The alt-right is shitting up the Hugo slates again

[Ultimate Paragon]

Sad Puppies? Not political? Because apparently their entire purpose being to counter a perceived liberal bias in the Hugos is somehow not political now.

I didn't say they weren't political, just that they weren't as political as is commonly claimed.

[RavynousHunter]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

Sad Puppies? Not political? Because apparently their entire purpose being to counter a perceived liberal bias in the Hugos is somehow not political now.

I didn't say they weren't political, just that they weren't as political as is commonly claimed.

As claimed by who. Is your yardstick "being political" or is "being political in a specific way" because if it is it behooves you to tell us what that means.

[davedan]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

Particularly considering that they're a group of supposed authors. Perhaps an indication of why they fail to get nominated is reflected in the fact they couldn't even come up with a self respecting moniker.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Sad Puppies? Not political? Because apparently their entire purpose being to counter a perceived liberal bias in the Hugos is somehow not political now.

I didn't say they weren't political, just that they weren't as political as is commonly claimed.

As claimed by who. Is your yardstick "being political" or is "being political in a specific way" because if it is it behooves you to tell us what that means.

What I mean is that they nominated several left-wing authors.

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

It's a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

[Tolpuddle Martyr]

Sad Puppies? Not political? Because apparently their entire purpose being to counter a perceived liberal bias in the Hugos is somehow not political now.

I didn't say they weren't political, just that they weren't as political as is commonly claimed.

As claimed by who. Is your yardstick "being political" or is "being political in a specific way" because if it is it behooves you to tell us what that means.

What I mean is that they nominated several left-wing authors.

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

It's a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

So you are claiming that a campaign to counter an alleged liberal conspiracy gets partially depoliticised because they voted for some authors that could be called left wing. How does this act partially depoliticise the Sad Puppies? What's the mechanism at work here?

[Askold]

No, what I'm saying is that there is no right-wing conspiracy to take over the Hugos, at least not on behalf of the sad puppies.

As for your requests for evidence that this happened before, Correia claims that he was subjected to whispering campaigns before the puppies existed.  I'll try to find evidence of that.

But the two Puppy groups have openly admitted that they are right wing groups that are trying to take over the Hugos. That is a thing that they have specifically said. They claimed that it is an counter attack against the conspiracy by the leftists who don't vote for books that have big titted babes and manly men with ray guns on the cover, but they have never denied that their movement is political and aiming to take over the Hugo awards.

[Ultimate Paragon]

Sad Puppies? Not political? Because apparently their entire purpose being to counter a perceived liberal bias in the Hugos is somehow not political now.

I didn't say they weren't political, just that they weren't as political as is commonly claimed.

As claimed by who. Is your yardstick "being political" or is "being political in a specific way" because if it is it behooves you to tell us what that means.

What I mean is that they nominated several left-wing authors.

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

It's a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

So you are claiming that a campaign to counter an alleged liberal conspiracy gets partially depoliticised because they voted for some authors that could be called left wing. How does this act partially depoliticise the Sad Puppies? What's the mechanism at work here?

Because it demonstrates that they're not biased against leftist authors, at least not to the degree that they claim WorldCon is biased against them.

No, what I'm saying is that there is no right-wing conspiracy to take over the Hugos, at least not on behalf of the sad puppies.

As for your requests for evidence that this happened before, Correia claims that he was subjected to whispering campaigns before the puppies existed.  I'll try to find evidence of that.

But the two Puppy groups have openly admitted that they are right wing groups that are trying to take over the Hugos. That is a thing that they have specifically said. They claimed that it is an counter attack against the conspiracy by the leftists who don't vote for books that have big titted babes and manly men with ray guns on the cover, but they have never denied that their movement is political and aiming to take over the Hugo awards.

I think you're conflating the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies.  The former are more interested in proving biases.

[RavynousHunter]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

Particularly considering that they're a group of supposed authors. Perhaps an indication of why they fail to get nominated is reflected in the fact they couldn't even come up with a self respecting moniker.

Christ, I'm just a fanfic author, and I thought that one up off the top of my head.  If supposed "proper" authors can't do that...well, I guess that means good things for me if I ever write some original fiction I want published.

[Ultimate Paragon]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

Particularly considering that they're a group of supposed authors. Perhaps an indication of why they fail to get nominated is reflected in the fact they couldn't even come up with a self respecting moniker.

Christ, I'm just a fanfic author, and I thought that one up off the top of my head.  If supposed "proper" authors can't do that...well, I guess that means good things for me if I ever write some original fiction I want published.

Like I said, it was a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

[davedan]

That doesn't make it not a shit name.

[Askold]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

Particularly considering that they're a group of supposed authors. Perhaps an indication of why they fail to get nominated is reflected in the fact they couldn't even come up with a self respecting moniker.

Christ, I'm just a fanfic author, and I thought that one up off the top of my head.  If supposed "proper" authors can't do that...well, I guess that means good things for me if I ever write some original fiction I want published.

Like I said, it was a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

...And a group of supposed writers thought that the best they can do is imitate a commercial? Welp, this is about as much evidence for their talents and why they had poor luck at winning as anything UP has provided for the supposed conspiracies or lack of bias from the Puppies.

[Ultimate Paragon]

I just want to comment on how utterly ridiculous these people's chosen moniker is.  Like, how out-of-touch do you have to be to call yourself and members of your movement "puppies?"  Couldn't have thought of something a bit more, I dunno, adult-sounding?  Like "The Coalition for Bias Elimination in the Hugos," or "Hugo Bias Eliminators" for short?  Is it so hard for people to think up grownup names for their little clubs?

Particularly considering that they're a group of supposed authors. Perhaps an indication of why they fail to get nominated is reflected in the fact they couldn't even come up with a self respecting moniker.

Christ, I'm just a fanfic author, and I thought that one up off the top of my head.  If supposed "proper" authors can't do that...well, I guess that means good things for me if I ever write some original fiction I want published.

Like I said, it was a tongue-in-cheek reference to those Sarah McLachlan commercials.

...And a group of supposed writers thought that the best they can do is imitate a commercial? Welp, this is about as much evidence for their talents and why they had poor luck at winning as anything UP has provided for the supposed conspiracies or lack of bias from the Puppies.

Have you actually read their work?

[Askold]

Read who's work?

[Ultimate Paragon]

Read who's work?

The people you're talking about.