Friday, August 31, 2007

More on the SFWA thing

In the comments to the prior post, someone linked to the "official apology" by Michael Capobianco, current president of SFWA.

Here it is.

I think it's woefully inadequate.


Mary Robinette said...


joycemocha said...

I agree with you about the inadequacy of the comment.

I'm still just gobsmacked by the whole thing. Okay, no I'm not, not really, not after Howard Hendrix's rant.

But a developing SF writer, do I really want to deal with this organization? I also feel burned because I've recommended it in the past.

Gonna think that one over, if I can ever qualify for membership.

Jenny Rappaport said...

Because it's the sort of apology that politicians in Washington use, the kind where they're just covering their ass. It says nothing about what sorts of measures will be done to prevent this from happening in the future, or how this whole incident has quite negatively affected the perception of the organization.

It's the type of apology that I'd classify as "Oops, I did it again--please forgive me?".

Dave said...

I think the whole maneuver was a "kill em all, let God sort them out" thing and that bugs me.

What also bothered me was that a professional writer used weasel words like "the list was not checked." Right there they are abdicating responsibility and that's just not appropriate.

Their goal was laudable, their methods heavy handed and did more to hurt their image than to remove infringing works.

The last thing any group needs is to share a reputation with the RIAA. A targeted approach would have worked much better.

James Dashner said...

Gee, just when I think I'm finally "worthy" to join the organization, now this. Oh well, I'll do whatever you tell me to do, Jenny. :-)