ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, February 04, 2013

A debate challenge is issued

My recent opponent on the issue of sexual equality, Ed Trinmell, has presented a debate challenge, which I have accepted:
Within eight hours of the debate challenge I issued to feuding bloggers John Scalzi and Vox Day, Vox responded positively in the comment threads of the original post.

Half of the debating lineup is on board. But what about the other man?

Within an hour of my debate challenge post, John Scalzi mysteriously posted an ad hominem attack against his opposition. Scalzi now states that he will make a charitable contribution at the end of 2013 in lieu of further acknowledgements of Vox Day, who has agreed to debate him in a neutral venue....

Should John Scalzi agree to this debate for the benefit of Children International, I will volunteer to function as moderator. My ground rules will be as follows:
  • This will be a civil, professional, and dignified debate. I will not allow ad hominem attacks, profanity, or excessive sarcasm from either man.
  • This debate will be fair and ideologically balanced. The questions will be equally weighted so as to favor neither Vox Day nor John Scalzi.
  • Specifically, I will challenge Vox regarding his views of women in the political process (which I am on record as opposing). I will challenge John regarding the premises behind his now-infamous “straight white male” essay—which generated a lot of controversy on the Internet last summer.
It's certainly an intriguing challenge.  Can I present a credible and convincing case for opposing equality in the political process?  Does McRapey have anything to offer in support of his claims of racial, sexual, and orientational equality beyond false game analogies and repetitive ad hominem attacks?

And then there is the question that all impartial parties will surely be asking: does John Scalzi possess the courage required to take the risk of having his spinal column metaphorically ripped from him in public?  My guess is that he does not.  He's a rabbit.  He's a gamma male.  His blog readership is smaller than mine.  His intellectual influence is miniscule in comparison with mine. He has no original ideas; he's little more than a parrot.  I strongly suspect that he cannot credibly defend his assertions, which is why he merely repeats them over and over again.

Just as PZ Myers disheartened his supporters by twice backing down, I assume that Scalzi will find a way to rationalize his inability to defend his views in public.  That lack of courage, that manifest lack of confidence in the strength of his positions, is one reason my influence will continue to grow in comparison with his, as was the case with regards to the Fowl Atheist, who is increasingly regarded as a joke even within the atheist community.  Dr. Myers tried the "I'm too important to waste my time on a crackpot" approach back in June 2008, when my readership was 38.5 percent of what it is now.  It may be worth noting that Mr. Scalzi's fans appear to be woefully ignorant concerning the facts of the situation.  Consider this tweet directed to my attention earlier today:

"just a thought, but "superintelligence" doesn't need to mooch off real thought leaders ( @scalzi ) to get people to notice you."

How, one wonders, can John Scalzi possibly be considered a "thought leader" of any kind?  He has no ideas of his own.  Even his fiction is openly derivative, whereas my original concepts have been cited in science journals, on Wikipedia, and provided scientists with hypotheses for which their subsequent experiments have found empirical evidence.  Furthermore, I have no need to mooch off anyone, least of all Mr. Scalzi, in order to get people to notice me.  Not only did he first come to my attention as a result of him and a number of other SFWA members reacting to one of my WND columns, but my blog readership first surpassed his in 2011.

This failure to understand that there are two sides to the political spectrum is apparently a common misapprehension on the part of the left; some in the SF/F community have publicly complained about Black Gate giving me a platform despite the fact that nearly a quarter of its annual traffic in recent years has come from VP alone.

Labels: ,

129 Comments:

Anonymous Tad2 February 04, 2013 9:08 AM  

You, with your words like knives,
And swords and weapons that you use against me.

You, have knocked me off my feet again,
Got me feeling like a nothing.

You, with your voice like nails on a chalk board, calling me out when I'm wounded.

You, picking on the weaker man.

You can take me downnn,
With just one single blow~

But you don't know,
What you don't know!

Someday, I'll be, living in a big ol' city,
And all you're ever gonna be is mean.
Someday, I'll be, big enough so you can't hit me,
And all you're ever gonna be is mean.

Why you gotta be so mean?

Anonymous The Gray Man February 04, 2013 9:22 AM  

Taylor Swift. Really man? (Tad2)

Anonymous Vidad February 04, 2013 9:27 AM  

It's obviously infuriating for leftists of all stripes to realize that someone of your unorthodox persuasions has an audience - a large audience.

That's the really burning pain for the wabbits.

Anonymous Vidad February 04, 2013 9:29 AM  

@ The Gray Man

That better be Swift's cover of a B-side AC/DC track or it's gonna get really rowdy in here.

Anonymous RINO February 04, 2013 9:30 AM  

I will predict that this will not happen. Him, all those like him, operate by trying to silence other ideas and engaging in a lifelong circle jerk. He will smite down this debate challenge with some sort of self-righteous rationale like "if I debate VD then I give racist homophobe dipshits credibility," and then all his followers will nod happily and continue on.

Anonymous Daniel February 04, 2013 9:34 AM  

Neutral site, strict rules? Totally biased in favor of Vox. He is, after all, not prevented from bringing his spear and magic helmet.

Spear and magic helmet!

Anonymous Susan February 04, 2013 9:34 AM  

Well, this should put the AWCA talents on show. Who gets to define 'excess sarcasm'? When somebody offers you good material, it would be rude to refuse it.

Vidad, you owe me a keyboard with that AC/DC comment.

Anonymous David of One February 04, 2013 9:37 AM  

About the only reason I can think of that he would point a crooked pinky to disqualify you from debating him is that you have not donned mesh hose, high heels and silky panties. (That image still reeks. The Ilk did not deserve such pain that day!)

On the other hand you might be fighting SB for her keyboard right now ... rolling on the floor with keys popping off all over the place ... but I seriously doubt it.

Anonymous VryeDenker February 04, 2013 9:40 AM  

The hard left doesn't have nearly as many supporters as one thinks. It is jsut that they yell much louder than everyone else.

Anonymous Roundtine February 04, 2013 9:41 AM  

But will Vox choose rationality or rhetoric?

Anonymous Thales February 04, 2013 9:41 AM  

Debate? A great idea, but JS will never in a million years accept it because he is a coward. Still, these types of challenges have their use: they illustrate who the coward is. When times get tough (e.g.: now) people will not be turning to cowards.

Also, I now desperately want to hear Taylor Swift do a cover of AC/DC – any song, I’ll let her pick.

Anonymous TLM February 04, 2013 9:44 AM  

Two sci fi writers in an internet fight, gay. Get back to posting what makes your blog enjoyable and interesting.

Anonymous The Gray Man February 04, 2013 9:48 AM  

RINO
He will smite down this debate challenge with some sort of self-righteous rationale like "if I debate VD then I give racist homophobe dipshits credibility," and then all his followers will nod happily and continue on.

This is precisely what I expect will happen. I believe this is what some people call a "safe bet".

Anonymous rycamor February 04, 2013 9:49 AM  

His blog readership is smaller than mine.

Subtextually pwned.

Blogger Nate February 04, 2013 9:49 AM  

" Get back to posting what makes your blog enjoyable and interesting."

You're either new here... or slow.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 9:50 AM  

Still, these types of challenges have their use: they illustrate who the coward is.

It's more than that. They illustrate which ideas cannot be successfully defended by those who hold them. You should understand that McRapey isn't merely afraid that he'll be humiliated by me in front of everyone, he's even more concerned that I will present arguments capable of convincing him. If he genuinely believed me to be a "dipshit", then he'd swagger into the debate without any hesitation.

Scalzi is far less concerned about what the facts and logic dictate than in being able to cling to his present beliefs. If he runs away, he only loses his credibility, which he thinks he will lose anyhow. But if he doesn't run, he loses his ability to hold onto his beliefs too. That's why I think he'll sacrifice his credibility on the altar of his equalitarianism.

Anonymous Make it stop February 04, 2013 9:50 AM  

"Two sci fi writers in an internet fight, gay. Get back to posting what makes your blog enjoyable and interesting." - TLM

I'll have you know that some of us here enjoy watching rabbit-smackdowns and eviscerations by an AWCA.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 9:52 AM  

Get back to posting what makes your blog enjoyable and interesting.

Which is what, to your mind? I'm just curious. Different readers find different things to be uninteresting.

Blogger Nate February 04, 2013 9:53 AM  

"Also, I now desperately want to hear Taylor Swift do a cover of AC/DC – any song, I’ll let her pick."

Heatseaker? Shoot to thrill? Dirty Deeds?

Anonymous the bandit February 04, 2013 9:53 AM  

I wonder how high the pledged donation to Children's International will have to get before the beleaguered SFWA President will start getting pestered by his readership to have an excuse to rise to the challenge "just to take money from all those RSHDs."

Probably higher than the alleged total of his funding drive, since he will point at that as an initial excuse.

Anonymous the bandit February 04, 2013 9:54 AM  

Also, did Scalzi realize how easy is it to add a coda that mentions him in the next 200 posts, like Jimmy Kimmel's "Our apologies to Matt Damon, we ran out of time"? It'd hit the cap on the donations within two months (including previous posts), which would still be fresh enough to watch the Whatever Wabbits try to squirm out of following through on their monetary commitments.

Anonymous JartStar February 04, 2013 9:57 AM  

RINO nailed it.

Anonymous Vidad February 04, 2013 10:00 AM  

"Hells Belles."





Blogger Edward Trimnell February 04, 2013 10:00 AM  

Vox:

Picking up on the above comment, I have one further condition as moderator: Both debaters must present themselves in attire that is conventionally appropriate to their M/F classification. Jim Hines may form the cross-dressing section of the audience if he wishes; but John will be disqualified if he shows up in drag. (That goes for *you* as well, BTW.)

I apologize if this fails to show a full appreciation for the diversity of the debaters, and all orientations and preferences that may be present among the viewership of the event. The primary purpose of this requirement is to avoid unnecessary distractions. (Also, John is far more practiced at cross-dressing than you are; and I don't believe you to be his equal in this regard.)

Thank you in advance for your cooperation on this important point.

Sincerely,
Edward Trimnell

Anonymous Vidad February 04, 2013 10:01 AM  

Oh wait...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlOya5dphnQ&feature=related

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 10:02 AM  

I have one further condition as moderator: Both debaters must present themselves in attire that is conventionally appropriate to their M/F classification.

This additional condition is acceptable to me.

Anonymous rycamor February 04, 2013 10:05 AM  

VD February 04, 2013 9:50 AM

Scalzi is far less concerned about what the facts and logic dictate than in being able to cling to his present beliefs. If he runs away, he only loses his credibility, which he thinks he will lose anyhow. But if he doesn't run, he loses his ability to hold onto his beliefs too. That's why I think he'll sacrifice his credibility on the altar of his equalitarianism.

This is the number one existential problem with most people. A friend of mine who led apologetics discussions used to ask the following two questions to any group of Christians he addressed:

"How many here consider yourselves truth-seekers?" (large show of hands)

"If you found that the truth was 180 degrees in opposition to what you now believe, would you still want to be a truth-seeker?" (90% of the hands go down instantly, most of the rest waver, only a couple remain firm)

Anonymous TLM February 04, 2013 10:07 AM  

The ecomoics stuff has been great and i've learned a ton. Same goes for the history, but its been some time since you did a voxiversity. And the wit used to lamblast the womrns issues was awesome. Since you started AG it hasnt been the same quality here as it was. The athiest stuff was good too, but this picking a fight with some no name fat f*ck sci fi writer appears like a massive DLV. Why waste time on those beneath you?

Anonymous Lulabelle February 04, 2013 10:07 AM  

I'm wondering if I can bribe Mr. Trimnell to hold the debate in Texas somewhere.

Anonymous allyn71 February 04, 2013 10:11 AM  

How could you not find this enjoyable and interesting? This is an offshoot of the great hrududu thread.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/01/a-rabbit-bites-back.html

One of the funniest, ejoyable, and interesting things I have seen on the internet in some time.

Do the sounds of the rabbit squalling bring back nightmares?

Man can not live on bread alone. Rabbit gotta Rabbit, Vox gotta Vox.

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 10:13 AM  

Why waste time on those beneath you?

You must not be able to recognize or appreciate great cruelty artistry.

Anonymous Clay February 04, 2013 10:13 AM  

Taylor Swift should give Big Balls a shot.

Anonymous Amanjaw Marcuntte February 04, 2013 10:13 AM  

"I will not allow ad hominem attacks, profanity, or excessive sarcasm from either man."

For Scalzi, that would be the verbal equivalent of a full disarmement.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 10:18 AM  

Since you started AG it hasnt been the same quality here as it was. The athiest stuff was good too, but this picking a fight with some no name fat f*ck sci fi writer appears like a massive DLV. Why waste time on those beneath you?

Interesting. I started AG in order to separate the Game discussions since many people had no interest in them. Any how, if I wasn't willing to waste time on those "beneath me", I wouldn't read the comments.

I'm not writing as much on economics because there is nothing new to write about. Everything is playing out as I expect, so far. I update the Z1 each quarter, and when something changes, I'll address it. But until then, what is there to say?

It's February 2013. Still no recovery. More Federal sector debt. More spending. Less Household and Financial debt. BEA statistics still unreliable.

Blogger Nate February 04, 2013 10:22 AM  

"It's February 2013. Still no recovery. More Federal sector debt. More spending. Less Household and Financial debt. BEA statistics still unreliable."

but but but...

14000eses!!!

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein February 04, 2013 10:22 AM  

VD:
This additional condition is acceptable to me.

One caveat: Hope the moderator doesn't find an emanating penumbra that includes pointy loafers and fruity umbrella drinks.
Slippery slope and all of that....

Blogger IM2L844 February 04, 2013 10:33 AM  

Also, did Scalzi realize how easy is it to add a coda that mentions him in the next 200 posts

I thought Scalzi said he had to be mentioned in the title. He knows that will effect google searches and direct more people to his site so he can sell more books. Smart.

I would guess Vox understands this as well, but I doubt Vox will give it much thought one way or the other. Vox could easily include Hot Topic triggers in the title of every post in order to leverage google searches and draw more people to this blog, but he doesn't seem to be interested in doing that sort of thing. Given that, I can't imagine that Vox would assign any weight whatsoever to Scalzi's little scheme when deciding what he wants to talk about at any particular point. I wouldn't, but maybe that's just me giving it more thought than it actually deserves.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 10:37 AM  

I thought Scalzi said he had to be mentioned in the title.

No: "an entry on his site in which he uses my name (or one of his adorable nicknames for me)"

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 10:46 AM  

It's February 2013. Still no recovery. More Federal sector debt. More spending. Less Household and Financial debt. BEA statistics still unreliable.

But surely aapl will come back and save the hedge funds!

Blogger IM2L844 February 04, 2013 10:46 AM  

No: "an entry on his site in which he uses my name (or one of his adorable nicknames for me)"

Oh well, I guess I don't pay very close attention to what Scalzi writes.

Anonymous RINO February 04, 2013 10:51 AM  

It's February 2013. Still no recovery.

But the DOW hit 14,000. How can you deny reality?

Anonymous Daniel February 04, 2013 10:54 AM  

So Scalzi's resorted to throwing money at Vox in hopes that he goes away? Does he also put out grease fires by drowning them in gasoline?

Anonymous DrTorch February 04, 2013 11:01 AM  

I hope Scalzi goes broke w/ all the charitable donations he has to make.

Then maybe he'll leave Ohio, and head someplace more appropriate for him. Like Alabama.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother February 04, 2013 11:04 AM  

Well, this should put the AWCA talents on show. Who gets to define 'excess sarcasm'? When somebody offers you good material, it would be rude to refuse it.

Vidad, you owe me a keyboard with that AC/DC comment.


Susan, you should know by now not to drink and Vox. Let that be a lesson to you.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother February 04, 2013 11:11 AM  

"I will not allow ad hominem attacks, profanity, or excessive sarcasm from either man."

For Scalzi, that would be the verbal equivalent of a full disarmement(sic).


"What are we supposed to use, man? Harsh Language?"

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 February 04, 2013 11:16 AM  

I've been reading VD's feud with Scalzi (if you could call it that, though seeing actual casualties on both sides would be amusing) and honestly, I don't think Scalzi is worth it. He is definitely a parrot, as VD has pointed out, having apparently fully embraced his government skooling (white straight man bad, everyone else angelic).

I would enjoy a debate between the too, but again, it seems utterly pointless other than to pass the time.

Anonymous JartStar February 04, 2013 11:19 AM  

I would enjoy a debate between the too, but again, it seems utterly pointless other than to pass the time.

A much more practical debate for Americans would be one calculating the actual out of cost pocket of health care costs in 2019 thanks to Obamacare.

But the DOW hit 14,000. How can you deny reality?

I hope everyone has been fully diversified to take advantage of the Central Bank supported rally. Will it end tomorrow? 1 year? 10 years? Nobody knows, but diversification means you don't miss out any significant sector.

Anonymous rycamor February 04, 2013 11:19 AM  

VD February 04, 2013 10:18 AM

I'm not writing as much on economics because there is nothing new to write about. Everything is playing out as I expect, so far. I update the Z1 each quarter, and when something changes, I'll address it. But until then, what is there to say?


Heh... at least one Keynesian entity is starting to realize that its most cherished beliefs are flawed.

Gotta love the irony of this quote:

"The reality is that a random walk is what you would get from chance," said Bill Mitchell, a professor of economics at Charles Darwin University.

Anonymous Azimus February 04, 2013 11:20 AM  

VD:
He's a gamma male. His blog readership is smaller than mine.


I know it SAYS "blog readership"... but it certainly feels like there's some kind of metaphor going on there...

Anonymous Kickass February 04, 2013 11:29 AM  

It just gets better and better. Expect John to enter the ring, knock himself out and cry foul play.

Anonymous Young American Man February 04, 2013 11:29 AM  

I am a new reader to the blog and the manosphere in general. I only found the manosphere because I live most of the year in Central Europe and was curious as to the why I was so easily able to get the girl of my dreams in Europe and not in the states. I found Roosh, which led to Roissy, which led here. The red pill was easy to swallow because it was stuff I already intuitively knew from growing up in the states and my personal interactions with girlfriends, but its fun to be more consciously aware of how society and sexual dynamics interact.

I would like to say as a new reader I've enjoyed the analysis of Scalzi's behavior and your public mocking of his antics. I've never gotten along with people like him and its interesting to read your take as to the why he acts the way he does. I'm reading your analysis of his anxiety over how others view him and I'm nodding in agreement thinking, "Yea, that is how I was in the fifth grade." I think the problem is that fewer and fewer American guys are going through the normal milestones that allow for normal, healthy development of character and personal masculinity. Getting that first girlfriend in the 8th grade, getting in your first fight, getting your heart broken in high school, these things that I went through, I don't think Scalzi or his male readership did to their detriment and the detriment of society as a whole.

How would Scalzi explain himself to his grandfather? His great-grandfather? I can't help but think he would be viewed as a monstrosity, so, he adheres to a belief system that demonizes those successful men who view him with open disdain, but dare not explain to him why they find him so contemptible. You are refreshing because you are explaining to him as to why he is annoying and it's not because he's a special snowflake. It's precisely because of how regular he is, how cowardly he conducts himself that he is mocked, deserving the whipping all the more because of his claim to some sort of superiority due to his worship of all the right trendy causes of the day.

Blogger RobertT February 04, 2013 11:30 AM  

Scalzi is going to regret getting vituperative with you. He can kiss his *** goodbye.

Anonymous Noah B. February 04, 2013 11:33 AM  

"But the DOW hit 14,000. How can you deny reality?"

Reality is that if interest rates and yields are allowed to rise, countries of the West will face profound debt crises. If they're not allowed to rise and the QE continues indefinitely to keep interest rates low, we have a global inflation crisis. Reality is the economy as we've known it is screwed, regardless of the DOW.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 11:34 AM  

Don't cross-post, Log. You already commented, and were answered, at Alpha Game. Comments are for discourse, not posturing.

Anonymous jack February 04, 2013 11:34 AM  

Edward Trimnell February 04, 2013 10:00 AM

Vox:

Picking up on the above comment, I have one further condition as moderator: Both debaters must present themselves in attire that is conventionally appropriate to their M/F classification.

Ed sure do write pretty. A lot like Vox. I hope their thread of semi-debate, left with Ed promising to answer Vox' last post to him will continue. Now, a real live debate with Scalzi would be like the desert.
I could probably be convinced to donate something to the mentioned charity if the action is entertaining; I suspect many of the Ilk would also be moved to do so.

Anonymous Noah B. February 04, 2013 11:36 AM  

"Nobody knows, but diversification means you don't miss out any significant sector."

You can diversify without being continually exposed to counterparty risk. Silver has done much better than the DOW.

Blogger JDC February 04, 2013 11:37 AM  

I thought Scalzi was the only one into cross-posting?

Anonymous Edjamacator February 04, 2013 11:40 AM  

Spear and magic helmet!

Nice reference. :)

Anonymous DCM February 04, 2013 11:44 AM  

When you overload the circuits on your computer the screen goes blank. Likewise, when you confront a Rabbit Person with reasoned argument, his mind goes blank. You can see it in his eyes. In the beginning, he either changes the subject and strikes a pose, a la Scalzi, or he just screams at you, a la Piers Morgan. But when it's face-to-face and he has nowhere to hide, and you just keep coming, battering down his defenses, he stops talking and and stops looking at you, and his eyes glaze over. Just like a rabbit. Reasoned argument is entirely on our side, but sometimes it's hard to find anyone to reason with. That blank screen is hardly an interesting antagonist.

Blogger James Dixon February 04, 2013 11:44 AM  

> 14000eses!!!

Not today. :) Dow down 126 as I type.

Anonymous JartStar February 04, 2013 11:50 AM  

You can diversify without being continually exposed to counterparty risk. Silver has done much better than the DOW.

And APPL has done better than silver or gold, so what? It's easy to pick an asset that outperforms in hindsight.

Anonymous The Deuce February 04, 2013 11:51 AM  

Vox:

This failure to understand that there are two sides to the political spectrum is apparently a common misapprehension on the part of the left

I think this is part and parcel of how according to leftist ideology, there is no objective truth that can be discovered by reason, but only dueling "narratives" that are established by consensus. And that consensus is formed by whatever is available - sophistry, mass murder, lies, social exclusion, rhetoric, and simply pretending that the other side doesn't exist. They'll use anything but the actual application of reason, which is their major enemy.

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 11:57 AM  

A much more practical debate for Americans would be one calculating the actual out of cost pocket of health care costs in 2019 thanks to Obamacare.

A bajillion.

Blogger The Observer February 04, 2013 12:00 PM  

For all those overjoyed that the DOW is past 14,000 again:

If you adjust for inflation, no, it really isn't. It's still down by 11%. Which only means one can wonder whether the increase is due to real production, or just money printing.

Anonymous Lysander Spooner February 04, 2013 12:17 PM  

"It's still down by 11%."

No brainer.

I would give Vox a (-)22 point spread to Scald the FemBot Scalzi.

I find it extremely amusing the FemNazi's reaction to Herr Berry's throwing teh Wimmins into combat, it appears in the end that he just kicked the pedestal right out from under the Princesses feet....lol. So, the Grrrls are gonna get their EEkqwualiteee after all, and they don't appear to be so "Haaaaaaaappy" that their Obamaphilia hasn't quite turned out to be like the 'Twilight' saga.

Blogger The Observer February 04, 2013 12:35 PM  

@Lysander:

If they're allowed to continue (barring societal collapse or awakening before then), eventually the state will have accumulated so much power that it'll decide it doesn't need them anymore.

The moment that happens is the moment Pimp Daddy Government starts beating his whores.

Anonymous The Gray Man February 04, 2013 12:46 PM  

Vox,

When I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh a lot he would often discuss the NFL (he has been a huge Steelers fan for years). Every time he ever brought up the NFL, there would inevitably be callers who would complain to him with "Stick to the issues!" and "we don't need to care about sports!"

He never listened.

And of course, he might be a terrible idiot of the Republican persuasion, but he's definitely the most successful talk show host of all time.

The "stick to the issues!" crowd is always out there. And they're always a minority.

Anonymous DonReynolds February 04, 2013 12:51 PM  

Is this just another Presidential Debate, where the moderator teams up with one of the candidates? This is by no means an honest debate. It is a sideshow at the traveling circus, where the audience comes to see the fake freaks and still feels ten cents was too high a price. Reject the moderator. Find someone....there are millions to pick from.....who understand how a debate should be conducted.

My suggestion is that each of the debate parties write their own four or five debate questions. (Not the moderator.) Put each written question in identical opaque envelopes before delivering them to the moderator. The moderator will begin the debate by shuffling all of the envelopes into a single stack and open each one in turn as they occur. Each question begins with the moderator opening the top envelope and reading the question.

Anonymous GreyS February 04, 2013 12:55 PM  

Zero chance of Scalzi accepting. Zero.

The only thing in question is what form the Brave Run will take.

Anonymous bw February 04, 2013 12:59 PM  

Children International!

I see what he tried to do there. I wonder how much bank the brass up there in that "Non-Profit" make?
We shall not mention what else might be going on.
In any case, you can bet your sweet ass it's really all for the children.

Anonymous the bandit February 04, 2013 1:11 PM  

I hope Scalzi goes broke w/ all the charitable donations he has to make.

Nah, he capped it at $1k. I can't tell if that's $1k for each of the four charities (i.e., $4k) or $1k split between. If it's the latter ... that's quite lame. Either way, probably not breaking the bank.

Anonymous zen0 February 04, 2013 1:25 PM  

"But the DOW hit 14,000. How can you deny reality?"

I understood this statement to be sarcasm. It would be embarrassing if it wasn't.

Anonymous Lysander Spooner February 04, 2013 1:30 PM  

@ The Observer

Big Pimp Daddy in China, for example, has been so successful at slaughtering females there are 30,000,000(that's 30 million ladies) more males than females in the CommieFemNazi Utopia.

The future does look bright for the Grrrrrrls and their luv affair with Herr Dronator.

Anonymous WinstonWebb February 04, 2013 1:55 PM  

Trinmell, while a misguided egalitarian, is clearly offering his services for the lulz. You can tell by the way he's proposed the debate (and by the anti-tranny caveat) that he knows Scalzi will never agree.

While not exactly award-winning, I congratulate Ed for his attempt at cruelty artistry.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother February 04, 2013 2:18 PM  

Brave o Brave Sir Scalzi
Rode forth from Camelot
He was not afraid to die
Brave Brave Sir Scalzi

He was not afraid to be killed in nasty ways
Brave Brave Brave Brave Sir Scalzi

Bravely Bravely ran Away

Anonymous Tammy February 04, 2013 2:54 PM  

Scalzi may or may not have only put up 1k but Mr.Vox there will be thousands of $$$$$ put into charities you adore ;)Scalzi fans will be sure of that. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the charities will love you for it.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 2:59 PM  

I'm sure your utility providers* will take that into consideration as well.

*Provided that a majority of Whatever live on their own accord.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 3:06 PM  

Scalzi may or may not have only put up 1k but Mr.Vox there will be thousands of $$$$$ put into charities you adore ;)Scalzi fans will be sure of that. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the charities will love you for it.

I'm curious as to why you seem to think I care whether there is money in the pocket of a rabbit or a bureaucrat who works for a leftist organization. You might as effectively have vowed to spend the money on candy. I challenge you all to give twice what you've already pledged.

Anonymous daddynichol February 04, 2013 3:11 PM  

Scalzi may or may not have only put up 1k but Mr.Vox there will be thousands of $$$$$ put into charities you adore ;)Scalzi fans will be sure of that. Keep up the good work, I'm sure the charities will love you for it.

Unlikely but only if Master Wabbit accepts the challenge which is extremely doubtful.

Anonymous Randy M February 04, 2013 3:27 PM  

"Keep up the good work, I'm sure the charities will love you for it."

What is it with these people and wanting to put the locus of control outside themselves?

Anonymous Razoraid February 04, 2013 3:28 PM  

Wanted Dead and Alive. Schrodinger's Cat.

Anonymous Daniel February 04, 2013 3:42 PM  

I sure hope that Scalzi doesn't get his confidence back before he puts a "RHSD Memorial Fund Tracker" on his front page. He might as well change the name of his blog to "Vox PoopedonMe" while he's at it. Maybe he'll catch some accidental cross-traffic that way.

His Day Trips could be: reddit, slate, krispy kreme and post-secret

Scalziversity would be what? Cats, Motherhood, History from 1969-1973, Macho Girls, Sci-fi "Tributes," Raping and Pedestalogy.

Anonymous WinstonWebb February 04, 2013 3:50 PM  

Scalziversity would be what? Cats, Motherhood, History from 1969-1973, Macho Girls, Sci-fi "Tributes," Raping and Pedestalogy.

You forgot Cross-Dressing.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 3:58 PM  

What is it with these people and wanting to put the locus of control outside themselves?

Rabbits believe WE > I. Notice how they will often get allies before confronting anyone, then announcing "we think...."

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 3:58 PM  

I'm curious as to why you seem to think I care whether there is money in the pocket of a rabbit or a bureaucrat who works for a leftist organization.

Because it's clearly obvious that you are obsessed with them!

The rabbit people seem shocked that other people aren't as intensely interested in them as their mothers are.

Anonymous JartStar February 04, 2013 3:59 PM  

I'm curious as to why you seem to think I care

Projection.

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 4:02 PM  

Rabbits believe WE > I. Notice how they will often get allies before confronting anyone, then announcing "we think...."

This ties in to the sensitivity driven discourse that's focused on consensus building and making sure everyone agrees about everything. And it also makes them feel valued and important because their sense of self worth and value comes from other people. They love me, they really love me, and all that. Probably one of the reasons that rabbit people love awards shows.

Anonymous Heh February 04, 2013 4:08 PM  

Tammys Of The World Demand To Be Taken Seriously
News in Brief • World • ISSUE 32•04 • Aug 26, 1997

UNITED NATIONS—In a historic United Nations summit Tuesday, the world's 178,000 Tammys convened to demand that they be treated with the same respect afforded the world's approximately 5.1 billion non-Tammys. "Tammy discrimination has been ignored for too long, and it's high time we took action," said summit organizer Tammy Mugler, 24, an assistant manager at an Atlanta-area Orange Julius. "Do you realize that in the entire history of the United States, no Tammy has ever been elected to federal office?" Tammy Halford, 38, a Vienna, VA, data-entry clerk, said: "As soon as people hear my name, they start to make assumptions about me. The Christines and Helens of the world don't know how good they have it." The world's Heidis expressed support for the summit.

Anonymous Daniel February 04, 2013 4:10 PM  

You forgot Cross-Dressing.

I don't think he's even gotten his Master's in that yet. Even he's got to realize his limitations!

Blogger Phoenician February 04, 2013 4:16 PM  

I'm curious as to why you seem to think I care whether there is money in the pocket of a rabbit or a bureaucrat who works for a leftist organization.

You mean apart from the fact that you obsessively post about him and why you most certainly don't like him or never ever need his approval?

You sad, silly little fuck. Your father really screwed you over for life, didn't he?

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 4:25 PM  

You mean apart from the fact that you obsessively post about him and why you most certainly don't like him or never ever need his approval?

Let's postulate that I am obsessed with McRapey, like him, and need his approval. Even if that were the case, why would I care if you, or anyone else, happens to spend your money on pizza and gay porn or gives it to some charity bureaucrats?

How much did you pledge, Phoenician? I challenge you to give 10x more. If you don't, you'll just prove you don't care about the poor gay little black chilluns!

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 4:36 PM  

Wait...I thought you were obsessed with Malkin, Shapiro, the gay mustache, Amynda, that Kelly whore atheist, pz, Krugman, Mitt Romney, etc

That's a long and disturbing list of obsessions, dude. Especially Shapiro.

Blogger James Dixon February 04, 2013 4:39 PM  

> And of course, he might be a terrible idiot of the Republican persuasion, but he's definitely the most successful talk show host of all time.

Paul Harvey might have a few words about that, but otherwise, yes.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 4:41 PM  

Given the over/under in the exchange, it's interesting that Hutch defenders feel a need to claim that Vox is obsessed per the number of posts related in some way to the Great Robbespierre, in an attempt to bolster John's assertion that he (Scalzi) is really, really (really, this time) just like Vox on the subject - indifferent and amused.

Such being the case, Scalzi would then have no hesitation to jump into the ring and debate, seeing that the more Vox mentions him and the more publicity ensues, the more John's apparent amusement, unfeigned indifference, and - most importantly - monies to his select charities. It's win/win.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 4:48 PM  

Would Scalzi's tweets count as writing about Vox, or should the Hutch only consider how many times John simply posts on his blog about He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named.

Blogger Bogey February 04, 2013 5:02 PM  

@WinstonWebb
Scalziversity would be what? Cats, Motherhood, History from 1969-1973, Macho Girls, Sci-fi "Tributes," Raping and Pedestalogy.
Pretty good assessment of where the modern liberal is stuck on stupid Winston.

@Vox
How much did you pledge, Phoenician? I challenge you to give 10x more. If you don't, you'll just prove you don't care about the poor gay little black chilluns!
It's amusing that some of the followers of the Master Rabbit would come here even though he continually insults the readers of Vox Popoli. You've become what Scalzi hates people. I'm beginning to see a pattern here though. So now you need to offer up some kind of pledge to get out of such an egregious sin. Kind of like carbon credits. Modern indulgences for the rabbit set.

@kh123
Odd, isn’t it? Scalzi would tuck his little manhood away and put on some fishnets for a little publicity yet he most likely won’t take on Vox for what would amount to a lot more publicity if crushes his biggest foe.

Anonymous Josh February 04, 2013 5:13 PM  

Scalzi would tuck his little manhood away and put on some fishnets for a little publicity yet he most likely won’t take on Vox for what would amount to a lot more publicity if crushes his biggest foe.

They could have a walk off.

Anonymous Johnny Caustic February 04, 2013 5:25 PM  

The athiest stuff was good too, but this picking a fight with some no name fat f*ck sci fi writer appears like a massive DLV. Why waste time on those beneath you?

Whether it's a DLV or not depends entirely on whether Vox is motivated by self-amusement or defensiveness. Maybe Vox is really good at hiding his secret insecurities, but to me the whole thing reminds me of my parents' cat toying with a mouse for several hours instead of killing it quickly.

It sure hasn't been a waste of time, though; it's been a living case study of rabbit psychology. Rather than simply write a standard internet post of observations about generic bunnies, Vox is doing show-and-tell of a live specimen as it's poked and prodded. The specimen has a large body of work we can inspect for its subtler manifestations of r-selected behavior. I can't remember ever seeing such a vivid, comprehensive demonstration of passive-aggressive rabbitude and the associated sexual cluelessness anywhere.

Anonymous Vidad February 04, 2013 5:36 PM  

Josh "Wait...I thought you were obsessed with Malkin, Shapiro, the gay mustache, Amynda, that Kelly whore atheist, pz, Krugman, Mitt Romney, etc

That's a long and disturbing list of obsessions, dude. Especially Shapiro."

Don't forget Bakker. That was fun while it lasted.

Anonymous JartStar February 04, 2013 6:01 PM  

I can't remember ever seeing such a vivid, comprehensive demonstration of passive-aggressive rabbitude and the associated sexual cluelessness anywhere.

What's really telling is the lack of engagement. If Vox really is a silly dipshit then anyone of the posters there should be able to come here and make a fool of him on his blog. Even if they don't like the venue they could arrange a debate somewhere else.

I want Vox to be challenged intellectually. The blog is so much better when he is.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 04, 2013 6:02 PM  

It doesn't matter. Even if he agreed to a debate, it would just go like this...

http://weaselzippers.us/2011/03/25/video-i-dont-care-obama-is-awesome/

Anonymous bob k. mando February 04, 2013 6:23 PM  

Nate February 04, 2013 9:53 AM

"Also, I now desperately want to hear Taylor Swift do a cover of AC/DC – any song, I’ll let her pick."

Heatseaker? Shoot to thrill? Dirty Deeds?





seriously, Nate?

the only one true option for a Taylor Swift cover is "Squealer":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z4ijIQYYNo

"she'll never ball no more".

and she's got to play that guitar solo herself.

Blogger Phoenician February 04, 2013 6:54 PM  

Odd, isn’t it? Scalzi would tuck his little manhood away and put on some fishnets for a little publicity yet he most likely won’t take on Vox for what would amount to a lot more publicity if crushes his biggest foe.

"Biggest foe"?

Bwahahahahahahahahhahhah!! Do you people have no sense of your own *ridiculousness*?

Some sad wanker who has achieved fuck all in life except helping his father evade taxes starts preening about "Alphas" and "rabbits", a bunch of sycophantic losers slime up to him because his posturing feeds their neuroses and insecurities, and now you're claiming that he's the "biggest foe" of someone who actually has a life?

Dude, VP isn't the "biggest foe" of anyone or anything except his own grasp on reality. He's a sad loser, fawned on by other sad losers.

Anonymous Signe February 04, 2013 7:09 PM  

Some sad wanker...blah blah blah posturing blah...yada yada I'm so awesome for insulting total strangers on the Intarwebz on behalf of someone else...

Let's count the classics:

- "So's yer old man"
- You're all crazy and/or stupid
- All your so-called "friends" don't really like you
- Get a life
- Looooooosers! (I imagine this with the "finger and thumb in the shape of an L on the forehead" execution. I also imagine it done with the left hand, but that's because I'm ironic like that)

C'mon, you can do better than that, Phoenician. You should've also said something about his mom dressing him funny, told him he was ugly, and then blown a raspberry at him. Or something about how he'll never have a girlfriend and how he has to hang a ribeye around his neck so his dogs will play with him.

Amateur.

Anonymous VD February 04, 2013 7:12 PM  

Some sad wanker who has achieved fuck all in life

Well, except for that whole "self-made millionaire by 27" thing.

except helping his father evade taxes

Right, because I was somehow involved in stuff that goes back to when I was in college.

someone who actually has a life

(laughs) I'll take mine, thanks. I'm sure life in Ohio is, well, survivable.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 04, 2013 7:13 PM  

O you who turn the wheel and look windward,
Consider Phlebas, who once was handsome and tall as you.

Anonymous Anonymous February 04, 2013 7:50 PM  

Vox,
Who is Scalzi? I have seen his name a few times, I recall something unsavory, but, really dude, you are quite far capable compared to anyone on the web. You turned me onto K Denninger, your books, I feel like you are a red pill dispenser! I love that you embarrass the atheists! Anyway, I believe a niece of mine may have attended college with you in Pennsylvania. Keep up the great work.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 8:12 PM  

"...a bunch of sycophantic losers slime up to him because his posturing feeds their neuroses and insecurities..."

Projection: Not just for movie theaters.

Anonymous TheExpat February 04, 2013 8:16 PM  

Phoenician, you forgot to threaten not to have sex with Vox.

Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 8:22 PM  

...Wait, I'm not clear on the whole donation-per-mention-of-Scalzi deal. Wouldn't comments by Whatever readers here qualify as a double-plus-good mention? I'd think that would up the contribution by said-commentator to double the amount - they're not only increasing the number of times Scalzi gets mentioned on The Unmentionable's blog per post and per week, but they're simultaneously hopping to the defense of the Warren on enemy territory in the meanwhile. That's worthy of a blessing bestowed upon them by the Grand Hutchinson.

Why do Whatever readers want to skimp so heavily on contributing monies to Progress?

Blogger mmaier2112 February 04, 2013 9:19 PM  

"(laughs) I'll take mine, thanks. I'm sure life in Ohio is, well, survivable."

Ouch...

Anonymous Anonymous February 04, 2013 10:07 PM  

Greencarman here...

VD--Even his fiction is openly derivative, whereas my original concepts have been cited in science journals, on Wikipedia, and provided scientists with hypotheses for which their subsequent experiments have found empirical evidence. Furthermore, I have no need to mooch off anyone, least of all Mr. Scalzi, in order to get people to notice me.

Scalzi--The pathology of it is pretty standard elementary-school taunting dynamic, which is to call me a name they think is clever (top of the hit parade at the moment is “McRapey,” because the main Racist Sexist Homophobic Dipshit apparently believed this was real, and once it was explained to him what satire was, had to rather embarrassingly suggest he was doing satire too so there, which, again: adorable), followed by generally unimaginative insults regarding my work/position/status, followed by rah-rah plumping for their beloved leader.


And both "authors" have the audacity to claim that the other person has the fixation? Calling, Roy Cohn, calling Roy Cohn...

Anonymous WinstonWebb February 04, 2013 10:14 PM  

...a bunch of sycophantic losers slime up to him because his posturing feeds their neuroses and insecurities...

Because every single one of us agrees with him.
100%.
All the time.
On every issue.
Without question.
Which is why you'll never see anyone on this blog (well, except the valiant Phoenician) ever engage him with a difference of opinion on any topic.

This is truly an echo chamber.

Nate drinks blue umbrella drinks, RINO wears gay Italian loafers, Wheeler supports ending the Drug War, and Dread is sane.

Blogger Phoenician February 04, 2013 11:06 PM  

I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that I scored a solid hit.

Good night, chumps.

Anonymous Toby Temple February 04, 2013 11:18 PM  

I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that I scored a solid hit.

Good night, chumps.


Whatever gets you to sleep at night, princess.


Anonymous Anonymous February 04, 2013 11:37 PM  

I can say that Scalzi is one of the new Liberalcons who no longer support freedom of speech and consider anything he doesn't agree with as worthy of censorship.

If you see my posts today on his site about this subject under(Moondoggie) you will see how he and cohorts justify avoiding the topic by name calling and censorship.

And his following fools pretend that Scaliwag is going to Hammer down anyone who doe's disagree with him by his sheer overpowering genius. (which is just ignoring what one said and to censor it)

Justin Guess was one of them who is a writer and I can understand him wanting to feed his ego and be a Grammar Nazi but I looked on his goodreads etc reviews and most people are agreeing with one of the reviews.

"I downloaded this for free. Thank goodness. There were capitalization and spelling errors in the first few pages, so I couldn't continue. Editors are a good thing"

Which shows how hypocritical people can be and even when they should not be calling the kettle black. They are still going to do so as a convenient way to believe they have won the debate without discussing the issues.

Lots of Hypocrites on that page. I don't even know who Vox Day is but I doubt scalzi is as Lilly White as he likes to pretend to be and certainly no better.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 04, 2013 11:46 PM  

"I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that I scored a solid hit."

PHOENICIAN:(chuckles to self) My plan has worked flawlessly! A masterpiece of strategy and execution! Why, I logged onto some guy's blog, called some people names and flung poo at them, and then a few of them unsurprisingly insulted me back. They've walked right into my trap, the fools. I... AM... A MASTER STRATEGIST!!

[SFX: Thunderclaps, choirs of angels, maybe a theme or two from Brahms. Several paupers fall off a ladder.]

You know if you want, I know a few people, I could probably get you an internship at Doofenshmirtz Evil Incorporated.

Unpaid, naturally.


Anonymous kh123 February 04, 2013 11:49 PM  

"I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that..."

...your use of mom's Mastercard to make $10 donations to a "Lord Hutchinson of the SFWA" have gone too far this time.

Anonymous Anonymous February 04, 2013 11:56 PM  

In Fact I would suggest going to Goodreads and giving one star ratings to all of Joshua Guess and Scalzi's books.

Oh i think this is lowering your/myself down to their level, but I would love to hear their response. As they both agree with censorship and do not want to debate or hear the person out. So much easier to just censor and delete the responses.

Especially in Joshua's case.(Scalzi at least wrote one good book) But this guy believes in Censorship basked on typo's etc and his books are apparently full of the same grammatical errors that he despises in other's and feels people's opinions are invalid if they succumb to such abominations.

So I gave his books a bad rating based on the fact that he finds grammatical errors something to be shunned and even though (in this case) we now see eye to eye on this. He will never allow himself to see that their are two sides to the coin. No matter how simple the (Thought) process should be.

And I know I am being petty. But Pettiness begets the same.

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 12:22 AM  

ridonculous!!

Anonymous Anonymous February 05, 2013 12:49 AM  

I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that I scored a solid hit.

Good night, chumps.


You should go for the kill and donate a bunch of money to a charity they really really won't like. That would be the ultimate insult.

Blogger Mike LaRoche February 05, 2013 1:17 AM  

It appears that Scalzi has finally decided to stop living a lie.

Blogger redlegben February 05, 2013 2:13 AM  

The rabbits coming on here help me to convince our home-schooled children that MPAI. They don't believe me. I find it incredulous. There are so many posts that I am thoroughly convinced are people pretending to be idiots in order to increase the humor.

It is so sad to me that I'm wrong about how many morons there are in the world. Idiocracy is a true story.

Anonymous VD February 05, 2013 3:45 AM  

I'll take the pained squealing as a sign that I scored a solid hit.

"Very little the gamma says about the conflict is reliable, either about himself or those with whom he is in conflict. And the worst part is that over time, the gamma often manages to convince himself that it is, at least in part, the correct interpretation of events. This is the gamma reality reconstruction instinct at work."

Blogger MsJess February 05, 2013 6:36 AM  

Its cute that you use google analytics as your e-peen. I suspect scalzi is busy with his writing career which is so sucessful you asked him to plug your book on his website.

Anonymous VD February 05, 2013 6:57 AM  

Its cute that you use google analytics as your e-peen. I suspect scalzi is busy with his writing career which is so sucessful you asked him to plug your book on his website.

That's nice. I think it is informative that after years of Whatever fans repeatedly telling me that Whatever has more traffic than my blog, the fact that the objective statistical measures indicate that my blog now has more traffic has people like you suddenly attempting to claim that the relative size of our readerships is irrelevant.

It will be interesting to see what excuses you concoct when my books start outselling his too. They don't yet. But they will.

Anonymous Tammy February 05, 2013 11:48 AM  

Hahahahaha.Now your a comedian too.Add that to the list of things you do.Hahahahaha.

Blogger Markku February 05, 2013 1:02 PM  

Your readers aren't true Scotsmen.

Anonymous Harsh February 06, 2013 11:02 AM  

You mean apart from the fact that you obsessively post about him and why you most certainly don't like him or never ever need his approval?

Scalzi is running a charity pledge drive in VD's "honor." That's much more obsessed than anything VD has done.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts