The only disagreement I've seen over no-awarding among decent human beings (those who don't endorse rape or mutilation of their political enemies) has been whether, as you suggest, No Award should just go ahead of the Sad Puppy slate, or whether this year's awards are so tainted that *everything* should rank below No Award, so no awards at all are given this year in any category. One good thing has come out of this, I suppose -- so many people have mentioned The Three-Body Problem, specifically, as a book that should have been nominated and didn't get on the ballot, that I've bought a copy, while if it had been on the ballot I'd have waited for the packet. I hadn't heard of it before, and if that's true of other people, it may have led to a nice sales boost for a Chinese writer, which may not be what the neofascist scum slate wanted...
I took a photo of the nomination ranges shown during the announcement, which I haven't seen pop up anywhere else yet -- see here. Some of the jumps in threshold and maximum are quite large.
Anything passed this year needs to be ratified next year, so can take effect from the 2017 Hugos onwards. That means that nothing requiring a rule change can be done for the 2016 Hugos, but years after that can have new rules.
I'm planning to No Award anything that got a boost from a slate, without exception, because looking at the suggestions Torgersen collected makes it plain how badly slate nominations skew from normal nominations (I did a bit more extensive explanation of this on my LJ/DW.)
I do not push others to read slate works, but I intend to do so myself because I expect the sixth-place slot on my ballot to be a hard choice and I want to make it correctly.
I am very sorry for those slate members who did not agree to be on a slate, or who did not realize when they agreed how unfair a slate is to non-slate works. FWIW, for those slate members who are not Sad Puppy movers-and-shakers, I promise not to hold this against them if they reach the ballot fairly in future years.
Moreover, if the packet works by such slate members turn out to be my sort of thing, I will try to keep up with them in future years to see if I might want to nominate future works.
Having never been a Member you know the system better than me, but from an observers perspective isn't a big part of the problem that a large number of those able to nominate don't, thus allowing it to be skewed by a small organised group?
Given that we're fairly sure the majority of voting members outnumber the idiots and their recruits and have, well, taste, wouldn't part of the solution be to ensure in future years that all those eligible to nominate works are reminded to do so as well as to vote in the final ballot? Turnout for the latter has been massively higher than # nominations in every year I've paid attention.
Comments 10
One good thing has come out of this, I suppose -- so many people have mentioned The Three-Body Problem, specifically, as a book that should have been nominated and didn't get on the ballot, that I've bought a copy, while if it had been on the ballot I'd have waited for the packet. I hadn't heard of it before, and if that's true of other people, it may have led to a nice sales boost for a Chinese writer, which may not be what the neofascist scum slate wanted...
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
I do not push others to read slate works, but I intend to do so myself because I expect the sixth-place slot on my ballot to be a hard choice and I want to make it correctly.
I am very sorry for those slate members who did not agree to be on a slate, or who did not realize when they agreed how unfair a slate is to non-slate works. FWIW, for those slate members who are not Sad Puppy movers-and-shakers, I promise not to hold this against them if they reach the ballot fairly in future years.
Moreover, if the packet works by such slate members turn out to be my sort of thing, I will try to keep up with them in future years to see if I might want to nominate future works.
Reply
The link to my brief analysis of normal nominations versus a slate is here. My bad.
Reply
Given that we're fairly sure the majority of voting members outnumber the idiots and their recruits and have, well, taste, wouldn't part of the solution be to ensure in future years that all those eligible to nominate works are reminded to do so as well as to vote in the final ballot? Turnout for the latter has been massively higher than # nominations in every year I've paid attention.
Reply
Leave a comment