On why George R.R. Martin is wrong: No Awarding the slate

[nwhyte]

When I saw the domination of this year's Hugo finalists by a slate of works nominated by a misogynist racist and his colluders, my immediate reaction was that I should vote "No Award" ahead of every one of their nominations, no questions asked or quarter given. (I was not alone.)

There has been some debate about this in the last week. Notably,

Comments

[la_marquise_de_]

My editor at DAW, Sheila Gilbert, is another one who the puppies listed without her knowledge or consent. They seem to have picked her name up from previous Hugo shortlists -- she was a nominee for Best Editor (Long Form) in 2013 and 2014, too. She's liberal, feminist and supportive of writers of all backgrounds, genders, sexualities, beliefs and political views.
She's not happy.

[druidsass]

Can you link me to somewhere she's said that? I'm planning to treat slate candidates who have publicly distanced themselves from the Puppy project the same as the non-slate nominees, but to rank No Award above all the remaining slate nominees.

[la_marquise_de_]

She can't say it in public: she's in a very awkward position with this. But she has said it in emails to a number of writers on her list, including me.

[druidsass]

I believe you, of course - but I'm specifically looking for slate nominees to speak out in public, because that's the only way I think a win for a Puppy will not further damage fandom. So I'll be placing her below No Award, but above those who have been actively engaging in hate speech, because obviously giving a win to one of them is the worst possible outcome.

[ethelmay]

I have not heard a single person say anything bad about Sheila Gilbert, FWIW. I would be happy to vote for her above No Award in another, less tainted year.

[druidsass]

In a year in which she is not on a Puppy slate or has spoken out against it, I'm sure I would too. That's not my point.

[ethelmay]

I wasn't disagreeing with you, I don't think. I only meant that I wasn't voting her down for any behavior on her part. I'm not sure I'd vote her up if she did distance herself at this point, actually -- for me it's not relevant, the slate's spoiled things. But in any case I don't think her feeling she has to keep out of it is a reason to think badly of her, and it seemed like a good idea to say so because I've seen several of her friends and associates worrying about that.