Some thoughts before the Hugo Awards

[TheMysteriousGX]

Oh that's easy. The block is "people who don't agree with the Sad Puppies premise."

So the Sad Puppies exist as a voting block in opposition to another voting block which arose as an opposition to the Sad Puppies?

I don't think you see the temporal paradox you've just implied here. Either that or like many others here you've mixed up the Sad and Rabbit Puppies. I'd lean towards the later since it's the one that's actually possible.

Man, "everybody else" is not a "block". It's just everybody else.

Look, I had sympathy for the Sad Puppers not being the mainstream audience anymore, but I lost that sympathy after they tried telling me that sci-if didn't used to be political (sci-fi's always been political, usually some flavor of progressive), then organized, publicly, in the open, and advertised a voting block to try and game a system that's worked mostly okay for over 70 years.

They came in and pissed in the Hugo's Cheerios, then got mad when the Hugos dumped the Cheerios out instead of eating them.

 

[WindKnight]

...gamergaters, MRA's and neo-nazis...

And then in the next paragraph...

Dont try to make me feel sorry for childish so-called adults who resorted to name-calling their opponents silly little names...

I sense conflict within you.

If you've paid any attention to Vox Day, you'd find that an accurate summation of his audience (and thus the rabid puppies), so not really name calling.

 

[Zontar]

Man, "everybody else" is not a "block". It's just everybody else.

Then it's a good thing that no implication that that was the case was ever made and that this statement came from out of nowhere.

Look, I had sympathy for the Sad Puppers not being the mainstream audience anymore, but I lost that sympathy after they tried telling me that sci-if didn't used to be political (sci-fi's always been political, usually some flavor of progressive)

Except for, you know, the fact the entire genre until the 1990s not having any strong political leanings in any particular direction.

, then organized, publicly, in the open, and advertised a voting block to try and game a system that's worked mostly okay for over 70 years.

And in the early 00's the system's broken nature began being exploited, leading to outright trash consistantly winning because their authors where in the right cliche. How, apart from using the same tactic, is one supposed to fight such a problem?

They came in and pissed in the Hugo's Cheerios, then got mad when the Hugos dumped the Cheerios out instead of eating them.

Again I have to ask, because this problem remains a consistent one, are you absolutely sure you aren't mixing up the Sad and Rabbit Puppies? Because that seems to be happening quite a lot in this thread.

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

In just two years, the Hugos let it'self degenerate into a playground slapfight between zealous left wingers and a lynch mob lead by an actual misogynist and racial segregationist.

Value that award holds for me went bye-bye, stepped out for a drink, and never came back.

Though it didn't have that much to begin with when I think about.

Hell, did I ever think about it before now? I guess this did bring it more publicity this time...

I hate Vox Day and oppose anything he pushes. Yea, I'll leave it at that.

 

[Silvanus]

We had this discussion last year already, and appart from mixing up the Sad and Rabbit puppies no one has added anything new to the discussion outside of denial of the existence of a far left leaning voter block that caused all this in the first place and that last year no one was pretending didn't exist, only that it wasn't a big deal.

Nobody provided any goddamn substantiation for this paranoid noise, either. I've still seen not a single compelling reason to believe conspiracy over... well, taste.

 

[RaikuFA]

Just have your own awards to celebrate you and your friends works instead of relying on these Hugo awards.

 

[Chris Mosher]

One thing that I never heard anything about; was there some campaign to keep certain people from joining the Hugo voting pool?
It seems to me that for a supposedly rigged contest that the two Puppy groups were able to influence the nomination process fairly easily.

 

[WindKnight]

Again I have to ask, because this problem remains a consistent one, are you absolutely sure you aren't mixing up the Sad and Rabbit Puppies? Because that seems to be happening quite a lot in this thread.

To be fair, the Sads had no impact till the Rabids got involved. They pushed their slates, their slates got ignored by everybody and made no impact on the nominations for a good 2-3 years.

Also, it doesn't help that when they did find out what kind of person Vox was, they refused to condemn him and distance themselves from him, because, well, he'd actually made them relevant for once.

 

[Fox12]

If the Sad Puppies didn't want to make this about politics, then why did they choose to make it about politics?

It was already political, they just took the stance that the other 90% of views (like conservatism and liberalism) should not make an author automatically removed from the selection process.I'm certain that you have evidence for that claim, other then the testament of the bitter author that started the group to begin with.

Again, are you absolutely sure you're talking about the Sad Puppies? Because the more you talk about them the more it sounds like you've mixed them up with the Rabbit Puppies, since one is continually described inaccurately while the other perfectly, and it's not unusual for the two to be mixed up due to their names.

I'm talking about Larry Correia and the Sad Puppies, not the Rabbid Puppies. I'm asking you to support your claim.

Well there's no discussion to be had. Everything pretty much everyone on this board could say was a year ago the last time this happened, and people became fairly entrenched between those who thought the Sad and Rabbit puppies effectively the same and those who did not. Given how others didn't convince you last year, I don't see how I could change that. I'm not going to pretend I'm one of the better debaters on this site.

You could change it by providing some evidence, which no one has seen fit to do.

Also, I see little difference between the sads and the rabids when the sads embraced Vox Day for so long. They made their bed with him. They can't clean their hands now and pretend they were always clean.

 

[Falling_v1legacy]

I have done a lot of reading on this, going back and forth between GRRM, Larry, Brad, occasionally Kate's when she got involved and yes a fair amount of Vox's blog. (It was interesting to hear Brandon Sanderson finally speak because apparently he was trying to go behind the scenes as peacemaker to Larry and Brad, but to little avail.)

There has been scant evidence of a bloc prior to the two Puppies groups. I've seen lots of assertions, but I've seen more insulting acronyms coined by the Puppies than I have seen evidence of logrolling and the like. GRRM asked multiple times, aside from that Dinosaur book that everyone latched on to, what other books did not merit nomination and got there because of an intentional and organized liberal agenda. Never saw a response, just more complaining about in and out crowds... despite the fact that Larry had gotten nominated before this whole hoopla. Difference in taste, yes. But never evidence of a liberal bloc.

I also don't know how much stock I'd put in the claim that the Hugos used to be just romping good times pulp sci fi like the 50's. While that existed, I'm not sure how much the Hugos paid attention to 50's type pulp sci fi- it's hard for me to not see Third Hand of Darkness as being viewed today as hyper liberal agenda in gender fluidity, but it was given a Hugo in the 70's. Similarly, Asimov's stuff while engaging, is hardly laser fights and alien scares. His Empire series is great, but more of a slow burn... for his short stories, he seemed like an ideas author over a rollicking plot- I recall one story where, yes the main characters were being held at gun point, but the entire story consisted of arguing the merits of colonizing under the sea vs the moon... that was the story. And Speaker for the Dead is space archaeology. Not exactly action packed.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

One thing that I never heard anything about; was there some campaign to keep certain people from joining the Hugo voting pool?
It seems to me that for a supposedly rigged contest that the two Puppy groups were able to influence the nomination process fairly easily.

Not to my knowledge.

Anybody who wanted a vote for who won could've ponied up the $40, and if there were enough of them, they could've beat out the "No Award" votes.

It's just that most of the Internet Randos that got really into the Hugos last year, regardless which puppy they backed, weren't willing to put their money where their mouth was.

 

[Chris Mosher]

One thing that I never heard anything about; was there some campaign to keep certain people from joining the Hugo voting pool?
It seems to me that for a supposedly rigged contest that the two Puppy groups were able to influence the nomination process fairly easily.

Not to my knowledge.

Anybody who wanted a vote for who won could've ponied up the $40, and if there were enough of them, they could've beat out the "No Award" votes.

It's just that most of the Internet Randos that got really into the Hugos last year, regardless which puppy they backed, weren't willing to put their money where their mouth was.

I thought so. It seemed to me that the puppy slates were too successful in the nomination process last year that the and then the no awards slate won the second stage of voting too easy for there to have been much of an organized push before the puppy slates were in effect

 

[Hawki]

I have done a lot of reading on this, going back and forth between GRRM, Larry, Brad, occasionally Kate's when she got involved and yes a fair amount of Vox's blog. (It was interesting to hear Brandon Sanderson finally speak because apparently he was trying to go behind the scenes as peacemaker to Larry and Brad, but to little avail.)

There has been scant evidence of a bloc prior to the two Puppies groups. I've seen lots of assertions, but I've seen more insulting acronyms coined by the Puppies than I have seen evidence of logrolling and the like. GRRM asked multiple times, aside from that Dinosaur book that everyone latched on to, what other books did not merit nomination and got there because of an intentional and organized liberal agenda. Never saw a response, just more complaining about in and out crowds... despite the fact that Larry had gotten nominated before this whole hoopla. Difference in taste, yes. But never evidence of a liberal bloc.

I also don't know how much stock I'd put in the claim that the Hugos used to be just romping good times pulp sci fi like the 50's. While that existed, I'm not sure how much the Hugos paid attention to 50's type pulp sci fi- it's hard for me to not see Third Hand of Darkness as being viewed today as hyper liberal agenda in gender fluidity, but it was given a Hugo in the 70's. Similarly, Asimov's stuff while engaging, is hardly laser fights and alien scares. His Empire series is great, but more of a slow burn... for his short stories, he seemed like an ideas author over a rollicking plot- I recall one story where, yes the main characters were being held at gun point, but the entire story consisted of arguing the merits of colonizing under the sea vs the moon... that was the story. And Speaker for the Dead is space archaeology. Not exactly action packed.

Don't suppose there's anywhere where the conversation is logged in one place? Wouldn't mind trying to read it.

Also, Speaker for the Dead, I think it would be "anthropology" actually - the piggies are still alive after all.

 

[shrekfan246]

I will say that it does make me laugh to think that all of these sci-fi "fans" who decry the "political" nature of "modern" sci-fi have apparently never heard of a little thing called [HEADING=1]Star Trek.[/HEADING]

 

[Zontar]

I will say that it does make me laugh to think that all of these sci-fi "fans" who decry the "political" nature of "modern" sci-fi have apparently never heard of a little thing called [HEADING=1]Star Trek.[/HEADING]

That would be a good point if it wasn't for the fact that Star trek was far from alone when it come out in terms of views of those involved in the making of it, while today there's a concerted effort to push out those who don't subscribe to a very fringe political view.

Your example is like my arguing that those who complain about the inherent right wing nature of science fiction have never heard of a genre defining book called Starship Troopers.

 

[Fox12]

I will say that it does make me laugh to think that all of these sci-fi "fans" who decry the "political" nature of "modern" sci-fi have apparently never heard of a little thing called [HEADING=1]Star Trek.[/HEADING]

That would be a good point if it wasn't for the fact that Star trek was far from alone when it come out in terms of views of those involved in the making of it, while today there's a concerted effort to push out those who don't subscribe to a very fringe political view.

Your example is like my arguing that those who complain about the inherent right wing nature of science fiction have never heard of a genre defining book called Starship Troopers.

A concerted effort made by who? The nominees aren't made in secret behind closed doors. It's decided by the community. The idea that the industry is controlled by a panel of industry elites is tinfoil hat levels of conspiracy silliness.

 

[Falling_v1legacy]

I have done a lot of reading on this, going back and forth between GRRM, Larry, Brad, occasionally Kate's when she got involved and yes a fair amount of Vox's blog. (It was interesting to hear Brandon Sanderson finally speak because apparently he was trying to go behind the scenes as peacemaker to Larry and Brad, but to little avail.)

There has been scant evidence of a bloc prior to the two Puppies groups. I've seen lots of assertions, but I've seen more insulting acronyms coined by the Puppies than I have seen evidence of logrolling and the like. GRRM asked multiple times, aside from that Dinosaur book that everyone latched on to, what other books did not merit nomination and got there because of an intentional and organized liberal agenda. Never saw a response, just more complaining about in and out crowds... despite the fact that Larry had gotten nominated before this whole hoopla. Difference in taste, yes. But never evidence of a liberal bloc.

I also don't know how much stock I'd put in the claim that the Hugos used to be just romping good times pulp sci fi like the 50's. While that existed, I'm not sure how much the Hugos paid attention to 50's type pulp sci fi- it's hard for me to not see Third Hand of Darkness as being viewed today as hyper liberal agenda in gender fluidity, but it was given a Hugo in the 70's. Similarly, Asimov's stuff while engaging, is hardly laser fights and alien scares. His Empire series is great, but more of a slow burn... for his short stories, he seemed like an ideas author over a rollicking plot- I recall one story where, yes the main characters were being held at gun point, but the entire story consisted of arguing the merits of colonizing under the sea vs the moon... that was the story. And Speaker for the Dead is space archaeology. Not exactly action packed.

Don't suppose there's anywhere where the conversation is logged in one place? Wouldn't mind trying to read it.

Also, Speaker for the Dead, I think it would be "anthropology" actually - the piggies are still alive after all.

Oh right anthropology. It's been awhile since I've read it.
But it's not really in one place. There was a back forth blog series between George and Larry a year ago, but it's not quite so easy to jump in without going through their blog archives.

 

[Zontar]

The idea that the industry is controlled by a panel of industry elites is tinfoil hat levels of conspiracy silliness.

Good thing that isn't what anyone save the detractors of the Sad Puppies are claiming to be the case, only that the system has been gamed by the SocJus crowed, pushing out liberals and conservatives, and allowing for outright trash to start to win due to the political views of those who won.

Hell, even Steven King openly admits he was offered a Hugo for being in the right group, which made him wash his hands of it all given he has actual integrity and believes in meritocracy.

 

[Fox12]

The idea that the industry is controlled by a panel of industry elites is tinfoil hat levels of conspiracy silliness.

Good thing that isn't what anyone save the detractors of the Sad Puppies are claiming to be the case, only that the system has been gamed by the SocJus crowed, pushing out liberals and conservatives, and allowing for outright trash to start to win due to the political views of those who won.

Trash? Like pornography? Or the awful prose that Larry threw out?

Also, whose gaming the awards? The entire sci-fi community at large? Again, your claim makes no sense when the vote is open to the public.

Hell, even Steven King openly admits he was offered a Hugo for being in the right group, which made him wash his hands of it all given he has actual integrity and believes in meritocracy.

I can't find that anywhere. Could you offer me a link? Also, how does that work? Was he offered the award before the voting began? What group did he belong to? This is interesting, but I need context.

 

[shrekfan246]

I will say that it does make me laugh to think that all of these sci-fi "fans" who decry the "political" nature of "modern" sci-fi have apparently never heard of a little thing called [HEADING=1]Star Trek.[/HEADING]

That would be a good point if it wasn't for the fact that Star trek was far from alone when it come out in terms of views of those involved in the making of it, while today there's a concerted effort to push out those who don't subscribe to a very fringe political view.

Your example is like my arguing that those who complain about the inherent right wing nature of science fiction have never heard of a genre defining book called Starship Troopers.

A concerted effort made by who? The nominees aren't made in secret behind closed doors. It's decided by the community. The idea that the industry is controlled by a panel of industry elites is tinfoil hat levels of conspiracy silliness.

I don't see how his point is a counter to mine, anyway. In the first part he's reinforcing my point (which was really just altnameJag's point) that sci-fi has always been political, and typically in a progressive slant, and then in the second part he's... using a relatively right-wing book as an example of how sci-fi isn't right-wing? Or else completely missing the point I was making. Like, it wasn't until the film that Starship Troopers actually got a relatively satirical edge to it, and Heinlein's politics were always very weird in the first place.

But yes, the idea that there's "a concerted effort to push out" anyone from writing is hilarious. Racist, sexist bullshit doesn't win awards? Gee, there's a surprise. But nobody is actively trying to stop people like Vox Day from writing (though, to be perfectly honest I really wouldn't care one way or the other; on top of being an awful person, he's a dreadfully boring and unskilled writer).