Surprise book series smashes previous Kickstarter record by more than double

Shawn Knight

Posts: 14,223   +158
Staff member
Editor's take: Fantasy and sci-fi author Brandon Sanderson has smashed Kickstarter's most-funded campaign record by a large margin. The final tally from 185,341 backers is $41,754,153, or more than double the previous record. Considering how long Pebble held the top spot, Sanderson's record could go unchallenged for a while.

Pebble Time generated $20,338,986 from 78,471 backers when its campaign wrapped up in March 2015. The color e-paper smartwatch has reigned supreme as the most-funded Kickstarter campaign ever since… that is, until last month.

Sanderson launched a surprise campaign for four novels he wrote in secret during the pandemic. It took less than four days for his campaign to dethrone Pebble Time, leaving more than three weeks for backers to pad the new record.

To celebrate the campaign's overwhelming success, Sanderson decided to give back to the community by backing every other safe-for-work project in Kickstarter's publishing category.

Sanderson will start seeding the new books to backers in early 2023 in eBook, audiobook or physical format depending on pledge level. Higher-tier backers will also receive eight themed swag boxes over the course of 2023 as an added bonus for their support.

Those who missed out on the campaign can still purchase goodies through BackerKit for a very limited time. Sanderson said he expects the books will eventually be available via standard publishing channels, but the swag boxes won't return.

Image credit Jeffrey D. Allred, The New York Times

Permalink to story.

 

Kosmoz

Posts: 600   +1,110
"Fools will be parted with their money."

Like those who buy 3090/3090 Ti, same happens in all aspects of life with those with more money than sense.

I also consider fools those who pre-oder games too, especially when so many end up to be **** at launch or even 1-2 years after launch...
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,216   +4,268
This is a reminder is that 10% of anything this kickstarter makes will go to the Mormon Church and thus, towards *directly* backing and promoting hateful homophobia and transphobia.

Sorry but the fact he's directly involved with that church means a win for him personally is the same as a win for those bigots he actively promotes and supports.
 

psycros

Posts: 4,233   +6,026
This is a reminder is that 10% of anything this kickstarter makes will go to the Mormon Church and thus, towards *directly* backing and promoting hateful homophobia and transphobia.

Sorry but the fact he's directly involved with that church means a win for him personally is the same as a win for those bigots he actively promotes and supports.

Congrats, you just made more people want to back him.
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 874   +1,510
This is a reminder is that 10% of anything this kickstarter makes will go to the Mormon Church and thus, towards *directly* backing and promoting hateful homophobia and transphobia.

Sorry but the fact he's directly involved with that church means a win for him personally is the same as a win for those bigots he actively promotes and supports.

I've got no problem with people and the religion they want to follow....but I have a problem with money going to churches. Nothing better than seeing new, elaborate churches getting built when the economy was bad (like a $40mil church that was built near me back in 2010 - just after the housing crash and economy tanked) or existing churches getting elaborate add-ons to their buildings (not too far from the new big church being built in 2010, another church a few miles away was having a big steeple and giant bell added to it). Also nothing better than seeing high priced cars parked in the parking lots for the priests that drive them......

But I digress.

This very successful author needs the money to publish the books - yeah doesn't make anymore sense does it.

This was my exact thought, too. Why does someone that's a successful writer need a kickstarter? Wouldn't he have publishers that he's writing for or has he burned his bridges?

Or does he simply want to publish his own book? According to a quick search his net worth is $6mil. He's not super rich by any means, but he certainly is well off.

Oh well, I guess folks can do what they want with their money, be it backing a well established author or their church.....I just find the way people justify their reasons to be interesting and/or sad.
 

Uncle Al

Posts: 8,904   +7,878
Simply amazing since so many of these projects have gone belly up while the "creators" have paid themselves handsomely before the big fall. I've said it too many times but anyone that starts one of these kickstarter projects should, by law, be REQUIRED to post a Performance Bond so the investors don't take it on the chin ......
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 1,113   +815
He is very prolific - and very successful - needs to get a series good enough for Hollywood/Netflix.
Did finish off Wheel of Time series after huge amounts of hair tugging and procrastination by Robert Jordan and finally death .
He would make this money anyway and more just by writing books .

Why KS - haven't looked at it - maybe deluxe versions with all the trimmings . 10% - I think Publishers take X amount as well - so can afford to self publish and then do a distribution deal

Mormon Church aka The Church of Latter Day Saints - I was in it from about 6 to 13years old - so only a deacon - never made it to priesthood ( needed to by 16 ) - I think that's right - 14 is a Teacher . Was a laugh talking to missionaries on my travels - when I had some inside knowledge .
Yeah real middleclass traditional family values - a Patriarchy - a lot of the family things are good - family only evenings no TV that night etc .
They finally accepted I think in 70s the black people could now hold the priesthood - something I think about the mark of Cain - oh you get married forever - I mean forever - no until death :)
So don't asked me to do a laying of the hands as a lowly agnostic deacon. Oh the President is a Prophet - so much higher up than the Pope with divine infallibility.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,216   +4,268
I've said it too many times but anyone that starts one of these kickstarter projects should, by law, be REQUIRED to post a Performance Bond so the investors don't take it on the chin ......
It's one of the most notorious ones and likely to dupe a lot of people for sure. But hear me out: I think ALL Kickstarter projects should be on a performance bond and probably enforce a profit share among investors too.

Also, we should normalize calling people who support kickstarter projects what they are, investors, that way we can eventually get them at least some protections for their gambling.
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 1,113   +815
I do understand where you are coming from. But this is basically a rich person asking people to give him money so he can then make even more money.
I think you need to join the right side - I have a special offer to you - You can buy my course for a life changing $99 ( note 1 ) "Break the grind - and live like a fat pig"
Note 1 - there will need to be ever increasing payments to get to KingHog level .
As I said earlier he makes money anyway - no matter how he releases books - think I read something a month or 2 ago he's prolific and just pumps out books . He's no phoney like that Catcher in the Rye guy who just writes one book .

Seriously though- how many of us would just quit our day jobs after the first 50 Million . Bob Dylan just has to write songs and tour - Sanderson has to write
 

George Keech

Posts: 211   +374
I think you need to join the right side - I have a special offer to you - You can buy my course for a life changing $99 ( note 1 ) "Break the grind - and live like a fat pig"
Note 1 - there will need to be ever increasing payments to get to KingHog level .
As I said earlier he makes money anyway - no matter how he releases books - think I read something a month or 2 ago he's prolific and just pumps out books . He's no phoney like that Catcher in the Rye guy who just writes one book .

Seriously though- how many of us would just quit our day jobs after the first 50 Million . Bob Dylan just has to write songs and tour - Sanderson has to write
Think it depends what you earn and how easily you earn it - plenty of people retire when they get there first Mill I imagine. Depending on were you live you could buy a nice house and but enough money in investments etc to live the rest of your life work free
 

Todd Sauve

Posts: 60   +75
This is a reminder is that 10% of anything this kickstarter makes will go to the Mormon Church and thus, towards *directly* backing and promoting hateful homophobia and transphobia.

Sorry but the fact he's directly involved with that church means a win for him personally is the same as a win for those bigots he actively promotes and supports.
Not approving of a lifestyle does not make you hateful.
 

Aaron Fox

Posts: 153   +90
Not approving of a lifestyle does not make you hateful.
Misuse of the word lifestyle doesn't make bigotry fairness.

Lifestyles are irrelevant to the central subject — sexual orientation.

A nun in a convent has the same lifestyle as another nun, even though one of them is heterosexual and the other is homosexual.

The best advice I can give you is to place yourself in the shoes of a gay person before making a claim about how society should treat them. Think about how you would like, for instance, going to tech forums and seeing people make claims that you're subhuman — which is exactly what all the claims against equal rights for gay people mean. They are about trying to justify gay people not being fully human and the end game is extermination. That's not overly dramatic. It is the logic that's used. Invisible people (I.e. 'don't throw it in our face' and the 1001 varieties of that) don't have rights. Invisible people disappear and no one notices.

Hooker's research from the 50s, the first to not use a polluted sample to reach an illusory correlation, is definitive. It proves that homosexuality is not a problem in need of a solution. That means the only objections to homosexuality are religious (I.e. fantasy-based). Taking away the civil rights of various people on the basis of fantasy tales is unjust.
 

Aaron Fox

Posts: 153   +90
This is a reminder is that 10% of anything this kickstarter makes will go to the Mormon Church and thus, towards *directly* backing and promoting hateful homophobia and transphobia.

Sorry but the fact he's directly involved with that church means a win for him personally is the same as a win for those bigots he actively promotes and supports.
Thanks for the heads-up about Kickstarter. I did not know that.

As for the types of bigotry you mentioned — heterosexism is the larger issue. Homophobia is a subset. Gay people also face the challenge of being erased by transgenderism.

It's very possible that the word heterosexism refuses to be used by dominant cultures because it would make prejudice against gay folk be seen as just as important as sexism and racism. The 'gay panic' defense has been used quite a few times in courts. Using the word homophobia plays into that by making it seem reasonable to believe that people have an innate fear of gay people, as if they're spiders or high places. If one looks at the historical discourse of racism in America, the same fear-mongering was used to promote it. The dominant narrative is that white women are at great risk of being sexually assaulted by black men. Yet, no one refers to racism as blackophobia. No one calls sexism femaleophobia. Anti-Jewish propaganda also dehumanized Jews to make them seem frightening, yet people use an -ism for prejudice against them also.

It's not politically correct for a gay person to object to being lumped in with transgenderism but they are not the same. In fact, on one level transgendered people have more in common with heterosexuals. Homosexuals like their sex (and therefore the sex of their bodies). Heterosexuals and the transgendered prefer the bodies of the sex they are not (biologically).

It's true that homosexuality was once listed as a mental disorder by the APA via their DSM. That was (belatedly) removed due to the definitiveness of Hooker's 1950s research that was the first undertaken without a polluted sample (gay men who were mentally ill being chosen as the sample). It was the first research to demonstrate, with complete clarity, that sanity has nothing to do with being heterosexual or not. It has not been discredited and never will be because the finding is fact.

Transgenderism is a different matter. It persisted longer in the DSM because some psychologists believe that the only way it can be rectified is with major genitalia/breast surgery and medications (hormones) — if not also plastic surgeries. The argument is that transgenderism, at least prior to these interventions, is a disordered state — because the individual is so profoundly unhappy that the very strong interventions must be undertaken to restore full mental adjustment. So, transgenderism, according to that view, has two states. The pre-intervention/pre-operative state is disordered and the post-intervention/post-operative state is not.

All of this has no relationship to homosexuality. So, the removal of transgenderism from the DSM is bound to be more controversial. Transgender policy is bound to be more controversial, not just due to the dramatic nature of the interventions (and their timing, I.e. childhood) but also due to the wide variety when it comes to what transgendered individuals feel they need. Some are unhappy until they have sex reassignment surgery, implants, facial plastic surgery, hormones, et cetera. Others are satisfied with life without sex reassignment surgery but with hormones and possibly some plastic surgeries and implants.

Gay people have been lumped in with the transgendered for a number of reasons but they are very different — just as different as heterosexuals are from the transgendered and from homosexuals. It is not politically correct to say that. What is politically correct is to get behind the ever-expanding acronym and say nothing, including when a slur (the q word) is used recklessly as a label for homosexuals. Martina Navratilova, the highly-accomplished tennis player, is condemned by Margaret Court — another highly-accomplished tennis player — for being gay. Martina Navratilova is also condemned by some people for alleged 'transphobia'. Navratilova opposes the inclusion of transgendered people in women's tennis. Court opposes the inclusion of lesbians in women's tennis.

Court's opposition has no rational justification. That view is backed by Hooker's definitive research and plenty of research that has followed. One study even found a slight increase in good parenting outcomes for lesbian parents, versus hetero parents and two men.

Navratilova's arguments about transgenderism in sports are more rational than the opposition's. I don't agree with some who claim that the concept of biological sex is bigoted. It's a basic scientific fact. Humans are sexually dimorphic (male and female). There is some blurring (such as XXY people and differences in how hormones are handled by specific bodies) but the basic fact of biological sex in humans is irrefutable.

The difference between Court and Navratilova when it comes to sports participation illustrates the existence of the crucial gap between homosexuality and transgenderism, even though some will try to shout down anyone who says so (as a Forbes author did recently). It illustrates the fact that a gay person does not have to automatically back every political stance a transgendered person has and vice-versa. And yet, political correctness demands that inclusion in the expanding acronym means total subservience to the 'community' — a monolithic political entity in which the differences between the people within it is mostly erased. Anyone who doesn't agree with the conflation is seen as being against community. What really matters is having facts and sound logic behind one's stances. That aforementioned Forbes article attacking Navratilova and science itself is appalling to me.
 
Last edited:

Todd Sauve

Posts: 60   +75
Misuse of the word lifestyle doesn't make bigotry fairness.

Lifestyles are irrelevant to the central subject — sexual orientation.

A nun in a convent has the same lifestyle as another nun, even though one of them is heterosexual and the other is homosexual.

The best advice I can give you is to place yourself in the shoes of a gay person before making a claim about how society should treat them. Think about how you would like, for instance, going to tech forums and seeing people make claims that you're subhuman — which is exactly what all the claims against equal rights for gay people mean. They are about trying to justify gay people not being fully human and the end game is extermination. That's not overly dramatic. It is the logic that's used. Invisible people (I.e. 'don't throw it in our face' and the 1001 varieties of that) don't have rights. Invisible people disappear and no one notices.

Hooker's research from the 50s, the first to not use a polluted sample to reach an illusory correlation, is definitive. It proves that homosexuality is not a problem in need of a solution. That means the only objections to homosexuality are religious (I.e. fantasy-based). Taking away the civil rights of various people on the basis of fantasy tales is unjust.
You are convinced that belief in God and that He may tell us what is acceptable and what is not acceptable is a fantasy. Please go here and watch this.
 

Aaron Fox

Posts: 153   +90
I'll watch whatever it is you linked (it's blank in my browser) as soon as people calling themselves Christians read what Ezekiel said about Gomorrah — that the problem with the place was that the people were rich and greedy, that they didn't help the poor and needy.

After they've read that bit of Ezekiel they can get back to me as soon as they have stopped the rich greedy people in their societies from having piles of money. Meanwhile... here we are, with super-rich people like Musk getting headline after headline and comment after comment — the sort of people who actually libel heroes out of spiteful narcissism.

So... what was that about what 'God' supposedly said again?

Somehow I doubt it was about wasting everyone's time ignorantly grandstanding about sexual minorities.
 

Todd Sauve

Posts: 60   +75
Indeed. I am quite familiar with what Ezekiel had to say about it. God was angry with the people of Sodom and Gomorrah for ignoring the needy in their society, so He destroyed them. But God was also angry with the people of those cities for their sexual practises. Read the Genesis account. It is very clear.

They just recently discovered what looks to be Sodom at a place in southwest Jordan called Tall El Hammam. It is written up in Nature magazine, the premiere scientific journal in the world. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-97778-3

You should be careful about calling God ignorant. He really is there and has given you every last thing you own and will ever have, including your very body and the air you breathe. He actually owns you and me and everyone and everything else in this universe, whether you like it or believe it or not.

But please look at the material I have linked for you. I think you will find it compelling Aaron. 😉
 
Last edited: