While I was reading Charlie Stross' post, I have to say, the text to your link was my first thought.

Wow. o_O

It's very possible I'm a hopeless optimist. But as one of the folks on that advisory committee, my own thinking was that we couldn't control the individuals appointed to the copyright committee. Even if we specifically recommended against Andrew Burt coming anywhere near it, we couldn't stop someone equally damaging from taking his position down the line.

So for me, the important thing was to get policies and procedures into place that would stop any one individual from making a bloody mess of things again.

I'm depressed to see Andrew in charge of the new committee, and I think it sends a very bad message. But I'm also hopeful that this will not be "Burt's Anti-Pirate Crusade" under a new name. I could be wrong, but if they're held to the rules SFWA has adopted for the committee, it should be an improvement.

But like I said, it's possible I'm just a hopeless optimist.

Edited at 2007-11-30 02:19 am (UTC)

I said it at Nick's journal and I'll say it again here:

Bwahaha!

It's always nice to be reminded of why I have little to no interest in ever joining SFWA.

Could SFWA possibly get more dysfunctional? This is ludicrous.

To the Wankshelter, Batman!

There was a time in my life when joining SFWA was a *goal* of mine. And now that I could, I won't. It's a silly organization, full of silly people. Ta.

I remember when I first sat down and was balancing the books for Mister and Missus --- when I came across their medical insurance (both freelancers mind you) and ran into Missus's Office and was like, "YOU PAY WHAT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE!?"
Fricken mind numbing.

And just like the current situation, the idea of impeaching still another sitting president...sort of implies we have some major overhauling to do.

Maybe we should start a new group, without all that History weighing it down. I know it's easier to fix old things, usually -- and getting the non-profit status would be a b&**h. But sometimes I wonder....

I'm a new pro -- novel signed to Daw, not out yet. I've been wondering about joining Sfwa, but, being British and resident in the UK, hadn't got around to it. Serious question: should I bother? Realistically, I'd be doing it for social reasons mainly (I'm not regular at worldcons).

One can only assume that Andrew Burt has a picture of someone in a compromising position with a chicken.

I wonder about the demographics of SFWA. Everyone who I think of as an up-and-coming author, the current through next generations of SF authors, are somewhere between ambivalent about their SFWA memberships, and hostile to the idea of ever becoming a member.

I assume that there are actively-writing SF authors who are enthusiastic members of SFWA, but I don't know any off the top of my head.

This seems to bode ill for the future of SFWA.

I swear, letting Andrew Burt run anything in SFWA is like hiring Jeffrey Dahmer to run a culinary school. It's a good thing I quit writing, because I no longer have to write about how incompetently operated the organization is. So long as they can keep running that Jim Van Pelt wankfest on the number of editors telling little white lies about the value of putting "Member, SFWA" on manuscripts, I'm sure the ever-decreasing membership will continue to masturbate furiously over how they're overseeing "the literature of the future".

Andy, Andy, Andy: a little bit of advice. Go work for the Libertarian Party. You can't cause any more damage over there, and you'll probably be working with the same chickenfuckers you worked with at SFWA.

Has anyone pursued a perjury case against SFWA yet? I haven't found any in some googling...

Andrew Burt leaps into action on the committee's recomemendations:

What should we do about scribd?