Most reports indicate that the *Puppies got sufficient numbers to cheat by enlisting gamergaters.

Where is the proof? I've been watching GG activity and I have not seen this. Also, cheat? What rule did the puppies cheat on? I get that doing things at as a group goes against the spirit, but they at least said they did it not to win but to expose it as being possible as they believed others were already doing it. If they wanted to win why wouldn't they have done it all covertly?

As for involvement from the gamergaters, I'm not really quaking in my boots.

It costs $50 to become involved enough

GG are largely "hyper consumers" who spend money on what they like and are happy to vote with their wallets to buy what they like or support what they see as good causes. There are tens of thousands of them on kia alone, with many more elsewhere. Give them enough reason and they will part with the money to get involved.

and by 2017 the rules will have been changed to prevent brigading the votes at which point the *Puppies/gamergaters can go piss up a rope.

I looked at the changes they intend to make and it does not look like it will actually prevent large enough groups of coordinated people from getting who they want nominated. It's reactionary to current behavior only. I do think the changes are good, and they will make it more difficult for any group, any influencer to be able to get people to vote a certain way.

But, again, reports I've seen indicate that GG, always eager to find a new thing to brigade

Even if they do get involved, they should want to vote on merit and not politics. They are enthusiast who value quality. They refuse to boycott as a group creators based on their politics, and want products to stand on their own. There are many scifi fans in GG. Most scifi fans at large have never gotten involved with the Hugos. The Hugos are supposed to be a fan aware. Surely more fans voting no matter who they are would be a victory.

I suppose they were disappointed there was no doxxing to be done, but hey brigading is almost as good, right?

Doxing is one x not two.

Since GG is known mostly for lying, doxxing, and brigading, I'm afraid I can't take your huffy denial seriously.

GG is known for things because so many people and media outlets have been lazy at repeating a narrative of lies about GG. But the attacks against GG have largely backfired as GG has grown so big in part because of the lies told about them. People wanted to see for themselves, only to see that they are largely reasonable, thoughtful people who care about issues that matter for consumers. They are used to being slandered and libeled by people who are willing to be dishonest to push for ideological purity. It's expected at this point. I have been called "one of the worst harassers" by people who lazily believed what others said just because I followed certain people on twitter. Not for anything I did to anyone, but because I followed a diverse set of people and some of the people that I followed certain ideologues deemed me guilty by association. I'm sick of it. I am sick of the ideologues. GG is huge, diverse, and not what you are saying it is, they are not doing what you say they are doing. People in GG have been victims of everything GG has been accused of. People against GG even say things like "there are no bad tactics, only bad targets".

And yes, the nominating process was known to be exploitable, previously expectations that people wouldn't act like raging assholes and fuck the system worked

It was alleged that some groups and influencers were already exploiting the system but doing it less obviously. Fixing the system is better than letting it be exploited again and again by people doing bad things below the surface. It took people doing it completely publicly for people to get motivated to try to fix it.

But, if nothing else, the *Puppies were proven quite wrong.

GRRM himself said the puppies were proved right.

After all, if there had been an Evil Liberal Conspiracy working to keep conservative fiction out, it would have locked out their slate.

I identify with liberal politics. I support a lot of social justice concepts. But I also care about nuance and the facts. Extremists on the left and the right dislike me because I refuse to treat politics like supporting sports teams and instead want to look at individual issues on their own.

As I understand the way things have been going, it was less about pushing conservatives out, and more about people and companies with influence using their influence to get who they wanted to win, which naturally pushed out others who were not in the in group of those with the influence, in part what the puppies alleged, and also what they were able to do with the nominations to illustrate it being able to be done. It's alleged that in the past the same kind of behavior was already happening without the puppies doing it. The puppies didn't want to win, but to show that it was being done by proving they could do it.

But the *Puppies/GG love sticking their right wing culture war shit where it isn't welcome, so now we're stuck with it.

It's anti-authoritarian culture, pro creative freedom, pro facts, anti censorship, pro merit, pro free market culture. GG is largely left leaning liberals and moderates! Saying they are right wing is a way for people who knee jerk hate conservatives to dismiss those they disagree with. Extremists on the left call anyone not as extreme as they are as being right wing.

Here's a hint: if you have to cheat to get your books nominated for an award, it probably means your books suck.

I have seen people admit to voting purely for political and ideological reasons. They say they only vote for people whose politics they find tasteful.

I dislike this mess too. I'm saddened by it.