2015-04-12
Hugo Final Ballot Controversy
For those who do not know about the Hugo awards please read about them at
http://www.thehugoawards.org/ or other online sites.
The finalists for the Hugo Awards were announced a bit over a week ago. When I read the list of finalists I was concerned. The results appeared to have been affected by slate voting of a type which is outside the social norms of the SF Fandom. It was not technically against the rules as written but it did violate the social norms. As might be expected there has been much written about this during the past week and easily found via your favorite search engine.
I will use the term Puppy Contingent to refer to the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies and their various followers; if you do not know about the Sad Puppies or the Rabid Puppies please use your favorite search engine. And rather than focus on the details of the activities of the persons involved in this contravention of the social norms I am going to comment primarily on some broadly issues.
My first observation is that introducing politics explicitly and overtly into a situation where there is not already overt and explicit political considerations can lead to unpleasant results. And I fear we are already seeing signs of the unpleasantness. As far as I can tell the Puppy Contingent tends to refer to themselves as either conservative or right-wing. Since I am neither conservative nor right-wing please excuse me if I get some of the details a bit wrong and as I use the term conservative below remember that the definition is in flux; even as far as I can tell amongst self-identified conservatives.
My understanding is that they claim either a) that some writers have not received awards because of their political views or b) works with 'conservative themes' are ignored and not given recognition. Or both. Or something else because there is also talk about getting more best selling popular authors on the final ballot regardless of political stance. Or maybe it is having fewer works considering issues of race, gender, identity or something. The problem is that the complaints of the Puppy Contingent are not quite clear and as far as I can see the main evidence they present is that the voting history for the Hugo Awards does not make them happy. One person involved with previous Sad Puppy campaigns was a Campbell Award (Not a Hugo Award) finalist and as I understand his complaint he feels that there was a whisper campaign by certain persons to urge people not to vote for him due to his political views. Was there such a campaign? I do not know. All I know is that I was one of the voters that year and I am unable to recall anything like that. All of this is to say that attempting to consider all of this is a bit frustrating but I think these are important issues and I will give it a try.
While it might be possible that many Hugo voters share some political leanings; I have not seen any serious scholarly study of the question and thus in the absence of such a study I urge caution because the political views might also be more diverse than some realize. And let us remember that political leanings do not necessarily always predict taste in SF.
Another concern I have is with conflating political positions and aesthetics as expressed in fiction. A story may contain detailed discussion of firearms, graphic descriptions of military tactics, combat and violence; not to mention space wars and laser battles. It is quite possible for someone to enjoy that story as a story regardless of their political position. My position is that we need to avoid conflating politics and values and aesthetics. Obviously it is a logical fallacy to say in the absence of strong evidence that when the voters of an award do not vote for works which is full of firearms and violence that they are necessarily doing so on political grounds. It might be aesthetics; the majority of voters just might not like stories with violence and firearms. Or possibly the story itself did not measure up to their standards of character, plot, world building, etc. Or maybe the voters liked the story overall but felt that it was not really award quality. Let me emphasize this point again: people may enjoy a story enough to make it a run-away best-seller and the author very famous but still not feel that it is at a level where it should be considered for the one of highest awards in the SF field.
Most people have heard of the 'Wisdom Of The Crowd' where there are certain types of questions that if asked to a sufficiently large number of random persons will generate answers which on average in the aggregate converge on an answer which is reasonably close to correct. Voting to determine the list for the final Hugo ballot is not exactly a 'Wisdom Of The Crowd' situation however it is close enough that in some respects it often tends to have similar behavior and function. For the past few decades one function of the final ballot is a person who is not a specialist in SF could typically take the Hugo finalist list and be reasonably sure that the works listed were of at least award level in terms of the craft of writing. A person may be looking for Steampunk instead of a near future urban fantasy but whichever they select it would likely be up to a certain standard in terms of the craft of SF writing. And it is typical to find a variety of works on the final Hugo ballot not just Steampunk or just urban fantasy or any other sub-genre.
I am concerned that slate voting might tend to break this dynamic both in the quality and the range of the works making the final ballot. Now at this point some of the Puppy Contingent might want to claim that all they were doing is putting works they like into the process. To which I say: No that is not an accurate statement. Having a slate misses the point since a slate lacks that individual variation that can counteract group think. Even if the slate was produced in a bottom up fashion it can inadvertently swamp the votes of 'conservatives' who are not part of the slate creation process thus possibly leading to the final ballot having fewer quality works. And remember there is a big difference between creating a recommendation list of works that people might want to consider and doing slate voting. Please do not confuse the two.
Another item which appears to be part of the complaint of the Puppy Contingent is about the concern with issues of race, gender and related matters; which some refer to as the concerns of the Social Justice Warriors aka SJW. At least I think this is one of the complaints since I see what I think are Puppy Contingent members making derisive references about persons and issues that are labeled as SJW however the specifics are a bit vague to me. It is as if they are complaining about the amount of consideration of issues of race and gender in contemporary SF. Yet what would they expect? Seriously? As has often been observed much of SF is about addressing contemporary issues by imagining a different time or place. So why are they upset? We need to understand this is 2015 not 1955 and I think SF Fandom and society at large have make great strides in understanding people as individuals as well as people in social groups. We are (I hope) more compassionate and comfortable with diversity and I posit that encountering these issues in fiction is part of the catalyst that has lead to this change.
As has been pointed out by several people such as Mary Robinette Kowal there has been a decades long discussion of race, gender and related matters in much of the SF community. The discussion has been in many venues including blog posts, email lists, panels at SF cons and increasingly in social media. And also in the broader culture at large. Views on race and gender have changed tremendously in recent years and some might be surprised. The reasons for this change is a whole other essay. My point is that people have participated in this discussion to different degrees and those that have not been very much involved in the discussion might find it disconcerting when it starts changing from something relatively small which might be ignored to something that is increasingly part of broader SF discussion. Now of course not everyone is the discussion agrees. And you can find people claiming to speak on issues of race and gender as if they had the final word when actually they have at best a not well thought out position. My suggestion is for open discussion and a bit of intellectual humility.
My admonition is that just because discussions of race, gender and related topics are unsettling do not point to the most extreme, loudest and most strident voice and say because that voice is extreme then there is nothing to discuss. Instead I urge everyone to try to understand the other person's point of view. Understanding does not mean acceptance. What understanding does is facilitate furthering the discussion.
In closing I will quote the view of one of the Puppy Contingent:
'SAD PUPPIES simply holds its collective hand out — standing athwart “fandom” history — and yells, “Stop!”'
My response is to please consider the phrase from Bob Dylan:
For the times they are a-changin'.
That phrase comes from an era when many thought that the changes in race and gender would cause havoc but we survived. And if we all behave like reasonable and rational persons we can survive this latest controversy.
2015-01-08
Reflections on the attack on Charlie Hebdo
The attack on Charlie Hebdo and the deaths and injuries are horrific.
Yet sometimes when something like this happens there are a few people who say that religious satire and sarcasm not should be published. Some of these people want legal prohibitions; others do not want legal prohibitions but just want people to self-censor.
To those who say that religious satire and sarcasm not should be published my response is that on the contrary people should be able to heap ridicule, satire and sarcasm on religion. And politics. And which OS is better. Anything. The point is that I have never seen a convincing argument that religion or any thing else should have a special status.
My position is that through the criticism of ideas we improve both individually and as a species. And that criticism can take the form of ponderous tomes written by philosophy professors or it can take the form of a satirical cartoon pointing out the absurdity of some idea. But sometimes we hear the lament: what about the emotional grief that the cartoons caused to some people? This position assumes that the emotional grief is caused by the cartoon. Let me propose that the problem is caused in part by people committing so strongly to an idea that they think it is the most important idea in existance and that it defines them. How tragic. Tragic because as mentioned above criticism of ideas is a method of identify false, illogical and harmful ideas and if one abandons the criticism of ideas then they have abandoned reason and rationality in order to commit to some an idea that they will never fully test.
Consider a gardener who tends the garden to pull out the weeds; what I advocate is that each of us have a similar process of eliminating false, illogical and harmful ideas that each of us may have. Is this easy? No, it is hard. Is it worth doing. I certainly think so.
There are many book, essays, blogs and other tools. One that I have often recommended to persons with an interest in philosophy is the book The Retreat to Commitment written by W. W. Bartley however be warned this is a dense book. The position given in the book is that of Pan-Critical Rationalsim. A more accessible summary of Pan-Critical Rationalism is at
http://www.maxmore.com/pcr.htm
written by my friend Max More.
So let us look a decade or two in the future; how do we avoid similar attacks on those who publish satire and sarcasm? Perhaps each of us should practice cultivating our own mental garden of ideas and encourage others to do likewise. And when it comes to criticism of ideas remember that satire and sarcasm are useful tools. And the master of any craft knows how to use all of the tools.
Yet sometimes when something like this happens there are a few people who say that religious satire and sarcasm not should be published. Some of these people want legal prohibitions; others do not want legal prohibitions but just want people to self-censor.
To those who say that religious satire and sarcasm not should be published my response is that on the contrary people should be able to heap ridicule, satire and sarcasm on religion. And politics. And which OS is better. Anything. The point is that I have never seen a convincing argument that religion or any thing else should have a special status.
My position is that through the criticism of ideas we improve both individually and as a species. And that criticism can take the form of ponderous tomes written by philosophy professors or it can take the form of a satirical cartoon pointing out the absurdity of some idea. But sometimes we hear the lament: what about the emotional grief that the cartoons caused to some people? This position assumes that the emotional grief is caused by the cartoon. Let me propose that the problem is caused in part by people committing so strongly to an idea that they think it is the most important idea in existance and that it defines them. How tragic. Tragic because as mentioned above criticism of ideas is a method of identify false, illogical and harmful ideas and if one abandons the criticism of ideas then they have abandoned reason and rationality in order to commit to some an idea that they will never fully test.
Consider a gardener who tends the garden to pull out the weeds; what I advocate is that each of us have a similar process of eliminating false, illogical and harmful ideas that each of us may have. Is this easy? No, it is hard. Is it worth doing. I certainly think so.
There are many book, essays, blogs and other tools. One that I have often recommended to persons with an interest in philosophy is the book The Retreat to Commitment written by W. W. Bartley however be warned this is a dense book. The position given in the book is that of Pan-Critical Rationalsim. A more accessible summary of Pan-Critical Rationalism is at
http://www.maxmore.com/pcr.htm
written by my friend Max More.
So let us look a decade or two in the future; how do we avoid similar attacks on those who publish satire and sarcasm? Perhaps each of us should practice cultivating our own mental garden of ideas and encourage others to do likewise. And when it comes to criticism of ideas remember that satire and sarcasm are useful tools. And the master of any craft knows how to use all of the tools.
2014-12-31
2014 Drawing To A Close
As 2014 draws to a close I realize that while I had several essay length blog posts that I wanted to make during 2014 the evidence is that I was not very productive. I think the term is 'slacker'. I was somewhat slowed down for a few weeks by my shoulder injury but that is healing and is not much of an excuse.
So rather than try to compose a long essay to close out the year I am going do something relatively short. Here are a few items that caught my attention recently.
First I want to draw your attention to the piece by Radley Balko in the Washington Post about Civil Liberties.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/12/30/horrifying-civil-liberties-predictions-for-2015/
And a high profile challenge to the traditional gender roles. I think Obama should have received more coverage for this and if you have not seen it then here is the quickest link I could find (yes I know it is FB but I am in a hurry)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/9464967525/permalink/10153004017092526/
Plus the comments are good particularly the one about being on the school target shooting team is classic.
Jim Peron is one of those writers that I try to follow because Jim usually has something insightful to say. Not just people in Australia but people everywhere might want to take a look at this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-peron/gay-hero-of-sydney-hostag_b_6332038.html
I wish everyone a Healthy and Prosperous New Year
So rather than try to compose a long essay to close out the year I am going do something relatively short. Here are a few items that caught my attention recently.
First I want to draw your attention to the piece by Radley Balko in the Washington Post about Civil Liberties.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/12/30/horrifying-civil-liberties-predictions-for-2015/
And a high profile challenge to the traditional gender roles. I think Obama should have received more coverage for this and if you have not seen it then here is the quickest link I could find (yes I know it is FB but I am in a hurry)
https://www.facebook.com/groups/9464967525/permalink/10153004017092526/
Plus the comments are good particularly the one about being on the school target shooting team is classic.
Jim Peron is one of those writers that I try to follow because Jim usually has something insightful to say. Not just people in Australia but people everywhere might want to take a look at this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-peron/gay-hero-of-sydney-hostag_b_6332038.html
I wish everyone a Healthy and Prosperous New Year
2014-04-27
Avoiding baseless pejoratives
This blog post is something that has been forming in my mind for several months and just recently I read another blog which both helped clarify my thoughts and provided the impetus to write my thoughts.
The general theme is the importance of cultivating a civil environment for exchange of ideas and specifically to follow the guidelines ourself which one advocates for others. The specific event that spurred me to action is a blog post that is obviously satire and makes reference to a group of people which self-identify with a certain philosophical and political tradition. For this discussion rather than use the actual text of that other blog (see why at the end) I will modify it so we can focus on some general principles not the specifics of a one or two political traditions. I will change the name of the group mentioned in the other blog to PPPBP (Progressive Political Philosophy and Bheer Party).
Thus the example becomes: When the PPPBP has established their Utopia then members of various groups not commonly considered part of mainstream society will be subject to enslavement, rape, torture and finally being shot. What is most unusual is that there is a wealth of scholarly articles and books on the PPPBP historical and philosophical tradition and these articles and books argue against slavery, rape, torture and murder. So why did the original blogger write as they did? And why do we see other writers making similar rhetorical flourishes?
Well it is difficult to determine the motives and inner thoughts of any person but let us assume for the moment that the other blog post was not made for malicious purposes. Further let us assume the comment was not made out of ignorance. I make these assumptions because the blogger in question is of above average intelligence, is (or at least should be) aware of the basics of the PPPBP political philosophy and knows people who self identify with the PPPBP and who would not do any of the harmful things mentioned. And this is not just confined to one writer; I have observed many different people speaking or writing in a similar fashion.
One possibility that occurred to me today is that perhaps for some people referring to the PPPBP now is not dis-similar to the use of the infamous N-word in times past (and not so past unfortunately). I can remember decades ago as a young lad hearing people referring to someone who had taken many one dollar bills folded and wrapped a twenty dollar bill showing on the outside and put in a money clip as having a "n*gg*r bankroll" (and note that I will slightly obfuscate a few words to avoid offence and also to avoid attracting those whose main purposes are disruption and grief). Note that this usage of "n*gg*r bankroll" was applied regardless of the race of the person with the money clip. The use of the word "n*gg*r" appears to be a way to characterize a particular action as poor, phony, lower-class, cheap or unsophisticated. Fortunately I have heard this usage in many years so perhaps there is improvement.
Consider the recent growth and decline of the phrase "th*t's so g*y". For a variety of reasons the usage as declined and for that I think we are all grateful. In considering this and the use of "n*gg*r" it seems to me that these terms often take on the role of "throw away general purpose pejorative" which are safe to use perhaps because the person using the term assumes their audience will know their reference is to some group that is it safe to denigrate.
And in many of these cases one hears the reply "Oh I was just kidding", "Can't you take a joke" or "I was not referring to all of them just some of them" or similar comments. And for something such as money clips it is not completely uncommon to see people using money clips instead of wallets and if you consider that some people doing so will have have the larger bills on the outside as opposed to the inside and the number of African-Americans in the USA then it is probably true that there are likely several perhaps many African-Americans who use a money clip with the largest bill on the outside. Does that mean I think it is a good idea to use the term "n*gg*r bankroll"? No; I think it is generally improper in almost all situations.
OK hopefully we all agree to avoid "n*gg*r bankroll" and similar terms; but what are the broader implications. The most obvious is that we should strive to improve the arena of discourse for everyone by reducing the use of "general purpose personal pejorative" and similar terms. The narrower implication for any blogger is that if you do not want some terms used about you personally or a group with which you identify then avoid the pejorative yourself. If you do not like hearing African-Americans referred to as "n*gg*rs" then it might be a good not to refer to "f*gg*ts" when writing about a same-sex couple. Similarly if you do not want the use of "f*gg*t" consider setting a good example by not using PPPBP as a pejorative particularly in a manner which distorts the philosophy behind the PPPBP. Similarly if you do not want to have a trans-woman referred to as "tr*nny" then perhaps a good place to begin is to not use a baseless pejorative on another group.
We humans are social creatures and we do learn (sometimes slowly) from others. Thus we can each help our fellow social creatures by encouraging a better arena of discourse. Does this mean that we will all agree? No. Does it mean that I am always correct? No. I would go further as say that as far as I can ascertain none of us is completely correct in everything. We all have limited knowledge, perspective and experience; what we can do is use our critical thinking skills to improve our knowledge and understanding. And a key to this is improving our arena for discourse.
There is a lot more that could be said about this; such as what about the real jerks who do identify with various groups and movements. For example what about people who claim to be Fans of Science Fiction and Fantasy yet act boorish and use a malicious pejorative about others? Do we want to paint all of SF fandom baaed on a few persons? No and similarly for other groups.
Now some will have read to this final paragraph (or shipped here directly) expecting a link to the blog which gave me the impetus to write my blog entry. I have thought about this and at least at this point I am not going to post the link. And I have obfuscated the content of the other blog such that it will likely not be found with a simple search. The reason is that I do not want to have a bunch of people going to that other bloggers site and leaving numerous messages with annotation, references and a detailed explanation of the errors implicit and explicit in that other blog post. As I mentioned above we are social creatures and we learn in social situations; sometimes that learning works when everyone is yelling and screaming STOP and sometimes that learning works best when someone hears something said in a less threatening manner. And often it takes hearing something multiple times; I know it often does more me.
However I will give one link since I have touched previously on related topics:
http://blog.lightingonemorecandle.com/2013/01/a-few-considerations-about-arena-of.html
The general theme is the importance of cultivating a civil environment for exchange of ideas and specifically to follow the guidelines ourself which one advocates for others. The specific event that spurred me to action is a blog post that is obviously satire and makes reference to a group of people which self-identify with a certain philosophical and political tradition. For this discussion rather than use the actual text of that other blog (see why at the end) I will modify it so we can focus on some general principles not the specifics of a one or two political traditions. I will change the name of the group mentioned in the other blog to PPPBP (Progressive Political Philosophy and Bheer Party).
Thus the example becomes: When the PPPBP has established their Utopia then members of various groups not commonly considered part of mainstream society will be subject to enslavement, rape, torture and finally being shot. What is most unusual is that there is a wealth of scholarly articles and books on the PPPBP historical and philosophical tradition and these articles and books argue against slavery, rape, torture and murder. So why did the original blogger write as they did? And why do we see other writers making similar rhetorical flourishes?
Well it is difficult to determine the motives and inner thoughts of any person but let us assume for the moment that the other blog post was not made for malicious purposes. Further let us assume the comment was not made out of ignorance. I make these assumptions because the blogger in question is of above average intelligence, is (or at least should be) aware of the basics of the PPPBP political philosophy and knows people who self identify with the PPPBP and who would not do any of the harmful things mentioned. And this is not just confined to one writer; I have observed many different people speaking or writing in a similar fashion.
One possibility that occurred to me today is that perhaps for some people referring to the PPPBP now is not dis-similar to the use of the infamous N-word in times past (and not so past unfortunately). I can remember decades ago as a young lad hearing people referring to someone who had taken many one dollar bills folded and wrapped a twenty dollar bill showing on the outside and put in a money clip as having a "n*gg*r bankroll" (and note that I will slightly obfuscate a few words to avoid offence and also to avoid attracting those whose main purposes are disruption and grief). Note that this usage of "n*gg*r bankroll" was applied regardless of the race of the person with the money clip. The use of the word "n*gg*r" appears to be a way to characterize a particular action as poor, phony, lower-class, cheap or unsophisticated. Fortunately I have heard this usage in many years so perhaps there is improvement.
Consider the recent growth and decline of the phrase "th*t's so g*y". For a variety of reasons the usage as declined and for that I think we are all grateful. In considering this and the use of "n*gg*r" it seems to me that these terms often take on the role of "throw away general purpose pejorative" which are safe to use perhaps because the person using the term assumes their audience will know their reference is to some group that is it safe to denigrate.
And in many of these cases one hears the reply "Oh I was just kidding", "Can't you take a joke" or "I was not referring to all of them just some of them" or similar comments. And for something such as money clips it is not completely uncommon to see people using money clips instead of wallets and if you consider that some people doing so will have have the larger bills on the outside as opposed to the inside and the number of African-Americans in the USA then it is probably true that there are likely several perhaps many African-Americans who use a money clip with the largest bill on the outside. Does that mean I think it is a good idea to use the term "n*gg*r bankroll"? No; I think it is generally improper in almost all situations.
OK hopefully we all agree to avoid "n*gg*r bankroll" and similar terms; but what are the broader implications. The most obvious is that we should strive to improve the arena of discourse for everyone by reducing the use of "general purpose personal pejorative" and similar terms. The narrower implication for any blogger is that if you do not want some terms used about you personally or a group with which you identify then avoid the pejorative yourself. If you do not like hearing African-Americans referred to as "n*gg*rs" then it might be a good not to refer to "f*gg*ts" when writing about a same-sex couple. Similarly if you do not want the use of "f*gg*t" consider setting a good example by not using PPPBP as a pejorative particularly in a manner which distorts the philosophy behind the PPPBP. Similarly if you do not want to have a trans-woman referred to as "tr*nny" then perhaps a good place to begin is to not use a baseless pejorative on another group.
We humans are social creatures and we do learn (sometimes slowly) from others. Thus we can each help our fellow social creatures by encouraging a better arena of discourse. Does this mean that we will all agree? No. Does it mean that I am always correct? No. I would go further as say that as far as I can ascertain none of us is completely correct in everything. We all have limited knowledge, perspective and experience; what we can do is use our critical thinking skills to improve our knowledge and understanding. And a key to this is improving our arena for discourse.
There is a lot more that could be said about this; such as what about the real jerks who do identify with various groups and movements. For example what about people who claim to be Fans of Science Fiction and Fantasy yet act boorish and use a malicious pejorative about others? Do we want to paint all of SF fandom baaed on a few persons? No and similarly for other groups.
Now some will have read to this final paragraph (or shipped here directly) expecting a link to the blog which gave me the impetus to write my blog entry. I have thought about this and at least at this point I am not going to post the link. And I have obfuscated the content of the other blog such that it will likely not be found with a simple search. The reason is that I do not want to have a bunch of people going to that other bloggers site and leaving numerous messages with annotation, references and a detailed explanation of the errors implicit and explicit in that other blog post. As I mentioned above we are social creatures and we learn in social situations; sometimes that learning works when everyone is yelling and screaming STOP and sometimes that learning works best when someone hears something said in a less threatening manner. And often it takes hearing something multiple times; I know it often does more me.
However I will give one link since I have touched previously on related topics:
http://blog.lightingonemorecandle.com/2013/01/a-few-considerations-about-arena-of.html
2013-12-23
The Pardon of Alan Turning
Alan Turing has been granted a royal pardon for the 1952 conviction on charges of homosexual activity. According to news reports the pardon was granted under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy. It is really good that this small step was taken to at least begin to correct a terrible injustice even if there is no way to fully correct what happened. However I am struck by the name Royal Prerogative of Mercy; it has a disconcerting feel to it. Why not have a Royal Prerogative of Reversing Bigotry?
And of course the obvious question is what about Oscar WIlde who was convicted and imprisoned on similar charges? Is a Royal Pardon only available to those who have a group of well known and well organized persons supporting the pardon? What about the many persons who were prosecuted for sexual activity between consenting adults? Will each of them be getting a Royal Pardon? If not why not?
UPDATE: Cheryl Morgan @CherylMorgan retweeted a post by Intercom Trust @IntercomTrust which pointed to document describing a method for requesting that records be cleared for persons convicted in situations similar to those of Alan Turing. The URL is http://www.intercomtrust.org.uk/news/DevCorn_police_statement_January_2013.pdf and since I do not live in a jurisdiction where this is relevant and am not an expert on UK law then all I can say is that if you think this applies to you perhaps you should consult proper legal advice. Of course the obvious question is why does someone need to make an application; why not clean up the records automatically? The persons with these records have already been through enough why not just do the right thing and clear the records without making these persons jump through more bureaucratic hoops?
And of course the obvious question is what about Oscar WIlde who was convicted and imprisoned on similar charges? Is a Royal Pardon only available to those who have a group of well known and well organized persons supporting the pardon? What about the many persons who were prosecuted for sexual activity between consenting adults? Will each of them be getting a Royal Pardon? If not why not?
UPDATE: Cheryl Morgan @CherylMorgan retweeted a post by Intercom Trust @IntercomTrust which pointed to document describing a method for requesting that records be cleared for persons convicted in situations similar to those of Alan Turing. The URL is http://www.intercomtrust.org.uk/news/DevCorn_police_statement_January_2013.pdf and since I do not live in a jurisdiction where this is relevant and am not an expert on UK law then all I can say is that if you think this applies to you perhaps you should consult proper legal advice. Of course the obvious question is why does someone need to make an application; why not clean up the records automatically? The persons with these records have already been through enough why not just do the right thing and clear the records without making these persons jump through more bureaucratic hoops?
2013-01-20
A Few Considerations About The Arena Of Discourse
It is January the first month of a new calendar year and one often finds blog posts with reflections on the months past or looking at the coming months with a mixture of hope, resolution, anticipation, concern or discomfort where the exact ratios of these and other factors depend on the author in question. I had been considering one or two blogs doing some reflecting on the past year and a quick look at trends and expectations. However another matter began competing for my attention recently and thus this blog post will not be a looking back or looking ahead post.
The topic of this post is about the arena of discourse or what some call the marketplace of ideas or the public dialogue. Specifically I want to make a plea for us all to be good stewards of the arena of discourse and to note some practices which hinder and some which help this stewardship. This is very similar to but different from personal epistemological hygiene and it can be argued that having ones own epistemological house in order is likely a prerequisite for dealing with the broader arena of pubic discourse
Today with the internet it is relatively easier than in the past for individuals to publish their ideas where they can be considered by many others. At least potentially considered since the internet does not guarantee an audience. Prior to the internet those without a major media outlet could reach a potentially smaller audience by the use of relatively cheap duplication technology such as photocopier and before that mimeograph And for those with the time and money there was the possibility of setting up a small hand operated press. Of course as Moses Harmon and others found out the problem of having ones publication seized in the mails could not be ignored. In the 1950s and 1960s the postal censorship situation improved.
The phrase "With great power comes great responsibility" is commonly attributed to Voltaire. There are several reasons why we all should undertake this shared responsibility to keep the arena of public discourse is as good a condition as possible. One of these is that each of us will have our own pet ideas evaluated in that arena and I expect that we will want our ideas evaluated by persons who already have the skills and habits of making accurate and fair evaluations. So what are a few tips for improving our shared arena of discourse.
One of the first is to avoid logical fallacies. There are many resources that explain logical fallacies and it is a good idea to find a couple and keep the URLs handy for example:
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx
http://www.manyworldsoflogic.com/resources.html
But it is more than just avoiding logical fallacies. Just like one does not throw candy wrappers on the ground when walking in a park we should be similarly considerate of our discourse in the garden park of ideas. If I can use this park metaphor for just a bit more we should be vigilant to not plant or perpetuate falsehoods for these are the weeds in the park. We should nourish honesty and integrity. Plus we should be aware that there will often be disagreements. People no matter how honest and well intended can disagree so the goal should be to keep things civil and work on determining the cause of the disagreement. And remember that one failure does not forever mark person as outside the realm of civilized discourse. I expect that each of us including me has slipped up and written or spoken something which is not in accordance with one of these principles. The point is to identify the problem and try to do better.
If you reference a document please provide a link so people know what you taking about. Newspapers are part of the discourse and in their online editions one would expect links to primary sources so that a person can find the original and make up their own mind. Not like the recent experience I had where a major newspaper located in the DC area had an article about a report published by a government agency. What I could not find was a link to the original article; there were plenty of links in the article but everyone of them linked back to lists of other articles in the newspaper site; by doing a Google search I was able to find the original document Even if it disappears from the original site just having the URL will help with trying to find it on archive.org the Internet Archive
Also be careful of how one characterizes others in the dialogue. For example consider someone in the political sphere who identifies as a Green and who is also what is commonly called a 9/11 Truther which slightly over simplified means they think that the 9/11 attacks were an inside job and the World Trade Center towers were brought down by planted explosives not as a result of being hit by the airplanes. The distinction we need to keep in mind is if the 9/11 Truther stuff derives from the Green philosophy or if it just the ideas of some people who just happen to identify as Green.
When engaging in a dialogue remember it is a dialogue not a monologue. You may think the other person is wrong but the key is to find that person's strongest argument and address that argument. This will hopefully encourage the other person in the dialogue to do the same relative to your arguments.
One of the easiest activities to fall into is going after the weakest argument in a group and then acting as if one has vanquished them all. We should avoid letting a philosophy or movement or social group be defined by their least credible or sympathetic advocate or member.
This is all to easy when attempting to create or perpetuate a stereotype. For example a reporter who goes to a Science Fiction convention and focuses on the person who lives in his mother's basement collecting action figures. And to make the main lead of their story the reporter walks past the elementary school teacher who could talk about how to inspire children and the scholar in intellectual history who can talk about the impact of post WWII Science Fiction in France or the corporate lawyer for a major technology company who can knowledgeably discuss legal issues in technology or the physicist who can discuss technology as it is portrayed in novels. It is the issue of a representative sample versus a selective sample. And we know that reporter works for a media company that wants capture attention and sell advertisements. Yes the reporter should behave better but will they; I am not sure. Perhaps the best thing to do is show a good example. It might begin by not doing the usual stereotyping of some political or religious group. If we start a meme about fair representation and issues related to not only to politics and religion but also gender, race and similar factors perhaps the situation will improve.
Another part of the process is to try to develop common clear crisp definitions and to clearly determine the topic of conversation. This goes a long way toward avoiding endless looping. For example if two people agree that they want a just society yet are disagreeing about how to get there it is a good idea to make sure they have the same concept of justice. There is a concept of justice based on the rules of social interaction and the related processes. This is a also a concept of justice based on the distribution of outcomes. There are other definitions and variants. The point is for there to be a common understanding of where the difference is occurring. Thus it is valuable for each participant in the discussion to have a clear conceptual map of their own views as well as the views of the other participants. I said it is valuable; I did not say it is common.
There is a difference between directing humor and ridicule at an argument and directly them at a person making the argument. It is a thin boundary and easy to cross inadvertently so humor and ridicule need to be used with care. In some circumstances humor can break the tension and get everyone to relax. In other circumstances in can cause a breech in the flow of ideas. One of the problems here is that so many people identify with their ideas and ideologies. Often much of a persons social context is in groups with many commonly held ideas and thus for a person to abandon an idea might feel like either leaving or being expelled from the group. One way of addressing this is to propagate the meme of always questioning and doubting and always making every hypothesis subject to falsification. This stems from the work of Karl Popper in the philosophy of science. The critical rationalism approach was extended by W.W. Bartley who felt that if could be useful in analyzing issues related to the long standing clash between science and religion. The approach he developed called Pan-Critical Rationalism is useful in looking at that clash but is also useful in understanding issues related to other issues.
Now let me comment on strawman arguments. In my experience strawman arguments can arise in three different ways. First when a person understands a position perfectly well and deliberately misrepresents that position. Second is when a person mistakenly thinks they understand a position and misrepresent it. Third is when a person is aware that they do not understand a position but make a representation as if they did. The person whose argument is being subjected to this strawman treatment will often not know which of the three situations is occurring. That is why it is important to firmly but politely object to the strawman with specifics. And if someone claims you are doing a strawman on their argument ask for specific details.
Selective quoting is one of those behaviors that is easier to catch now with so many works available online. An example: if I was asked about which of the baseball players of the pre-WWI era I admired and I wrote "Leaving his racism aside, I admire Ty Cobb." If someone else then wrote that I admired a known racist in an attempt to disparage my character that would be inappropriate. Actually I am not a big baseball fan and not a Ty Cobb fan, I had to look up Ty Cobb to make sure that the example worked. My point is that we need verify quotes and ask for citations and make sure that context is supplied. In particular do this for quotes or anecdotes that are the "silver bullet" in some argument. I expect most of us have heard the quotation or anecdote that clearly supports our view and discredits and contradicts a view we do not hold and thus we really want it email it and tweet it and blog it and Facebook it and GooglePlus it all at once to the whole world however that is the moment to instead stop and make sure the quote or anecdote is accurate, in context and really represents the situation. And remember to check snopes.com please. I have seen my friends get embarrassed because someone emailed them something and because it was from a friend they just put it out themselves without checking only to find the item they propagated was not accurate.
I recommend reading for understanding not to find a gotcha. One example of this is when a writer makes a small error which is not consequential to the issue under discussion. For example if a person mistakenly attributes a Richard Feynman quote to Carl Sagan that would only invalidate an argument if the author of the quote was a central aspect of the discussion. Otherwise it is worth a minor correction just to keep confusion from arising but not to derail the discussion. Similar to the above is when there is an obvious mistake in typing. Thus if a major anti-censorship figure types "I am in favor of censorship" where obviously the word "not" was missing and the intended phrase should be "I am not in favor of censorship".
Another item to avoid is the derailment. This is taking a discussion off topic. Some people do this because the discussion is not going their way and they want to get the topic shifted before the last bit of their argument is publicly shredded. Others do it because they have a particular hobby horse and they feel this great urge to shift the discussion to their favorite topic or at least one in which they feel they are expert. For example no matter what the topic of discussion they might steer the discussion to the role of the British Monarchy in being part of some secret conspiracy behind the assassination of both Kennedy brothers.
Avoid the Gish Gallop. This is the name given by Eugenie Scott to a debate technique of the creationist Duane Gish. The technique is to spew out an incredibly large number of falsehoods, half-truths, misleading comments, strawmen arguments and canards in such a fashion that a person on the other side of a debate can not answer them. What is the count needed for someone to be engaging in a Gish Gallop? That is open to discussion; one number I have seen is 50. The point is not the exact number but the intention. This is particularly tempting to do to someone who is not as linguistically skilled as you are. Please don't do it.
Don t be afraid to say "I don't know" when you do not know. Deliberately blustering through an argument with false or incomplete or misleading statements might lead to a short term advantage but for the long term it is usually not worth it.
It is important to be able to identify what you do not know. Failure to do so can be like going around a corner at high speed and no visibility; it can often lead to a negative experience. If the ignorance is due to someone not realizing the state of ignorance it is worthwhile to politely point the person to the appropriate information resources. If a person stays in a state of ignorance willful by not asking or by not seeking information or by not accessing information when it is provided
These few comments do not come close to covering all of what needs to be covered. However I hope it is a starting point.
2012-12-03
A Report Inspired By Attending Dragon*Con
I had long been aware of Dragon*Con in the same vague sense that one is often away of annual cons that one has never attended however it was in 2011 that my desire to attend Dragon*Con was tweaked. The catalyst that tweaked my desire to attend Dragon*Con occurred at TAM in 2011. TAM is an annual conference ran by The James Randi Educational Foundation. The conference has been held in Las Vegas for several days in July the past few years. TAM was another of those conferences I had heard about but never attended. So in 2011 I attended TAM for the first time and had a great experience. TAM is a conference focused on the value of Science and Skepticism and how to detect and counter cognitive fallacies and woo-woo stuff such as psychics, ghosts and faith-healers. There were workshops on how psychic readings are done and how to critically investigate everything from big foot to ghosts. Several times I heard speakers or conversations where Dragon*Con was mentioned. I gathered that there was a strong presence of Skeptics at Dragon*Con and there was an entire programming track devoted to Skepticism with speakers such as Eugenie Scott from NCSE. This lead me to deciding to attend Dragon*Con in 2012 and thus skip needing to make the choice between Burning Man and Worldcon.
My previous time in Atlanta was about ten years ago on a business trip and all I had seen was the airport, a hotel on the outer edge of Atlanta and a computer server room where I was part of team installing some servers. I decided to arrive early and have at least an afternoon to see more of Atlanta. The con ran from Friday morning to noon Monday (Labor Day). My flight from SFO to Atlanta had at least three people headed for Dragon*Con; there may have been more but I could personally confirm three. By the time I checked into my hotel it was late in the Wednesday evening. The Atlanta rail system is called MARTA and has a terminal at the airport. The main con hotels had long been booked solid so I was staying in the Melia which is two MARTA stops past the stop near the Hyatt. Hint if you are going to be making more that a handful of trips on MARTA buy the 7 day pass. Second hint if you have a Clipper card which is used by many of the transit systems (BART, VTA, etc) in the San Francisco Bay Area do not get it near the MARTA card reader or the MARTA reader will think it is an MARTA card and your Clipper card might get corrupted. The Melia Hotel is conveniently located a block from a MARTA stop which is also a bus transfer point. Many other Dragon*Con attendees were staying at the Melia Hotel plus the Melia was a main hotel for Pride Weekend such as International Black Gay Pride. So the Melia was full and busy.
Thursday morning I got up and headed off to go through Dragon*Con registration since they had special Thursday morning hours for persons who had pre-registered. When I got to Sheraton the line was already out the door, down the sidewalk and around the corner. Since I had been in a similar long line at Fanime in San Jose a couple of months previously and it had taken 2 hours and 37 minutes to cycle through. However I was pleasantly surprised when the line moved and after a few minutes moved again. Much sooner that I expected I was in the hotel and then into the large room with the serpentine line which moved surprisingly quickly. I had my badge less than an hour later. One of the main reasons seemed to be the bar coded postcard system they used. When I had pre-registered months previously they had sent a blue postcard that said very plainly to bring the post card with you to registration. That post card had a bar code printed on it and when a person stepped one of the reg stations the staff person there scanned the post card and a label was printed on a label maker which the slapped on the Dragon*Con badge and the badge handed over. That was all they did. If you had a problem you went to the problem station. If you wanted to pickup a banquet ticket you first got your badge and then went to the station for other tickets. The reg station did not hand people their program books that was done in the next room. All the reg stations did was do reg badges; nothing more. And there were about 16 stations. There was no worrying about how to split by last name because any station could handle any pre-registration card. There was one person as traffic control so that at any time a reg station had one person being processed and two in queue waiting. It was very efficient.
After I had my badge and other items I got some lunch and then headed back to the hotel to drop things off. After dropping my things at the hotel I walked over to the bus transfer point and got a local bus which stops about a block from the Martin Luther King National Historical Site which has many fine displays and information about Dr. King and the Civil Rights struggle. Across the street is the King Center which has rooms with interesting displays related to Dr. King, Coretta Scott King, Mahatma Gandhi and Rosa Parks. Outside there was a long reflecting pool and what appeared to be a small chapel or meditation room at the end of the pool. But it was locked and appeared to have been converted to storage although this was most likely noticeable only to a inquisitive person such as me. Overall I rate the time spend at the various MLK sites as well worth the effort and I recommend it to others. Then I got the bus back to the hotel to get ready for the evening.
The Thursday evening event was not directly part of Dragon*Con but had many attendees who would be in town for Dragon*Con. The event was sponsored by the Atlanta area skeptics as a charity fund raiser for the Leukemia Lymphoma Society. The theme was to be astronomy in honor of Jeff Medkeff who had died from cancer in 2008 and had been very involved in astronomy. The plan was to hold the event at a venue that served food and drink and had a place to set up some telescopes. The venue was good, the food was good and the beer was cold and reasonably priced and all served by a friendly and competent staff. The problem was that the sky was covered by clouds. The storm that disrupted the Republican convention was close enough to Atlanta to cause clouds, not rain just a lot of clouds. So no telescope viewing but they did use the internet to contact people in other places to view their computer linked telescopes and thus there were images of the moon displayed on a screen. Plus there were live performers including George Hrab as well as bloggers and writers well known in the Skeptic community. It was a great party but eventually I decided to leave and get some rest since I still had not totally made the time zone shift and I expected the morning would come subjectively very early.
So I departed and was going to grab a taxi back to my hotel. A large group of people had justed exited the bar next door and were filling both of the available taxis. So I decided to walk on and contemplate my options when after walking about 20 meters or so I came upon a young lady who appeared to be about 14 or 15 years old asking some random person on a bicycle how to get to the Sheraton. After the person on the bicycle said that he had no idea, I stepped up and asked if she was looking Dragon*Con registration at the Sheraton. She said yes and that she thought it was nearby since she had gotten off at a MARTA stop and walked this direction. I said no and that she was turned around 180 degrees however I knew where the Sheraton was since I had been there that morning. Since there were no more cabs around I suggested we just walk. So we walked back and she said she was going to volunteer at Dragon*Con and this was her first year attending. She needed to meet someone the Sheraton before midnight. So at 11:55PM I walked her to the proper intersection and pointed to the Sheraton across the street. She was happy and thankful and headed toward the Sheraton and I headed to MARTA so get back to my hotel for some much needed sleep because the con would be going in earnest in the morning.
Friday morning came earlier than my body expected. I got up and did the usual morning things and caught MARTA to the con. At this point I should note that weeks prior to the con a smartphone app had been released which listed all of the events in all of the tracks and allowed each person to customize their own schedule even to the point of booking themselves to four or more events at the same time. And there were many items to consider.
Dragon*Con is a large event with attendance in the 50,000 plus range. I suspect that most readers of this report have either engaged in the game of Bumper Cars or have observed others engaged in that activity. Navigating the hallways at Dragon*Con is like a game of Bumper People; particularly at a couple of choke points. Dragon*Con utilizes much of the hotel space in central Atlanta in particular the Sheraton and three hotels which are connected the Hyatt, Mariott and Hilton. These hotels are connected by an enclosed walkway which allows moving from hotel to hotel without worrying about weather or crossing the street. These three hotels are located on a slope so to access the walkway one does need to utilize the escalators or stairs to get at the appropriate level.
Dragncon has many tracks. Many, many tracks. Everything from a track on Skepticism to a track related to computers and technology to a track on Star Wars. Interested in cosplay then there are panels on than. Interested in podcasting then their are panels on that. Interested in the latest SF and Fantasy novels then there will be publisher representatives to tell you about upcoming books. And that is only touching the surface. To get an indication see http://DragonCon.org/fan_tracks.php and look around. And speaking of tracks now is a good time to mention the Dragon*Con parade. This parade has contingents from the different tracks marching in downtown Atlanta. This is an event where many people from the community turn out several deep to watch the parade particularly families with children. You can see the information an Atlanta family site provided at http://www.atlantawithkid.com/family-guide-to-annual-dragoncon-parade-2012/ as an example There are many pictures and videos of the parade online so I will give one URL http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/09/the-cosplay-of-dragoncon-2012-day-two-the-parade and everyone can google for the rest. The parade has about 3000 Dragon*Con attendees participating. I watched the parade from near where it began and from beginning to end was about an hour or so. For a great photo of people viewing the parade and a fine Dragon*Con report see: http://efanzines.com/SFSF/SFSF134.pdf
In addition to the various panels Dragon*Con had a number of larger events. One of those was a joint appearance of James Randi (already mentioned above) and Alice Cooper. Now one might ask why were the well known magician and skeptic James Randi and the famous (or Infamous) rocker Alice Cooper on stage together being interviewed. The answer is that years ago James Randi was part of the Billion Dollar Baby tour of Alice Cooper. And they had remained in touch and friends over the years. The interview was a great time for stories from Randi and Coop. And Coop gave the true story that he did not kill the chicken at the concert in Detroit. However at the time he let the rumor spread because it was such good publicity.
One difference from a Worldcon was a larger number of special guests who had acted in various TV or media productions. For some of these guests you who purchase a photo opportunity. In many cases you could buy autographed photos and most of them were on panels speaking about the shows in which they appeared. I am not generally interested too much in media however I decided to go to one panel listed as a Star Trek series mashup just to see what it was like. Several hundred people turned up to hear Michael Dorn (Worf, TNG DS9), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura, TOS) Connor Trinneer (Charles "Trip" Tucker, ENT) and Garrett Wang (Harry Kim VOY). Considering this was near the end of the con it went well.
Occasionally one hears a plaintive lament about the "Graying of Fandom"; my suggestion for anyone with that concern is go to Dragon*Con and look around. My observation was that the Dragon*Con attendees tend to be much younger than the typical Worldcon attendees. I am not the first one to make this observation and I doubt I will be the last. And others have listed the reasons so I will not attempt an exhaustive or even extensive list in this report. However I will note a couple of items. One is the cosplay. Cosplay is becoming an increasing large phenomena. I noticed at Dragon*Con many dealers selling non-book items such as superhero action figures, DVD/BluRay videos, costuming accessories, media star photos and photo opportunities compared to Worldcon.
There was an art show somewhat like a Worldcon art show with a few differences. One difference was that I saw a couple of instances where the artists was also a writer and was selling both copies of their books as well as artwork based on their stories. In one case I noticed an author selling used copies of her early works published by one of the regular publishers and then later works in the series being self published and selling both art prints as well as a large original oil painting based on the series.
There were so many dealers that they were split into multiple rooms. And the rooms were crowed with people and as least some appeared to be making purchases. At one point I thought I had visited every dealer room when I turned a corner and there was one more which was serendipitous since it was in that room that I found a DVD of the play The Book of Morman. I was glad to get it since I suspected that I would not get tickets for the play when it was in the San Francisco Bay Area. The dealer slots varied from a small space where one to authors were pushing the books to slightly larger for some small presses to very large muli-space areas crammed with collectible action figures, games, manga, videos, t-shirts and toys. And there were a few traditional book dealers. Unfortunately there was a booth hawking L. Ron Hubbard drivel and Writers of the Future. At least they were not offering free personality tests or trying to run an e-meter scan on the unsuspecting. At least not as far as I could see. However one never knows when one sees people who appear to me to be shills, fronts or smokescreens for Hubbard, Dianetics, Scientology or what other BS they are shoveling at the moment. But the rest of dealers areas were interesting.
And of course Dragon*con had an area for various organization and fan tables. The James Randi Educational Foundation and National Center for Science Education NCSE were just a couple of the tables I stopped by on multiple occasions. And since I had not packed enough shirts I was able to get a NCSE T-shirt; the new hip fashion.
The hotels were generally well prepared. In additional to their restaurants they had setup additional food sales stands selling burgers, sandwiches, chips, fruits and drinks. Also some pizza vendors set up stalls selling pizza either by the slice or the whole pie. One of the advantage of having Dragon*Con in the same city and hotels each year is that a lot of knowledge can be build up about crowd control, food services and event scheduling. Due to the size of the con the walkways were more crowded and thus not as conducive to spontaneous conversation. Some of this was alleviated by having most panel sessions being sixty minutes with a thirty minute break between sessions. This allowed some conversations to occur following panels without the need to immediately vacate the room for the next panel.
Dragon*Con does have an opening ceremony and a closing ceremony however these were lightly attended compared to Worldcon in both absolute and relative terms. Dragon*Con also has a banquet and since it was my first Dragon*Con I decided to attend. The cost for a banquet ticket was sixty five dollars. The banquet attendance was I am guessing in the 200 to 300 range but it was difficult to tell from where I was sitting. The banquet started with a small group of musicians performing lovely classical music as people found a seat and socialized, a welcome change of ambiance. The food was good actually slightly better that most banquet food. A local politician did the usual politician speech. Awards were presented and Robert Picardo the holographic Doctor from ST:VOY performed and showed off his many skills. He is really very talented and entertaining.
The size of the events varied a seventy five person room to rooms set up to handle hundreds. For example the line to see James Randi and Alice Cooper started to form more that an hour prior to the event and went down the hall then out the side door and down the walkway to the sidewalk and then down the sidewalk. But everyone got in and there were extra seats just not up front.
One of the events I enjoyed was not on the official list. George Hrab had started telling some people that following his scheduled event at 11:00PM he would be performing on the piano in the hotel hallway. And after his scheduled event and after his assistant had concluded selling a few CDs he went out to the piano in the hotel hallway and performed the entire Dark Side of the Moon. Just him singing and accompanying himself on the piano and a crowd people standing and sitting and listening to a great performance. George Hrab has a podcast and you can hear part of his scheduled Dragon*Con event and the mis-communication about him possibly being the interviewer for the Randi and Coop event as well as him discussing playing Dark Side of the Moon at http://geologicpodcast.com/the-geologic-podcast-episode-279 And to hear about George having Poutine in Montreal try http://geologicpodcast.com/the-geologic-podcast-episode-281
Podcasting is becoming increasingly popular. In addition to en entire track on podcasting the popular Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast recorded an entire session before a live audience late one night at Dragon*Con. To listen to it http://www.theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=373 And ranging even further afield you can read what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aka CDC had to say about Dragon*Con http://blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2012/11/Dragon*Con-2012/
As Dragon*Con started to wind down on Monday I joined an eclectic mix of persons who had been attending many of the Skeptics panels for an impromptu Skeptics In The Pub gathering at a bar. We ate and drank and spoke of the fun we had and discussed flying back to our various homes. It was a fun end to an enjoyable weekend.
This report has only touched on small fraction of many aspects of Dragon*Con. Dragon*Con is big and seems to have covered almost all of the fannish bases plus more. In summary I will say that I really enjoyed Dragon*Con. It had a different vibe and higher energy than a lot of cons I have attended. It might not be for everyone every year but I think most fans would enjoy attending it at least once.
My previous time in Atlanta was about ten years ago on a business trip and all I had seen was the airport, a hotel on the outer edge of Atlanta and a computer server room where I was part of team installing some servers. I decided to arrive early and have at least an afternoon to see more of Atlanta. The con ran from Friday morning to noon Monday (Labor Day). My flight from SFO to Atlanta had at least three people headed for Dragon*Con; there may have been more but I could personally confirm three. By the time I checked into my hotel it was late in the Wednesday evening. The Atlanta rail system is called MARTA and has a terminal at the airport. The main con hotels had long been booked solid so I was staying in the Melia which is two MARTA stops past the stop near the Hyatt. Hint if you are going to be making more that a handful of trips on MARTA buy the 7 day pass. Second hint if you have a Clipper card which is used by many of the transit systems (BART, VTA, etc) in the San Francisco Bay Area do not get it near the MARTA card reader or the MARTA reader will think it is an MARTA card and your Clipper card might get corrupted. The Melia Hotel is conveniently located a block from a MARTA stop which is also a bus transfer point. Many other Dragon*Con attendees were staying at the Melia Hotel plus the Melia was a main hotel for Pride Weekend such as International Black Gay Pride. So the Melia was full and busy.
Thursday morning I got up and headed off to go through Dragon*Con registration since they had special Thursday morning hours for persons who had pre-registered. When I got to Sheraton the line was already out the door, down the sidewalk and around the corner. Since I had been in a similar long line at Fanime in San Jose a couple of months previously and it had taken 2 hours and 37 minutes to cycle through. However I was pleasantly surprised when the line moved and after a few minutes moved again. Much sooner that I expected I was in the hotel and then into the large room with the serpentine line which moved surprisingly quickly. I had my badge less than an hour later. One of the main reasons seemed to be the bar coded postcard system they used. When I had pre-registered months previously they had sent a blue postcard that said very plainly to bring the post card with you to registration. That post card had a bar code printed on it and when a person stepped one of the reg stations the staff person there scanned the post card and a label was printed on a label maker which the slapped on the Dragon*Con badge and the badge handed over. That was all they did. If you had a problem you went to the problem station. If you wanted to pickup a banquet ticket you first got your badge and then went to the station for other tickets. The reg station did not hand people their program books that was done in the next room. All the reg stations did was do reg badges; nothing more. And there were about 16 stations. There was no worrying about how to split by last name because any station could handle any pre-registration card. There was one person as traffic control so that at any time a reg station had one person being processed and two in queue waiting. It was very efficient.
After I had my badge and other items I got some lunch and then headed back to the hotel to drop things off. After dropping my things at the hotel I walked over to the bus transfer point and got a local bus which stops about a block from the Martin Luther King National Historical Site which has many fine displays and information about Dr. King and the Civil Rights struggle. Across the street is the King Center which has rooms with interesting displays related to Dr. King, Coretta Scott King, Mahatma Gandhi and Rosa Parks. Outside there was a long reflecting pool and what appeared to be a small chapel or meditation room at the end of the pool. But it was locked and appeared to have been converted to storage although this was most likely noticeable only to a inquisitive person such as me. Overall I rate the time spend at the various MLK sites as well worth the effort and I recommend it to others. Then I got the bus back to the hotel to get ready for the evening.
The Thursday evening event was not directly part of Dragon*Con but had many attendees who would be in town for Dragon*Con. The event was sponsored by the Atlanta area skeptics as a charity fund raiser for the Leukemia Lymphoma Society. The theme was to be astronomy in honor of Jeff Medkeff who had died from cancer in 2008 and had been very involved in astronomy. The plan was to hold the event at a venue that served food and drink and had a place to set up some telescopes. The venue was good, the food was good and the beer was cold and reasonably priced and all served by a friendly and competent staff. The problem was that the sky was covered by clouds. The storm that disrupted the Republican convention was close enough to Atlanta to cause clouds, not rain just a lot of clouds. So no telescope viewing but they did use the internet to contact people in other places to view their computer linked telescopes and thus there were images of the moon displayed on a screen. Plus there were live performers including George Hrab as well as bloggers and writers well known in the Skeptic community. It was a great party but eventually I decided to leave and get some rest since I still had not totally made the time zone shift and I expected the morning would come subjectively very early.
So I departed and was going to grab a taxi back to my hotel. A large group of people had justed exited the bar next door and were filling both of the available taxis. So I decided to walk on and contemplate my options when after walking about 20 meters or so I came upon a young lady who appeared to be about 14 or 15 years old asking some random person on a bicycle how to get to the Sheraton. After the person on the bicycle said that he had no idea, I stepped up and asked if she was looking Dragon*Con registration at the Sheraton. She said yes and that she thought it was nearby since she had gotten off at a MARTA stop and walked this direction. I said no and that she was turned around 180 degrees however I knew where the Sheraton was since I had been there that morning. Since there were no more cabs around I suggested we just walk. So we walked back and she said she was going to volunteer at Dragon*Con and this was her first year attending. She needed to meet someone the Sheraton before midnight. So at 11:55PM I walked her to the proper intersection and pointed to the Sheraton across the street. She was happy and thankful and headed toward the Sheraton and I headed to MARTA so get back to my hotel for some much needed sleep because the con would be going in earnest in the morning.
Friday morning came earlier than my body expected. I got up and did the usual morning things and caught MARTA to the con. At this point I should note that weeks prior to the con a smartphone app had been released which listed all of the events in all of the tracks and allowed each person to customize their own schedule even to the point of booking themselves to four or more events at the same time. And there were many items to consider.
Dragon*Con is a large event with attendance in the 50,000 plus range. I suspect that most readers of this report have either engaged in the game of Bumper Cars or have observed others engaged in that activity. Navigating the hallways at Dragon*Con is like a game of Bumper People; particularly at a couple of choke points. Dragon*Con utilizes much of the hotel space in central Atlanta in particular the Sheraton and three hotels which are connected the Hyatt, Mariott and Hilton. These hotels are connected by an enclosed walkway which allows moving from hotel to hotel without worrying about weather or crossing the street. These three hotels are located on a slope so to access the walkway one does need to utilize the escalators or stairs to get at the appropriate level.
Dragncon has many tracks. Many, many tracks. Everything from a track on Skepticism to a track related to computers and technology to a track on Star Wars. Interested in cosplay then there are panels on than. Interested in podcasting then their are panels on that. Interested in the latest SF and Fantasy novels then there will be publisher representatives to tell you about upcoming books. And that is only touching the surface. To get an indication see http://DragonCon.org/fan_tracks.php and look around. And speaking of tracks now is a good time to mention the Dragon*Con parade. This parade has contingents from the different tracks marching in downtown Atlanta. This is an event where many people from the community turn out several deep to watch the parade particularly families with children. You can see the information an Atlanta family site provided at http://www.atlantawithkid.com/family-guide-to-annual-dragoncon-parade-2012/ as an example There are many pictures and videos of the parade online so I will give one URL http://www.tor.com/blogs/2012/09/the-cosplay-of-dragoncon-2012-day-two-the-parade and everyone can google for the rest. The parade has about 3000 Dragon*Con attendees participating. I watched the parade from near where it began and from beginning to end was about an hour or so. For a great photo of people viewing the parade and a fine Dragon*Con report see: http://efanzines.com/SFSF/SFSF134.pdf
In addition to the various panels Dragon*Con had a number of larger events. One of those was a joint appearance of James Randi (already mentioned above) and Alice Cooper. Now one might ask why were the well known magician and skeptic James Randi and the famous (or Infamous) rocker Alice Cooper on stage together being interviewed. The answer is that years ago James Randi was part of the Billion Dollar Baby tour of Alice Cooper. And they had remained in touch and friends over the years. The interview was a great time for stories from Randi and Coop. And Coop gave the true story that he did not kill the chicken at the concert in Detroit. However at the time he let the rumor spread because it was such good publicity.
One difference from a Worldcon was a larger number of special guests who had acted in various TV or media productions. For some of these guests you who purchase a photo opportunity. In many cases you could buy autographed photos and most of them were on panels speaking about the shows in which they appeared. I am not generally interested too much in media however I decided to go to one panel listed as a Star Trek series mashup just to see what it was like. Several hundred people turned up to hear Michael Dorn (Worf, TNG DS9), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura, TOS) Connor Trinneer (Charles "Trip" Tucker, ENT) and Garrett Wang (Harry Kim VOY). Considering this was near the end of the con it went well.
Occasionally one hears a plaintive lament about the "Graying of Fandom"; my suggestion for anyone with that concern is go to Dragon*Con and look around. My observation was that the Dragon*Con attendees tend to be much younger than the typical Worldcon attendees. I am not the first one to make this observation and I doubt I will be the last. And others have listed the reasons so I will not attempt an exhaustive or even extensive list in this report. However I will note a couple of items. One is the cosplay. Cosplay is becoming an increasing large phenomena. I noticed at Dragon*Con many dealers selling non-book items such as superhero action figures, DVD/BluRay videos, costuming accessories, media star photos and photo opportunities compared to Worldcon.
There was an art show somewhat like a Worldcon art show with a few differences. One difference was that I saw a couple of instances where the artists was also a writer and was selling both copies of their books as well as artwork based on their stories. In one case I noticed an author selling used copies of her early works published by one of the regular publishers and then later works in the series being self published and selling both art prints as well as a large original oil painting based on the series.
There were so many dealers that they were split into multiple rooms. And the rooms were crowed with people and as least some appeared to be making purchases. At one point I thought I had visited every dealer room when I turned a corner and there was one more which was serendipitous since it was in that room that I found a DVD of the play The Book of Morman. I was glad to get it since I suspected that I would not get tickets for the play when it was in the San Francisco Bay Area. The dealer slots varied from a small space where one to authors were pushing the books to slightly larger for some small presses to very large muli-space areas crammed with collectible action figures, games, manga, videos, t-shirts and toys. And there were a few traditional book dealers. Unfortunately there was a booth hawking L. Ron Hubbard drivel and Writers of the Future. At least they were not offering free personality tests or trying to run an e-meter scan on the unsuspecting. At least not as far as I could see. However one never knows when one sees people who appear to me to be shills, fronts or smokescreens for Hubbard, Dianetics, Scientology or what other BS they are shoveling at the moment. But the rest of dealers areas were interesting.
And of course Dragon*con had an area for various organization and fan tables. The James Randi Educational Foundation and National Center for Science Education NCSE were just a couple of the tables I stopped by on multiple occasions. And since I had not packed enough shirts I was able to get a NCSE T-shirt; the new hip fashion.
The hotels were generally well prepared. In additional to their restaurants they had setup additional food sales stands selling burgers, sandwiches, chips, fruits and drinks. Also some pizza vendors set up stalls selling pizza either by the slice or the whole pie. One of the advantage of having Dragon*Con in the same city and hotels each year is that a lot of knowledge can be build up about crowd control, food services and event scheduling. Due to the size of the con the walkways were more crowded and thus not as conducive to spontaneous conversation. Some of this was alleviated by having most panel sessions being sixty minutes with a thirty minute break between sessions. This allowed some conversations to occur following panels without the need to immediately vacate the room for the next panel.
Dragon*Con does have an opening ceremony and a closing ceremony however these were lightly attended compared to Worldcon in both absolute and relative terms. Dragon*Con also has a banquet and since it was my first Dragon*Con I decided to attend. The cost for a banquet ticket was sixty five dollars. The banquet attendance was I am guessing in the 200 to 300 range but it was difficult to tell from where I was sitting. The banquet started with a small group of musicians performing lovely classical music as people found a seat and socialized, a welcome change of ambiance. The food was good actually slightly better that most banquet food. A local politician did the usual politician speech. Awards were presented and Robert Picardo the holographic Doctor from ST:VOY performed and showed off his many skills. He is really very talented and entertaining.
The size of the events varied a seventy five person room to rooms set up to handle hundreds. For example the line to see James Randi and Alice Cooper started to form more that an hour prior to the event and went down the hall then out the side door and down the walkway to the sidewalk and then down the sidewalk. But everyone got in and there were extra seats just not up front.
One of the events I enjoyed was not on the official list. George Hrab had started telling some people that following his scheduled event at 11:00PM he would be performing on the piano in the hotel hallway. And after his scheduled event and after his assistant had concluded selling a few CDs he went out to the piano in the hotel hallway and performed the entire Dark Side of the Moon. Just him singing and accompanying himself on the piano and a crowd people standing and sitting and listening to a great performance. George Hrab has a podcast and you can hear part of his scheduled Dragon*Con event and the mis-communication about him possibly being the interviewer for the Randi and Coop event as well as him discussing playing Dark Side of the Moon at http://geologicpodcast.com/the-geologic-podcast-episode-279 And to hear about George having Poutine in Montreal try http://geologicpodcast.com/the-geologic-podcast-episode-281
Podcasting is becoming increasingly popular. In addition to en entire track on podcasting the popular Skeptics Guide to the Universe podcast recorded an entire session before a live audience late one night at Dragon*Con. To listen to it http://www.theskepticsguide.org/archive/podcastinfo.aspx?mid=1&pid=373 And ranging even further afield you can read what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aka CDC had to say about Dragon*Con http://blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2012/11/Dragon*Con-2012/
As Dragon*Con started to wind down on Monday I joined an eclectic mix of persons who had been attending many of the Skeptics panels for an impromptu Skeptics In The Pub gathering at a bar. We ate and drank and spoke of the fun we had and discussed flying back to our various homes. It was a fun end to an enjoyable weekend.
This report has only touched on small fraction of many aspects of Dragon*Con. Dragon*Con is big and seems to have covered almost all of the fannish bases plus more. In summary I will say that I really enjoyed Dragon*Con. It had a different vibe and higher energy than a lot of cons I have attended. It might not be for everyone every year but I think most fans would enjoy attending it at least once.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)