Victoria Silverwolf
Vegetarian Werewolf
Here they are:
» 2016 Hugo Finalists
At this point, all I can say is "Welcome to Puppygate Part Two."
» 2016 Hugo Finalists
At this point, all I can say is "Welcome to Puppygate Part Two."
Hugo Nominees Announced
- Thread starter Victoria Silverwolf
- Start date
The novels looks reasonably interesting, though it's a shame we didn't see Jo Zebedee up there for a Campbell.
I noticed Vox Day - leader of the Rabid Puppies - has been nominated for "Best Editor - long form".
An article in The Guardian suggests that Worldcon are trying to change the voting system to make them harder to game...
The Hugo Awards: George RR Martin, Vox Day and Alastair Reynolds on the prize's future
I noticed Vox Day - leader of the Rabid Puppies - has been nominated for "Best Editor - long form".
An article in The Guardian suggests that Worldcon are trying to change the voting system to make them harder to game...
The Hugo Awards: George RR Martin, Vox Day and Alastair Reynolds on the prize's future
Ha! I think I would have needed to have several thousand more sales.
Still a lot of puppies in there
J Riff
The Ants are my friends..
Uhoh... Puppygate?? Rabid Puppies? Is it need-to-know stuff? Rabid writers I can unnerstand, but....*
The Big Peat
Darth Buddha
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2016
- Messages
- 3,762
I hope something's done that works because right now, not a whit of interest I'll take.
SilentRoamer
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,462
Its funny because when I look at reading older SF "Hugo nominated" carries some weight and is a label of quality.
Vox Day and the whole Puppygate saga is beyond frustrating - they really need to get ths sorted for next year or the Hugos are dead.
Vox Day and the whole Puppygate saga is beyond frustrating - they really need to get ths sorted for next year or the Hugos are dead.
As someone who has only a general understanding of the issue, can someone explain what it is about the slate that suggests this is a repeat of last year? I see Vox Day was nominated for editor. But other than that, where is the manipulation? Leckie, Butcher, Jemisin, Stephenson, and Novik all seem like successful or well-regarded authors in the genre.
This is the ongoing discussion - the RP selected a lot of books that would be popular anyway, which means they were in, they felt, a win-win. Not to get those books in would mean not supporting stuff that deserved to be in there, and to get the books in there meant they could take the credit....
@MWagner see:
Hugo Awards | File 770
Of 81 nominations pushed by the puppy slates 64 made the list. Only 5 of all the fiction nominees are non-slate.
Hugo Awards | File 770
Of 81 nominations pushed by the puppy slates 64 made the list. Only 5 of all the fiction nominees are non-slate.
So people aren't upset that Lois McMaster Bujold was nominated - they're upset because she was nominated as part of a slate. Is that right?
Unless there are some egregious examples of worthy works and authors being left off the shortlist, I'm not sure I see where the huge problem is. They should probably re-jig the system to minimize the effectiveness of slates. But I guess I don't see how the nominees that were announced have made a joke of the merit of the Hugos.
Unless there are some egregious examples of worthy works and authors being left off the shortlist, I'm not sure I see where the huge problem is. They should probably re-jig the system to minimize the effectiveness of slates. But I guess I don't see how the nominees that were announced have made a joke of the merit of the Hugos.
Yes, that's exactly it (although Bujold getting nominated often gets much gnashing of teeth by the sf purists.) The system is being changed for 2017.
Victoria Silverwolf
Vegetarian Werewolf
Anything from "Castalia House," which appears several times on the list, is associated with Vox Day.
His own comment on his motives, from Wikipedia (I have edited out the profanity):
J-Sun
⚡
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2008
- Messages
- 5,324
This year's Hugos are invalid for me simply because of Martin L. Shoemaker's Today I Am Paul. This was on the Sad Puppies list... and the Nebula list. It was not on the Rabid Puppies list... or the Hugo list. This isn't remotely an ideological story - it's just great. And ignored by the Hugos. This is probably the fault of the Rabids this time (in an active sense, though the apathy of fandom towards short fiction is really more responsible as an act of omission) but I don't care whose fault it is. The Hugos haven't really mattered for two or three decades and this is just another example.
If so inclined, please go read the story now rather than, or before, continuing with this post. To riff off that well-known right-winger, Eric Burdon, "It will be worth it, if not for the sake of this post but for the sake of your own peace of mind."
I wish I didn't have to preface this and maybe I don't, but feel like it's probably wiser. I find the Rabids revolting and even the Sads are, let's say, not a natural place for me though in certain aesthetic areas, especially, I am sympathetic. My positions are all over the map but I average left of your average Sad. But I would certainly be placed to the right of orthodox SF fandom by that fandom. So this isn't some pure ideology I'm spouting here one way or the other, but a sort of misfit observation:
It honestly seems to me that it is a sad year for the Hugos, but more because, in the context of SF fandom, a large group of people can't grasp that science fiction is meant to be inclusive and that being inclusive means being tolerant of straight people, white people, male people, Republicans, Christians, people who favor spare prose, people who like vigorous plotting, etc. I totally get people hating the Rabids because Rabids are hateful. I even get people being uncomfortable with Sads because Sads may not be comforting. But it honestly seems to me that fandom today reacts to the groups I've mentioned above as an immune system to invaders. If I were a member of any of those groups (and I am of some) I would (and somewhat do) feel very unwelcome. Some people talk about the "liberal media elite" in general society and I have no idea what they're talking about as most media is corporate-controlled and speaks for the moneyed interests as they are the moneyed interests. But when people talk about a liberal elite bias in science fiction, I don't know how anyone could fail to see it. Yes, this may be trying to make up for decades of supposed white male bias (a "make up" significantly driven by white males, ironically) but two wrongs are definitely not making a right and intolerance and exclusion are intolerance and exclusion no matter which direction they point.
Being nationally parochial for a moment, one of Thomas Jefferson's and other Founders' major concerns was to prevent a "tyranny of the majority" and one of the prime examples of a democracy working well are to have most everybody a little (but not too) annoyed. If anyone is completely happy, it means they live in a fascist state and just happen to like the fascist. It seems to me that many on the extremes and much of SF fandom seems to feel otherwise: that when all straight white males who like simple prose are eliminated, paradise will be achieved. That "liberal values" will somehow triumph through this exclusive, reactionary ideology. All it does is produce Rabid Puppies and more "liberals" fundamentally indistinguishable from them and more Ultra-Rabid Dogs and so on. As we can see: the Sad Puppies (the center-right portion of the "moderates" in this madness) are virtually eliminated from all influence. To blaspheme Paul Rodgers, "it's all Rabid now." And that's not all right. Maybe the extreme right will "win." Maybe the extreme left will "win." Most people will lose either way.
If so inclined, please go read the story now rather than, or before, continuing with this post. To riff off that well-known right-winger, Eric Burdon, "It will be worth it, if not for the sake of this post but for the sake of your own peace of mind."
I wish I didn't have to preface this and maybe I don't, but feel like it's probably wiser. I find the Rabids revolting and even the Sads are, let's say, not a natural place for me though in certain aesthetic areas, especially, I am sympathetic. My positions are all over the map but I average left of your average Sad. But I would certainly be placed to the right of orthodox SF fandom by that fandom. So this isn't some pure ideology I'm spouting here one way or the other, but a sort of misfit observation:
It honestly seems to me that it is a sad year for the Hugos, but more because, in the context of SF fandom, a large group of people can't grasp that science fiction is meant to be inclusive and that being inclusive means being tolerant of straight people, white people, male people, Republicans, Christians, people who favor spare prose, people who like vigorous plotting, etc. I totally get people hating the Rabids because Rabids are hateful. I even get people being uncomfortable with Sads because Sads may not be comforting. But it honestly seems to me that fandom today reacts to the groups I've mentioned above as an immune system to invaders. If I were a member of any of those groups (and I am of some) I would (and somewhat do) feel very unwelcome. Some people talk about the "liberal media elite" in general society and I have no idea what they're talking about as most media is corporate-controlled and speaks for the moneyed interests as they are the moneyed interests. But when people talk about a liberal elite bias in science fiction, I don't know how anyone could fail to see it. Yes, this may be trying to make up for decades of supposed white male bias (a "make up" significantly driven by white males, ironically) but two wrongs are definitely not making a right and intolerance and exclusion are intolerance and exclusion no matter which direction they point.
Being nationally parochial for a moment, one of Thomas Jefferson's and other Founders' major concerns was to prevent a "tyranny of the majority" and one of the prime examples of a democracy working well are to have most everybody a little (but not too) annoyed. If anyone is completely happy, it means they live in a fascist state and just happen to like the fascist. It seems to me that many on the extremes and much of SF fandom seems to feel otherwise: that when all straight white males who like simple prose are eliminated, paradise will be achieved. That "liberal values" will somehow triumph through this exclusive, reactionary ideology. All it does is produce Rabid Puppies and more "liberals" fundamentally indistinguishable from them and more Ultra-Rabid Dogs and so on. As we can see: the Sad Puppies (the center-right portion of the "moderates" in this madness) are virtually eliminated from all influence. To blaspheme Paul Rodgers, "it's all Rabid now." And that's not all right. Maybe the extreme right will "win." Maybe the extreme left will "win." Most people will lose either way.
Victoria Silverwolf
Vegetarian Werewolf
Let me say that I am definitely on the left/liberal side of things, and that I think that J-Sun speaks with wisdom. On "my" side, George R. R. Martin speaks with the same reasoned tone. Neither of us have a problem at all with the Sads saying "here are some works we think should be honored." That's completely fine. We all have a problem with the Rabids, in which one person, for all practical purposes, tells hundreds of minions what to vote for, and they do so with the sole purpose of wrecking the awards.
Victoria Silverwolf
Vegetarian Werewolf
Oh, I might mention here that Thomas A. Mays has withdrawn his story "The Commuter," which might possibly open up a space for the fine story "Today I am Paul."
According to this chart from the fanzine File 770, "Today I am Paul" was on the recommended list from the Sads, but not on the mandatory list of the Rabids (and I cannot emphasize the difference too much.) Given that, there seems to be a good chance it might be bumped up to replace "The Commuter."
Measuring The Rabid Puppies Slate’s Impact on the Final Hugo Ballot
According to this chart from the fanzine File 770, "Today I am Paul" was on the recommended list from the Sads, but not on the mandatory list of the Rabids (and I cannot emphasize the difference too much.) Given that, there seems to be a good chance it might be bumped up to replace "The Commuter."
Measuring The Rabid Puppies Slate’s Impact on the Final Hugo Ballot
You've recognized the fundamental difference between liberalism and the identity politics left (and you're not the first). The new left champions diversity of race, gender, and sexual orientation, but have a dogmatic and conformist approach to ideas and speech. By making group identity the paramount characteristic of people, and seeing all politics and speech through the lens of power struggle between these groups, they've become a mirror-image of the conservative right. Championing writers because they're non-CIS women of colour is no different from championing writers simply because they're white men. It's tribalism. And tribalism begets tribalism.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hugo Nominees for 2021 | Book Discussion | 62 | |
|
|
Hugo 2020 Short Story nominees | Book Discussion | 27 | |
|
2019 Hugo Nominees | Book Discussion | 14 | |
|
|
2018 Hugo Nominees | Book Discussion | 25 | |
| S | 2011 Hugo Award nominees announced | Book Discussion | 0 |