The alt-right is shitting up the Hugo slates again

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

I kind of wonder how these two books are related to Science Fiction - seeing as they are in the 'related works' category:

“Safe Space as Rape Room” by Daniel Eness (castaliahouse.com)
SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police by Vox Day (Castalia House)

If you wanted to get super-duper pretentious you could  argue that it's speculative fiction wherein the laws of reality bend to the demented musings of the Redpiller mindset.

[Ultimate Paragon]

"Legitimate reasons" in this case refers to their paranoid fantasy the Ess Jay Double Yews have scret cabals that botked the voting. Another one for our F&B dictionary.

It's nothing so grandiose as that.  Here's what Correria had to say:

“Short Version:
 1. I said a chunk of the Hugo voters are biased toward the left, and put the author’s politics far ahead of the quality of the work. Those openly on the right are sabotaged. This was denied.
 2. So I got some right wingers on the ballot.
 3. The biased voters immediately got all outraged and mobilized to do exactly what I said they’d do.
 4. Point made.”

Ah. People who read are biased to the left, eh? Next you'll be telling me bears are biased to shitting in the woods.

The problem is that judgments are being made on the political leanings of the authors, rather than the works themselves.

[davedan]

"Legitimate reasons" in this case refers to their paranoid fantasy the Ess Jay Double Yews have scret cabals that botked the voting. Another one for our F&B dictionary.

It's nothing so grandiose as that.  Here's what Correria had to say:

“Short Version:
 1. I said a chunk of the Hugo voters are biased toward the left, and put the author’s politics far ahead of the quality of the work. Those openly on the right are sabotaged. This was denied.
 2. So I got some right wingers on the ballot.
 3. The biased voters immediately got all outraged and mobilized to do exactly what I said they’d do.
 4. Point made.”

Ah. People who read are biased to the left, eh? Next you'll be telling me bears are biased to shitting in the woods.

The problem is that judgments are being made on the political leanings of the authors, rather than the works themselves.

Whether or not that was actually a problem before these guys, it is the problem now.

[Ultimate Paragon]

"Legitimate reasons" in this case refers to their paranoid fantasy the Ess Jay Double Yews have scret cabals that botked the voting. Another one for our F&B dictionary.

It's nothing so grandiose as that.  Here's what Correria had to say:

“Short Version:
 1. I said a chunk of the Hugo voters are biased toward the left, and put the author’s politics far ahead of the quality of the work. Those openly on the right are sabotaged. This was denied.
 2. So I got some right wingers on the ballot.
 3. The biased voters immediately got all outraged and mobilized to do exactly what I said they’d do.
 4. Point made.”

Ah. People who read are biased to the left, eh? Next you'll be telling me bears are biased to shitting in the woods.

The problem is that judgments are being made on the political leanings of the authors, rather than the works themselves.

Whether or not that was actually a problem before these guys, it is the problem now.

I think you're conflating the sad puppies and the rabid puppies.

[Svata]

"Legitimate reasons" in this case refers to their paranoid fantasy the Ess Jay Double Yews have scret cabals that botked the voting. Another one for our F&B dictionary.

It's nothing so grandiose as that.  Here's what Correria had to say:

“Short Version:
 1. I said a chunk of the Hugo voters are biased toward the left, and put the author’s politics far ahead of the quality of the work. Those openly on the right are sabotaged. This was denied.
 2. So I got some right wingers on the ballot.
 3. The biased voters immediately got all outraged and mobilized to do exactly what I said they’d do.
 4. Point made.”

Ah. People who read are biased to the left, eh? Next you'll be telling me bears are biased to shitting in the woods.

The problem is that judgments are being made on the political leanings of the authors, rather than the works themselves.

Whether or not that was actually a problem before these guys, it is the problem now.

I think you're conflating the sad puppies and the rabid puppies.

They're 98.9% similar.

[dpareja]

If it looks like a puppy, walks like a puppy, and barks like a puppy...

[Ultimate Paragon]

"Legitimate reasons" in this case refers to their paranoid fantasy the Ess Jay Double Yews have scret cabals that botked the voting. Another one for our F&B dictionary.

It's nothing so grandiose as that.  Here's what Correria had to say:

“Short Version:
 1. I said a chunk of the Hugo voters are biased toward the left, and put the author’s politics far ahead of the quality of the work. Those openly on the right are sabotaged. This was denied.
 2. So I got some right wingers on the ballot.
 3. The biased voters immediately got all outraged and mobilized to do exactly what I said they’d do.
 4. Point made.”

Ah. People who read are biased to the left, eh? Next you'll be telling me bears are biased to shitting in the woods.

The problem is that judgments are being made on the political leanings of the authors, rather than the works themselves.

Whether or not that was actually a problem before these guys, it is the problem now.

I think you're conflating the sad puppies and the rabid puppies.

They're 98.9% similar.

They're similar in a lot of ways, yeah, but the rabid puppies are a lot worse.

[davedan]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

I'm not entirely sure how true that is.

[davedan]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

I'm not entirely sure how true that is.

Except it's the entire premise behind both groups. It's kind of what they were formed to do. But I think we're missing the bigger point of what is really true.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

I'm not entirely sure how true that is.

Except it's the entire premise behind both groups. It's kind of what they were formed to do. But I think we're missing the bigger point of what is really true.

If it is true, then the purpose is to demonstrate ideological bias among the voters.

[davedan]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

I'm not entirely sure how true that is.

Except it's the entire premise behind both groups. It's kind of what they were formed to do. But I think we're missing the bigger point of what is really true.

If it is true, then the purpose is to demonstrate ideological bias among the voters.

Or to manipulate the nominations. Besides how can you be so sure of their purpose if you are uncertain of whether the action is true?

[Ironchew]

Hey UP, I've got a couple more direct questions:

Do you read science fiction or fantasy nearly enough to care this deeply about this year's Hugo awards?

Are you tilting at this windmill because Milo and co. have directed you to do so?

[mellenORL]

Why don't you guys go lobby The Edgars, ya know, the detective and crime story awards? Moping and griping about "bias" amongst SciFi and fantasy readers is like bitching that there ain't no meat served at a Hindu wedding banquet.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Although they are both pushing the nomination of people not for the quality of their books but because of their right wing politics.

I'm not entirely sure how true that is.

Except it's the entire premise behind both groups. It's kind of what they were formed to do. But I think we're missing the bigger point of what is really true.

If it is true, then the purpose is to demonstrate ideological bias among the voters.

Or to manipulate the nominations. Besides how can you be so sure of their purpose if you are uncertain of whether the action is true?

Because Correia said as much:

http://monsterhunternation.com/2014/04/24/an-explanation-about-the-hugo-awards-controversy/

I’ve said for a long time that the awards are biased against authors because of their personal beliefs. Authors can either cheer lead for left wing causes, or they can keep their mouth shut. Open disagreement is not tolerated and will result in being sabotaged and slandered. Message or identity politics has become far more important than entertainment or quality. I was attacked for saying this. I knew that when an admitted right winger got in they would be maligned and politicked against, not for the quality of their art but rather for their unacceptable beliefs.

If one of us outspoken types got nominated, the inevitable backlash, outrage, and plans for their sabotage would be very visible. So I decided to prove this bias and launched a campaign I called Sad Puppies (because boring message fiction is the leading cause of Puppy Related Sadness).

Hey UP, I've got a couple more direct questions:

Do you read science fiction or fantasy nearly enough to care this deeply about this year's Hugo awards?

Kind of.  I'm more of a casual fan, but I'd say that's enough of a stake to care.

Are you tilting at this windmill because Milo and co. have directed you to do so?

No, I learned about this on my own.

Why don't you guys go lobby The Edgars, ya know, the detective and crime story awards? Moping and griping about "bias" amongst SciFi and fantasy readers is like bitching that there ain't no meat served at a Hindu wedding banquet.

Bias may or may not be an accepted norm, but either way, it shouldn't influence the voting.