Monster Hunter Nation

A letter to the SMOFs, moderates, and fence sitters from the author who started Sad Puppies

On Saturday they announced the finalists for the Hugo Awards. As you are aware by now, Sad Puppies suggested candidates absolutely dominated. I tried to mostly avoid the internet this weekend because it was a holiday better spent with family than hate mail.

This blog post is directed at the newcomers, the fence sitters, the undecided, and the unlucky SMOFs who’ve been caught in the crossfire. There is no need to address my detractors, because they have already repeatedly demonstrated that they’ll just ignore what I actually say and do, and fabricate their own wild and crazy narrative about what I secretly meant to say.

This is going to be get long, but there are a lot of things being tossed around that I need to respond to.

For those of you just joining us, Sad Puppies 3 was a campaign to get talented, worthy, deserving authors who would normally never have a chance nominated for the supposedly prestigious Hugo awards.

I started this campaign a few years ago because I believed that the awards were politically biased, and dominated by a few insider cliques. Authors who didn’t belong to these groups or failed to appease them politically were shunned. When I said this in public, I was called a liar, and told that the Hugos represented all of fandom and that the awards were strictly about quality. I said that if authors with “unapproved” politics were to get nominations, the quality of the work would be irrelevant, and the insider cliques would do everything in their power to sabotage that person. Again, I was called a liar, so I set out to prove my point.

This blog post has details and links to most of the background, history, and fallout from last time: http://monsterhunternation.com/2014/04/24/an-explanation-about-the-hugo-awards-controversy/

Basically, I did what the other side had been doing for years, only in public and with the wrong kind of fans, and everything unfolded just like I predicted it would. Especially vehement was the contingent of fandom that I took to calling Social Justice Warriors.  This may offend the No Labels crowd, but oh well, it is what it is. The name has stuck in our culture.

Having proven my point far better than I’d ever hoped, I was going to walk away, but Brad Torgersen is a very idealistic author and fan, and he was inspired to continue the program for another year. All of his explanations are available at this link: http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/01/21/sad-puppies-3-only-a-few-days-to-register-to-vote/

Sad Puppies 1 consisted of me and a handful of blog posts. Sad Puppies 2, more people joined in, we had some fun with it (check the link, we’ve got badly drawn cartoons, videos, and a spokesmanatee), and we made a dent. A handful of nominations damned near caused the apocalypse. Then Sad Puppies 3 was wildly successful beyond all of our expectations.

Now I want to address some of the many concerns I’ve seen voiced over the last few days. I will try to be as honest and direct as possible.

-SP says that they’re fighting back against biased politics by having biased politics.

Yes and no. SP1 was very politically biased because it was just me. SP2 did have a preponderance of nominees on the right side of the political spectrum, again, because that slate was basically my suggested list of stuff that I personally enjoyed. However, ultimately that didn’t matter because the liberals we got noms for were just as attacked and vilified as the rest of us.

SP3 is actually extremely politically diverse. That’s because this time our slate of suggestions was put together by a bigger group of authors and fans, and since Brad was running the show and trying to be all about getting recognition for quality, deserving authors, their personal beliefs were of no concern. Don’t take my word for it. Go through our list of nominees for yourself. You’ll find that we have liberals, conservatives, moderates, and question marks who’ve kept their politics to themselves.

What these authors have in common is that they are good, entertaining, and wouldn’t normally have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting a nomination because they aren’t inclined to kiss the right butts. If you look at our best novel nominees, none of them are conservatives.  I was the only one on there who could possibly be described as right wing, and I refused my nomination.

For the record, Brad Torgersen is a moderate. By Utah standards he is a flaming liberal.

As you go through the other categories, you’ll find that we put up many authors and editors who are my polar political opposites, and I’d guess that a majority of them are actually moderate to left on the spectrum.

That’s because Sad Puppies suggestions was about the quality of the work. Not the author’s politics. Anybody who says the SP nominees are a bunch of right wingers is either misinformed, willfully ignorant, or a liar.

-Sad Puppies wants to destroy the Hugos

Not at all. The Hugos were already broken. My people are just the inevitable backlash that happens in any system when the pendulum swings too far in one direction.

For years people have paid lip service to bringing new people into the Hugos. Whenever people complained about the biased, cliquish state of the awards, they were dismissed and told that if they wanted to change things, they should get more people involved in the process.

Okay. Done. Next?

Note, a lot of the anger this week is about how my people are wrongfan having wrongfun, and thus are bad and should be dismissed, blocked somehow, or excluded. That kind of talk only proves my original point that started this all, and really, it is that sort of asinine, outlandish accusations that caused more of the previously apathetic fans to shell out their $40 to get involved too.

I fully admit, and am on record about starting this out of spite. However, it has grown far beyond just one man’s opinions. Brad is fighting to make the awards relevant to more of fandom.

Okay, many of us agree the Hugos were broken, but Sad Puppies isn’t the way to fix it

That is a valid opinion, and I’ve seen it pop up a lot over the last few days. I really want to address this, because I can’t stress enough that if that’s what you believe, we’re not your enemy.

For years authors have complained about the biased state of the Hugos, the politicking, and the games you needed to play in order to be considered. Most of the grumbling was in private, behind closed doors, and there wasn’t a green room at any con in the country where you couldn’t find authors complaining about the sorry state of things.

But nobody did anything.

Then some cliques started manipulating this small, easily manipulated system. When 40 or 80 nominations was all it took to sway the most prestigious award in the industry, a few whisper campaigns and calling in favors was all it took to secure a spot. Again, many honest WorldCon fans were offended by this behavior.

But nobody did anything.

As time went on, it got increasingly absurd and political. Some once beloved and award winning authors were shunned for their politics, never to be seen at the Hugos again. Editors and companies related to those shunned authors discovered that they too were shunned by relation, regardless of their politics. Campaigns became more public, with “award pimpage” becoming the norm. And the long time SMOFs who took pride in this award were offended.

But nobody did anything.

To my half of fandom, we’d pretty much written the awards off. They’d become a joke. Award winning became a synonym for boring and preachy. The insider cliques just declared that my part of fandom was stupid and didn’t matter anyway, while those who honestly cherished the awards didn’t like seeing their Hugo lose its luster in the eyes of the masses.

But still nobody did anything, and it got worse and worse.

Then several years ago some upstart, minor jackass hack pulp writer (who’d owned a machinegun store and did gun rights lobbying for the Republican party so couldn’t exactly hide his politics) managed to squeak in a Campbell nomination. I got to see how the sausage was made up close and I was stunned by how asinine the process really was.

So I did something.

Now I’m the bad guy. I’m cool with that. Eventually somebody was going to have to do it.

Here’s the thing. This massive upheaval wouldn’t have ever happened if the moderates had done something years ago, but they didn’t. I can’t really say I blame them though. If they took a stand against the perpetually outraged crowd, they risked their career and their reputation. We’re talking about the same angry, entitled twitter mobs that ran off a famous comedian because he might tell a fat joke in the future. Those mobs are quick to outrage, slow to reason, and will turn on their allies, because attacking is what they are programmed to do. And the moderates—those who will admit it—are terrified of ending up on the wrong end of a witch hunt.

Now it is okay to rail against my people for doing what the other side has done in the past, because we’re not going to sabotage anyone’s career or slander you. We actually believe in the concept of free speech and free expression.

We’re getting condemned for bringing politics into the awards, but we all know politics have been in the awards for a long time. We just did it openly.

I never expected us to sweep the awards. Frankly, I was shocked by the results. I didn’t realize just how many regular fans had been turned off for so long.

Now the moderates are telling us we did it wrong, or telling us what we should have done better, but the thing is at least we did something. There’s not exactly an instruction manual for this sort of thing you know.

-All the Sad Puppies people are lying. It isn’t about getting good books recognized, it is about TOPIC X.

Now this is a really hard one to argue against, because X is whatever they want it to be, and it changes constantly. I’ve seen how we’re all angry white straight males (which is why we’ve got like a dozen women in there, the person taking it over is female, I don’t care about anybody’s race, and I have no idea who our nominees have sex with). Yesterday X was about how my fans are motivated by homophobia. The day before X was racism. I’m sure tomorrow we’ll hate the disabled. Who knows? I can’t keep up.

That is all nonsense, but they keep on making new crap up, and the gullible keep swallowing the narrative and regurgitating it all over the internet.

Here is an interesting one for you moderates, SMOFs, and fence sitters to ponder on. Why is it that our own words and actions aren’t to be believed, but anything the other side says about us, no matter how outlandish, is to be accepted?

Over the years I’ve done Sad Puppies, do you know how many fannish blogs, fanzines, and podcasts interviewed me, the guy who started the campaign, about the goals of Sad Puppies?

None.

I can’t think of single one. You’d think with the most controversial thing to happen to the Hugos in forever, somebody would actually want to sit down and interview us and get our side of the story, but nada, zip. Sure, lots of people wrote about it, but it was pretty obvious these fannish journalists didn’t read what I actually wrote, and instead they critiqued Straw Larry, or they quoted other bloggers quoting Straw Larry.

Finally, last month Brad and I were finally asked to do a podcast interview. They tried to be unbiased. They asked us hard questions.

It was fantastic.  http://www.adventuresinscifipublishing.com/2015/03/aisfp-289-larry-correia-brad-r-torgersen-sad-puppies/

So I’ve been a little less than patient with some fannish journalists. It has been really interesting to see a few of them who originally hated my guts, watch the foot stompy outrage crowd doing exactly what I said they would, and having those journalists realize that maybe I was telling the truth after all.

On this note, I’d like to extend an olive branch to Mike Glyer at File 770. We’ve gone around a few times, but I’ve got to hand it to him. Recently he’s been fully quoting my side and letting our arguments stand without interpretation. Well done, sir.

-Sad Puppies is mean

We’ve been getting a lot of moderates and SMOF friends reaching out, concerned, because the straw versions of us are very hateful, and it is so very sad that there are sides in fandom, and they are fighting.

That’s nice. Now let me flip this back around. Where were you guys when my people were being libeled, slandered, attacked, and insulted? Did you reach out to the perpetually outraged crowd and urge them to be nice and tell them there shouldn’t be any fighting in fandom, or do you just do that to the side you know won’t sic an angry mob on you?

Do you know the biggest single reason SP3 got more fans involved than SP2? My guess is that it was after the other side moved the goal posts, and danced in the streets about our “humiliating defeat”, and called all those outsiders first time voters stupid homophobic racist sexists and other super gracious acts, and Hugo award winning former SFWA presidents take to Twitter to have all caps rants about how my people are motivated by hate and racism, you shouldn’t be shocked when my people are increasingly motivated.

Just think, if you guys urging peace, love, and harmony now would have reigned in the attack dogs years ago, Sad Puppies would never have existed.

Sad Puppies BLOCK VOTING is different because it was designed to lock out all other contenders

Nope. And here is a very simple way to tell that simply isn’t true.

Based upon our past performance, how in the world could we know we’d get this much more turn out?

Also, if you look at the suggested slate posts, you’ll note that in some categories we had 5, because we had 5 works that we really liked, and there are 5 slots. In other categories we had less because we didn’t think of 5 in time. We ran with what we thought of. It wasn’t exactly a nefarious master plan.

The year before we’d only gotten half of our novels on. In SP2, I put up 2 works for best novel. Mine (which made it) and Sarah Hoyt’s A Few Good Men (which sadly didn’t make it). Why wouldn’t we put up more this time?

(Funny note on A Few Good Men, as morons were saying Sad Puppies 2 was motivated by homophobia, trying to kick gays out of fiction, the protagonist and hero of that one is a gay man, but I voted for it because it was a fantastic book)

Now the moderates are telling us that if we’d suggested fewer/more works, then magically this would all be okay and they wouldn’t be so angry at us. Oh bullshit. Come on. We all know that whatever we do, whether there is one nomination or a hundred, the perpetually outraged would still be outraged.

I do love however how everybody who was completely silent while the SJW mob was running rampant and unopposed, are now full of all sorts of condemnation against my people, and full of helpful strategic advice about what we should do next time. So, when we were in a position of weakness, they maligned us. Now that we’re in a position of strength, they malign us, but your advice is to go back to a position of weakness…

Yes, that is super helpful. Thanks a lot.

Here’s the thing, this isn’t just me and a couple of my friends having fun with this anymore. It is bigger than that. There are a bunch of us involved now. For next year, we’ll take a look at how this shakes out and proceed from there. Kate Paulk is in charge next year and will be organizing what we do.

We don’t want to replace one kingmaker with another. We don’t want to replace one dominate clique with another. I don’t want the Nielsen Hayden’s throne of skulls. It doesn’t look very comfy to sit in.

Let me reiterate. We don’t want to exclude anybody. We want to include everybody.  We’ll look at what happens and adjust fire from there. We are willing to listen to suggestions, debate, and talk with you, because we truly don’t want to destroy the awards or lord over them like some petty tyrants. But getting screamed at, insulted, and lectured at is just going to annoy us, so you can skip that part.

-The Hugos belong to a select few

My, how the tune has changed in just a few years. I loved when Teresa Nielsen Hayden proclaimed that, because when I said the same thing several years ago, I was a lair.

Think about this carefully moderates and SMOFs, the Hugos are either:

  1. The most prestigious award in genre fiction that represents the best of all of fandom
  2. An award for the favorites for one small group of people at one small convention.

You can’t have both.

-Sad Puppies insults SMOFs

Now this gets tricky, because we get into the definitions of words that have insider meanings.

SMOF means Secret Masters of Fandom. It can be used in a few different ways. To people whose social lives revolve around conventions, it means the people who run stuff there. The word started as a joke.

To many of my people, SMOF was seen as a pejorative, used for the snooty, snobbish types who liked to tell those fans that they aren’t real fans, or that they are the wrong kinds of fans, or that they were having wrongfun.

However, many good, decent, honorable people self-identify as SMOFs. I count many of these people as friends, and many of them are cheering Sad Puppies on.

This is why Brad Torgersen, being diplomatic, made up the word CHORF to describe the snoots. https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2015/03/31/chorf-its-a-word-now/ which I must admit, made me laugh.

We’ve got nothing against fans. We’re fans too.

-Larry Correia is a big mean jerk

No denying that.  As Sarah Hoyt said the other day, nobody raised in a Portuguese household has ever been accused of subtlety. I’m loud, opinionated, and bombastic. Part of that is because I didn’t get to Live Life on the Easiest Difficulty Setting, and where I come from if you look like food you will be eaten.

So yes, I can be rude, impatient, and I’m quick to anger. It is a character flaw. I never claimed to be perfect, but I’m the one who showed up.

I used to be more patient. For those of you who are authors, artists, or creators, I want you to think back to the meanest, most vile, fundamentally dishonest, cruel thing anyone has ever said about you or your work. How did that make you feel? Now I want you to imagine getting that twenty times a day for your entire career. How long do you think your thin veneer of civility would last?

The SJWs are bullies. They can’t tolerate anybody being outspoken against their ideas. So when you are the nail that sticks up, they will try to hammer you down. They will spread lies about you, hoping that everyone else will shun you. This gets tiresome after a few years, especially when they start to make up “scare quotes” from you in international newspapers.

I’ve had a bunch of honestly concerned people tell me recently that they think I’m being too mean, or that I’m so used to responding to malicious attackers that I sometimes lump in innocent bystanders in with those malicious attackers (a moderate friend referred to it as my “shotgun approach” which is a good comparison).

You get attacked enough and eventually your ability to differentiate targets starts to suffer. For those caught up in that, I apologize.

To those who still willfully want to attack me, come get some. 🙂

Vox Day! VOX DAAAAaaaay!

Vox Day wasn’t on the Sad Puppies suggest slate. Sorry. Can’t blame that one on us.

Well, I suppose you can, in that I demonstrated how small this most prestigious award actually is last year. Vox Day’s alternate Rabid Puppies slate was him going directly to his fan base. Looking at the numbers, and he on his own was about as successful as I was last year for SP2.

Now here is an interesting thought for you moderates out there who despise Vox Day. Above I talked about the angry reaction to SP2… Honestly, last year Fandom (capital F) insulted hundreds of outsider fans’ taste and intelligence, called them names, and basically treated them like trash (while the majority kept their mouths shut at best, or gave tacit approval at worst) and now you’re shocked when Vox Day has appealed directly to those people you mocked to vote in a manner that especially pisses you off?

Well, duh.

-Sad Puppies invited in Breitbart.

That’s cool. The SJWs brought in the Guardian, Io9, and Tor.com, so now we’re even.

Actually Breitbart approached me and asked for an interview. Last year the SP2 controversy got a small mention in the USA Today. The guys who talked to me from Breitbart have been doing reports on SJW crusaders across many industries, and this is news, so this isn’t exactly shocking.

GamerGate is behind Sad Puppies!

Okay, now this one is just stupid. It comes from Teresa Nielsen Hayden, head of the SMOFfen SS.

Because many SJWs check under their bed for the Gamergate boogieman before going to sleep, obviously GamerGate is responsible for the Sad Puppies sweep. Apparently she discovered that one of my longtime fans, Daddy Warpig, is a GamerGate blogger, and has tweeted about SP3, and she exposed this shocking revelation!

Wow… Yeah, good work there, Sherlock. You could have just saved time and asked me, since I also favorited those and retweeted them. I’ve also been on his podcast. But if you want to really damn me, let me save you some detective work. I’m also friends with actor Adam Baldwin, the guy who coined the word GamerGate. I’ve also blogged about GamerGate, but more in relation to Sarkesian calling for a boycott of my home state because she didn’t understand our constitution or laws wouldn’t allow for violating our citizen’s civil rights because of fake threats against her. http://monsterhunternation.com/2014/10/21/fisking-the-deseret-news-anti-ccw-article/

But GamerGate isn’t behind Sad Puppies.

  1. SP predates GG by a couple of years.
  2. SP is tiny compared to GG, and the vast majority of GG paid no attention to SP,
  3. Until the Breitbart article came out, but if you loot at the dates of the article http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/02/05/breitbart-reports-on-sad-puppies/ it came out too late for any new people to register in time to nominate for Sasquan.
  4. We do share some common members, but enemy of my enemy is my friend, and both movements can’t stand Social Justice bullies telling people they are having wrongfun.
  5. There were like 2,000 total nominations. If it had been a GamerGate plot there would have been 20,000 nominations, and they would spammed it across the internet and had a great laugh about it.

Oh, quick note moderates and SMOFs, if you don’t want GamerGate to get involved in the Hugos, don’t blame me. Tell your Social Justice idiots to shut up on Twitter!  TNH is the one invoking and provoking them, not me.

Brianna Wu—who is despised by hundreds of thousands of gamers as an opportunistic vulture—took to Twitter after the nominations were announced, blaming GamerGate for ruining the Hugos, and then she tweeted about how the awards were precious and sacred to her because her husband has 4 Hugos.  That is like waving the red cape in front of the bull.

-We’re going to vote No Award against every single thing suggested by the Sad Puppies slate!

Yes, voting based on politics with no consideration for the quality of the actual work will sure show Larry Correia what’s up.

The fact that the CHORFs were already demanding rule changes, No Awarding everybody, and blocking the wrong kind of fans before the nominations were even announced should be pretty telling. Funny. That is exactly what I said they would do years ago. The insider clique cares far more about maintaining their insular little kingdom than they do about the awards.

Here’s the thing, if you No Award everybody on the slate with no consideration to the authors or their work, you’ll just be proving me right.

And seriously, you’re telling me Jim Butcher, the god father of an entire genre, isn’t worthy? Marko Kloos indy published sci-fi book has sold literally over ten times as many copies as last year’s winner Ancillary Justice, and people love it, but it isn’t worthy? You’re telling me that Kevin J. Anderson, industry pro, 23 million books in print, three decades of working in fandom and helping other authors, isn’t worthy?

Bullshit. And none of those authors share my politics.

Toni Weisskopf has spent her entire life in fandom. She grew up at cons and lived in Rocket City. She had relatives on the Manhattan Project and ate dinner at Warner Von Braun’s house. I don’t know how many hundreds of conventions Toni has gone to, as everything from volunteer to GoH. She’s edited hundreds of authors, took over and successfully run a publishing house, and it is telling that she was ignored until Sad Puppies came along. She’s not worthy?

Edmund Schubert has been running Intergalactic Medicine Show for years, producing tons of great short fiction, and you’re telling me he’s unworthy? Why? His boss (who he disagrees with) doesn’t like gay marriage? Jim Minz started as David Hartwell’s assistant at Tor, and is beloved by everybody in publishing and has spent his whole life in fandom, and he’s unworthy?

All of these short fiction authors, some of whom have been writing for places like Analog for decades, they’re unworthy? Campbell nominees who are brand new, producing all sorts of great work, and you’ll shit all over their prospective careers and No Award their future because Brad recommend them?

They’re unworthy because of association, but you didn’t say a damned thing when the SJWs tried to give a Campbell to Requires Hate?

That is hypocrisy.

We want people to read the works and judge them for themselves. We were accused of trying to get people to nominate without reading, but we put that one to bed when we Book Bombed all the short fiction in the weeks leading up to the nomination’s, selling thousands and thousands of stories, and bumping all of our nominees up to the tops of their Amazon categories sales rankings, and making the SP nominated works the most widely read things on the ballot in years.

But yeah, No Award a bunch of obviously worthy creators over politics and brag about it on the internet in advance. If I truly wanted to destroy the Hugos credibility to all but one tiny, insular little group of fans, that’s exactly what I’d do.

Well, the whole world is watching now. What are you going to tell them the award is really about?

 

EDIT: To add, read this article for Entertainment Weekly http://www.ew.com/article/2015/04/06/hugo-award-nominations-fall-victim-misogynistic-and-racist-voting?hootPostID=221657cca998c926458486c3f53fbe17

So, SMOFs and Moderates, read that article. Hell, just read the headline… If you’ve paid any attention or have even an iota of honesty in your soul you know that article in a national publication is total bullshit.

Now do you understand why it is so very tempting for my side to just say to hell with it and hoist the black flag?

EDIT 2, they’ve already changed the article because the EW lawyers freaked out. That should tell you something. I’ve got the original cached.

Since they changed it, here is the original. See moderates? This is what happens when you cross the Social Justice crowd. The truth become irrelevant and they spread whatever they can about you to get you shunned and destroyed.

Hugo Award nominations fall victim to misogynistic, racist voting campaign
BY ISABELLA BIEDENHARN • @ISABELLA324

The Hugo Awards have fallen victim to a campaign in which misogynist groups lobbied to nominate only white males for the science fiction book awards. These groups, Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies (both of which are affiliated with last year’s GamerGate scandal), urged sci-fi fans to become members of the Hugo Awards’ voting body, World Science Fiction Convention, in order to cast votes against female writers and writers of color. Membership only costs $40, and allows members to vote for the 2016 nominations as well as the 2015 nominations, which were just released.
Sad Puppies broadcast their selection on Feb. 1, writing: “If you agree with our slate below—and we suspect you might—this is YOUR chance to make sure YOUR voice is heard.” Brad Torgerson, who runs Sad Puppies along with Larry Correia, complains that the Hugo Awards have lately skewed toward “literary” works, as opposed to “entertainment.”
Torgerson also writes that he disagrees with Hugos being awarded for affirmative action-like purposes, as many women and writers of color went home with awards in 2014: ”Likewise, we’ve seen the Hugo voting skew ideological, as Worldcon and fandom alike have tended to use the Hugos as an affirmative action award: giving Hugos because a writer or artist is (insert underrepresented minority or victim group here) or because a given work features (insert underrepresented minority or victim group here) characters.”
The other lobbying group, Rabid Puppies, is run by Theodore Beale (who goes by the name Vox Day). As The Telegraph reports, “Members of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America have called for Beale’s exclusion from the group after he has writtenagainst women’s suffrage and posted racist views towards black writer NK Jemisin.”
Fortunately, some sane voters allowed well-deserving writers to pull through. Ann Leckie’s Ancillary Sword and Listen was nominated for Dramatic Presentation, and Annie Bellet’s Goodnight Stars was nominated, despite having a non-white, female protagonist.
Plenty of members of the science fiction community have voiced their disgust with both sects of “Puppies.” Writer Philip Sandifer wrote on his blog Sunday, “The Hugo Awards have just been successfully hijacked by neofascists.” Sandifer’s post, which is worth reading in full, addresses what this disaster means for the sci-fi world:
To be frank, it means that traditional sci-fi/fantasy fandom does not have any legitimacy right now. Period. A community that can be this effectively controlled by someone who thinks black people are subhuman and who has called for acid attacks on feminists is not one whose awards have any sort of cultural validity. That sort of thing doesn’t happen to functional communities. And the fact that it has just happened to the oldest and most venerable award in the sci-fi/fantasy community makes it unambiguously clear that traditional sci-fi/fantasy fandom is not fit for purpose.
As writer Joe Abercrombie put it:
The Hugo Awards winners will be announced on Aug. 22 in Washington.

##
And this is how she addressed me after being called on these obvious blatant lies on Twitter.

isabella biedenharn ‏@isabella324 1h1 hour ago
@monsterhunter45 Hi Larry, we’re happy to update to include your side. Please send me your comment when you have time
4 retweets5 favorites
Reply
Retweet4
Favorite5
More

Addendum to Yesterday's Letter
Sad Puppies Update: The Nominees Announced and Why I Refused My Nomination
Brian Niemeier
Guest

“Well, the whole world is watching now. What are you going to tell them the award is really about?”

If they’d only done that to begin with, none of this would’ve been necessary.

James
Guest

I want to follow Staw Larry on Twitter.

TallDave
Guest

Oh, the hilarity.

I love this, still kills me I was a day late to the party.

Shadowdancer
Guest

If I am not mistaken you can still vote. =D

Then nominate next year.

TallDave
Guest

Thanks so much! It would appear you are correct.

http://www.thehugoawards.org/i-want-to-vote/

Love seeing Wright nominated so many times, only discovered his work recently through SP.

Shadowdancer
Guest

You’re welcome! I got my membership today and am waiting for my name to show up on the membership list.

Excited to vote in the genres I’ve loved and grown up with.

Carbonel
Guest

I pretty much voted a straight JCW slate for short fic. I don’t read everything in the field: just Analog, Sci-Phi & a few (mostly YA) anthologies, but he just blew me away this year.

Joseph Capdepon II
Guest

You can still vote for the Hugo though. Get a supporting membership, read the nominated works and vote!

Mary
Guest

And what’s more, you will get free copies of many of the works, so you can read them and judge.

Guess
Guest

Looks like one of the authors that SP nominated is a socialist and she is getting harassed by people for having this endorsement. I had never heard of her. However, it looks like her most popular series is Urban Fantasy. This group has a large Urban Fantasy fan base. How about book bombing her to help her out? Its a way of showing people on the opposite side that this group can appreciate quality writing and its not about your political views?

https://overactive.wordpress.com/2015/04/05/hugo-nomination-and-thoughts/#comments

https://twitter.com/anniebellet

Book
Guest

Ugh. I think a book-bomb is an excellent idea. Although I plan on buying a membership and will hopefully get a copy of her book anyway. Still, good work is good work- and deserves to be acknowledged.

Adam Maas
Guest

Annie Bellet is also an Indie publishing star (seriously, check out her 20 Sided Sorceress series, it’s awesome. Next book is out tomorrow). So she’s not sucking up to the right people despite having the ‘right’ politics.

T.L. Knighton
Guest

Interesting.

Any indie who is “doing it right”, so to speak, deserves better.

Christopher M. Chupik
Guest
Christopher M. Chupik

I hope she isn’t shamed into withdrawing. On top of that libelous EW article, I’ve had just about enough of these little tin fascists.

Brad R. Torgersen
Guest

Annie is hanging tough. In her own words, she’s finding out who her friends are. She won’t be cowed into abandoning her nomination. She earned it, SP3 aside. Anyone who attacks her is an idiot and a fool. Seriously.

Doug Northcote
Guest

Huh, guess I should buy one of her books. Just got book one of the series you recommended.

Looks to be good stuff, and man I so love the indie publisher thing on Amazon. So many good books I’d never seen/heard of. Love how it expands the library.

Stephen St. Onge
Guest

Well, I just picked up a couple of her novels, so we’ll see how they go.

David H
Guest

Well, she just got another sale, and some well-wishing.

Pouncer
Guest

James Nicoll, world-famed for the best and most succinct analysis of the state of the English Language ever published, announces a new policy due to Toni Weisskopf’s essay at Hoyt’s:

http://james-nicoll.livejournal.com/5297418.html

I like Nicoll’s reviews and am saddened that he now chooses to exclude a massive segment of the genre from his sphere of influence.

His choice.

TallDave
Guest

Never heard of him, but I did find it odd he does paid reviews. That’s generally considered a conflict of interest, because even if the author has no direct control over the review, it’s still amounts to paid advertising, and obviously an incentive exists to attract customers.

At any rate I’m not reading advertisements or reviews by someone whose reading comprehension is poor enough to call the SP slate “doctrinaire lockstep.”

T.L. Knighton
Guest

It is, unfortunately, becoming far more normal for reviews to be paid for.

However, I figure if I have to pay someone to read my book, I probably wrote something shitty anyways.

Bruce
Guest

Aww, man. I was counting on that check!

Nathan
Guest

…and PNH poked GamerGate?! Taunting them that they couldn’t organize anything?

Do they really want a hundred James May’s crawling all over their stuff?

J. C. Salomon
Guest

“Hastur, Hastur, Hast—arrrgh!”

Doug Northcote
Guest

J.C. Solomon that got a real LOL outta me.

Haha!!

Geek cred to you sir!

Its an old reference to D&D, and there was a chance if you said his name, he’d show up and eat you. Or his unpleasant minions would. Either way, all bad.

And “Hack” as we called him is brother of Cthulhu (admit I looked that up, been that long since reading Deites and Demigods). Its a very unpleasant end at that point.

BikerDad
Guest

No, I think that given the tremendous volume of material being published, paying for a review is a legitimate approach. Reviewers have a fixed amount of time in the day, an amount that is clearly insufficient to review even a small fraction of what’s available. This isn’t to say that paid reviews can’t be abused, but as long as the payment is disclosed, the review reader is able to assess it’s objectivity. Any reviewer who consistently overrates their subjects is going to lose credibility, and thus lose eyeballs, and poof, no more paid reviews.

TallDave
Guest

I understand there’s a large volume of material and reviewers prefer to be paid for their time (as do we all), but that doesn’t negate the conflict of interest. People generally respond to financial incentives, and if he gave a lot of bad reviews that didn’t drive book sales authors would have less incentive to employ him as a marketing tool.

Anyways, nothing wrong with marketing, and I don’t begrudge the guy a living, I just find his sanctimony to be built on sandy ground.

Carbonel
Guest
There’s an unspoken thing with book reviewers (yes, I am one, but don’t worry unless you write for the kids/YA market) wherein we think: o god do I have to read/finish this book–?! Frankly, that’s no bad thing; better to skip a book, if you suspect you can’t treat it fairly. There’s a book I’m passing on because I read an author interview before I read the book itself that was astonishingly bigoted: and the characterization in the story is just weak enough, and it’s got that typical first novel slow middle… Am I irritated by the the book itself,… Read more »
J. C. Salomon
Guest

Apparently these are often fan-commissioned reviews.

TallDave
Guest

Interesting, but similar incentive problem.

Max Florschutz
Guest
Back when my first book came out, I was looking for ways to get reviews, only to decide I’d rather keep my ethics than get in on so many of those scams. There were “review” blogs out there that would take your money, plus a free copy of the book, for a “chance” at a review. No actual promise of one. The more you “donated” past the base fee, of course, the greater chance you had of being reviewed. They admitted as much. I found another site that had “tiers” of reviews. Want a mention in passing? X dollars. A… Read more »
James
Guest

I would write reviews for free books all day long. Unless the book really sucked, like so many self published garbage.

Christopher M. Chupik
Guest
Christopher M. Chupik

Oh no! Deprived of the SJW critical endorsement, Baen will be forced to rely on their massive, outspoken loyal fanbase instead.

Nathan
Guest

Oh… a patreon. Pass.

Thomas Monaghan
Guest

Nice guy he also posted online that Jim Baen shouldn’t get the Long Form Editor Hugo posthumously. Jim lost the Hugo on the last tabulation by 2 votes.

pavetack
Guest

I love that the comments describe Tom Kratman as “not merely a Holocaust apologist”.

That’d be the same Kratman who describes himself as “a Catholic, and mostly Irish. There’s a chunk of Scot in there, along with an eclectic mix of Ashkenazi Jew, Gypsy, Russian, Magyar, Pole, German, Austrian, and God alone knows what else.”

Now, the two are necessarily mutually exclusive, but I’d love to see a cite.

windsong
Guest

I’ve been watching Sad Puppies over the years, and just wanted to say thank you, Larry.

I’ve been dismayed over the outright hate and lying that has been going on when a simple google search would have sufficed to clear up any confusion. As you said, you’ve been very forthright about your position.

Thank you for standing up for good stories, and for shedding light on the hypocrisies, lies, and general uncivil behavior that has gone on far too long.

Dawn Watson
Guest
Don’t forget the intolerance. What saddens me about all this is that Larry, et al., have to continually defend themselves against such base ignorance and hatred; yet the worst offenders don’t see themselves in that light. As you said, hypocrisy. I refuse to engage them directly (it’s pointless; they’re never going to grow up), though I’m outspoken enough among friends and family. Instead, I made a conscious and deliberate decision to combat the problem from the inside in my own genres (Fantasy and SciFi Romance under not-very-well-hidden pen names) where many masquerade their hatred of freedom and self-expression behind the… Read more »
windsong
Guest

That bothers me too. Especially when it’s not that hard to go back and read what he actually said.

*high five to new authors*

I’m trying to get to the point that it doesn’t bother me if I alienate some readers due to being honest. I would rather have fans to enjoy my stories and are the sort that can separate the author from his/her books–and who both have and can enjoy varied and different opinions–rather than those that demand I march in lockstep to what they believe is the One True Way or else.

Dawn Watson
Guest
I’m at that age where I’m tired of biting my tongue. It was getting kinda sore. Also, I’m not a lockstep kinda gal. I’ve always been out of step with the people around me, always. Don’t see any reason to change that now. I’m waiting for the backlash, though, and not from the average reader. Truthfully, most are willing to overlook a character’s politics if the story is good and the message isn’t preachy. But there are a handful of self-appointed gatekeepers that will take one look at the stories I’m publishing and scream loudly about what an anti-[insert cause… Read more »
windsong
Guest
Me too. 🙂 That’s why I’ve started speaking up now, and plan to in the future. That’s the thing that I’m angriest with. People shouldn’t have to be afraid for speaking their opinion out loud. Silencing an opinion doesn’t magically make it go away. Shunning people who don’t have the “right” opinions isn’t going to make those people go away. What it does is convince those who are trying to do the right thing that we need to stand our ground and say “Enough is enough.” *writing cookies* To good stories! Hear, hear! Thank you. 🙂 I spoke up because… Read more »
Dawn Watson
Guest

It’s not the first thing that OP has deliberately mangled. But yeah, I get why you’re speaking out. In fact, I agree with you on all points. Especially the cookies. 😉

re: Sisyphus/Prometheus. *snicker*

windsong
Guest

The only thing better than cookies is dragons. O:) *am thankful my muse is easily bribed*

Dawn Watson
Guest

Dragon-shaped cookies for the muse.

Sorry. I couldn’t resist. 😉

windsong
Guest

!

You have no idea how awesome that sounds. Just the thought of those delectable treats has sent my muse spinning furiously all sorts of wonderful ideas. Right. Before. Bed. Time. O.O

Miguel
Guest

If Twitter is any indicator, SJW is not well regarded by anybody. And the Gamer Gaters are going “HUH? WTF, We’ve been playing, who has time to read about trisexual nymphs?”

Gamergater
Guest
Gamergater here. You know, I would make more time for reading if it weren’t for the likes of Scalzi putting me right off the hobby sometimes. Or way back when I found a proto SJW calling Piers Anthony a pedophile. I was reading long about gender swaps long before SJWs made it their religion in the likes of John Varley. Regarding the comments from Dawn about people being willing to read a story with politics they don’t agree with I can attest to that since as an atheist lefty type I read a good bit of Dean Koontz and Orson… Read more »
Doug Northcote
Guest

So say we all!

Long time gamer here too.

Hm, got a “comment too short” so the rest of what I would say is: “Well said!”

Dusty Ayres
Guest

Sorry for the late response, but…there are left-wing Gamergaters? I’m amazed, since all of the media’s been painting them as right-wing morons who, live in their parent’s basements and are fat with Asperger’s. Thanks for confirming this; I’m a left-wing gamer myself, but of the pragmatically progressive type (and I hang out at this blog with like-minded people.)

trackback

[…] And speaking of which, you really should read this excellent open letter from Larry to the moderates….  Links in there to a lot of needed background and history.  Bravo sir! […]

trackback

[…] You really should read this excellent open letter from Larry to the moderates, fence sitters, and ot….  Links in there to a lot of needed background and history.  Bravo […]

David
Guest

Just a minor proofreading comment. In the “The Hugos belong to a select few” section, I suspect that Hayden called you a liar.

You are a big guy, to be sure, but I doubt anyone would consider you a lair.

Eamon J. Cole
Guest

It’s the hobo beard. Lotta lair could be built in that beard.

And it’s at a great height, good defensive position…

Eamon J. Cole
Guest

Sigh. I wanted to checky the little box so I could follow the comments…

rcade
Guest
As a Hugo voter for several years, I regard the slates as tampering because they filled the ballot with the choices of only two people: Brad Torgersen and Vox Day (Theo). As a nominator I picked works I liked and have been confident in my belief that the bulk of nominating and voting is done by other people doing the same. But the pool of people eligible to vote for Hugos is small (850 people nominated a best novella last year), so it doesn’t take much for a small group voting as a bloc to determine all of the nominees.… Read more »
Chris Scena
Guest

rcade, take your sanctimonious crap and shove it back up your ass. People like you are what got people like me voting in the first place. All your hand-wringing, false-modesty, whining, belligerence and flat out lying pissed me (and judging by the comments and this and many other blogs) and plenty of others off.

You don’t own being a fan. You don’t get to tell people how and how not to feel about anything.

Kristophr
Guest

Your tears are precious to me. Keep them coming.

Malcolm the Cynic
Guest

Do you know how Brad picked the slate?

He opened his comments section and took reader suggestions.

rcade
Guest
So what? He used bloc voting to enable 100-200 Hugo nominators to drown out the choices of everyone else. This even hurt the fans who made suggestions to him: If a work they liked wasn’t in his top 5, it had almost no chance of being nominated. A bloc voting campaign putting the choices of two people all over the ballot is not made more acceptable by the fact they took some public input. It’s still a subversion of the process that gives those of us who do what Correia said he wanted — vote for great SF/F books without… Read more »
Rowan
Guest

The greatest flaw in your argument is to think that everyone supporting the goals of SP votes, thinks and acts in lockstep. The slate is just a set or recommendations. if voters agree, they will put them up there, if not, they’ll go their own way. No one tells me how to vote when it comes down to the actual ‘picking time’ and from reading the others here, well, good luck getting them to either. I have a herd of cats, and I’d rather get them going in the same direction.

Rowan
Guest

Hey, don’t tell me how easily persuaded and manipulated I’m not! 🙂

Back from Space
Guest

rcade and the rest of the SJW nutjobs are projecting. They assume that because they’re a hivemind, that everyone else is a hivemind, only with wrongthink.

Understanding *real* diversity — diversity of thought — is well beyond their abilities to comprehend.

TallDave
Guest

Lisa Simpson: Watch yourself, Dad – you’re the highly suggestible type.
Homer Simpson: Yes, I am the highly suggestible type.

Correia is good, Correia is great, we surrender our will, as of this date!

Patrick Chester
Guest

@TallDave: To the International Lord of Hate? 😉

The Phantom
Guest
dear rcade, personally i paid $40 for the express purpose of making YOU whine. i didn’t know it was you at the time, but i knew it would be somebody. i just wanted you to know that all your convoluted bullshit here has fulfilled my every hope, and i feel i have gotten my full-on forty bucks worth already. next up, i get to read all the nominated stories and books, which for the first time in 30 years WILL NOT SUCK. wait until you see what we do to you fuckers next year. you’re going to be pining for… Read more »
Alan S.
Guest

I need a shirt that says this.

rcade
Guest

Whatever floats your boat.

I’m not your enemy. I’m just a Hugo voter who wanted to make nominations that had a shot at getting on a ballot. Correia and his pals took that away from me with their bloc voting campaign, so I’m telling him why I think that sucks.

As for the notion that the Hugo packet has sucked for 30 years, Kim Stanley Robinson alone shoots that idea to hell. And there are plenty of other authors along that span among the greats of the genre.

Nathan
Guest

Rcade. Prove your claim, please. A 200 vote variance between #1 and #5 in the Novella nominations tends to argue against people voting a bloc.

Alan S.
Guest

Nathan, only if you’re willing to think and apply your own honest assessment. If you’re willing to concede higher functions to Argument from Authority, well, you get what you get.

Craig
Guest

The high point for SP-related votes is probably 368-387 (editor or novel). Let’s go with the editor figure, 368.

Looking for a lowpoint…
Two Best Dramatic shorts did not make it. Cut off was 71. Semiprozine cutoff was 94, and one missed.

Unless they were ineligible or declined, of course, that establishes the overall range.

Douglas B. Killings
Guest
rcade: I’m another Hugo voter, off and on for the last 30-some years. Personally, I’m used to nominating works that never wound up on the ballot, because 99% of the time that’s what happens to my picks. But it used to be I could rely on the final ballot to have at least some works I could enjoy. For novels its more or less still true, but for shorter works… I really can’t say I’ve enjoyed many of them for at least a decade now. Last year’s SP noms were probably the first in a fairly long time which I… Read more »
John C. Randolph
Guest

So, you’re bent out of shape that a couple hundred people bought memberships and voted in a way that you don’t like. Rather anti-democratic of you, isn’t it?

-jcr

Kristophr
Guest

Bloc voting is apparently only actionable when wrongfans do it.

( sarc ) The SJW crowd never bloc votes. It is just a coincidence that their hivemind always picks out authors that are of the protected-class or the day. No hive-voting here, no siree. ( / sarc )

BikerDad
Guest

You keep saying “he used bloc voting”. Do you have some arcane insight into the actual nominations? Or are you simply ASSUMING?

Kristophr
Guest

Screw them. They have bloc voted their hivemind for years.

Dish some of it back to them.

Obey the Libertarian International Lord of Hate. You know you want to.

Joe Buckley
Guest
I’ve tended to avoid all this controversy because most people already know that I personally know & like most of the authors from SP1 & SP2, but I’ve been on the verge of commenting on this for days, now. You say: “I’m just a Hugo voter who wanted to make nominations that had a shot at getting on a ballot. Correia and his pals took that away from me with their bloc voting campaign, so I’m telling him why I think that sucks.” It’s comments like this that bug the hell out of me. You say that you’re “just a… Read more »
Wombat-socho
Guest

F*cking A well told, Joe.

Kristophr
Guest

Of course we are not worthy. We are wrongfans who promote wrongfun.

Our badthink must be purged.

Mike Glyer
Guest

Wait a minute. Joe Buckley? I read in a book that you were dead. A lot!

phunctor
Guest

Oh, just die already, Joe.
hehehe

Carbonel
Guest
Not a single one of my graphics works nominations made the ballot. Not. One. None of my artist noms made it Only one of my best novel nominations–Jim Butcher–made Nearly all of my short fic made the list: because JCW was on fire this year. And, you’re going to screw me and Mr. Wright over, raced, just to make a point? How in the unsanctiried lack of salvation is THAT fair? Why do you hate me? What did I ever do to you that you would piss all over the chance of my favorite author winning the Hugo? I’ve been… Read more »
Jeff Gauch
Guest

But the pool of people eligible to vote for Hugos is small (850 people nominated a best novella last year),

You’ve obviously missed the point. The purpose of SP is to broaden the Hugo electorate to make bloc voting, public or no, ineffective. I’d bet that more than 1000 nominating votes were made in the novella category this year, and that number is going to grow.

rcade
Guest
Bloc voting doesn’t expand the electorate. It discourages participation in the Hugos for everyone who does not join a bloc. It makes our nominations worthless. No one outside of Torgersen and Day’s blocs got a nominee on the novella, novellette, short story, best related work, or best editor categories. Before the nominees came out, I held out hope that the Puppies would be a net positive by bringing a lot more people into the nominating process — both pro-Puppy and anti-Puppy. But bloc voting games the system so completely that it will just cause one or more other blocs to… Read more »
Eamon J. Cole
Guest

rcade,

You’ve fouled your message, as far as I’m concerned. You showed up at another author’s page, one who’s taking some joy in her nomination despite finding herself amidst the silly kerfuffle, and denigrated the value of her nomination.

Leaving aside her request to keep the nonsense out of her space, who are you to lecture her about the value of her nomination? Who are you to stop by her place and cast a shadow on her pride in the accomplishment?

It’s pathetic concern trolling, it’s petty and pointless.

Alex
Guest

Oh, s/he’s the graceless and pathetic concern troll that did that? Guess I should have compared names…

Eamon J. Cole
Guest

Yep.

Not much class on display with this one.

McChuck
Guest
But I thought the SJWs wanted people to organize? Are you saying you’re anti-union? What SP is at its heart – organizing the oppressed working class reading masses into recognizing their oppression and working together to do something about it to make a better future for their children. We demand good science fiction and fantasy! Down with puerile, heavy-handed, “progressive” message fiction! We demand heroes who perform heroic deeds! We demand stories where the humans are the good guys! We demand stories where the good guys win, or at least go down doing their best, setting up a sequel where… Read more »
s0beit
Guest

“Bloc voting doesn’t expand the electorate. It discourages participation in the Hugos for everyone who does not join a bloc.”

Except for this year when this exact thing happened…

A bloc existed, a new one formed, and hopefully so many blocs will be created that they aren’t just blocs anymore, but intermingling individual opinions (gasp)

It’s either that or do away with democracy, which I’m totally fine with, but it’ll probably blow up in their faces if they’re exclusionary again.

Back from Space
Guest

That’s quite the temper tantrum there. Would you care for some Preparation H for that industrial-strength butthurt?

But then, as A Certain Frenchman once said, “Never interrupt your enemy while he’s making a mistake.”

Please, continue.

BikerDad
Guest

But the pool of people eligible to vote for Hugos is small (850 people nominated a best novella last year), so it doesn’t take much for a small group voting as a bloc to determine all of the nominees.

Wrong. The pool of people eligible to vote for the Hugos numbers in the billions. The pool of those who choose to make the effort and expend the resources to do so is much, much smaller. Sad Puppies has expanded the latter pool. Why is that a bad thing?

curmudgeoninchief
Guest

I just plunked down my $40, so I will match your “I’m picking up my marbles and going home” brave “No Award” with my vote for the stories I like bestest. When democratic, party politics can trump the creation of a Supreme Soviet for SF, I have to cheer.

Conformity and acquiescence is easy. Democracy is hard, and sometimes it isn’t pretty. Nancy Pelosi, for example. But it is better than the alternatives.

Greg Q
Guest

“Be sure to let me know when your movement to oppose elitism in the Hugos will allow nominations to once again be selected by individuals”

Um, never have, and never will. It takes at least 30 votes to get something or someone nominated. 30 >>1 that your vote pretty much never matters.

Sorry

Brad R. Torgersen
Guest

rcade, these were not “my” choices. I polled (straw poll) many dozens of fans, as well as friends, and fellow pros. The list was condensed from a large number of selections. It was right there in my damned blog comments. Of course, all the whiners and complainers never bothered to check. They just wanted to vent their spleens and point fingers, like the crying toddlers that they are.

rcade
Guest
The fact you took comments from “dozens” in your community does not make it OK that you hijacked the Hugo nomination process away from everyone else. The nominations that I and hundreds of others submitted as individuals in good faith had almost no chance of making the ballot because your slate and Day’s slate filled it. In another comment in this discussion, Correia admits he has no proof that even a single novel/novella/novelette category was stuffed with a secret bloc’s nominees in the past 10 years. None. Yet in the name of fighting that non-existent problem, you’re completely taking over… Read more »
Shadowdancer
Guest

AAAAAAAAAAAND there’s that moving the goalposts when you are outright told that nope, it’s not just a small handful of people who picked out what to put on that list. Retreat to screaming about hijacking and recommendation lists and voting lockstep when that didn’t happen with SP3. Don’t know about Rabid Puppies, you’ll have to demand answers from them.

So predictable.

Dcrhere
Guest

Out of curiosity, just what were your nominees that didn’t make the cut?

Groblek
Guest
I’m in the same place as rcade on this one. I’m sympathetic to the goals of SP – I’m a newcomer to Hugo voting, having attended my first and only Worldcon in 2011. I’ve kept up a supporting membership since entirely because I didn’t see enough of the sorts of work I like on the ballot. My wife and I have been buying Baen’s monthly bundles almost every month for nearly a decade now, so it’s not that I dislike the sort of work you’re trying to get nominated, either. That said, organized open campaigning for the award is not… Read more »
keranih
Guest
“That said, organized open campaigning for the award is not something I can support. I get a little uncomfortable with individual recommendation posts from people for what they think of as works worthy of nominating, and the SP movement has taken that to a new level.” I can get the first part. I’m not really looking forward to the Steampunk slate, and the MilSF slate, and the CyperWar slate, and the Medical slate, and the Latin America slate, and the AltHist slate, and the KillHitler slate, and the Muslim slate, and the Orthodox slate(*) and the FTL slate, and the… Read more »
Eamon J. Cole
Guest

^This!^ Oh, so completely this!

If people passionate about their interests got together and gave everybody their particular list? And I could go strolling through those lists to find great stuff?!?

I could live with that.

Groblek
Guest

Honestly, of those two options, I’d reluctantly rather have no visible slates. Entirely because I believe that there’s a limit to how many people can be involved in a secret slate voting bloc, and so enough other voters will be able to over come them. And because I think the effects on the community of having visible slates are going to be very negative. I could well be wrong on both of those fronts, but that’s my opinion on the matter.

Differently
Guest

I think we should reach out to all of those fandoms next year, if we can. It is their award too.

Carbonel
Guest

Some of us came late to the party (but you’ll note we’re not complaining)

I swear on my towel I’ll get in touch with Kate Paulk and share links & resources to amazebos Indy art and comics. I’m a librarian. We Do Research Right 😉

Power to the people!

JSchuler
Guest

“As a Hugo voter for several years…”

Question: how many years does someone have to vote before their vote becomes legitimate?

astrodog
Guest
Rcade, I find you fascinating. I think SJWs need to be studied as a psychological and sociological phenemenon of the internet age. What I find remarkable is that you are completely lacking in any self-awareness. You keep projecting your own characteristics on everyone else but you don’t even know you are projecting. Then you realize the SJWs don’t actually see themselves as SJWs at all. They just think they are RIGHT. About everything. And in a completely mindless way. You don’t reconize how badly the SJW crowd ruined the Hugo awards despite being a SJW because you don’t any clue… Read more »
rcade
Guest
If you knew my tastes in SF/F and the way I’ve voted for the Hugos the past several years, you would realize the absurdity of calling me a social justice warrior. I roll my eyes at all the excessive politicization going on within these genres, whether it’s coming from someone you’d call a SJW or someone whose politics align with Correia. All I want is to make my Hugo nominations as an individual and have them not completely swamped by people running slates. Like hundreds of other Hugo voters acting in good faith, I had no chance to see one… Read more »
Ember11
Guest

I have to wonder… how do you feel about bloc voting for under-represented minorities in general?

Or perhaps, this situation is different?

Geodkyt
Guest

Frankly, Rcade, if you didn’t agree with Scalzi, et. al., you never DID have a chance of getting your choices nominated.

But you didn’t “No Award” every work from Scalzi’s lists in previous years, did you?

rcade
Guest
Show me where John Scalzi posted a list of nominees and urged people to vote for them as a bloc. He didn’t do that. There has never been a public bloc campaign like the one the two Puppies slates have undertaken, nor has there been anything that successfully put an entire slate all over the ballot to the exclusion of anyone other people’s nominees. I’ve voted as an individual and seen some of my nominations make the ballot in past years, and I never took recommendations from Scalzi. What Scalzi does is tout his own Hugo-eligible work on his blog… Read more »
rcade
Guest
Obviously the bloc voters didn’t vote their own individual tastes — at least not with much variance — or we wouldn’t be having this conversation. There’s no way the Puppies slates fill the entire ballot without a bunch of straight party-line voting. If your bloc just voted together because they liked the same works, I’m not seeing many comments that reflect it. It seems like everybody just wants to talk about how they stuck it to the social justice warriors. I don’t care about that stuff where SF/F is concerned. If I want to argue about politics I focus on… Read more »
Geodkyt
Guest

Mathematical analysis, by a fairly disinterested party who has been cranking out fairly accurate predictions and analysis of such awards voting says you’re simply wrong.

Analysis shows that Puppy voters only stuck to the Puppy slates 40%-50% of the time.

That’s not “bkoc voting a slate”. Hell, any political party that counted on slate voters that did that poorly would be firing the campaign managers.

Math is hard.

James May
Guest
What’ politicization? Listen, everyone can say all they want about what’s in the stories but the truth is that without the massive wave of anti-white, anti-male and anti-heterosexual remarks this never would’ve happened. That’s the single binding factor that got all these folks on the same page. Or rather, they were thrown onto the same page merely by existing. That massive wave of bigoted remarks continues even right now. I am more than happy the morons throwing stuff around about “white privilege” are authors who got pushed off this year’s ballot. They will also be pushed off of next year’s.… Read more »
Tim H
Guest

“SJW” is just a relatively new label a certain group of people uses for anyone and everyone who doesn’t toe their line. It doesn’t have any functional meaning beyond “someone saying something I don’t want to hear”.

Feather Blade
Guest
“SJW” stands for “Social Justice Warrior”. The term refers specifically to those people for whom “social justice” is the highest good in the world and who aim to accomplish “social justice” by means of slander, defamation, and incitement to violence against those whom the “Social Justice Warriors” deem either members of a privileged class, race or sex (sorry, gender) or insufficiently committed to the cause of “social justice”. This slander, defamation and incitement is usually accomplished by blogging or tweeting passive-aggressive comments and outright insults with neither the provision of evidence nor any other attempt at substantiation by the SJW.… Read more »
Geodkyt
Guest

No, actually, “Social Justice Warriors” is a term they started using to describe themselves. The ACLU even used it in an article several years before I ever heard it used by conservatives.

Sorry, but your narrative is sadly missing factual truth.

Jim in Alaska
Guest
I must admit, rcade, I’m not a fan, just an avid sf&f reader for well over 50 years, None the less I’m delighted with this whole sad puppies thing, through it Larry, et al, have introduced me to a lot of great writers and reads. Your ‘No Award’ stance seems, sorry to say, rather elitist and silly. Because you don’t like those who proposed the slate, you plan to refuse crediting an author/book/etc., even though they deserve credit? This sounds so much like the thoughtless action of a true SJW (sorry I’m calling it as I see it), -the type… Read more »
Someone Else
Guest

Funnily enough, I distrust you not because of any politics or social justice reasons, but because you lied. You’ve said that you’d asked all the authors on your slate if they were okay with being associated with SP, but you didn’t. Several of the authors have made that clear.

So, while maybe you aren’t pushing any agenda I can’t and won’t trust anything you say in that regard. If you have no agenda, you had no reason to lie about that.

James May
Guest

I agree with LC. The fact they even needed to be contacted shows an inquisition is in play. Does anyone need to pre-contact N.K. Jemisin or Saladin Ahmed. If those Twitter feeds were the world I’d think white people were hunter-killer teams.

Kristophr
Guest

What do you mean we don’t have a hunter-killer team? What kind of International hate organization is this?

Shadowdancer
Guest

Well, they’re sjw seals, so natcherally we have hunter-killer teams, except it’s only metaphorical. Also tetsubos. We established that the last time there was a flood of trolls over here.

Don’t forget the tetsubos.

Geodkyt
Guest

Tetsubos make the meat tender…

T.L. Knighton
Guest

Wow. What a special word you live in. It must be nice to be able to label every goof up as a lie.

Here’s the thing. I was being considered for the Sad Puppies slate, and I got spoken to before I was even on the slate (and I wasn’t, alas). I have every reason to believe that the attempt was made, because I saw evidence of it myself.

But you go on believing that a mistake is a lie. I sincerely hope you get to experience the sensation soon enough.

Geodkyt
Guest

Wait? So everyone is supposed to ask every author’s permission before saying, “I like these stories, and I think you will, too. Go buy them, read them, and decide for yourself…”

Shit, I’d better go edit my Facebook “likes” page, since I already know Ouija boards are fake…

Kristophr
Guest

There already is a permission process. The authors are asked if they accept the nomination.

Apparently this special snowflake is worried we might be triggering authors.

The only triggering here is being done by the SJW witch-hunters to author careers.

Porkopolitan
Guest

Damn skippy! I mean, affirmative consent, right? (“Can I linger over this next verb? Please?”). (/sarc)

keranih
Guest

*spits coffee*

You, sirah, owe me a new monitor.

Reziac
Guest

If YOU nominated someone, would YOU feel obligated to inform them? Maybe, but no one else does. That SP did so (however imperfectly) was a courtesy they dreamed up, not a requirement of the process.

And I don’t count honest mistakes as “lies”, especially when the perp has already owned up to their mistake.

Someone Else
Guest

With something this politically charged with the fandom and internet as it is? Hell yes. Causing problems for someone is something I try and avoid to the point where things actually become detrimental to myself.

Patrick Chester
Guest

So the actions of SJWs causing problems is somehow Brad’s fault?

What an… interesting world you live in.

Rob Crawford
Guest

It’s the same mindset that gave us “she dressed provocatively, she knew what to expect”.

Shadowdancer
Guest
Yeah. Fan of (insert author here): “I love this person’s books so much I will nominate them for a Hugo Award. I’ll blog about it.” Friends of the fan: “Hey, let’s make a list of awesome books that qualify this year and we think deserve a Hugo. Raise awareness, because I didn’t know you could vote for the Hugos.” Fan: “Sure! Nobody has to vote for it, this is just the list of the ones we like.” Some of the friends: I like some of the ones on that list but I’ll nominate a few others that aren’t on it.… Read more »
Taarkoth
Guest

One of the problems with modern discourse is the tendency to equivocate responsibility with blame. They are not one and the same.

Yes, Messrs. Correia and Torgerson and the rest of the people involved with SP3 are partly responsible for the SJW attack swarms going after the SP nominees. They are not, however, AT FAULT for the antics of the morlocks.

Torgerson et al. acknowledged that responsibility by attempting to contact everyone they nominated, something they didn’t have to do. That they failed was simple human error, not maliciousness (that trait lies entirely with the morlocks doing the attacking).

Someone Else
Guest
Brad telling them that the authors agreed to be on the list is the reason the authors are being attacked so, yes, he bears some responsibility for it. He didn’t have to say they’d all agreed, and he obviously has low opinions of SJWs and has been on the internet for more than ten minutes. Saying he didn’t expect the authors to be harassed just doesn’t cut it. Since other people seem to want to think I’m a rape apologist or excuse domestic abuse, here’s another analogy: It’s not the fault of the victim that they were raped, ever. However,… Read more »
Eamon J. Cole
Guest

No. Quite simply no.

Quite with the asinine analogies.

Creators were chosen because their creations were appreciated. Full stop.

Bullies are attacking them because they’re petty human beings.

You’re here, castigating the people who appreciated the creations for daring to voice their opinion.

Care to illustrate where you’re anywhere else standing up to the bullies for their petty filth?

J. C. Salomon
Guest

Oh, this is great:
• Brad says he got agreement → he left them open for attack; but
• Brad doesn’t say that → he gets attacked for this omission.

Go commit some anatomically-improbable obscene acts elsewhere.

SDN
Guest

No, the only liar here is Someone else and his crew. They are using the exact logic of a wife beater: “If you took better care of the kids, I wouldn’t have to hit them and you.”

Shadowdancer
Guest

Yep, the justifications of the habitual abusers, the muggers, and stalkers.

Stalker: “Tell you what, if she takes down the sticky (that documents all my abuses and warns other people about me) I’ll leave all of right-wing SF alone. Oh, she didn’t, it’s her fault then that I’m harassing everyone. It’s all on her now.”

I’m very, very familiar with the ‘argument.’

I love how they blame the victim. DARVO tactics at it’s finest.

Someone Else
Guest

I like how I’m part of a crew just because I dare to criticise someone. Isn’t that what you people say the SJWs do?

Retro Rockets
Guest

Someone Else

Please examine the articles listed.
https://archive.today/X2HPi
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/booknews/11517920/Hugo-Award-nominations-spark-row-over-diversity-in-sci-fi.html

After that try and ignoring your personal feelings toward the sad puppies crowd and answer the following questions.

Specificly:
Are the articles factually correct or not?
Are you concerned about any lies in the articles or are there any lies?
Did the articles present multiple sides of the issues as befitting journalstic standards or not?
Is the the type of discussion or conversion you want to see in the media or not?

Please explain why you think what you think. Also what are you going to do about it.

Patrick Chester
Guest

No, that’s you trying a lame “tu quoque” fallacy… and failing.

Brad R. Torgersen
Guest
I take full responsibility for anyone on the slate who got missed. I was juggling hundreds of e-mails and FB messages over a very short span of time. So far, only two people specifically asked to be removed, and they were removed. We did all of this with as much communication and transparency as could be managed. And some balls got dropped. However, I think this is one of the silliest red herrings in the entire fracas. Since when does anyone ask “permission” to list an author or an editor on a suggestion list? Simple: when everyone knows that the… Read more »
Shadowdancer
Guest

SJWs: Did they ask? I need to know if it’s okay for me to go after this guy. I need to know if I can start slandering this author. I NEED TO KNOW IF THEY SAID YES TO THESE PEOPLE I HAAAAAAAAAAATE!!!!! THEY AREN’T ALLOWED TO LIKE THE THINGS I LIKE MORE THAN I DO!!!!!!!

*shakes head*

James May
Guest

In other words the way SJWs criticize you is by admitting they’re an inquisition.

How many RPM’s is Orwell up to now?

Bibliotheca Servare
Guest

“How many RPM’s (R’sPM…because I must…correct…teh grammorz!) is Orwell up to now?”

You, sir, are a prince among men. I fear I may have broken something, laughing as enthusiastically as I did…oh boy… Best. Orwell reference. Ever! Oh…I need to sit down…

Shadowdancer
Guest

Well, if I can honestly blame you for something, Larry, it’s letting a lot of us readers who weren’t aware that we could nominate and vote for the Hugos!

So, yeah, that’s your bad. Totally all your fault. At least where I’m concerned.

And now I continue to stare with teary eyes at the screenplays for movies, because I can’t choose, they were all awesome!

(cue Lego Movie themesong)

Book
Guest

EXACTLY. Three yeas ago I didn’t even know I COULD vote in the Hugos. I thought the winners were decided by committee- and the results seemed to reflect that. (which is why I never paid attention to who won.)

And on Twitter- this is the conversation I’m having most often with people who are new to SP.

Geodkyt
Guest
Yup. I’ve been a die hard fan since, well, forever. I GAVE up on using a Hugo Award as a sign of quality about 25 years ago, because while earlier Hugo winners were almost always entertaining, the inverse was true after that. An until Sad Puppies, ibthough there was some kind of “Hugo Committee” that made the awards, sort of like the Nobel Prizes and other major awards. “Bloc voting”? Well, no. I didn’t nominate this year (because, frankly, it was the shouts from the tiny clique that thinks it personally owns the Hugo’s as a fiefdom, and the people… Read more »
Geodkyt
Guest

Forgive the typoes. Typing via phone limits one’s ability to readily proof…

Expendable Henchman
Guest

Boy oh boy do I have some good news for you!

Not only did your $40 buy you a year’s shadenfreude, but it also includes e-book versions of most nominees. More than I was able to read last time, anyway.

I think they shoot for Mermorial Day to get them to you.

Shadowdancer
Guest
I didn’t nominate – didn’t have the money – but goddamn I would have when I found out that Jim Butcher’s Skin Game was eligible. See, I completely forgot about the Hugo noms this year, till SP3. I wouldn’t have nominated Lego Movie, nor Interstellar (I hadn’t watched it until two nights ago), or any of the movie nominations because I live in Australia and I wait for the DVD release over here. That came WAAAAAAAAAAAY too late for any of the ones that ended up being nominated for me to watch and go “I’ll suggest that for a nomination.”… Read more »
Lea
Guest

I’ll have to check and see if I caught the butcher story in dangerous women! I tend to pick up short story collections at the library because I’m not big on them, but I like to know what’s happening if they are characters from books I’m reading (like the dresden files).

I’ve read all of GRRM’s books, but they are long. I read the first three in a clump and had to take a break for a year or two before tackling the last two.

Shadowdancer
Guest
Lea; The Jim Butcher story in Dangerous Women was all sorts of AWESOME – and if I am not mistaken, it’s the first one. I’ll restrain myself on the excited squee because well, it’s full of dangerous women, and Harry’s not the main character this time. It was a fantastic look into the head of one of the other important characters. Also, Jim writes really good women, imho as a woman. It really showed in this story – well, at least to me. The GRRM story, I felt, was masterful writing; I greatly prefer his stuff when they’re short. I… Read more »
Lea
Guest

Ooh, that story is about Molly? I have to say, she has become one of my favorite things about the Dresden files in the last half of the series. I think Jim’s done a fantastic job with her.

When I finish the pratchett books I picked up at the library and the new jane yellowrock and the new annie bellet that I’m trying out, maybe I’ll check it out.

I also really liked Jim’s short story about Thomas. I think it was in an all dresden files short story compilation.

Jackson Carberry
Guest

And for a change the bundle won’t be filled with grey goo like If You Were A Dinosaur, which I did read and it was COMPLETE AND UTTER CRAP. That would have earned a no-award from me because it wasn’t sci-fi OR fantasy.)

I did read If You Were A Dinosaur, and honestly, it wasn’t that bad as many people make it out to be; the protagonist of the story just wants her boyfriend lying in bed critically injured to get back up and kick butt, is all. And she imagines him doing so as a dinosaur.

JIm Richardson
Guest

This, a thousand times this.

I’ve done cons, including worldcon in several locations, It wasn’t until SP1 that I realized the Hugos were fan driven.

For that alone, I’ll thank Larry et all, if for no other reason.

(OK, I loved the grimnoir series, and the MH series tickled me pink, but Larry did that for money, and I responded, the SP stuff, he did for free, and for that, I will thank him)

TomT
Guest

I know it’s great. The real great evil that Larry did here is let general fandom know that they could vote in the Hugo’s. I never knew how they were awarded before the Sad Puppies campaigns.

Chris Gerrib
Guest
Larry: I’m probably going to regret posting, but I’ll say it anyway. Here’s the problem with what y’all did. Three Body Problem isn’t on the ballot because you hadn’t had a chance to read it yet. One author, John C. Wright, has six Hugo nominations because his editor put him on a slate. It’s like if CBS figured out a way to get 15% of the Emmy voters (which is the approximate percentage of the Hugo ballots your slate controlled) to game the Emmys such that in any given category there were 4 CBS shows and one show from HBO.… Read more »
Steve
Guest

In other news: concern trolls are *concerned*? More on this story after the commercial break.

Kristophr
Guest

Taking a concern troll’s bad advice will still not get you a seat at the “cool kids” table.

All concern trolls have the same advice: “Shut up, hick, and we promise you will stop being hated by us”.

This is a lie, of course. They just want you to shut up.

Chris Scena
Guest

Refer to Brad Torgersen’s blog for a take down of this troll. I am too busy to pull back all the eloquent rebuttals of him over there.

Jared Anjewierden
Guest

Wait, wait.

So us not nominating something we didn’t read is a bad thing now?

Which is it?

I am actually sad it didn’t make the ballot. But I haven’t read it yet, so I didn’t nominate it.

I nominated five novels I have read and loved, two of which are on the final ballot.

Keep in mind – apparently everyone else thought Ancillary Sword and Goblin Emperor were more worthy than 3-Body too.

Chris Gerrib
Guest

No, both Larry and Vox said they’d have put it on the slate had they read it in time. Basically, a book got denied a Hugo nomination because of the reading patterns of two people.

Nathan
Guest
So, why didn’t you nominate it and turn out the vote? Why are we supposed to do your job for you? And why are you surprised that a group of people that you’ve shown you disagree with over the past four months have different tastes and different ideas of what is good and fun than yours? Are we now expected to have read all works published in a year now? Sorry, no one has time for that, and.my library and the local Barnes & Noble don’t carry Three Body Problem, Ancillary Sword, or the Goblin Emperor. But clearing the rather… Read more »
rcade
Guest

An individual nominating the works that he or she likes is never going to defeat a slate voting as a bloc.

This is true while Correia and his pals are running the only two blocs, and it will be more true when people with bigger megaphones are running bigger blocs.

SDN
Guest

Bigger microphones.

Given the discussions I’ve seen about “giving moderators power to ban anyone backed up by strong gatekeepers when anyone complains”, that means “the only microphones that haven’t had their cables cut.”

Were you born that dishonest, or did you go to special schools?

Jackson Carberry
Guest

Are we now expected to have read all works published in a year now? Sorry, no one has time for that,

That reminds me of what the people behind this animation blog/site were demanding happen at the Oscars .

Jared Anjewierden
Guest
You know, one of the things that I personally got out of all of the internet fighting the last few months was a realization that I don’t like how angry I get when arguing back and forth. It frays my temper far too much. My temper is quite monstrous, and I spent more than two decades forging a leash for it. Given that coworkers have expressed outright shock when I talk about my temper I’d like to think I succeeded into making my control a strength rather than a weakness. So I am trying really hard to focus on the… Read more »
The Phantom
Guest

Let it go, snake. He ain’t nuthin’.

Jared Anjewierden
Guest

I’m not sure the significance of snake, but I laughed. I needed that.
🙂

Back from Space
Guest

He’s not worth getting upset over, no more than a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum over having to share the playground with kids he doesn’t care about sucking up to.

And that’s all his screeds are: temper tantrums. It’s only worth your pity that a supposedly grown man is acting like a two-year-old,

Lea
Guest

I love Patricia Briggs but I didn’t think night Broken was all that good.

But I agree with the rest 😉

DaveP.
Guest

Nice Drake quote, Phantom.

Alan S.
Guest

There are a couple of Patricia Briggs older works that should have been in contention though.

Skip
Guest
I have a question, Chris. Where’s the information on the numbers, and who was next in line, coming from? As far as I know that information is not supposed to be released until after the final voting, after the awards ceremony. As for the reading habits of two people, well, Tor’s probably earned that one. My own assumption is that a book coming from Tor that’s not from an author I know I like, will probably not be to my liking, so personally I’d have waited for someone else to jump on the grenade and read it first, that I… Read more »
Geodkyt
Guest
Yup. Let’s see, looking at my primary bookshelves, how many Tor books do I have…? Let’s see, Niven, Flynn, Drake, Pournelle, Poul Anderson, Cook, one Heinlein, Burst, and one rather mediocre Weber (took the risk because I like David’s stuff usually). MOST of those are older works, or authors who signed on with Tor years before. Well outnumbered by Baen books (which run about equal with the pre-1990 books). But the last fifteen years or so? I *won’t* bother risking my money on an unknown author published by Tor, without a trusted recommendation, because they publish so much dreck. For… Read more »
Shadowdancer
Guest
No fuck you this is where you’re lying. It wasn’t the ‘reading patterns of two people’ that became the suggestion list / suggestion slate. People were invited to give suggestions. Brad made a list of the ones that got the most suggestion count. I was one of the ones who actively said “Yes” for Skin Game. I had NO opinions outside of Lego Movie for the movie list because I hadn’t watched any of ther other movies being suggested except for that one. The discussion was held across several blogs and I think the owners of the blogs that were… Read more »
SDN
Guest

“Are we supposed to yell ‘This is Sparta!’ now?”

Too late.

ratseal
Guest

quote: “you’ve got upwards of a thousand eligible voters who are really upset at you. That’s a big hill to climb.”

Reminded me of this scene from Inglorious Basterds (sic):

Col. Hans Landa: Are you mad? What have you done? I made a deal with your general for that man’s life!

Lt. Aldo Raine: Yeah, they made that deal, but they don’t give a fuck about him. They need you.

Col. Hans Landa: You’ll be shot for this!

Lt. Aldo Raine: Nah, I don’t think so. More like chewed out. That’s ok, I’ve been chewed out before.

SDN
Guest

” “you’ve got upwards of a thousand eligible voters who are really upset at you. That’s a big hill to climb.”

Their arrows! Will BLOT out the SUN!

Then we shall fight in the shade.

Alan S.
Guest
Typical. In this year’s voting, 1174 people voted in short stories, nominating 728 short stories. Where’s the whisper campaign in that? “Let’s all nominate for How to Serve Man, because it is awesome.” How many other short story nominations would that “whisper” campaign cause? All 1174 could nominate HtSM, and and those same 1174 have 4700 other slots to fill with short stories. Reaching 728 ‘others’ should be no problem. Or a mere 70 could nominate HtSM, and 728 other short stories happen to fill in slots. In other words, as usual, “The statistics presented don’t have any bearing on… Read more »
keranih
Guest
“In this year’s voting, 1174 people voted in short stories, nominating 728 short stories. Where’s the whisper campaign in that? The only campaign was the one involving between 230 and 151 people voting a straight Sad Puppies ticket. The other 944 people spread their whispers out among 723 titles.” Dude. How on earth do you know this? I’m serious, has it been released that as many as 151 people voted “straight” SP? Linky links, por favor. I think it’s actually pretty likely that most people who were aware of SP voted for a couple-three of SP “slate” noms in each… Read more »
Chris Gerrib
Guest

I downloaded the slides from the Ustream presentation. They gave a breakdown of number of stories listed, ballots cast, and high and low vote counts for the finalists. I then compared them to the 2014 results.

Jared Anjewierden
Guest

So your guess is educated rather than pulled from some piece of your anatomy. Still a guess.

Nathan
Guest

If your analysis is similar to what you demonstrated in that statistics thread on Brad’s, I’m going to have to ask for an independent auditor. Or at least some form of peer review.

Differently
Guest

https://chaoshorizon.wordpress.com/ has a post estimating number of puppies. There could have been up to 150 block voters for the big categories. Or, what probably happened was 300 people agreeing with maybe half the slate.
Chaos Horizon does an excellent job with minimally biased Hugo information.

Geodkyt
Guest

And that matches the anecdotal information as well. No more than 50% agreement with the slate by the supposed “bloc voters”.

Hmmm… Almost like they didn’t vote as a bloc…

keranih
Guest

@differently – good link. I am impressed with what CH is doing – even if I take issue with limiting the math to “high school” stuff.

His list of factors for the Nebula, f’zample, are very telling, considering how the Locus list left out Baen entirely.

Differently
Guest

@keranih
Chaos Horizon is amazing. Sad Puppies came along and was like “the Hugos are biased against conservative authors”. Lots of people said “no it isn’t! the Hugos don’t have biases!”
Then Chaos Horizon came along and suddenly we have data and studies that show the Hugos are biased against everything from novels that weren’t published between May and October to YA SFF.
The blog/author should really get a Hugo nomination, sometime. Considering all the controversies, its amazing someone stepped in and started providing unbiased data.

Joe Sherry
Guest

I had both Chaos Horizon and Brandon on my ballot. He’s doing excellent and original work. Worth recognizing.

Differently
Guest

I assume you’re referring to Sanderson. Man is ridiculously good. I guess that’s what happens when he had enough time to write seven novels before Tor realized the one he submitted to them (Sanderson’s sixth) was worth publishing.
That being said, I think Tor gets a worse rap on this blog than they deserve. You could make a pretty good hugo shortlist with just Tor published fiction.

Differently
Guest

Whoops, never mind. Brandon is the first name of the guy who runs Chaos Horizon. My bad. I always think of him as Dr. Kempner.

Joe Sherry
Guest

Yeah, Kempner from Chaos Horizon. But I’m a fan of Sanderson. His stuff is good.

Differently
Guest

@ Correia
Fair enough. Frankly, I’d rather focus on the positive aspects of Tor.com. Authors GET PAID a lot for short fiction on that website. I’ve looked at their rates.
I’m also interested in seeing how Tor.com the Imprint ends up working out. It seems like a cool idea.
And, as a fan, I do love their extensive previews of upcoming work.

Geodkyt
Guest

Oh, you mean like Baen was doing in the 1990s?

The first time I read A Civil Campaign was a chapter at a time, as Baen posted Bujold’s submissions BEFORE editing.

James May
Guest

Speaking of cesspools…

Tor publishes Veronica Schanoes…

“The US is a cesspool of white supremacy.” – Veronica Schanoes

Oh, dear. Again?

James May
Guest

I’ve already done such an analysis. Apparently we wish a return to the antebellum South.

T.L. Knighton
Guest

Maths be hard as it is, but yours make about as much sense as making out with a rock.

S1AL
Guest

I’m pretty certain we can turn that into a running joke about pretty much everything he says…

keranih
Guest
Okay, there is a copy of that slide posted here: http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/04/04/2014-hugo-nominations/ I took those and did some internal comparisons (just 2015), and found that the range of entries to ballots, the range of high to low votes, and comparing those two ratios to the number of SP/RP/and other noms was all the hell over the place. Ranges *seem* most strongly related to the number of available entries (ie, more shorts than novels) than anything else. I need actual vote totals to do a better examination, and I’m not going up against LC on the strength of an excel spreadsheet, but… Read more »
Geodkyt
Guest

I’m not an auditor (retired or otherwise), but I have been doing failure analysis (starting with analyizong correlations in production testing with failures, to look for ways to set up testing more efficiently for total production ROI savings) for quite a while.

To paraphrase the great philosopher I. Montoya:

Your numbers do not mean what you think they mean.

S1AL
Guest
Please note that Gerrib is constitutionally incapable of admitting when he is wrong, so debunking him mostly involves laughing at absurdities. Go ahead, ask him if he’s willing to retract his statement that there were “no black people” in pirate movies before Pirates of the Caribbean. And his separate statement that there were no more than 2 black people in that movie. Because SJW’s only want to correct the “whitewashing” of history. Seriously. Someone ask him. But to his supposed points: 1) 2 novels NOT on the SP3 list made it onto the Hugo slate. If 3BP is *that* good,… Read more »
Christopher M. Chupik
Guest
Christopher M. Chupik