWA:

I did finally receive my copy of the Bulletin and I want to say for the record that I found the article very offensive. I have neither the time nor inclination to write a ranty blog post about it; there are plenty of those out there if you want to read one.

The SFWA is taking strides to amend this situation, so I intend to give my membership more time. I want to see what the SFWA does, and I also want to be a part of the solution if I am able. A lot of changes are happening, some of which are too rapid to document. So I'm sticking around for a while longer.

I hope so anyway.

I'll be around and if you don't see me, I'll be writing.

Change in the SFWA

E. Catherine Tobler posted an open letter to the SFWA earlier today about why she doesn't intend to renew her membership in the SFWA. Kameron Hurley gave more insight into the issue (see Kameron's post right here) as did Jason Sanford.

I make no dispute with Tobler's summary of the events leading up to her decision. After reading Tobler's post, I saw another author, who I respect, make the same decision for herself--that she would not renew her membership in the SFWA.

I, the last person on planet earth ever to receive the Bulletin, am still awaiting my copy in the mail. Since I have not read the article in question, I don't intend to make comments based on other people's blog posts--that's another post for another day.

Instead, I'd like to ask that the members who are quitting to please reconsider your decision. Organizations grow and change because the membership grows and changes. A very wise man once told me that the only way to change an institution was from the inside.

I understand your frustration; however, I also understand that a majority of the SFWA membership does NOT endorse Resnick and Malzberg's views. These members are working hard to change attitudes within the organization, and they can't work without us working beside them.

And change, being painful and unfamiliar, is often a long, arduous process.

I'm no stranger to change, pain, or arduous processes, and I'm sure none of you are either. Hence, I would ask that you please reconsider your decision. Whatever you decide, I will back you one hundred percent, but I do ask that you please stay and help us change.

That's all.