Extensive report criticizing Laura J Mixon's report on Requires only that you hate

[Lyanna Stark]

Wait, didn't we have a short-lived troll on this very board who claimed to be a Thai lesbian (who was 14 years old and who had a complicated relationship with a golden retriever)? Is pretending to be a Thai lesbian some new fad on 4chan or something?

 

Yes, the troll did claim that, but if it's a fad it must be the strangest one ever. Unfortunately I deleted the long, angry rants he/she sent me, but they were extremely entertaining and involved feminists in the west being responsible for all the political issues in Thailand.

[MacPeach]

From what I've been able to determine [and *recall] RH made a public appeal on her LJ or Twitter or something to the effect of some troll that was stalking her online presence.

 

Amongst many, one of the things RH claimed this individual had also done was out her RL information. Now, speaking for myself, I can't see her admitting to that [stalker guy outed me!] when said information was readily available unless it was actually true --or, alternatively-- she was going for some kind of misdirect. But, latter aside, the former definitely holds with some of the things she's inadvertently revealed about herself over the years in her various incarnations: Thai, lesbian, descendant of very wealthy hotel magnate-politically dynastic type family, etc [not a minority, at least in her home country, and quite privileged to most appearances]  

 

As to the OP, the essay reads a bit like a PR scrub job. Author apologizing for missing links, yet BS started cleaning up her background the minute she got outed as RH [if not before]. Some of the tones taken remind of things BS/RH has written in her own defense, but that could be me. Still kinda fishy. When was it published, anyone know?  

 

 

*refreshing myself, it appears the information is still available. Including her alleged name, which I won't post here but is easily discovered for one's self.

[Larry of the Lawn]

From what I've been able to determine [and *recall] RH made a public appeal on her LJ or Twitter or something to the effect of some troll that was stalking her online presence.
 
Amongst many, one of the things RH claimed this individual had also done was out her RL information. Now, speaking for myself, I can't see her admitting to that [stalker guy outed me!] when said information was readily available unless it was actually true --or, alternatively-- she was going for some kind of misdirect. But, latter aside, the former definitely holds with some of the things she's inadvertently revealed about herself over the years in her various incarnations: Thai, lesbian, descendant of very wealthy hotel magnate-politically dynastic type family, etc [not a minority, at least in her home country, and quite privileged to most appearances]  
 
As to the OP, the essay reads a bit like a PR scrub job. Author apologizing for missing links, yet BS started cleaning up her background the minute she got outed as RH [if not before]. Some of the tones taken remind of things BS/RH has written in her own defense, but that could be me. Still kinda fishy. When was it published, anyone know?  
 
 
*refreshing myself, it appears the information is still available. Including her alleged name, which I won't post here but is easily discovered for one's self.

So are you suggesting the author.of this is just a sock puppet of RoH?

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

 

Yes, the troll did claim that, but if it's a fad it must be the strangest one ever. Unfortunately I deleted the long, angry rants he/she sent me, but they were extremely entertaining and involved feminists in the west being responsible for all the political issues in Thailand.

Is it possible there's an undercurrent of anti-white-feminism in the Thai lesbian community?

[MacPeach]

Larry: it would be irresponsible to suggest that with any strength, really, but it's not out of the realm of possibility. I imagine, rather, they're friends and this is some form of collusion. 

 

Just intuition though, nothing concrete. 

[voodooqueen126]

From what I've been able to determine [and *recall] RH made a public appeal on her LJ or Twitter or something to the effect of some troll that was stalking her online presence.

 

Amongst many, one of the things RH claimed this individual had also done was out her RL information. Now, speaking for myself, I can't see her admitting to that [stalker guy outed me!] when said information was readily available unless it was actually true --or, alternatively-- she was going for some kind of misdirect. But, latter aside, the former definitely holds with some of the things she's inadvertently revealed about herself over the years in her various incarnations: Thai, lesbian, descendant of very wealthy hotel magnate-politically dynastic type family, etc [not a minority, at least in her home country, and quite privileged to most appearances]  

 

As to the OP, the essay reads a bit like a PR scrub job. Author apologizing for missing links, yet BS started cleaning up her background the minute she got outed as RH [if not before]. Some of the tones taken remind of things BS/RH has written in her own defense, but that could be me. Still kinda fishy. When was it published, anyone know?  

 

 

*refreshing myself, it appears the information is still available. Including her alleged name, which I won't post here but is easily discovered for one's self.

Isn't Scale Bright about figures in Chinese mythology? Then wouldn't it be likely that atleast one parent of BJ/Winterfox/RH is Thai Chinese.

Anyway I discussed this board over dinner with my godmother, and she said that both aspects of the name sounded authentic (I showed her Scale Bright on Amazon so that she could look at the name and surname) she suggested Pattaya as being a popular haunt for the gay community in Thailand

[Gormenghast]

I'm baffled that you people spend so much time discussing the specifics of who did what, when I think the important part of the story is how certain types of accusations can't be tolerable.

Those are the universal patterns that are important to recognize, because they'll come up again and again. Which is why Bakker wrote so much about it. It's not about a single person, but the analysis of that single person that exposes a much bigger and generalized picture.

It's not PERSONAL.

[Darth Richard II]

If I spent time specualting about who people on the internet really are I'd go insane.

[Darth Richard II]

I'm baffled that you people spend so much time discussing the specifics of who did what, when I think the important part of the story is how certain types of accusations can't be tolerable.

Those are the universal patterns that are important to recognize, because they'll come up again and again. Which is why Bakker wrote so much about it. It's not about a single person, but the analysis of that single person that exposes a much bigger and generalized picture.

It's not PERSONAL.

Um, it was personal for quite a number of people, actually.

[David Selig]

Um, it was personal for quite a number of people, actually.

Especially for Bakker. ;)

[Darth Richard II]

I was thinking of all the people who got death threats and such.

[Kat]

Admission: I voted No Award for the Best Fan Writer award because I thought the Mixon piece was poorly-researched and biased, but I also think that this piece, while exhaustive, is equally biased. The whole situation with RH and everyone involved embarrasses me.

[Callan S.]

Um, it was personal for quite a number of people, actually.

It's quite personal for, for example, the victims of sociopaths. But describing the behavioural parameters of sociopaths isn't personal toward any individual sociopath.

[Callan S.]

Admission: I voted No Award for the Best Fan Writer award because I thought the Mixon piece was poorly-researched and biased, but I also think that this piece, while exhaustive, is equally biased. The whole situation with RH and everyone involved embarrasses me.

I'm not sure how there is supposed to be an 'unbiased' position in regard to emotive issues.

 

I'd think it's a matter of which culture you take up - and I'd have thought the general culture was one against BS and her BS behaviour.

[Darth Richard II]

I honestly do not understand the bias claims, unless one is biased against abuse?

[Kat]

I'm not sure how there is supposed to be an 'unbiased' position in regard to emotive issues.

 

I'd think it's a matter of which culture you take up - and I'd have thought the general culture was one against BS and her BS behaviour.

 

Well, since my job here is to moderate behavior, I'm obviously against people whose behavior on the internet veers into the distasteful territory of gleefully wishing death on people, etc. But I also think there was a group of authors who behaved pretty badly in this situation and which really left a bad taste in my mouth. When I was reading Mixon's report, when I read various links to the context for some of her reports, I felt like she wasn't reporting the whole thing or was putting a spin on it, and also felt like the reason people thought it was well-researched was that it had data tables in it. If data tables is what it takes to be Best Fan Writer, I could probably come up with some of those too. I love data. I literally wear a pin on my key lanyard to work every day that says I <3 data.

 

OTOH, Brier seems to have even more of a hard-on for data whilst having just as much of a propensity for arbitrary categorization at the end of each of his analyses as Mixon did. I'm no Bakker fangirl, but I didn't read this thread before I read the Brier article and when I got to the part about Bakker typing with one hand, the author instantly lost any credibility that he may have set up at the beginning when he listed his "credentials".

[Darth Richard II]

See that's first reasonable answer someone has given me regards to Mixon, other than omg she's white.

[Kat]

The best point that the Brier article made was re: pseudonyms. Does anyone here actually use the same screen name for everything on the internet? I've been posting online since 1997 (I was 13 then) and have gone through a series of names, about 3 of which are in rotation now depending on how much I want to be linked to my public life. None of them are rage-bloggers or Campbell-nominated authors, but there's also a question of whether I want my students finding out everything I do in my spare time or whether I want someone who dislikes a moderation decision I've made here to find me at work and try to get me fired or something. But I also present different facets of my personality depending on who I'm with, and occasionally something will bring out all the 4-letter words I know while sometimes I'm well-reasoned and mild-mannered. But when articles about BS list her by all known pseudonyms, I think it makes the situation ultra-sketchier than it actually is. It's like the rhetorical equivalent of putting "so-called" or "alleged" in every other sentence. :P

[Kojiro]

The best point that the Brier article made was re: pseudonyms. Does anyone here actually use the same screen name for everything on the internet?

 

*Raises hand.*

[polishgenius]

 

*Raises hand.*

 

 

*joins*

Except for on twitter where I left it too long to join and have to go with polskigenius instead coz my name got stealed.


Anyway I don't know enough about the situation and haven't read and clicked through the Mixon report thoroughly enough to be able to comment on her credibility per se, but that doesn't mean it's wrong or unneccessary to be talking about RoH/Winterfox, and it seems unquestionable that she did damage to people, on purpose, which means that talk will be critical. I mean, it's sad that we're still talking about her, but it seems that we have to. If nothing else, so we (as in the SFF community at large) can be aware of how it happened and try not to let it happen again.