Foolishly jumping into the Hugos mishegas

[ianrandalstrock]

I told myself I wasn't going to get involved. I don't have the time or interest to argue Hugo rules. But enough of my friends are involved in the current debate that I keep hearing about it, so I have formed an opinion, which I want to share

Comments

[ext_2943885]

A number of people have predicted that there will be some sort of counter-slate to the puppies in future years.

A much larger number of habitual Hugo voters (including literally everyone I spoke to or heard on the subject at the recent Eastercon) have declared that a counter-slate would be disastrous and they will have no part of any such thing.

The discussion of possible rule changes seems to have been almost entirely devoted to ways of discouraging or preventing slate voting. Whether this can be achieved is something we may not discover for some time.

[ianrandalstrock]

Having seen the rule discussions during my years in the field, I know it's a slow, arduous process to change the rules. If anything can encourage such a change, I imagine this year's events can. But I'm wondering how they'll be able to change the rules without destroying that which they're trying to save.

Then again, any reaction in the next few months will be the reactionary "we have to do something right this second" sort, rather than the more considered, longer-lasting changes that will take a while to formulate and implement.

And, if I recall correctly, any changes to the rules have to be voted on at two successive WorldCons, which means all those who say they'll have no part in this party politics will have to sit through at least one more year of giving the Puppies Party the top of the heap as the only party involved.

[zornhau]

Can't the award simply fork to take into account genre or aspiration? Best Literary Novel? Best Action Novel?

[nohwhere_man]

Then you need objective rules for choosing the category. For written works, the Hugos have those (word count, work of fiction, etc). That also implies that an Action novel can't be Literary, which seems rather rough.

(This is similar the the recurring discussions of a Young Adult novel category- no one has an objective definition of what that is, and Oh they've tried.)

[zornhau]

Have a pre-nomination pool. The creator can put forward an eligible work but only into one genre category. The terms and conditions specify that you must use a full tag for a work. So if you insist on gaming the system to get your soft porn MilSF novel a "Hugo Nomination for Best Literary SF Novel" that's great, but it won't help you sell the book.

[nohwhere_man]

Hmm, well, we already have a "per-nomination" pool, it's the body work published in the previous year. There's already an objective mechanism for most categorizing and authors are allowed to withdraw from consideration. We also have a mechanism for the Administrators to move nominees from one category to another in case they're nom'd for one they're not eligible for. So how do you handle a pure space-opera novel that is put forth by the author as fantasy? It's all in the definitions. And I'd call it unethical for authors to nominate themselves.

BTW, I don't think any of this mess is about selling books.

[almeda]

Anybody who sets up a counter-slate will ALSO be No-Awarded into oblivion.

Slates are directly antithetical to the entire way the Hugoes are nominated-for.

[ianrandalstrock]

That's a high-minded ideal way of looking at things. Good luck keeping the Hugos in your ivory tower; I somehow don't think it's going to work.

[apostle_of_eris]

Your analysis cannot stand unless you explain why you take the avowed destroyers at their word that their motives are pure. Begin at the beginning (“I'm not winning so you all hate me so I'll kick over the table”).
The Hugos are for individual works, not baskets.

[ianrandalstrock]

I think my point was that the reasoning doesn't matter. It's party politics: the group working together, versus everyone else working as individuals. The group will triumph. (See Robert Baratheon's discussion with Cersei in season one of Game of Thrones: "which is stronger, five or one" [five fingers, or one fist]?)

[ext_261507]

"You can change the rules to make party politics impossible (though off the top of my head, I can't see an easy way to do so)."
Limiting nominations to two nominations per person (per category) would go a long way toward limiting slates.

[ianrandalstrock]

It would make slates slightly more difficult, but not impossible. The party directs its members: "you third nominate these, you third nominate those, and you third nominate the others." Still concerted effort, still a slate mentality, and still the non-party people grumble. But yes, it would be a small start.

[mikevonkorff]

I think that'd be a move in the wrong direction, actually. I think increasing the number of nominations per person per category is the way to go

[ext_261507]

ianrandalstrock:
>"It would make slates slightly more difficult, but not impossible. The party directs its members: "you third nominate these, you third nominate those, and you third nominate the others."

It would be 2.5 times more difficult; you'd need 2.5 different slates to drive other things off the ballot-- in the real world, of course, that means three separate slates. So each work on a party slate will only get 1/3 of the nominations it would get in the current system, where the number of nominations equals the number that wil make the ballot: the party needs to be three times larger to drive the full slate.

That's probably good enough-- the puppies (or any party) aren't a big group; merely a big ENOUGH group to drive the nominations as it's currently run, when it's easy to do so.

mikevonkorff:
>" I think that'd be a move in the wrong direction, actually. I think increasing the number of nominations per person per category is the way to go."

No, that makes the problem worse. The underlying problem is that there are too