The Sword and Laser discussion
Hugo finalists announced
Since Joe Hill was aware of last year's controversy, hopefully he'll clue his dad in on what's going down and we'll get a massive smackdown on the Puppies from Stephen King.
It seems clear to me that the Sad Puppies had negligible effect and this ballot is being dominated by Vox Day's automatons. I'm open to disagreement there though. Haven't had time to look it over to closely.I'm also thinking that the biggest problem is low voting numbers in most categories allowing the slates to dominate. I suppose that's obvious, but I guess it's worthwhile to state the problem.
I am very marginally consoled that the Novel category includes two books that I voted for and all the two slate picks were very possibly going to be there regardless of VD.
Yah, I can see Noa Ward getting several awards this year. There is a couple of legit competitive categories, but not many. Novel, Short Form Editor, Long Form Dramatic Presentation, and possibly the Campbell award. Any others I missed?
Not to get into the actual politics, but the parallels between this and the US Republican Presidential nomination are interesting. You have a choice that wins (almost a sure thing) in the nomination round, but looks to have a much harder time winning the end event.
How is Stephen King being connected to the odious Vox Day? Was his short story on the rabid puppies slate?
Yes, how is he connected? Where did you read about a connection? Stephen King is pretty liberal, so I doubt the puppies like him very much.
The Sad Puppies did not have a true slate this year, only suggestions that outnumbered slots in most cases. While I didn't like some of there suggestions, I really don't have much of a problem with this. That and there loosening of there ties with the Rabid slate, I believe led to there lack of influence on the nominations. The interesting thing will to see how the registration for this year goes. Last year's registrants were still able to nominate this year, but obviously not vote this year, unless they sign up again.
I admit as a non attendee, signing up again this year (I've done 3 of the last 4 years) is not as exciting a prospect. Part of the reason I sign up is to get copies of stuff I think I will enjoy reading. With the nominations what they are, that does not interest me as much. Add to that that I would probably only truly vote something besides "No Award" in a couple of categories, and it becomes a lot harder to justify. I understand this is part of what the VD wants to happen, but it still doesn't help.
E.J. Xavier wrote: "http://midamericon2.org/home/hugo-awa...Open season for discussion of all controversy as it seems to be a repeat of last year's trauma."
Oh, I dunno. I kinda like this ballot. A casual look reveals items in several categories that I would vote for, whereas in previous years it was a snobfest. Uprooted, Seveneves and Jim Butcher in Best Novel? That alone would be worth the price to vote. Sandman in Best Graphic Short Story? Warming up. It's too bad Galactic Journey wasn't nominated, that's a fave. Alastair Reynolds and Stephen King in minor categories and not even competing against each other? I think I will have to pick up a ballot this year.
As for the nominations Vox Day has gotten for himself, I would hope that we would all ignore them. There is no need for scorched earth again this year.
From Vox Popoli blog: (straight from the blog, none of the words contained are mine)(view spoiler)
At least this time there's a few legit items.
Right. Popularity voting when there are more than two options is inherently problematic.. It's very easy for a minority unpopular choice to dominate due to the splitting of votes in other areas. You can easily wind up with a winner that is deeply disliked by the majority of the voters. Based on polling of Republican Primary voters this is what's happened there.Fortunately for the Hugos it's much easier for them to change their voting systems than it is for the US political parties.
I wonder if this is a situation where more voters would help tremendously. Perhaps it's time to revisit the steep price for a voting membership? I mean $50 is a lot to pay for a free voting packet of books Especially since I've already read several. Many of the new ones don't seem worth the price. Color me skeptical that "Space Raptor Butt Invasion" is worth my time let alone my money.
John (Nevets) wrote: "Yah, I can see Noa Ward getting several awards this year. There is a couple of legit competitive categories, but not many. Novel, Short Form Editor, Long Form Dramatic Presentation, and possibly ..."
novella is legit. I've read 3 of the 5 (the Bujold, Sanderson and Okorafor) and they're worthy and I'd bet the other two are as well.
Leesa wrote: "I did purchase a membership this year so I could both nominate and vote. I guess I could Google rabid puppies slate but I hate to give Vox Day / supporters any clicks."
Anything by Castalia House is VD's as well as the obvious stuff with his name on it.
Sean wrote: "Since Joe Hill was aware of last year's controversy, hopefully he'll clue his dad in on what's going down and we'll get a massive smackdown on the Puppies from Stephen King."What was Joe Hill's take on it?
From memory Alistair Reynolds objected directly to being included on the VD slate. I'll be curious to see his response to the nominations.
It's pretty obvious what the tactic was here. VD deliberately included books from authors who are deserving and well liked, so that if no award is given in the category he can continue with his narrative of "SJW"s are willing to destroy everything. He also likes putting those authors on the spot where they feel pressure to turn down nominations.
He then of course mixed in his own obnoxious choices. Nominating himself, his publishing house, works that criticise "SJW"s in the title, and the previously mentioned "Space Raptor Butts".
Also slipped in are things he imagines will give him a moral high road shield (such as the deeply personal accounts by Moira Greyland). I expect that if no award is given in that category he already has a blog post prepared denouncing the cover up of sexual abuse by SJWs
(sorry if you quoted something I removed! I didn't want to repeat myself and did some editing.)
Scalzi's quick thoughts: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2016/04/26...Some more in-depth thoughts from Scalzi: http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketco...
John (Taloni) wrote: "Oh, I dunno. I kinda like this ballot. A casual look reveals items in several categories that I would vote for, whereas in previous years it was a snobfes. Uprooted, Seveneves and Jim Butcher in Best Novel?"This is Novik's second nomination and Stephenson's fourth. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your narrative.
Rick wrote: "novella is legit. I've read 3 of the 5 (the Bujold, Sanderson and Okorafor) and they're worthy and I'd bet the other two are as well."The Bujold and Sanderson are actually on the Rabid list, as are Reynolds and King. VD decided to poison the well this year by including several authors who could get on the ballot legitimately to force his opponents to choose between no-awarding everything or doing it selectively.
File 770 has a complete breakdown of which books were on which slate, but the site is currently getting hammered by heavy traffic.
I'll back up to be clear.These nominations are almost entirely the Vox Day slate with very little variation.
The categories that received the most votes such as Novel and Long Form Dramatic are the ones that are least influenced. Also in those categories The VD choices are ones that very likely didn't need his help. (Seveneves, and The Aeronauts Windlass).
Some categories are direct from his slate. A significant part of his slate included picks from legit authors. He's playing the narrative, as he always does. If there is another protest vote of "no award" to his controlling the slate he will go with the "they are burning their own house down in order to stop me" storyline.
If something from his slate wins, regardless if it was likely to with out him, he will crow about how he controls the Hugos and the SJWs are losing the battle.
He's basically just an egomaniac who found something that makes him feel powerful no matter what happens. The national press coverage after last year's Hugos only fanned his desires to be seen as influential.
For those who have gotten the materials in the past, how did they handle the graphic items? Do you get a book or perhaps pages bound in less than final form? Or is it only text that is included?
As a podcast listener I'm really sad about the Fancast category getting highjacked. I really wanted Sword and Laser to make the ballot.
Sean wrote: "The Bujold and Sanderson are actually on the Rabid list..."That is officially the saddest, most pathetic thing I've ever heard. Taking individual credit for Bujold getting a Hugo nom isn't precisely like taking credit for the sun coming up, but it might as well be.
Sean wrote: "The Bujold and Sanderson are actually on the Rabid list, as are Reynolds and King. VD decided to poison the well this year by including several authors who could get on the ballot legitimately to force his opponents to choose between no-awarding everything or doing it selectively...."
Sure, but as Scalzi put it, they're running in front of a parade, pretending to lead it. I mean, the Gaiman's on the list .Star Wars. It's just a cheap tactic so that they can crow how they 'won'. The best way to deal with these jerks this year is to a) ignore them and b)vote for the rule changes that make slating harder.
Rick wrote: "The best way to deal with these jerks this year is to a) ignore them and b)vote for the rule changes that make slating harder..."I agree.
The new rules do seem like it will be tough for them to get more than one silly thing per category. So we'll only have to deal with the occasional "Space Raptor Butt Invasion" not an entire category of invaded butt.
I'm not sure how I'll vote in the end, but right now, I'm leaning toward "Noa Ward" for everything that was on the RP slate. It's a principle for me at this point.Also, I wanted S&L on the list :( only sour grapes from me as a result! ::shakes old lady fist::
Read 3 of the nominated novels and the last two are on my to-read list ( Seveneves and the Fifth season). Rather happy with myself ;)if I had to pick it would be Uprooted, then The Aeronaut's Windlass.
While decent, Ancillary Mercy is just more of the same than anything new so I don't feel it deserves an award ( but it was a good book) and I wish New Moon had been nominated in its stead...
I still have problems with outright fantasy books in the Hugos. I have seen the rules, but if you look at the awards the predominantly go to SF. This is a decent slate in the novels.
I couldn't vote for Seveneves (could not get through it). I haven't read the Aeronaut's Windlass but if it is Jim Butcher's usual style it will be a great holiday book but not an award winner.
Uprooted is to straight fantasy for me, a nice book but not great.
Ancillary Mercy falls in the same category. Almost want it to win just to drive certain people nuts (it is an anti-puppy book). The fifth season falls into the same category.
I would be tempted to no award, not sure we are hitting the heights here.
Leesa wrote: Also, I wanted S&L on the list :..."
Looks like they have been slated!!! :-(
Get a load of the retros: http://midamericon2.org/home/hugo-awards-and-wsfs/1941-retro-hugo-finalists/. Grey Lensman, Batman #1, The Spirit, This is the good stuff.
Leesa wrote: "I'm not sure how I'll vote in the end, but right now, I'm leaning toward "Noa Ward" for everything that was on the RP slate. It's a principle for me at this point. :..."Everyone should vote however they want, but I rather liked Scalzi's approach last year which I remember as being, basically "Read the work and if you think it's deserving, vote for it. If not, place it below no award" (any inaccuracies are mine of course).
That is, there are several good books in Novel and Novella that very likely would have been nominated in any event. If you feel they really are worthy of being on the ballot, then vote accordingly.
Of course, if you want to No Award things across the board that's also your prerogative.
@iain - I like Ancillary Mercy a lot (better than Sword, not as much as Justice) but it is the 3rd book in a trilogy and thus a harder sell. I'd have no issue with it winning though. Not read Fifth Season yet.
Iain wrote: "Get a load of the retros: http://midamericon2.org/home/hugo-awa.... Grey Lensman, Batman #1, The Spirit, This is the good stuff."
Wow. That is HARD. Gray Lensman vs Slan? THREE Heinlein stories versus two good L. Sprague de Camp ones? Roads Must Roll vs Blowups Happen? Heinlein vs Brackett? I honestly don't know how I could pick. That was a GREAT year for SF.
I am still chuckling over Ray Bradbury as fan writer...hey, he hadn't hit the big time yet!
John (Taloni) wrote: "For those who have gotten the materials in the past, how did they handle the graphic items? Do you get a book or perhaps pages bound in less than final form? Or is it only text that is included?"PDF files.
Thanks Serendi! I appreciate the information.As I think about it, crossing fingers for all materials to be electronic this year. Last year at Westercon one of the committee members told me that conventions barely break even on supporting memberships because of the costs involved in moving the physical materials. If it's all electronic they could make money. The conventions deserve to get some compensation from this, they didn't ask for the controversy.
E.J. Xavier wrote: "What was Joe Hill's take on it?"This is pretty representative.
Sorry, but if you aren't a straight, white, conservative male who hasn't won a Hugo Award, you don't know what real oppression is like, man!
The voter's packet has always been electronic. John Scalzi started it some years back when he realized a lot of it was available online anyway, so he pulled it together and talked to authors and publishers and got what he could into one place. After maybe three years or so? something like that, the worldcon committees took over the job.Before that, we were on our own...
The progress reports have been available as electronic OR paper in recent years. That's probably a lot of what costs the con money in the runup to the con.
Interesting discussion! I don't have anything very specific or intelligent to add, this is actually the first year I've tried to look into what the whole Puppies things was even about! I was vaguely aware there was something going on from being a Scalzi fan already, but wow, I wish it wasn't so political. :( I'm excited to actually get to attend the con this year and meet some favorite authors since it is near me, so we sprang for the full shebang membership/attendance etc. My plan is just to read as much of the material as possible and vote for the one I like the best in each, luckily there are several I was already interested in anyway. I don't really understand the no award thing, is that just if you don't think any of them are deserving you can vote that way? Is that different from just not voting in that category? What does it take for the total vote to go no award? Sorry, if it is an obvious question! :)
Well I read the nominated “Safe Space as Rape Room" which is a mess. Daniel Eness has thrown everyone under the bus. I am still trying to figure it out.
Shaunesay, That is awesome you are going, and I hope you have a great time. From what I know (I've never been to the convention before, but have been following it for the last few years), the Hugo awards are the part of the convention that gets the most attention from outside the convention, but from within there is a lot more going on. If you want to know a bit more about the awards ceremony, I'm guessing you can find the video from last year. This year will probably be similar, with the possibility of a few no awards. Because of the way the nominations happened last year, and the back and forth between the Puppies and the traditional attendees the results were a bit of an emotional issue last year (as they are probably going to be this year). This led to some cheering when the "No Awards" were given last year, this was a bit of a shame and a bit mean, but also a bit understandable given those feeling the awards they loved were being attacked. I bring up this tangent, just so you know that it is possible some of the works you vote for and enjoyed, could fall behind the No Award.
Now for your actual question. The way the voting goes is you list your choices from 1st to last in each category. If at some point on your list you feel the remaining nominees are so bad they don't deserve the award you fill in "No Award" and then continue listing the books if you want. If you honestly have no preference, but didn't feel the nominees were so bad they didn't deserve a No Award, you could abstain. The reason this is this way, is the voting system applied this year (and for the last several) is called an Instant Runoff System" with the "No Award" test thrown in. Before I make more of a mess of it you can read about it on the Hugo website here http://www.thehugoawards.org/the-voti...
I hope that helped at least a little bit.
Rick wrote: "...b)vote for the rule changes that make slating harder. ..."Do you know what the specific rule change is or where it can be found?
Greg wrote: "Do you know what the specific rule change is or where it can be found?"E Pluribus Hugo:
http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/...
This is the first posting of it - it may have some revisions between this draft and the final but in general it is here.
I remember vaguely that Django Drexler wrote up a program based on the rules and ran data through it last year and he says it works. I think he has more info on his website.
Here are the minutes from last years business meeting. You cand find the presentation for EPH starting on page 129, and the discussion starting on page 73.http://sasquan.org/wp-content/uploads...
There is a lot there. Anyone with an attending membership to that years worldcon can vote at the business meeting.
The short version of EPH is, if you nominate one item and I nominate four, your nominee will receive four times as many points as any of mine. Since most Hugo voters aren't widely read enough to nominate five items in every single category, this means people won't end up with wasted slots -- any slot you don't use will be counted as additional support for the nominations you do make.The number of slots on the final ballot won't change, so any slate will either have to focus on getting just one title in each category, or they'll need an overwhelming number of ballot-stuffers to overcome all the people who only nominate one or two items.
(Personally I'd prefer if voters received a fixed number of points which they could assign to nominees at will, instead of the votes being evenly distributed. Maybe I think this one story is super awesome and want to put the bulk of my nominating power behind it, but there's this other story that deserves at least one point.)
Sean wrote: "File 770 is back up, so here's the breakdown of which nominees appeared on which slates."I'm very sad Shamus Young, a legitimately good columnist/blogger/writer I've followed for years, has been tarred without consent by this BS. Grey Carter's also made his displeasure known.
I'm confused about the retro hugos. I recently tried to find rule 18 by clifford d simak, which has supposedly only been reprinted once since 1938, and that reprinting was more than two decades prior to the 1939 retro hugos. So I'm wondering how many of the voters for the story could have actually read it.
John (Nevets) wrote: "Shaunesay, That is awesome you are going, and I hope you have a great time. From what I know (I've never been to the convention before, but have been following it for the last few years), the Hugo ..."Thanks! That was a lot of great info, I appreciate it! I read through the ballot counting process, wow, that sounds like a lot of work! lol!
Vox Day and friends have pretty much turned me off completely from ever sympathizing with them, but I will forever be grateful to him for introducing me to Chuck Tingle. Did he think including Chuck would piss us off? I think he is delightful and his new book title Slammed In The Butt By My Hugo Award Nomination is giving me no end of pleasure. Which is probably exactly what Tingle intended.
I'm just going to threat this year as if no puppies were involved and just vote normally. Which still might mean some "no awards", but I'll give everything a fair shake. Except for everything directly related to Beale and/or castalia house. I'm not spending my time on that shit, so it gets auto no awarded.
It's such a shame to see the Hugos hijacked yet again. At this point, my personal tactic is just to ignore the politics behind the Hugos entirely. The Puppies are clearly doing this primarily for the attention and I refuse to feed their egos. Give them a few years where everyone completely ignores them and their agenda - even if they win - and I'm almost positive they'll sulk off like petulant children. For now, I'll content myself with reading the nominees for the Nebula Award and the Arthur C. Clarke Award, which are filled with quite a few works I've never heard of - much less read! Exciting!
Edit: And the new voting system will hopefully help things, of course! Totally forgot to mention that, but I'm excited to see how it works next year.
Adelaide wrote: "Vox Day and friends have pretty much turned me off completely from ever sympathizing with them, but I will forever be grateful to him for introducing me to Chuck Tingle. Did he think including Chuc..."I had assumed that the Tingle work was some sort of VD puppet, but have since learned that the author has been around for a bit writing what looks to me to be best classified as "erotic satire". So I'm willing to walk back my earlier assertion that it wouldn't be worth my time.
TS wrote: "Give them a few years where everyone completely ignores them and their agenda - even if they win - and I'm almost positive they'll sulk off like petulant children..."There was a time I would have agreed with you, however from experience I will warn you that it may not be the case. I happen to live near a place that removed a Confederate Battle Flag and gets protesters once per week on a regular schedule. When I moved here I asked how long this had been going on and was completely shocked by the answer.
That flag was taken down over six years ago now. And the "flaggers" as they self style themselves have shown up once per week every week since.
Six Years, and no sign of stopping.
George RR Martin has written " This does mean we will need a second set of Alfies. " Who should get one? The talented Felicia Day whose book You're Never Weird on the Internet should have been included in the Best Related Work category. If you want to get mad, go read the Vox nominations in that category. My hope is that one will get disqualified for being old work.
The Sword and Laser
Books mentioned in this topic
City of Stairs (other topics)Letters to Tiptree (other topics)
You're Never Weird on the Internet (other topics)
Slammed In The Butt By My Hugo Award Nomination (other topics)
New Moon (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Felicia Day (other topics)Felicia Day (other topics)
Open season for discussion of all controversy as it seems to be a repeat of last year's trauma.