I used be Sad, but I'm Rabid now.

[wombat_socho]

Well, that went about as well as it could have, if you were one of the Old Guard of Fandom, determined to destroy the Hugos in order to save them, or one of Vox Day's Dread Ilk, who've been waiting for an excuse to nuke the Hugos and sow the smoking ruins with (radioactive) salt

Comments

[wombat_socho]

Sasquan was the last chance for WSFS and the CHORFs to prove they meant what they said when they claimed the Hugos were still an award by the fans to the best SF/F of the year. Instead, they did everything they accused the Puppies of: stuffed the ballot box by buying memberships -allegedly for other people, but who really knows?- and voting a NO AWARD slate for every category where the nominees all came from the Sad Puppy/Rabid Puppy "slates".* They lied, bragged about lying, and did their little victory dance at having achieved something not done in the entire history of the Hugos - up to this point, there had been five No Award votes in the entire history of the awards, and now they've tied that total in ONE YEAR. Because the nominated authors and editors they snubbed weren't Of The Body.

So fine. If that's the way they want to play the game, we can play by their rules too, and make the awards completely worthless. There's some discussion as to whether we want to bother with nominations, or just go straight to voting NO AWARD for the categories that got zeroed this year.

Does this help clarify the difference?

*The Sad Puppies actually crowdsourced their nomination list, doing a "primary" before the nominations to come up with suggestions; Vox Day posted a list of his suggestions for the Rabid Puppies to follow.