(cache) 2015 Hugo Winners : Fantasy

Date	AMA Host
Jul 9	Django Wexler
Jul 14	Tim Gerard Reynolds
Jul 15	Rebecca Levene
Jul 16	Lucy A. Snyder
Jul 22	Travis Heermann
Jul 23	Carrie Patel
Jul 27	Tracy Barnett
Jul 28	Tim Marquitz
Jul 29	Karen Miller
Jul 30	Angel McCoy
Aug 6	Max Gladstone
Aug 11	ML Brennan
Aug 12	Tom Doyle
Aug 18	Ari Marmell
Aug 20	Darrell Drake
Aug 21-31	Pixel Project Authors
Aug 21	Colleen Gleason
Aug 22	Jonathan Maberry
Aug 23	Kimberly Derting
Aug 24	Rick Yancey
Aug 25	Becky Chambers
Aug 27	Zombies Need Brains
Aug 29	Jim C Hines
Aug 30	Tad Williams
Aug 31	Scott Sigler
Sep 1	Paul S Kemp
Sep 3	Fran Wilde
Sep 8	Aliette de Bodard
Sep 10	Seth Dickinson
Sep 15	Bradley P Beaulieu
Sep 22	Tamora Pierce
Sep 29	S Andrew Swann
Oct 1	Ilana C Myer
Oct 6	Ben McSweeney
Oct 7	Kameron Hurley
Oct 8	Drew Karpyshyn
Oct 20	Janny Wurts
Oct 29	Jason Denzel
Nov 3	Graham Austin-King

[–]undo-undo-undo 44ポイント45ポイント46ポイント 6時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] 17ポイント18ポイント19ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]KristaDBallAMA Author Krista D. Ball 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]shadowsong42 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 20ポイント21ポイント22ポイント 6時間前 (19子コメント)

[–]devotedpupa 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 6時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 6時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]devotedpupa 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]7Pedazos 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 6時間前 (9子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 6時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]jeremyteg 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 5時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 5時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]relentlessreadingWorldbuilders 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]jeremyteg 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]devotedpupa 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 5時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]jeremyteg 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]eean 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]MattieShoes 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]ydeliane 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 55分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 6時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Lanodantheon 15ポイント16ポイント17ポイント 5時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]photonlongsword 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 6時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]csuzw 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]EltaninAntenna 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 43分前 (0子コメント)

[–]photonlongsword 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]benpeek 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Millennium_Dodo 21ポイント22ポイント23ポイント 6時間前 (25子コメント)

Not gonna lie, I enjoyed seeing the puppies get shut out so completely, hopefully this sends a clear message and the same thing doesn't happen again next year. Although it's sad to see some deserving people get caught in the crossfire, so to speak. Hopefully some of the new people who voted this year will continue participating, ideally nominating and voting for the works they consider the best, instead of someone dictating their choices to them. At least that way something good would come out of all the drama this year.

Three Body Problem and Orphan Black were surprises, I expected Dr. Who or perhaps GoT to win and either Ancillary Sword or Goblin Emperor to take home Best Novel. I was rooting for Saga, Rat Queens or Sex Criminals to take the graphic story award, but I guess I should finally check out Ms. Marvel. Congratulations to all the winners!

Now I'm off to make Robert Silverberg singing Hare Krishna my new ringtone.

[–]unconundrum[S] 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 6時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Millennium_Dodo 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 6時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]eean 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]photonlongsword 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 1時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Millennium_Dodo 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 35分前 (1子コメント)

[–]photonlongsword 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 17分前 (0子コメント)

[–]devotedpupa 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 6時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Millennium_Dodo 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 6時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]UnsealedMTG 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Col_Volkov 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]urection スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 4時間前 (10子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 4時間前 (8子コメント)

[–]urection -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]Col_Volkov スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント 3時間前 (5子コメント)

How? No award as at best a reaction to the puppies actions. The voters of worldcon just were not willing to put up with campaigning on the level the puppies did.

Which is why they campaigned on a greater level than the puppies did. Thereby horrendously clearly illustrating that:

(a) campaigning clearly exists, always existed, and damages the awards (this year, to the point of them not being given out),

(b) some authors are allowed to campaign, others are not,

(c) campaigning will happen at a worse level next year.

This was awful. Puppies are hard to respect, sure - but the issue they pointed to was illustrated in spades. The award system needs to change, and the possibility for campaigning has to be removed. As of right now, it's present, and it's the reason for plenty of talented nominees getting shut out.

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (4子コメント)

There was not really anything in the way of campaigning for no award. The closest thing I could see was that puppy free list, which just removed sad puppy nominations from the ballot list.

It was more just an idea floated around by various people and in various blogs.

The closest thing to campaigning that's allowed is the Dr who fandom. But the difference with the dr who fandom is they make up a majority of numbers every year at nomination time. And their campaigning is more fans talking about what episodes they like at Hugo time. That and getting behind fans who make dr who related works - like the chicks dig time lords thingy.

Other than that its at most authors talking about what they like each year at award time or reminding fans about what they wrote in a year. Its gossip and talk more than an organised campaign like the puppies were.

As for next year, who knows. The sad puppies are dropping the whole full slate thing. The rabbids are seeming just going to campaign for no award. Will there be a 'happy kitten' campaign, possibly. I think given the fact that the puppies lost this year it will be unlikely. But if it happens I expect it to suffer a similar fate to the sads.

As for changes, they are in the work. Tomorrow at the business meeting there is a proposal to change how nominations will work. If it passes it limits the power any campaign can have to control the Hugos. It will make the nominations more a run off type system. It will however take a few years to come into effect, if passed.

[–]Col_Volkov -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Col_Volkov -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

To me campaigning requires some level of organisation. It needs more than just a lot of people sharing the same view. For example, sad puppies 3 that was pushed and organised by multiple authors (Correia, Torgersen, Hoyt, ect).

Which is exactly how the anti-puppies campaign worked: multiple authors coordinating their fans, via their blogs, to vote No Award. It was highly organized, in exactly the same way puppies campaign was.

A bunch of people all coming to the same conclusion, that the guys who are shouting about how shit the Hugos did the wrong thing, is not as organized enough to be a campaign.

Of course it's organized enough to be a campaign. Pushing fans toward a conclusion, which is exactly what was done, IS campaigning. The individual authors may have arrived to the conclusion independently (and even that's questionable, as one can easily argue - although not prove - that GRRM's authority and history in the field dragged other authors, who otherwise would have remained neutral and would not have expressed a public position, into it), but their fans sure as hell followed their shepherds. Which is the definition of campaigning.

I am actually OK with public votes... but not when authors express public positions on the subject. As it stood, campaigning was a routine component of Hugo, and an important author with a lot of fans saying, on their blog, "Vote for X", DID constitute campaigning... then, when puppies came and did it better, the same authors that have been doing it for years cried foul.

And that's bullshit. If there is a public vote, campaigning is bound to happen. So there shouldn't be a public component to it - or, what we observed, is a logical conclusion.

[–]Hypercles 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

Which is exactly how the anti-puppies campaign worked: multiple authors coordinating their fans, via their blogs, to vote No Award. It was highly organized, in exactly the same way puppies campaign was.

Which authors? I know there is the puppy free slate website that has been floating around. And I think an editor associated with Tor (Maybe TNH or PHN) said no award was not a dumb idea. But the big authors who have weighed in on the puppy drama (Flint, Martin and Scalzi) have not been supporting the no award everything.

Martin, was not pushing no award. If you had read any of his blogs on this, you would know he has been vocally against no awarding everything.

But the puppies did something different to what was normally done. Lets say I agree with you, that something like Scalzi's pimpage posts are campaigning. Previous campaigns have a) never been to the same scale as the sad puppies and b) never been as successful.

I think if Scalzi had in the past come out with a 'recommendation list' that comprised of the majority of categories and never discussed the nominated work. And then that list became the Hugo ballot, the outrage would have been the same and it would have been no awarded.

There is a difference to an author talking up what they like occasionally, and campaigning. I mean for example here's Martins recommendations for the 2013 Hugos.

http://grrm.livejournal.com/262170.html

Leviathan Wakes, The Wise Man Fears and 11/22/63 make up his recommendations.

http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/2013-hugo-awards/

Not one of those stories made it to the Hugos that year. Despite Martin being the biggest author in the industry at the moment. Him recommending something does not have that much of an impact on things.

Sure campaign will happen. But the voting electorate can also take a stand against that campaigning when it happens. As we saw this year.

[–]Indenturedsavant 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 50分前 (0子コメント)

[–]Ketomatic 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 6時間前* (12子コメント)

[–]relentlessreadingWorldbuilders 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]urection スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10ポイント-9ポイント-8ポイント 4時間前 (10子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 4時間前 (9子コメント)

[+]urection スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10ポイント-9ポイント-8ポイント 4時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 3時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Bergmaniac 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]urection スコアが基準値未満のコメント-14ポイント-13ポイント-12ポイント 3時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[+]urection スコアが基準値未満のコメント-15ポイント-14ポイント-13ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Celestaria -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Lanodantheon 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 6時間前 (47子コメント)

[–]SecondaryHammerSmith 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 6時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Lanodantheon 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 5時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]SecondaryHammerSmith -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 5時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 5時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]eean 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]mallamp_ 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 1時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]EltaninAntenna 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 22分前 (0子コメント)

[–]devotedpupa 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 6時間前 (9子コメント)

[–]Lanodantheon 13ポイント14ポイント15ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

It won't. The puppies declared victory under all conditions months ago.

If the no award swept the ballet, they win. If their picks win, they win.

Anything in between is still a win to them or so I have read and personally hypothesize.

The Puppies will continue to cry foul and do the same crap until they just do the American thing and....make their own award for goodness sake. That is their best option truth-be-told. They could call it the "Puppy Award." or "Trufan supercoolawesomeness Award" I don't care. I'd probably vote on it too.

Note: I also liked Skin Game...but it wasn't Award worthy. It didn't break any new ground. It didn't take chances. It was not better than anything else on the market. It was a "regularly scheduled episode of The Dresden Files." Comparatively speaking it was just an okay episode of the Dresden Files. Which I will still happily read and play the RPG of same like I have played for for the past 5 years.

In fact, I'll even go as far as to say that Skin Game was a let down for this Dresden fan. Spoilers: Spoiler

I seriously doubt Jim was like some behind-the-scenes Puppy mastermind, but even if he was I'd probably still read his books because he's built up a lot of Fan Good Will.

Dresden won't win a Hugo until the Apocalyptic Trilogy.

...or a "Musical Episode" complete with sheet music. I'd vote for that one.

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 4時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]eean 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (5子コメント)

I mean I kinda agree. I think it was cool of Kloss to turn down his nomination. But you can't really blame someone for not wanting to turn down a nomination for an award, particularly a Hugo.

Especially when they stayed out of the drama. I mean I have gone out and read Kloss lines of departure (and rather enjoyed it) because of what he did. But at the same time the only authors I will actively avoid after this puppy drama, are those who got involved in the drama.

I don't think this is a great loss as authors like Wright are not that great, if his short fiction is anything to go by. Nor is it that big of a loss to the puppy authors as I somehow don't think that I am their target audience.

And Antonelli is the only one I think will have issue finding people to publish his stories in the future. And that all comes down to him publishing a email (with contact ingo) by a publisher rejecting a work of his, after he sent a letter to the police about David Gerrold being 'violently insane'. It doesn't help him either that it all ended up with said publisher receiving death threats over their decision.

[–]eean 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]eean 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Temptime19 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 46分前 (0子コメント)

[–]bazhip 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 6時間前 (29子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 6時間前 (4子コメント)

There were two sorta-overlapping slates run this year. Slates aren't technically against the rules, but no one's really done them before. Slate-voting is getting a number of people to all vote the exact same way.

One of these called itself the Sad Puppies, and it suggested that 'fun' science fiction isn't allowed anymore, only academic, elitist, and progressive science fiction. (This is pretty easily disproved by looking at the recent Hugo wins, but whatever.)

The other puppy group were the rabid puppies, who are led by Vox Day, aka Theodore Beale, aka the only guy to get kicked out of the Science Fiction Writers of America for being extremely racist in their public feed.

Oddly enough, Brad Torgersen, one of the two Sad Puppy leaders, and Vox Day were constant commenters on John Scalzi's blog years ago, and now both hate him and blame basically everything on him.

[–]devotedpupa 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 5時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 4時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]relentlessreadingWorldbuilders 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]chonggo 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 3時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]chonggo 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]chonggo 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]GetMeOffReddit スコアが基準値未満のコメント-10ポイント-9ポイント-8ポイント 6時間前 (14子コメント)

A group of people think that the awards have been... rigged in a way. That only people who are of a certain political standing/opinion and are, in short, some form of minority or modern day "Victim" are winning the awards.

This assumption is that basically this competition is rigged and isn't actually an award for best work, but rather the award for best "insert social justice movement content/author politics" award.

So this group of people chose to get involved in the competition in the same way everyone else had previously been. They voted with their wallets and got several of their favorite books chosen. Some of these authors are hated among this subreddits crowd. Some are good, some aren't.

The backlash was phenomenal. People started accusing this group (The puppies) of trying to threaten women from getting published.

A lot of lies were spread and it made the hugos look very bad, not necessarily because a group of people worked together to nominate books that they liked but rather because of how much drama was caused by these actions.

I've seen several people threaten Butcher, for example, about what they would do to his "Cis sexist ass" if he accepted the award if he had won.

Even reading through these comments its clear that people weren't hoping that certain books would win based off of their own merits... but instead that they hoped that certain books would lose simply because of their personal political views and how much they hated the people that nominated those books in the first place.

That, to me, is depressing and shows what a mess this truly is.

Edit: Oh, and odds are that I will be downvoted for giving this shakedown of the events in this way. I'm not following the common trend on this subreddit where everyone and everything has to be following the exact same political agenda. So, as they say around here, bring on the downvotes, I guess.

[–]Ketomatic 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 6時間前* (9子コメント)

[+]GetMeOffReddit スコアが基準値未満のコメント-8ポイント-7ポイント-6ポイント 5時間前 (8子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 5時間前 (7子コメント)

[+]GetMeOffReddit スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 5時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]shhhhquiet 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]MaesterCat 11ポイント12ポイント13ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]flickering_truth 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 5時間前 (3子コメント)

[+]GetMeOffReddit スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント 5時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]flickering_truth 5ポイント6ポイント7ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]TheManWithNoHair 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]MaesterCat 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 5時間前 (3子コメント)

Something that I found interesting is that the "slate" manner probably took away from the possibilities of those nominees challenging the "No Award." It seems to me that it backfired in that it split all those possible votes, beyond even whatever hard feelings arose.

Just shows a bit of a difference between wanting a particular work to win, or ensuring "No Award" would win. If you just want to make a point about the voting, this works. But if you have a work that you think should win on its merits, it's best not to crowd the field. I'm thinking like how some people see Donald Trump, without winning the GOP nomination and running as an independent, would probably take enough votes away from the regular candidate so the Dems would win.

Just a thought I have about the tactics, not the motivations.

[–]Hypercles 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 5時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]MaesterCat 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]GetMeOffReddit 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 5時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]blalien -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]TheManWithNoHair 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 5時間前* (9子コメント)

Hugo has turned into such a shitshow and it's not just the puppies, but every single one of these little Hugo cliques that are all about turning things into a brawl rather than working with people. You guys are kidding yourselves if you think the Puppies aren't going to double down next year.

Maybe you can't talk with someone like Vox Day and his fandom. Everything I've seen from the Brad Torgerson and Larry Correia side of things however suggests that working/talking with them rather than going on the offensive might actually work out. I'm really fed up with staunch ideologues from all sides and I know I should just stop paying attention. To me, no awarding doesn't seem any more gracious than dominating the nomination slate, you are both keeping your declared 'enemies' from having any chance at an award.

[–]DjangoWexlerAMA Author Django Wexler 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 5時間前 (2子コメント)

I don't disagree that the Puppies are going to double down. The thing is, it's pretty clear that Vox's fandom is the core of the puppy thing -- going by the stats, they account for 200-250 votes, most of the 300 that is the puppy high water mark.

To me, the difference is that with the puppy nominations, a minority triumphed over a majority, whereas the No Award wins are the other way around. In the Novella category, for example, Puppy votes account for ~300 people out of ~1000 voting, yet they took all five slots on the ballot. In the final vote, OTOH, "No Award" got ~3500 of ~5400 votes, easily more than half the total. So while it may not be more gracious, the final No Award is more indicative of the will of the voters.

What really needs to happen is the nomination rules need to change. The final vote uses an instant runoff system, but the nomination is simple totals and vulnerable to manipulation.

[–]Hypercles 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]TheManWithNoHair 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]shhhhquiet 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]TheManWithNoHair -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 4時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (2子コメント)

But how do you define wider fandoms tastes? Should the Hugos become a who sold the most books this year award? If 50 shades has proven anything its that sales does not equal quality. Also worth noting that the best selling Scifi or fantasy book of last year was one of the books in the Divergent series. I forget exactly which one, but all three sold over a million copies each, far out selling anything else Scifi or fantasy.

If its about what people are talking about. Well then that all depends on community. For example if you look over at Goodreads and the number of reviews books get, then YA would swept the Hugos. Not even massively popular series like the Dresden files can compete with YA numbers.

And if it is just about community, then the community that is worldcon are the only people who matter. And the Hugo nominees and winners reflect what worldcon likes.

[–]TheManWithNoHair 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 3時間前 (0子コメント)

If Vox Day organises a campaign to no award. Which is what he is currently doing, because he thinks the only solution to things now is to burn down the Hugos. I am sure people will be pissed.

If he can actually do it because he has the numbers, well people will be pissed but he would be a majority.

Its not just that people could not vote for things that they wanted to, like a normal year. The no awarding was meant as sending a message that worldcon wont tolerate campaigns for the Hugos. As if that becomes an accepted and normal things the Hugos will change for the worse. Most people who I have seen say they no awarded all slate nominees, have said they would have done the same no matter who organised the slate.

Any outcomes was going to be a victory condition for them. No award means they were right all along, if they won awards it proved that what they said about the Hugos going to shit fiction was true and they have superior tastes. Theres no way tonight could have gone down with out the puppies getting more ammunition.

I mean I do agree personally with what you say about no award. I share Martins view on it, that it was not the best option. Which is why I personally only no awarded when I felt works did not deserve to win.

[–]shhhhquiet 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Daemon_Targaryen 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 6時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]unconundrum[S] 12ポイント13ポイント14ポイント 6時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Jeakel 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]fiif 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Hypercles 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (1子コメント)

A group of mostly conservative authors, felt that the Hugo awards had become an award given out to books with the right message or for affirmative action reasons. They believe this has been the case going back ten, twenty years. Despite two of the authors involved Correia (who started it) and Torgersen (who ran it this year) getting nominations for the Hugo (and campbell award).

They in a move to counter this 'right message clique' created a slate and campaigned to get all the works on it nominated for the Hugo. They succeed.

This upset people who did not see an issue with the Hugos (those who run the award, nominated for it and vote for it) and upset people who did not like the campaigning for the award.

In the end there attempt to dictate who won the award failed. With worldcon telling everyone that it will not support organised campaigning for the award.

[–]fiif 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 2時間前 (0子コメント)

Fantasy

About

Rules

Connect

Fantasy Recommendations

AMA Schedule

調停者