I got a fax from Sean R Thursday April 6 date-stamped 3:39 PM EDT telling me that there were 2,001 signatures on the petition (thanks, Sean).
iPetitions shut down the petition without notifying Margaret last time right after I had (foolishly) posted here with a "1,920 signatures on the Petition" headline. When the petition was restored, there were 1,851 signatures with the "1,920 signatures on the Petition" headline prominent in the AMOC popular posts box.
Good one on me. No, seriously, well done: good blow to my credibility.
Thus, my "anticipated fake news" headline this time.
Thanks to Alfonso Espinos (thanks, Alfonso!) and Leon Emmett (thanks, Leon!) of THE HAIRY TARANTULA for leaving phone messages this morning also notifying me that there were "2002"? "Signatures"? at this point.
Alfonso: In answer to your phone message: In the VERY unlikely event that the signatures actually "stick" this time, I'll repeat where we are in the "possible future appearances" end of things:
1) The STAN LEE model holds. What a convention would do for Stan Lee or George Lucas or William Shatner for "security of person" popularity reasons would have to be done for me for "Not Micro-aggressioning Feminist Safe Spaces" reasons.
2) The convention would have to tell me how they do that (if they have previously hosted someone in the "security of person" popularity category) or how they propose to do that (if they haven't previously hosted someone in the "security of person" popularity category) and I'll see if it seems sufficiently "Feminist Safe Spaces" airtight or what I would need to see improved to avoid ANY possible "Micro-Aggression" on my part.
3) This would have to include prominent signage (size to be determined) indicating at the entrance to the area where I am signing "TRIGGER WARNING: DAVE SIM APPEARANCE" and 'TRIGGER WARNING: THIS IS NOT A FEMINIST SAFE SPACE" and admission would be dependent on a "Miranda warning"-style verbal acknowledgement that the person seeking admission understands the warning and that they acknowledge that they have read it.
4) We would arrange some kind of after hours get-together for people who have signed the petition and there would have to be someone assigned by the convention to check the petition for signatures at the door. If the person's signature has been "made to not exist" (and not uncommon occurrence) presumably they will be able to sign the petition at the door if they have a cellphone with Internet access. As soon as their signature appears, they would be admitted.
The "2002" "signatures" are not a vote of confidence. We live in a Feminist Theocracy which I acknowledge and which I am doing everything in my power to keep from violating.
I would strongly advise NO convention to invite me. In a Feminist Theocracy, whatever you would spend would be a waste of money.
But, in acknowledgement of the "2002" "signatures" this is the best I can do in meeting you halfway if you are (for whatever reason) still interested in having me as a guest. And the "2002" "signatures" are still there in the future.