What was the Sad Puppies process?ext_2848157April 18 2015, 03:37:32 UTC
"Snow! Snow! Hugo! CORN!"
I'm just rubbernecking this drama, but my instinct is that fans of fantasy / sci-fi will continue to congregate, convene, applaud and reward their favorite works. Maybe the "Camelot" days of the Hugos are fading and the loci of attention will be more diffused among several parlors, but the craft seems healthy and the fans seem engaged... and unless the "Furious Puppies" actually succeed in "destroying" the Hugos (which doesn't seem likely, these reactionary movements seem to top out at a certain point) then life, art and business should continue to be splendid. I hope you're enjoying all this analysis for the most part, George, and not letting it aggravate you.
Oh, and thanks for all the thought-provocking adventures about society and rulership. Inspiring work.
How the worm turns...ext_2046987April 18 2015, 03:58:38 UTC
Hah! A definite touch, and I'd love to see their response. I predict a lot of hemming and hawing and sideways talk that will sum up to, "But you're the evil, monolithic Lib'ral conspiracy we're fighting in the first place! *fuming* Fine, It's an open process, nominate who you'd like. But we don't have to listen."
Whether any such nominations make the slate is another matter entirely. Either The Puppies would have to formalize their slate creation process, opening themselves up to the same organized campaign tactics they've introduced to the Hugos, Or admit their slate is their slate, and any suggestions are just that. Which one would hope would bring down the air of self-righteousness a bit, but I think that unlikely.
I don't think there's an obligation for putting together a rec list to be democratic, though if a readership of a blog repeatedly mention the same works there would be some rough approximation thereto. The democracy turns up later in the Hugo voting process.
I think the sad puppies are people with whom rapprochement is possible of an agree to disagree sort on what sort of books you like but you can agree that the Hugo process should not be broken in this way again. They like the books more than the politics.
The rabid puppies however seem more than happy to break Everything because no one should have nice things. The politics is what matters to them not books.
I guess I would agree with you if the SPs didn't vote in lockstep as a bloc. When that happens, it moves beyond being a "rec list" and becomes a concerted effort to use "democracy" to your advantage.
And no, "the democracy" doesn't "turn up later in the Hugo voting process" if the SP nominating block excludes who would have won in a "true" democracy.
And the progressive side arranging a no award vote bloc is not a slate because?
I don't like th SPs and I really don't like the RPs but you can't have doublethink. If you don't like it when they do it, then you shouldn't do it.and even if bloc voting takes place it's still democratic. People who vote in a way you don't approve of because they espouse views you don't agree with are still being democratic
The "progressive side" clearly has no slate. Discussions and debates are taking place all over the internet as to how to respond to the ballot. Four or five different approaches are being advocated, and there is deep disagreement. In the end, everyone will make their own choices.
Brad Torgersen had a call for suggestions in January which did result in a number of suggested works put forward in the comments. The largish number of suggestions were narrowed down to what became the official "Sad Puppies 3" slate. The exact method used was never made transparent. The open call did not include any mention of a number of works* that made the finalised SP3 slate, and that intrigues me.
*They include the Marko Kloos, the Annie Bellet, and Matthew David Surridge to name three.
Comments 248
I'm just rubbernecking this drama, but my instinct is that fans of fantasy / sci-fi will continue to congregate, convene, applaud and reward their favorite works. Maybe the "Camelot" days of the Hugos are fading and the loci of attention will be more diffused among several parlors, but the craft seems healthy and the fans seem engaged... and unless the "Furious Puppies" actually succeed in "destroying" the Hugos (which doesn't seem likely, these reactionary movements seem to top out at a certain point) then life, art and business should continue to be splendid. I hope you're enjoying all this analysis for the most part, George, and not letting it aggravate you.
Oh, and thanks for all the thought-provocking adventures about society and rulership. Inspiring work.
Reply
Whether any such nominations make the slate is another matter entirely. Either The Puppies would have to formalize their slate creation process, opening themselves up to the same organized campaign tactics they've introduced to the Hugos, Or admit their slate is their slate, and any suggestions are just that. Which one would hope would bring down the air of self-righteousness a bit, but I think that unlikely.
Reply
Puppies Without Banners!!!
Reply
I think the sad puppies are people with whom rapprochement is possible of an agree to disagree sort on what sort of books you like but you can agree that the Hugo process should not be broken in this way again. They like the books more than the politics.
The rabid puppies however seem more than happy to break Everything because no one should have nice things. The politics is what matters to them not books.
Reply
And no, "the democracy" doesn't "turn up later in the Hugo voting process" if the SP nominating block excludes who would have won in a "true" democracy.
Reply
I don't like th SPs and I really don't like the RPs but you can't have doublethink. If you don't like it when they do it, then you shouldn't do it.and even if bloc voting takes place it's still democratic. People who vote in a way you don't approve of because they espouse views you don't agree with are still being democratic
Reply
Reply
*They include the Marko Kloos, the Annie Bellet, and Matthew David Surridge to name three.
Reply
Leave a comment