Author Topic: The fight over Hugo awards  (Read 12805 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #30 on: August 29, 2015, 08:03:09 am »

Congratulations, you just proved the puppies right.

Uhh... No. People voted "None of the above" when all the candidates were puppies and they didn't like any of them. Besides, when you call a racist a racist and he claims that you are slandering him and therefore being just as bad as he is it is called false equivalency. That is what the Puppies are doing now. Their campaign backfired so now they are trying to make it look like the other side is just as bad (or even worse) while claiming that they themselves haven't done anything wrong.

The puppies are hardly perfect, but the reaction to them just proved how much the Hugo Awards have turned into a clique.

Have you read the article provided?  I thought it was a pretty good take on the matter.

Well, the results are in, and it's not pretty

Really? I thought sane fans made the best of the nominations given to them.

There's so much spin in that statement, it might as well be a tilt-a-whirl.

Congratulations, you just proved the puppies right.

UP, we sent you back to Vox and co. with your tail between your legs. Your pitiful movement had its 15 minutes of fame; it will never muster enough popularity to influence the Hugos again.

Famous last words.

It's a lot like Gamergate that way, actually.

You know, I never thought you of all people would be in favor of crony capitalism.

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10686
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #31 on: August 29, 2015, 04:24:49 pm »
Ok so someone who's opinion I give a shit about explain to me how this is a bad thing.

Offline Sigmaleph

  • Ungodlike
  • Administrator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3615
    • sigmaleph on tumblr
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2015, 06:05:19 pm »
Well, the results are in, and it's not pretty:

http://difficultrun.nathanielgivens.com/2015/08/24/lots-of-hugo-losers/



Congratulations, you just proved the puppies right.

...in what sense? The puppy claim, roughly, is "good sci-fi is being passed over for ideological reasons". The counter-puppy claim is "no, we're just voting for the stuff we like and the stuff you think is good sci-fi we think is not".

Voting a bunch of no-awards is compatible with both of those claims. The puppies think the no-awards were a political move. The non-puppies think the nominations were artificially filled with stuff that did not deserve a Hugo so the right thing to do was voting No Award.

Huzzah, nobody proved anything to anyone.
Σא

Offline Askold

  • Definitely not hiding a dark secret.
  • Global Moderator
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8358
  • Gender: Male
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #33 on: August 30, 2015, 12:57:13 am »
Ok so someone who's opinion I give a shit about explain to me how this is a bad thing.

1) Hugo nominees are chosen by people who go to Worldcon.
2) "Sad Puppies" and "Rabid Puppies" are sad (and foaming from the mouth?) because most of  the nominees are liberals who have written stories that these puppies don't like.
2) Puppies do not believe that anyone can really like liberal bullshit books and therefore assume that there must be a commie conspiracy where the liberals have turned "what books do you like the most" contest into a political war on the right wingers, mom and heterosexuals.
3) Puppies set up specific lists from which all their members must choose certain books in order to ensure that the "right" books will win the Hugo awards.
4) Because the communist hippy atheists are not in fact involved in a massive conspiracy and only vote books based on what they like the Puppies easily make their lists pass.
5) Most people actually don't like the books on the Puppy lists and therefore they vote for "No award" to be given rather than giving all the awards to books chosen on political and ideological basis rather than their own merit.
6) Puppies again believe that this must be an evil conspiracy because there is no way that anyone could dislike "proper American-Christian fiction."

...Now all we need is that someone about whom Ironbite gives a shit will make the same explanation.
No matter what happens, no matter what my last words may end up being, I want everyone to claim that they were:
"If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine."
Aww, you guys rock. :)  I feel the love... and the pitchforks and torches.  Tingly!

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #34 on: August 30, 2015, 04:35:36 pm »
Ok so someone who's opinion I give a shit about explain to me how this is a bad thing.

1) Hugo nominees are chosen by people who go to Worldcon.
2) "Sad Puppies" and "Rabid Puppies" are sad (and foaming from the mouth?) because most of  the nominees are liberals who have written stories that these puppies don't like.
2) Puppies do not believe that anyone can really like liberal bullshit books and therefore assume that there must be a commie conspiracy where the liberals have turned "what books do you like the most" contest into a political war on the right wingers, mom and heterosexuals.
3) Puppies set up specific lists from which all their members must choose certain books in order to ensure that the "right" books will win the Hugo awards.
4) Because the communist hippy atheists are not in fact involved in a massive conspiracy and only vote books based on what they like the Puppies easily make their lists pass.
5) Most people actually don't like the books on the Puppy lists and therefore they vote for "No award" to be given rather than giving all the awards to books chosen on political and ideological basis rather than their own merit.
6) Puppies again believe that this must be an evil conspiracy because there is no way that anyone could dislike "proper American-Christian fiction."

...Now all we need is that someone about whom Ironbite gives a shit will make the same explanation.



For starters, the Sad Puppy objective was to prove that the radflake clique in SF/F publishing and its associated fan groups/networks are the dominant player in this niche, and the clique makes sure to fix things to protect its influence at the expense of genuine meritorious work by folks not part of their clique, and in this context that means voting as a block along a slate, usually determined by a consensus opinion determined via backchannels.  This is, indeed, what happened.

The Rabid Puppies claim that the Hugos (and associated bits) are beyond saving, and instead should be destroyed and replaced. The Rabid goal this year was to gauge the strength and numbers of the opposition.

The radflake crowd did both parties' work for them admirably.  Only in categories considered unimportant (the fan stuff and the Film/TV stuff) were neither No Award nor clique-approved candidates winning. What happened at the ceremony was predicted, months in advance.

Why don't you talk to the Puppies before making judgments about them?  That's what I did.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2015, 04:38:45 pm by Ultimate Paragon »

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #35 on: August 30, 2015, 05:45:43 pm »
'genuine meritous work not done by members of the clique'

You mean like the malignant hack John C. Wright? I hate the bastard and hate his work, too.

And I'd rather not talk to Theodore Beale the Woman Smasher or his underlings, thank you very much.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #36 on: August 30, 2015, 06:12:00 pm »
'genuine meritous work not done by members of the clique'

You mean like the malignant hack John C. Wright? I hate the bastard and hate his work, too.

And I'd rather not talk to Theodore Beale the Woman Smasher or his underlings, thank you very much.

I'm not familiar with Mr. Wright or his work, but his writing deserves a fair chance.

And believe me, I hate Vox too.  But being a bigoted shithead doesn't automatically make him wrong.  If you don't want to talk to the Rabid Puppies, fine.  I tried, and I think they're a bunch of assholes.  On the other hand, I found the Sad Puppies to be very civil and reasonable, for the most part.  I still don't quite agree with their methods, but I can at least understand their grievances.

Offline ironbite

  • Overlord of all that is good in Iacon City
  • Kakarot
  • ******
  • Posts: 10686
  • Gender: Male
  • Stuck in the middle with you.
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #37 on: August 30, 2015, 06:26:14 pm »
Ok so someone who's opinion I give a shit about explain to me how this is a bad thing.

1) Hugo nominees are chosen by people who go to Worldcon.
2) "Sad Puppies" and "Rabid Puppies" are sad (and foaming from the mouth?) because most of  the nominees are liberals who have written stories that these puppies don't like.
2) Puppies do not believe that anyone can really like liberal bullshit books and therefore assume that there must be a commie conspiracy where the liberals have turned "what books do you like the most" contest into a political war on the right wingers, mom and heterosexuals.
3) Puppies set up specific lists from which all their members must choose certain books in order to ensure that the "right" books will win the Hugo awards.
4) Because the communist hippy atheists are not in fact involved in a massive conspiracy and only vote books based on what they like the Puppies easily make their lists pass.
5) Most people actually don't like the books on the Puppy lists and therefore they vote for "No award" to be given rather than giving all the awards to books chosen on political and ideological basis rather than their own merit.
6) Puppies again believe that this must be an evil conspiracy because there is no way that anyone could dislike "proper American-Christian fiction."

...Now all we need is that someone about whom Ironbite gives a shit will make the same explanation.

Well I guess you're gonna have to do as nobody else chimed in.

So in a nutshell, the voter base chimed in and the Puppies are sad and UP is still UP and believes this somehow matters in the long run?

Ironbite-got it.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #38 on: August 30, 2015, 08:13:39 pm »
People GAVE his work a fair shot - and they decided they hated it, and tossed it out in a No Awards vote.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #39 on: August 30, 2015, 08:40:50 pm »
People GAVE his work a fair shot - and they decided they hated it, and tossed it out in a No Awards vote.

That statement is... questionable, at best.

And the "No Award" thing is just a demonstration of the "it's my ball and you can't play" mentality.  I mean, imagine if the Oscars or the Grammys decided to do that.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #40 on: August 30, 2015, 08:42:52 pm »
They aren't, and they haven't - American Sniper for example.

The people have the right to choose not to like John C. Wright.

Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #41 on: August 30, 2015, 08:53:28 pm »
They aren't, and they haven't - American Sniper for example.

The people have the right to choose not to like John C. Wright.

What does American Sniper have to do with anything?

And yes, they do have the right to choose to not like him.  But there's serious reason to doubt that the Hugo Awards are still controlled by the people.  Tor Books seems to have an inordinate amount of influence.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #42 on: August 30, 2015, 09:25:21 pm »
The Oscars and such have chosen works like American Sniper, there's no chance that some bizarre "commie take over" could cast out right wing works from there.

The Hugo Awards are about voting and choice. If the people do not like Right Wing works, accept that.
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer

Offline Ultimate Paragon

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8423
  • Gender: Male
  • Tougher than diamonds, stronger than steel
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #43 on: August 30, 2015, 09:30:37 pm »
The Oscars and such have chosen works like American Sniper, there's no chance that some bizarre "commie take over" could cast out right wing works from there.

The Hugo Awards are about voting and choice. If the people do not like Right Wing works, accept that.

I was using a hypothetical scenario.

And why do you keep insisting that the people choose?  There's very strong reason to suspect that's not as true as you think it is.

Offline niam2023

  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4213
  • Gender: Male
  • The Forum Chad
Re: The fight over Hugo awards
« Reply #44 on: August 30, 2015, 09:38:05 pm »
Because they were offered a choice of Wright and Beale's "works", and they said "no thank you".
Living Life, Lifting, Waiting for Summer