It was inclusive of both Ben Sisko and David Mack's posts. So board policy doesn't have a problem with someone picking a fight and being rude... or with someone fighting back.
Authors on the Boards
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
It was inclusive of both Ben Sisko and David Mack's posts. So board policy doesn't have a problem with someone picking a fight and being rude... or with someone fighting back.
I'm not so sure about that one. Take this thread for instance alone. Stuff like that does get thrown around regularly around here.
Personally, that's the biggest turn off this community has. Not that it tolerates regular cursing, that's just a symptom of the problem. It tolerates the members regularly flaming, being rude and insulting each other.
It's also worth noting that Mack didn't just post "Shut the fuck up." He also posted a well reasoned paragraph and ended it with saying that after he showed that the OP was being nasty and had an obvious ax to grind. Just because he didn't mention Mack by name is irrelevant- it was clear who the OP was targeting.
Now before someone starts with the "he only got away with it because he's an author" nonsense, let's also note that a regular poster would not be insulted in the matter that Mack was which alone makes this a special situation.
Now before someone starts with the "he only got away with it because he's an author" nonsense, let's also note that a regular poster would not be insulted in the matter that Mack was which alone makes this a special situation.
While the title was off putting, I really didn't see an insult in the body of the post, merely someone who doesn't understand the realities of writing long-running series/tie-in fiction.
And Mack wrote a pretty well-reasoned post up until he went off the deep end.
The OPs entire tone was insulting. He was trying to belittle the work.
While the title was off putting, I really didn't see an insult in the body of the post, merely someone who doesn't understand the realities of writing long-running series/tie-in fiction.
And Mack wrote a pretty well-reasoned post up until he went off the deep end.
There is a well documented procedure for how to deal with moderator action on this board, if you don't agree with an action, you PM the moderator first, only when you can't get a satisfactory response do you take it to the Moderators Action forum. This is NOT a thread for such discussion. So, BillJ and anyone else who does have a problem PM either LS or myself, and let's get this thread back on topic.
What's the phrase - "Your mileage may vary"? So no - I don't need to separate the two if I prefer not to. It's the same principle wherein I don't patronize local stores where the staff is rude. It doesn't matter how much of a sale they might have some week of a thing I might need - rude staff means they don't get my business. And authors who have been rude to me don't get my business, either.
As the saying goes, "YMMV."
I re-read that thread (thanks so much for linking to the end of the thread instead of where my actual exchange began with him). I maintain that I did NOT "treat him like shit." He made what he thought was a funny joke. I didn't know it was a joke, and said I hoped he wasn't serious. He got insulting from there, and several other posters helped escalate the situation. At no time did I say I expected Mr. Mack to "grovel for my forgiveness." A simple "sorry" or "excuse me" is not groveling. It's ordinary courtesy - at least in my part of the world.
What the rest of you are missing from this incident is that David Mack could have simply said, "Yes, I was joking. I don't really support book burning." To which I would have said something like, "Great, that's good to know, thank you for clarifying." And that would have THE END of it. Instead, he (and other posters) chose to get increasingly nasty to me, and I made the decision that I don't feel like rewarding this person by buying his books.
At no time did I say that I thought David Mack is a bad author. I do know he has a reputation for being somewhat repetitious in his vocabulary - but that's what other people on Trek BBS have said, not me. And I certainly haven't gone on Amazon and slagged his books by posting awful reviews - I know some people do that if they hate an author, no matter if the author's work is good, bad, or indifferent. That's not my way.
The way I see it is when David Mack, Christopher, Greg Cox, etc. come here to this forum, they are at least partially doing so as another form of doing PR for their books. It's a professional part of their work in promoting their books. So they ought to deflect the criticism, and if it seems really bad - there's that little triangular icon called the "report post" button. Maybe instead of getting rude and tossing around the curse words and insults, they should just report the troublesome post to a moderator and move on. That's what everybody else is expected to do.
I believe I said I did NOT want this dredged up in this thread. Can't you read? But since you did... Christopher and I have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes canon and what doesn't. He has the right to disagree with me and I with him - that's not the issue. The issue is when he TELLS me what I REALLY meant and that I have NO RIGHT to disagree with his point of view.
Again, my decision to drop his books from my collection has nothing to do with his writing. I'm not saying he's a bad author. I'm not telling anybody else not to buy his books. I'm saying I won't. Again, I refuse to reward anybody who's been rude to me.
Thank you for making this point - I feel the same way.
Uhh, no, we don't. The thread being referred to is one where Dune came up, and I haven't read Dune in ages so I did a web search to try to find some information about the chronology of that universe, and I entirely innocently posted what I read in the first online chronology I found, and you jumped down my throat as if I'd committed some horrible blasphemy because -- entirely unbeknownst to me -- some of the information mentioned in that chronology came from the Brian Herbert-Kevin Anderson sequels that I have never read and know nothing about. So I can't have a "fundamental disagreement" with you about Dune canon because I have no opinion on the subject whatsoever. Yet you kept haranguing me with lengthy, angry tracts on a subject I have no knowledge of or interest in. I did my very best to defuse that discussion and let you know that I had no opinion on the matter and there was nothing for us to argue about -- but clearly you still haven't gotten the message.
That's a lie. I never said that. I did say "don't give me that" in response to what I considered a narrow-minded opinion of yours, but that's simply an emphatic way of expressing disagreement. It means I don't accept it, that it doesn't carry any weight with me, that any argument offered to me in those terms has absolutely no chance of convincing me. That's not the same as saying you "have no right" to disagree. Of course you have that right, and I have the right to tell you I think you're wrong.
He did not get insulting from there, he asked you to lighten up and you took that as an insult. He didn't get insulting until you said you would no longer buy his books and said you did the same for John Varley for being a jerk, implying (and later confirming that is exactly what you meant) that David Mack was a jerk. You then made a snide comment about how he pissed off his paying public. That is why he got insulting. You also expected an apology because he used the word "dude" which most people would find ridiculous since it isn't an insult no matter what your gender is. Just because you happen to be "old fashioned" doesn't mean everyone else is, and demanding an apology when no offence was meant is usually considered more rude than the original remark - at least in my part of the world.
He made it clear it was a joke, at one point saying "obviously a comment made in jest", and he had asked you to lighten up before that. Your response was not "thank you for clarifying" it was
Now, do you see who was being rude?
Eh, I don't know about that. Especially Christopher seems to actually enjoy discussing Star Trek novels as a fan, the majority of his posts have nothing to do with his own books.
Everyone but you? So you are expecting authors to be held to a different standard than you? I thought the whole point was they are just regular posters like the rest of us. In fact, that was how you ended this post...
Look, we can all see the old posts, I'm not sure who you are trying to kid here.
I have nothing to add to this thread other than to say how much I love bureaucrazy. It's so exciting.
There's all kinds of critical nudging for which "Shut the fuck up" is a perfectly appropriate, if somewhat emotional, response.
To treat every sort of cavilling, nitpicking and baiting as if the Internet were just rife with pseudonymous Edmund Wilsons and all criticism is equally worthy of respect and always a valid call for self-examination by the creative folks whose work is being discussed is arrant nonsense.
If my new puppy expresses his disdain for my interior decorating skills my reasonable impulse is to bat his nose with a newspaper, and so it is with a lot of "literary criticism" by interested - but by no means necessarily informed, much less expert - anonymous strangers.
If some of you read the "Author responds" letters in the NYT Book Review for a couple of weeks your hair would turn white. Norman Mailer would have left you for dead.
To treat every sort of cavilling, nitpicking and baiting as if the Internet were just rife with pseudonymous Edmund Wilsons and all criticism is equally worthy of respect and always a valid call for self-examination by the creative folks whose work is being discussed is arrant nonsense.
If my new puppy expresses his disdain for my interior decorating skills my reasonable impulse is to bat his nose with a newspaper, and so it is with a lot of "literary criticism" by interested - but by no means necessarily informed, much less expert - anonymous strangers.
If some of you read the "Author responds" letters in the NYT Book Review for a couple of weeks your hair would turn white. Norman Mailer would have left you for dead.
Well, I started the thread because I thought this was an important issue that really needed to be addressed. I'm a big fan of the authors who post on here, and as someone who reads most of their books, and interacts with them regularly I'm getting tired off people throwing a fit because they didn't just sit down and taking when people started ripping on their books. Honestly, I don't think I've come across a single one of these situations where I didn't side with the author, at least not that I can remember. Now that's not to say I think they can do no wrong, it's just that most of the stuff people are saying about their books is just plain ridiculous.
Agreed. A lot of people seem to think all you need to be able to do to be a writer is tie a few sentences together. It's definitely much harder and more complicated than that.
Try reading and understanding what I SAID, rather than what YOU say I said. I said we have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes CANON. Period. NOT DUNE CANON. Just CANON. Surely you haven't forgotten all those instances when we were arguing about STAR TREK CANON and you kept telling me I wasn't saying what I was really saying? You kept telling me I didn't have the right definition of "canon" - YOUR definition, and then you sneered at me for being a "purist."
Obviously if you've never read KJA's nuDune books, you couldn't possibly be expected to have any relevant opinion on their merits or lack thereof. And I never claimed you did, so stop misrepresenting what I said, 'k?
How is "don't give me that" and telling me my opinion is "invalid" not just another way of saying, "Shut up, Timewalker?" That's how I interpreted it.
Did I EVER say I wanted him to apologize? No. I DID NOT. It's not my fault if SOME Americans ('cause I have never run into this mental block with Canadians) interpret a civil "oops, sorry" as "groveling." Maybe you people would have a more civil society in general if more people practiced a little normal courtesy when a mistake is made.
His use of "obviously" implies I was at fault for not automatically knowing he was joking. So I let him know I didn't find his "joke" funny. If he'd left out the word "obviously" it would have been a simple, civil reply and I wouldn't have felt angered by it.
There was a time when Christopher and I had a few exchanges that had nothing to do with disagreements over canon, or whatever else this current batch of nonsense is. However... if an author says something here (ie. "Shut the fuck up") that he wouldn't say in person at a convention appearance or bookstore signing session, to me it shows a lack of professionalism. Because if an author is here on Trek BBS as a FAN he wouldn't have the "Author" title under his username, would he? Since he's using the "Author" title, he's obviously here at least in part to promote his own books. That's doing an aspect of the PR portion of what is included in an author's job. This means an author should make an effort to be professional in demeanor, and not fly off the handle at somebody because he misunderstood something a poster said and then refuses to listen to an explanation.
Yes, I can see those posts, too, and I assure you that I know what I mean a hell of a lot more than you know.
^In the middle of that rant, did you seriously lecture people about how to have a more civil society?
Did I imagine that?
Did I imagine that?
Actually it says "Writer" And that they're here to do PR is an assumption on your part. They might just like to interact with other fans. I think being on a BBS is different than an interview, con panel or in store appearance. I know at cons things can get pretty wild, especially "after hours". This BBS is after hours, IMO.
I think it's worth pointing out that I was a member of this BBS before I became a Trek author. In fact, it's because of my membership on this BBS that I got acquainted with KRAD, who invited me to pitch for SCE and thereby started my Trek writing career.
Similar threads
