Slashdot Mirror

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

Men are just not as good at creative writing, according to some vague statistics, but they’re better at other stuff like eating contests so it’s ok.

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

Men are just not as good at creative writing, according to some vague statistics, but they’re better at other stuff like eating contests so it’s ok.

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

Men are just not as good at creative writing, according to some vague statistics, but they’re better at other stuff like eating contests so it’s ok.

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

But the more important thing is that there isn't an obvious systemic problem here. If there was you know I'd be first to point it out. This year is exceptional.

No white men have won a Hugo in anything, save for the "dramatic presentation" category, in years.

So I guess 2017 was an exceptional year too.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And so was 2016.
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

And at last, we have ONE white guy in 2015 (for best novelette). And the only reason he won was because there was an open rebellion among the fans demanding it:
https://www.wired.com/2015/08/...
Of course, that didn't stop the Hugo committee from responding to the rebellion by refusing to issue awards for most of the other nominees:
http://www.thehugoawards.org/h...

Should I go on, or are you still going to pretend that white guys have a snowball's chance in hell of winning a Hugo anymore?

First I looked here, and learned that one has to join a Worldcon. Then I looked here and learned that minimum price of entry is $50. The money is apparently the only requirement. I also read this about the voting system. Any member can nominate five works for every category. The six of these nominees in each category with the most nominations are the ones voted on to win via instant runoff voting. So if you feel frustrated about the resulting choices, consider that this is how they got that way, and also, it never hurts to remember that Sturgeon's Law applies as well to opinions as it does everywhere else.

Since everyone will have a different opinion about what is crap, what would probably work better than having an award system is something like what Booklamp attempted to be. Perhaps a search tool for book related social media could help.

First I looked here, and learned that one has to join a Worldcon. Then I looked here and learned that minimum price of entry is $50. The money is apparently the only requirement. I also read this about the voting system. Any member can nominate five works for every category. The six of these nominees in each category with the most nominations are the ones voted on to win via instant runoff voting. So if you feel frustrated about the resulting choices, consider that this is how they got that way, and also, it never hurts to remember that Sturgeon's Law applies as well to opinions as it does everywhere else.

Since everyone will have a different opinion about what is crap, what would probably work better than having an award system is something like what Booklamp attempted to be. Perhaps a search tool for book related social media could help.

You seem to assume that there is an "organized fandom" voting on an "anti-Puppy" slate. Care to provide evidence about that?

"The Puppy-Free Hugo Award Voting Guide" blog posting still exists; see it for yourself: http://deirdre.net/the-puppy-free-hugo-award-voters-guide/

It didn't call itself a "slate" but I call it that. The recommendations in that slate were followed and Puppy-nominated works were outvoted, by 2:1 in several cases. It was an unprecedented number of votes any way you look at it and the anti-Puppy slate voting absolutely was organized.

http://www.thehugoawards.org/content/pdf/2015HugoStatistics.pdf

In the entire previous history of the Hugo awards there had been only 5 "No Awards" voted. Then last year the "Puppy-Free" slate recommended "No Award" in 5 categories; enough people voted the slate that all 5 categories passed "No Award" rather than allow even a single Puppy-nominated person to win any category.

There was exactly one deviation from the "Puppy-Free" slate. The popular movie "Guardians of the Galaxy" was voted for best movie Hugo.

Since the Puppies seem to have made a huge amount of nominations, I conclude that if there is such an anti-Puppy conspiracy it is a rather incompetent one.

It's true that the Sad Puppies surprised everyone, even themselves, by sweeping several categories in the nominations and getting most of their picks on the ballot. After that, the anti-Puppy faction really got organized, with the results shown above.

Try to read this novella, I dare ya.

It turns out that if you took away the "No Award" votes, "Flow" was the clear winner. http://www.thehugoawards.org/content/pdf/2015HugoStatistics.pdf

Clearly there are at least 1179 people who disagree with you on the merits of this story.

Apologies but my reference link to document the votes didn't work... I must have made a typo in the HREF tag or something.

Here's the URL so you can check on the vote totals: http://www.thehugoawards.org/content/pdf/2015HugoStatistics.pdf

The corruption is not from who can vote but who nominates and how organised they are.

Only people who read a lot will nominate. You need to have read a lot of works to have a good indication. The argument is that there's an informal clique that nominates the same work. This gets strawmanned as some sort of conspiracy.

I have no idea if such a clique exists. What I can say is that the Dramatic presentation (short form) seems to get a lot of nominations for Doctor Who. It's unlikely that these are coming from different people. More likely that the same set of fans are picking the same episodes. Do you think there may be a Doctor Who clique?

Sad puppies was a conspiracy. Intentionally so. Part of the aim was to demonstrate how broken the nominations system is. I'd say it did that job well.

As for the voting - 2015 statistics compared with 2014 stats. Take for example best Novella. Voting numbers up by 2638. All entries except "no award" seem to have comparable number of votes to the previous year. No award gets more than half the votes. Were the entries *really* that bad?

There's nothing wrong with campaigning, but the suggestion that there wasn't a concerted campaign to prevent people who have the wrong politics from winning an award stretches credibility.

Best Novel: Awarded for a science fiction or fantasy story of forty thousand (40,000) words or more.

Best Novella: Awarded for a science fiction or fantasy story of between seventeen thousand five hundred (17,500) and forty thousand (40,000) words.

Best Novelette: Awarded for a science fiction or fantasy story of between seven thousand five hundred (7,500) and seventeen thousand five hundred (17,500) words.

Best Short Story: Awarded for science fiction or fantasy story of less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) words.

It isn't.

The Hugo Awards, to give them their full title, are awards for excellence in the field of science fiction and fantasy. Hugo Faq

Re-run after reboot after re-run.

So many more great novels exist in the world that would be incredible on big screen.

Isn't it time to give some other hugo award winners a chance on the big screen?

My personal vote, tho not hugo class is the amber series.

And halfway in between is Joe Haldeman's Forever Peace. In the novel, soldiers use mechanical body surrogates which have the bizarre side effect of linking all senses of the team members as if it were a single organism. It's a good read. We can already see, hear and launch weapons from drone platforms and this is just the early stage of remote piloting.

How can it be an obligatory reference when few people will have ever heard of Schlock Mercencary? An obligatory reference is something from Futurama, Simpsons, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc.

Ahem.

Three story collections have been nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story: The Body Politic (2009); The Longshoreman of the Apocalypse (2010); and Massively Parallel (2011).

And you call yourself a geek! rofl

How can it be an obligatory reference when few people will have ever heard of Schlock Mercencary? An obligatory reference is something from Futurama, Simpsons, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc.

Ahem.

Three story collections have been nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story: The Body Politic (2009); The Longshoreman of the Apocalypse (2010); and Massively Parallel (2011).

And you call yourself a geek! rofl

How can it be an obligatory reference when few people will have ever heard of Schlock Mercencary? An obligatory reference is something from Futurama, Simpsons, Star Trek, Star Wars, etc.

Ahem.

Three story collections have been nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story: The Body Politic (2009); The Longshoreman of the Apocalypse (2010); and Massively Parallel (2011).

And you call yourself a geek! rofl

This might have already been mentioned... but for a list of "award winners", you can check out the Hugo Awards: http://www.thehugoawards.org/.

I find that these books tend to be pretty good.

regexes

Getting Hugo categories added is a long and tortuous road. There have been attempts in the past to add Best Interactive Video Game and Best Website but they failed through not enough people bothering to nominate and/or vote in those categories. If you're seriously interested, there's a lot more information at this page.

Its really tough to game the Hugo voting system. Here's a description:

http://www.thehugoawards.org/?page_id=4

Many US Libertarians feel that we should use this system (or perhaps, a system with a similar design) to vote in US elections:

http://rangevoting.org/rangeVapp.html