A Just and Lasting Puppy 4/22

A report from the battlefields of science fiction. Some are declaring victory, others are in pain.

Kary English

“On Anger, Power and Displacement in the Hugos (part one of possibly several)” – April 22

Americans hated the [Vietnam] war, so when the soldiers returned home, they displaced their anger onto the soldiers, reviling them, spitting on them and calling them baby killers.

Then, over the course of the next few decades, we grew to understand that we’d made a terrible mistake. So when next group of soldiers came home from a war that many Americans didn’t support, we didn’t spit and we didn’t call names. We’d learned that it was wrong to displace our anger onto the easy target. We said “Thank you for your service” even if we disagreed with the war.

But I don’t think we’ve learned that in the SFF community yet because we’re displacing our anger all over some of the Hugo nominees.

Vox Day spoke our names without our consent, and because of that we have been bullied in the news media and all over the internet. The women among us have been reviled as misogynist men, the minorities have been reviled as white racists, and the QUILTBAG authors and allies have been reviled as straight homophobes. We have been called assholes, bitches, mongrels, yapping curs, talentless hacks and so many more things that I can’t even name them all. I have seen at least one suggestion that all of us should be euthanized, a euphemism and allegedly funny word for murder.

There’s a trope made famous by Anita Sarkeesian that in the game of patriarchy, women aren’t the opposing team, they’re the ball. There’s a contingent that’s going to be upset that I’ve name checked Sarkeesian, but her comment is applicable to the Hugos, too. In the Hugo debate, the nominees aren’t the opposing team. We’re the ball.

We’re being kicked and bullied and savaged all over the internet.

And it hurts.

Brad R. Torgersen

“Why do it?” – April 21

That the field’s betters went full-force destruct-o-matic on me — because I invited the proles to the democracy — was not a surprise. They (the betters) had a media apparatus tailor-made for their bogeyman narrative, and they used this apparatus according to the playbook. Sad Puppies 3 got unceremoniously shoved into the role of Black Hat, and myself along with it.

But it’s worth all the drama, because the betters don’t “own” this field. If they ever did? When David Gerrold holds forth from his Fandom pulpit about “no forgiveness” and all that dire talk, he’s speaking to — at best — a collection of maybe one thousand people. Perhaps the pool of total Keep-Us-Pure-And-Holy-Fans is not even that large anymore? It’s difficult to say. A lot of them are passing on. They’re being replaced by new kids who seem obsessed with identitarian politics — which, not ironically, makes them a perfect fit for the Holy Church of the Peoples Republic of Science Fiction — but the replacement rate may not be enough to make up the difference.

Ultimately, the consumer market votes with its collective wallet. You can’t herd those cats, no matter how earnest and pure your motives. Nobody likes a preachy scold. And right now, that’s pretty much the only face being presented by Gerrold and the sundry opponents of SP3: preachy scolds. Dolores Umbridge!

Adam-Troy Castro on Facebook – April 21

If several of the people you thought you were benefiting by your plan to game the Hugos start withdrawing themselves from consideration, saying they don’t want your help and don’t want to be associated with it, then maybe the explanation is that it’s not at all helpful.

Maybe you’re not right. Maybe you’re not helpful. Maybe you’re not constructive. Maybe the room is trying to stop you before you embarrass yourself further.

Or maybe it’s all of a sign of the great big SJW conspiracy and you’re the world’s last correct man.

They did laugh at Galileo. They did laugh at Einstein. They did laugh at Jonas Salk.

But really: they also laughed at Peewee Herman.

Adam-Troy Castro on Facebook – April 22

“If No Award wins in any category, it will prove the SP3 contention that the Hugos are being gamed, and that the bullies have won.”–Arlan Andrews

Really, Arlan? Really?

It can’t mean anything else?

Like the votership deciding that the slate had promoted a group of largely subpar fiction?

Like the votership rejecting this very ballot as being gamed?

And if a Sad Puppy story wins, how does that prove, by your logic, that bullies haven’t won?

Jeet Heer on Storify

“Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, and Personal Taste”  – April 17

Adult Onset Atheist

“The Once and Future Hugo” – April 21

The 2015 Hugo awards are an attack on a secular future because they attack our ability to communicate what we think of a future. Even if that future is far in the past in some alternate universe.

What can be done? If the ballots are rigged using shadow voters then Worldcon should use some of the money that the new voters spent on membership fees, and validate that these new members actually exist. We could call on publishers to ignore the 2015 Hugo awards. A couple nominees, and one presenter, have declined their invitations to participate; we could ask more presenters and participants to refuse to participate. In any convention the exhibitors are a big factor in the event’s success, we could ask exhibitors to send a note of protest instead of a display. We could all also pony up $40.00 and vote for “No Award” (although I am not sure memberships are still open). One of the most damaging things this really shows is how easily Hugos can be bought.  The cost of the 2015 Hugos will end up being less than the marketing budget of a small Finish-based close-to-vanity press publisher like Castalia House.  If the Hugos turn into a bidding war then Worldcon should do something amazing with the extra revenue; like build a space ship or even a future where everyone is really smart and good looking, or just a talking cloud of pulsating colored energy.

I would suggest that Worldcon make a time machine, but I do not trust them to use such an awesome super power for good, and they already have one.  For the past couple years Worldcon has awarded retro Hugos for items published before there were Hugos.  They call them “retro Hugos”.  In alternative 1939 (2014) Ayn Rand’s novella titled “Anthem” was nominated for a Hugo.  It did not win, but solidly beat “No Award” by about 100 votes in the 5th round of voting.  In real 1939 few people read, and fewer liked, Rand’s dystopian novella.  In alternative 1939 it was one of the five best novellas.  I’ve always wondered why, when people time travel back to the beginning of world war II, they can’t go and kill Adolph Hitler.

John C. Wright

“Do presently lose all desire for light” – April 22

A man with a PhD in English holds forth on my hidden neofascism:

“If you got John C. Wright drunk at the bar, you could get him to admit that he thinks transhumanism and black people are ugly for the same reason.”

Actually, I am a teetotaler, and I always tell the truth, and I have absolutely no inhibitions about telling the truth requiring the seduction of wine to overcome. It will come as a surprise to my adopted daughter that I am a racist, I assure you.

Someone who pretends to know me well enough to discern the secret and yet strangely always discreditable workings of my hidden heart would know those two things about me.

This is the way of evil. Evil lies because no one is attracted to evil when its nature is clear. The lie serves only limited use, and must be extended and expanded in order to maintain credibility. The lie metastasizes, and grows to a point when no sane man can believe it any longer.

Geek Lady on The Care and Feeding of Geeks

“On ‘Publication’ As Defined By the Hugo Awards” – April 22

All of these situations constitute “first presentation to the public.”

Other people are publishing serially these days, especially during the NaNoWriMo events. When does that become ‘published’? Serialized fiction is nothing new, but publication is (I think) dated to the compilation of the whole work. But if you’ve posted each section of your novel to your blog as you write it, does it become compiled, and hence published the minute you post the last section?

This is a level of granularity that is impossible to monitor. The Hugo Awards Committee, consisting of mere men, cannot possibly monitor every avenue of publication under their very own definition of what constitutes published. It doesn’t even matter whether malfeasance is involved or not. Things will inevitably fall through the cracks in their omniscience, which makes their definition functionally useless.

Now, I’m a helpful sort of person, and I would be remiss if I sat here complaining about something’s inherent stupidity without providing a possible solution, so here is my idea:

Let date of first publication be set to the first association of an ISBN, ISSN, or registered copyright with a specific work.

This provides a simple, verifiable, and (most importantly) unarguable date of publication. It is accessible to any method of publishing: traditional, indie, or self publication. And it would put an end to the pointless bickering caused by wishy washy subjective guidelines.

Kevin Standlee on Fandom Is My Way of Life

“Worldcon Supporting Memberships Aren’t Pure Profit” – April 22

There are people on all sides of Puppygate who are talking blissfully about the vast sums of money that must be flowing into the coffers of Sasquan, the 73rd World Science Fiction Convention?. By the look of some of the comments, you’d think that the committee must be building Unca Scrooge’s Money Bin on the banks of the Spokane River. Y’all need some perspective. I do not speak with inside information for this Worldcon on this subject. I speak as someone who chaired a Worldcon and had to sweat over a budget.

1. Despite what you may think, a Supporting membership is not 100% “profit” to the convention selling it. You may think, “Oh, it’s money for nothing at all!” (which is the argument people use to say it should be $5 or free), but it does cost the convention resources to service the membership. This is what’s known as variable cost: the amount the convention’s costs go up every time they sell a membership. That includes paper publications and postage expenses for every member who requests them, and that’s not trivial. In fact, for non-US-based members, it may well exceed the revenue realized on the membership. Another cost not considered is what the convention’s payment-processing system charges per membership. There are others. So while in most cases, a Supporting membership does help support the Worldcon by helping to pay some of the huge fixed overhead cost, it’s not like sending them $40 means $40 “profit.”

dfordoom onThe Politically Incorrect Australian

“why Sad Puppies (and Rabid Puppies) matter” – April 21

One thing that both Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies were very careful to do was to play strictly within the rules. Their intention was to demonstrate that the leftists controlling the awards had been bending the rules for years in order to ensure that only leftist-approved authors could win, so it was obviously essential for Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies to be scrupulous about not breaking any rules.

And despite the unhinged claims of the leftists that the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies were aiming to ensure that only evil white heterosexual patriarchal males would get nominated both the Sad Puppies and the Rabid Puppies included works by women, blacks and even (gasp!) liberals among their recommendations.

The assumption behind both the SP and RP campaigns was that the leftist bullies running the Hugos would hysterically overreact to any threat to their cosy little club. Which is of course exactly what happened. The leftists responded with a vicious hate campaign, with intimidation of moderates and will libelous personal attacks.

You might be wondering why any of this matters. It matters for two reasons. Firstly, the whole affair has been a superb microcosm of the culture wars, revealing in a very clear manner the lengths to which leftists will go in order to keep control. And secondly, while this might be a very minor battlefield on a very obscure front of the culture wars it’s one of the very very few battlefields on which conservatives are actually taking the offensive.

Alex Lamb on The Tinker Point

“On Ostracism” –  April

Is there a solution? I am biassed, of course, but I would propose that the US borrow one from Britain: derision. By which I mean satire, mockery, teasing and all other forms of social reconciliation through mirth. It is not a surprise that social institutions like the Daily Show have become so valued in American society of late. They are badly needed and in short supply.

I believe that both sides in the Hugos debate, and in American society at large, need to set down their sense of outraged affront as rapidly as possible and start mocking each other instead. Mocking and accepting mockery in return. And if we find ourselves able to laugh at our own side from time to time, then we know that the healing has started. And after healing comes the potential for real, cohesive social change.

PZ Myers on Freethought Blogs

“A musical interlude, courtesy of Owl Mirror, on the Hugos” – April 22

[First two of seven stanzas]

They sentenced me to Less-Than-“No Award”-dom

For trying to game the system from within

I’m coming now, I’ll show them “No Award”-dom

First we take their rockets, then we bite their shins

I am guided by a voice from out of Heaven

I’m guided by my hatred of their sins

I’m guided by the beauty of our weapons

First we take their rockets, then we bite their shins

194 thoughts on “A Just and Lasting Puppy 4/22

  1. xdpaul

    My impression that Brad doesn’t understand the situation comes directly from Brad’s posts. Things like “The field’s betters went full destruct-o-matic on me–because I invited the proles to the democracy…”

    Dude. Right there. Right at the top of the quoted bit. That’s why I think Brad doesn’t understand that the problem is the slate. Because he states outright that he thinks the problem is inviting new voters.

    I don’t need someone else to help me spot that, thanks. I wonder why anyone would. Oh wait–that self-image thing.

    And that Scalzi took something down (wish I’d seen it) that he later decided was unfair–kudos to him. If he had been a Puppy he would simply have doubled down on the unfairness, which, come to think of it, is precisely what they did when they discovered they’d locked up the ballot, forcing, for example, _Three Body Problem_ and the Heinlein bio off it.

  2. At his site VD has posted either part or all (I couldn’t tell whether VD edited it or not) of John Scalzi’s deleted post. It looked harmless enough to me – and if there was something there that was horribly bitchy or just plain wrong, you can bet VD would have highlighted that part – so I’m not entirely clear why Scalzi took it down.

    My summary (caveat emptor – entirely my interpretation) is that Scalzi was pointing out Larry and Brad have become stooges for VD and that VD is calling the shots.

    VD posted it in part, I guess, to spite Scalzi but mainly to declare that he wasn’t the real man behind the curtain, he was sticking by his allies in this war on SJWs, they were all partners and buddies (cf Animal Farm) and also, interestingly, that he would be co-operating with Kate Paulk on SP4.

    Of course the puppet-master would always say “see, no strings”, but I’m a cynic.

  3. @ Cat
    My impression that Brad doesn’t understand the situation comes directly from Brad’s posts. Things like “The field’s betters went full destruct-o-matic on me–because I invited the proles to the democracy…”

    Brad fully understands the situation. He is just full of it. He is doing this for publicity and to help his crazy “Oh my god someone on the internet called me a name” friend Larry. He clearly targets parts of posts for responses. He makes multiple posts per week to drive viewership to his site. He made a decision that this will be good for business so he is all in. The guy had multiple nominations before this started and he just became a professional writer a few years ago. He was part of the “in crowd”. His writing style is the type that Hugo voters like. I’ve read some of his work. I like it. He is just full of it.

    Don’t bother engaging xdpaul. The guy is a racist defender of Teddy. Argue with James May and others. They are just pissy about books they like not getting nominated. I don’t see the others defending Teddy at all. xdpaul isn’t worth responding to or even noticing.

    James… before you get all mad at me, note I am separating you from the Teddy crowd. I can think that your arguments are silly and not be an SJW since I am clearly stating you are not racist like someone else on here.

  4. Old Yeller.
    My little puppy: Hugos are magic
    The Puppy of the Baskervilles
    Captain America: The Puppy Soldier
    The Clockwork Puppy
    Hedwig and the Angry Puppy
    Puppy Destroyer of Worlds
    Wag the Dog
    The mote in puppy’s eye

  5. Puppies Live in Vain
    The Puppies that Time Forgot
    Puppyhood’s End
    I, Puppy

    OK, last one I swear

    Through the Valley of the Nest of Puppies

  6. Mokoto,

    I think it is a matter of perspective. When I was a kid, it was extremely hard to find SF. Now is a pure paradise and I find that the selection is HUGE. If you read Eric Flints post, you know what I’m talking about. There should be something for everyone on the market now.

    My problem with Torgensen is that he has a selfcentered view. He thinks that what he likes automagically is what everyone else likes. Myself, I trust the editors. The editors will keep the authors that sell. If people won’t buy, they will die out. It is in their self interest to get the bestselling authors. While it is in Torgensens self interest to get HIS kind of SF/F on the selling list.

    Torgensen still lives in a world where you should be able to see whats in a book just by looking at a cover. He hasn’t even learned that you can turn the book over and read the other side. Or that you can find recommendations on the web.

    The world has moved, attitudes have changed in the last 20 – 30 years and taste has moved with it. But Torgensen is still in the same place. And can’t accept, can’t face that his taste is not in the center anymore.

  7. If You Were A Puppy, My Love really clearly is the winner here. But who can pass up a riffing opportunity?

    The Demolished Puppy
    They’d Rather Be Puppies
    Double Puppy
    The Big Puppy
    A Puppy Of Conscience
    A Puppy For Leibowitz
    Stranger In A Puppy Land
    The Puppy In The High Castle
    The Puppy Is A Harsh Mistress

  8. So Long and Thanks for All the Puppies
    Last and First Puppies
    Captain Future and the Space Puppy
    The Puppy of Doubt
    In the Hour of the Puppy
    The Legion of Puppies
    Puppies Go Home

  9. The Puppies, My Destination
    A Puppy of Earthsea
    The Puppy That Cried Love at the Heart of the World
    Terminal Puppy
    Jurassic Puppy
    The Puppy Memorandum
    A Puppy Upon the Deep
    Red Puppy
    Green Puppy
    Blue Puppy

    We surely must have had this one already but just in case we haven’t: The Three Puppy Problem

  10. @Hampus “Torgensen still lives in a world where you should be able to see whats in a book just by looking at a cover.”

    I’m not sure that world has ever existed. Does no one remember those weird abstract covers from the 60s and 70s?

    Plus the space opera covers on more thoughtful books isn’t exactly a new phenomenon. Even as a young reader, I learned quickly to read the synopsis and maybe the first chapter before buying/checking out a book.

  11. Steve moss, those aren’t the arguments I’m familiar with…

    1. Slates are not in the spirit of the rules, nor the tradition of the rule. The rest of us do not have to endorse what they’ve done and can indicate that
    expedient of availing ourselves of an option that IS in the spirit in tradition of the awards.

    All the rest of the cases you laid out are poor exaggerations and distortions that attempt to make this whole thing sound like some kind of emotional hissy fit.

    The proper way to view this situation is: some people who ought to have known better screwed with one of the few truly democratic and representative institutions remaining on the face of the planet for purley personal gain. They got away with it to a certain extent. Now, the majority, who were taken advantage of, are reacting in not-unpredicatble ways, one of which is to send a very clear and pointed message to the instigators that what they did is not appreciated.

  12. In honor of Larry Corriea:
    Puppy Hunter International
    Puppy Hunter Nemesis
    Puppy Hunter Vendetta
    Puppy Hunter Legion
    Puppy Hunter Alpha
    Hard Puppy
    Puppy Rising
    Puppy Six
    Sword of the Puppy

    Gene Lim- If you read the commentary, the posters have three not mutually exclusive theories:

    1. Scalzi’s contract with Tor is up and he wants to position himself to be available to Baen, either for more money or to improve his bargaining position, and insulting Baen authors like Corriea is unlikely to be helpful in that endeavor.

    2. Scalzi has historically avoided mentioning Vox Day by name and has instead used various insults to describe him. He slipped up and actually named Vox Day once or twice.

    3. Scalzi has typically dismissed Vox Day as being a legend in his own mind, ineffective. Scalzi’s post blows that [presumably false] narrative.

    Daveon-

    2. Slates are against the “spirit of the rules” and therefore he and those he supports must be punished.

    Slates aren’t against the rules. In my opinion, the “spirit” of the rules is a BS argument as:

    a. What I (or you) might think is within or without the spirit of the rules is largely a matter of subjective belief. It varies from person to person. And as Corriea once said on the issue (paraphrased as my memory is poor) “Sorry I didn’t know about your double secret gentleman’s agreement”.

    b. Regardless that some want to dismiss them as mere recommendations, people have been putting forth “slates” for years. And effectively a slate is a mere recommendation, as neither Corriea, nor Torgersen, nor Day has the power to compel anyone to vote. They recommend and then they must persuade. Corriea, Torgersen and Day just happen to have a lot more fans, who are a lot more dedicated, than most authors.

    4. He’s a pawn of Vox Day and should be ashamed that SP3 has been high-jacked, etc. into the service of misogyny, etc..

    This is wrong as:

    a. Having similar tastes in work doesn’t make one a pawn.

    b. Having a smaller fan base doesn’t make one a pawn.

    c. Having similar, though ultimately divergent, goals doesn’t make one a pawn.

    d. The SP slate was up before nominations closed. The RP slate was up after nominations closed. What this means, barring Vox Day possessing psychic powers, is that:

    i. RP were aware of SP’s slate and quietly (likely via email blast, Vox Day seems to have extensive email communications with his supporters) modified the slate and voted. This benefits Vox Day as he can confirm with his supporters that they indeed voted and, based on past voting trends, he can determine whether his works made the nomination list. If they didn’t, he never posts his slate. If they did, he posts his slate. We know which occurred.

    To those who would mock Vox Day over this, I wouldn’t. It is good strategy, especially in the moral arena (and by that I don’t mean right or wrong, same word, different meanings).

    ii. Someone within Sasquan leaked the nominations to Vox Day. I don’t think it is likely, (i) above makes more sense, but Vox Day seems to have incredibly extensive contacts so it is not beyond the realm of possibility.

    Either way, this means that SP and RP are not the same. They are shooting in the same direction, but one does not work for the other.

  13. Gene,

    I have a copy of the original post in my mailbox; as a regular reader of Scalzi’s blog I am subscribed to it.

    I can’t see what’s so bad about it either; your summary is entirely correct. About the most I can make of Scalzi’s retraction is that he has a low bar of what constitutes a permissible personal attack by himself. Which, given the relentless mocking he can unleash on targets of his ire puzzles me greatly (“But… there’s still more candy inside him!”)

  14. The Word for World is Puppy
    The Left Hand of Puppies
    The Lathe of Puppies
    The Faded Puppies
    Downbelow Puppies
    Merchanter’s Puppies
    The Pride of Puppies
    The Puppies Look Up
    Stand on Puppies
    They’d Rather be Puppies
    Have Puppies, Will Travel
    Puppysaber

  15. At this point I can’t tell if Brad’s being intentionally disingenuous or just has that much of a martyr complex. Trying to get people to vote on a slate is obviously different than inviting new members in. If all he was doing was trying to drum up new people to join Worldcon no one would have an issue, no one was being denied becoming a supporting member they certainly seem happy to welcome anyone who wishes to support them. If he wanted to criticize them for a lack of PR towards trying to get new people to join, I’d get that but at the same time the people who organize and run it are already doing a lot. Maybe he should’ve instead volunteered to be an outreach adviser to assist with that effort instead of slate voting and leveling accusations and making assumptions unsupported by any evidence.

    The pity party he’s throwing himself is truly impressive though, and his actions have absolutely inspired more to be involved, though unlikely for the reasons he wanted.

  16. Bruce: I know there are a few Vietnam veterans who read this site and perhaps they will weigh in, too.

    When I was in my Navy uniform in the Bay Area during the Vietnam War I got an occasional dose of the evil eye-ball. I was a young guy at the time, and spitting on me would have been a bad idea. I might have reacted badly.

    A friend of mine suggested that we might go over to the campus casbah in Berkeley in full dress whites with medals and sabers. We could probably wander around as we pleased, because nobody would believe we were for real.

  17. Gene- “Scalzi “has a low bar on what constitutes a permissible personal attack by himself”? Seriously?

    Scalzi is normally fairly well behaved on his blog. But his Twitter account is an entirely different story.

    Here’s one example, one of many, as to Scalzi’s Twitter behavior:

    http://twitchy.com/2014/06/19/monster-hunter-author-larry-correia-targeted-for-departing-from-rape-culture-orthodoxy/

    Here’s Will Shetterly’s analysis, complete with helpful background:

    http://sjwar.blogspot.com/2014/06/i-judge-larry-correia-and-john-scalzi.html

    I liked Scalzi’s Old Man’s War. I actually kind of enjoyed Red Shirts (I finally read it, after seeing many condemnations). Some of his other stuff is decent, though nothing to write home about. Old Man’s War might have been Hugo worthy, though Red Shirts isn’t, in my opinion. But Scalzi is probably one of the prime movers in creating the current mess:

    He actively “pimps” for awards, encouraging his presumably numerous fans to vote for him and his friends. He then screams when others do the same thing, only better- after suggesting to them that they do exactly that.

    He insults, regularly, other authors of opposing political views. He then professes surprise and outrage when they respond in kind.

    This is entirely my opinion, but I think the Scalzi and Hayden Nielsen axis of the WorldCon is the primary reason the SJW theory came about. Right or wrong, they invited the whirlwind. They have no cause for complaint if it tears up their idyllic farmhouse. It’s too bad the neighbors are caught in the whirlwind’s path.

    In my opinion, Scalzi is very smart. He’s not particularly wise.

  18. There are many excellent title suggestions, but my #1 vote goes to
    The Puppy Masters.

  19. I’m amused at the focus on Brad in this thread. I mean, I get it, he’s the current front man, and he’s talking … but he didn’t start this and he’s only the CURRENT front man (and not a very good one). He’s not the only ring leader talking. I’m not even sure I buy the “front man” narrative, frankly, other than nominally.

    Next year there will be a nominal front woman. Perhaps after that they will pick a nominal front intersex person or other non-gender-binary person, to try to prevent criticism (won’t work) — a quisling to show faux diversity, etc. Yawn. No doubt the ever changing nominal leaders will all be great! people!, but it’s just a marketing ploy.

    Cue a frothing talking point that isn’t relevant in 3…2…1….

  20. well, they have succeeded in bringing me in…sf reader for decades – went to one worldcon as a teen because it was near me, a couple boskones, but not really a part of active fandom

    but, now i’m here – just to say no to the mean spirited

  21. Steve said “The SP slate was up before nominations closed. The RP slate was up after nominations closed.”

    The RP slate went up on Beale’s website on 2/2. I believe the nominating period closed on 3/9 or 10.

  22. Steve Moss: At least get your facts and your names right.

    Scalzi does indeed put forward the works he himself can be awarded for in the previous year, and has since 2006. However, he does not put forward his friends, but provides open threads for others to note what also might be eligible. This cannot be realistically compared to putting forward a “slate”, but authorial self promotion for awards does come under a lower level of criticism from time to time.

    In this he’s not unusual — authors in general are increasingly urged (by their agents, at least) to self-publicize, and reminding people what’s eligible for the Hugos is merely one end of a spectrum mainly focussed on pushing sales. Nobody would be likely to heavily criticize Torgersen, Correia, Wright, or Hoyt for doing the same thing.

    Scalzi also does not have deep roots in fandom: he’s a popular blogger and SF author (in that order, chronologically), and his popularity gives him an edge in nominations over less visible or popular authors at nomination time, but his books are also in themselves popular enough and well-enough written to make their appearance on the nominations lists at least reasonable.

    Note that I’m no great booster of Scalzi: I’ve been known to use words like “slick” to describe his fiction.

    The Neilsen Haydens (the order counts) do have significant roots in fandom, but insofar as their online presence (at least) represents Worldcon, going by what I see from other fen who are very much not in the same camp — who were, for example, on the “other side” in RaceFail — the concerns they raise are generally shaed across axes.

    Correia’s own experiences as he now chooses to describe them indicate that Worldcon fandom as a whole, not just some clique secretly pulling strings, trends rather to the left of Correia, Torgersen, et al. Instead of simply offending a small clique, the Sad Puppies have pissed off the bulk of the social network which is Worldcon fandom, and galvanized a lot more people who were on the fringes but are now purchasing Supporting Memberships for the first time to make a statement. Worldcon fandom is not the farmhouse of the Neilsen Hayden’s and even less so of Scalzi, which accounts for the scale of the whirlwind that has been raised, with a large part of its direction back towards the Sad Puppies.

  23. just to clarify – in my post, the various puppies are the mean spirited i refer to

    mr. torgerson succeeded in bringing in a prole, but one dedicated to the puppies failure

  24. @Cat –

    Brad persistently fails to understand that it’s not bringing in new Hugo Voters that is the problem, but rather having a slate for them to vote. Probably because his self-image depends on him not understanding that.

    Or, perhaps, it’s because oh come on kiddies, come sign up for the WorldCon and get invested! You’ll get to vote for exactly the same stuff you ain’t reading now anyway! isn’t exactly a draw. Sad Puppies set up an opportunity for new people to get involved and vote for the kind of stuff they liked rather than the kind of thing the WorldCon voters (all 1 thousand of them) liked.

    And speaking of which…

    if the Worldcon settled down in a single large American city, was run by the same organization every year, and put down roots, it surely would have grown much bigger. But would it have the same claim to being the World Science Fiction Convention?

    I’m not saying that WorldCon has to grow in the same way as the megacons. I do think that if it is going to claim to be the World Science Fiction Convention then it needs to be something more than the Legacy Prose Readers of SFF Affluence Convention that it is drifting dangerously close to becoming.

    I think it’s perfectly possible for WC/WSFS to remain a viable, influential part of SFF fandom in the future. But not in the way that it is proceeding – and that’s mostly because WC/WSFS appears to be disinclined to acknowledge that what it prefers to consume in terms of SFF is only a small fraction of the available river.

    IMO, it’s not so much that the Hugos have been acknowledging the wrong stuff nearly so much as they’ve not been acknowledging enough of the the right stuff. There’s more great stuff out there. Let me show you the wonders I’ve seen…

  25. ” However, he does not put forward his friends, but provides open threads for others to note what also might be eligible. ”

    Except of course, when he does.

    “Please consider nominating someone other than me and The Human Division for the Hugo category this year (two suggestions: Ancillary Justice by Ann Leckie, and The Incrementalists by Steven Brust and Skylar White; I blurbed both of them last year and think them well worth your consideration).”
    http://whatever.scalzi.com/2014/01/02/the-2014-award-consideration-post/

    “Also, this year, let me start the ball rolling by offering five novels I am recommending people take a look at:”
    http://whatever.scalzi.com/2015/02/12/the-2015-sff-fans-award-recommendation-thread/#comment-775001

  26. Puppy
    Puppy Messiah
    Children of Puppy
    God Emperor of Puppy
    Heretics of Puppy
    Chapterhouse Puppy
    etc.

    (I’ll leave Tarnsman of Puppy and its sequels, such as Slave Girl of Puppy, to another poster)

  27. My apologies if this was mentioned and I missed it, but I think the Puppies should admit their debt to one of the greats of the New Wave, who would (I suspect) think their mission reprehensible, but who clearly named them in the past:

    The Puppies of Terra
    (or Mankind Under The Leash)

  28. @David W. Good one!

    How about the same author’s famous work: “The Feline Puppy”?

  29. Huh. Those links Rek provided look suspiciously like… slates. Provided, of course, that you use an English definition of the word and not some made-up list of qualifying attributes known only to yourself.

  30. The Use of Puppies
    Puppies Are The Hangman
    The Last Defender of Puppies
    One To Forsee For Puppies

  31. Some grimdark…. apologies if these have been done.

    The Last Resort of Puppies
    The Puppy Itself
    The Puppy Remains

  32. @ Steven S.

    Pretty soon you’ll have… dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

    Who ya gonna call? Puppybusters!

  33. Rek — Are Leckie, Brust and White actually friends of Scalzi’s? Or do you mean “friend” in that vague sense of “might know each other by sight” or “might have shared a panel together”? Or even “You can’t prove that they’re not”?

  34. @NelC
    You should ask Scalzi. He might know who his friends are.

    In my second link, he did say “Disclosures: I know all these authors personally”.

  35. ‘Huh. Those links Rek provided look suspiciously like… slates.’

    Clearly we had struck from our memories the way his legions of lockstep fans heedlessly filled out the nomination slots with his dictated titles. I particularly like the way he sneakily hid the evidence of his more recent slating of the Hugos in a long comment section full of other… suggestions. They look suspiciously like… suggestions. I suspect bringing attention to this will only heighten the contradiction between what Scalzi did and what the SP/RPs did. People have scolded Scalzi for the self-pimpage, but nobody’s begrudged him a, what, 64-comment-long section full of reading recommendations.

  36. “Clearly we had struck from our memories the way his legions of lockstep fans heedlessly filled out the nomination slots with his dictated titles.”

    Funny how there’s no evidence that anyone has done this at all… unless you know something the rest of us don’t.

    “I particularly like the way he sneakily hid the evidence of his more recent slating of the Hugos in a long comment section full of other… suggestions.”

    Are you ACTUALLY this dense? What is a slate? I want an honest-to-God, found-in-a-dictionary definition that allows you to somehow differentiate between the two. Go find one, or admit that you’re just making things up.

  37. I keep being surprised at the sheer inability of puppy supporters to actually read.

    Steve Moss, I am not Gene, and I specifically pointed out that Scalzi regularly engages in vicious mockery, so that his squeamishness at a rather mild criticism of Brad and Larry surprised me.

  38. Any reasonable definition of “slate” is going to have to go beyond “list of recommendations” in an extended community — fandom — which is built on recommending and sharing works, both in and outside the context of awards.

    As “slate” is a term borrowed from politics, one obvious component is the element of campaigning. I see Scalzi casually raising a handful of recommendations in the contexts, respectively, of a juxtaposed announcement of a thread for other people’s recommendations, and at the actual head of a thread of other people’s recommendations. (It’s also worth noting that The Incrementalists did not even the top 15 nominations that year, while Ancillary Justice needed Scalzi’s recommendation so much that it took the Nebula Award, BSFA Award, Arthur C. Clarke Award and Locus Award as well, but that speaks not to intent but effect, which is beside the point.)

    By contrast, the SP list — much more extensive — was published integrally on at least four different websites — Torgersen, Correia, Wright, Lamplighter — and heavily boosted on several others, at least including Hoyt’s and the Mad Genius Club; it had its own logo, reprinted in several locations, and was accompanied by emphatic urging to “combat puppy-related sadness”.

    On that basis, I’m willing to absolve Scalzi’s recommendations of being “slates”, while even without the RP urging to vote the straight ticket, the Sad Puppies look pretty much like a campaign pushing a slate.

  39. S1AL:
    Here are some more links that look like slates. These seemed to be called nominations, ballots, or recommendation lists. I think the difference between a slate and a nomination / ballot / recommendation list is that a slate is called a slate. Of course, Torgersen also used the words recommendation and list, in that he said that “the SAD PUPPIES 3 list is a recommendation”, so apparently you have to use them in a certain order without the presence of the word slate, in order to not be considered slate.

    http://wrongquestions.blogspot.fi/2015/03/the-2015-hugo-awards-my-hugo-ballot.html
    https://lizbourke.wordpress.com/2015/01/17/hugo-nominating-time-is-here/
    http://www.jasonsanford.com/blog/2015/2/my-hugo-and-nebula-award-nominations
    http://kenliu.name/home/nominating-stories-for-awards/

  40. Seems like what Scalzi and the Puppies did were the opposites from each other. Scalzi said what works he liked, then asked for more recommendations for all to read. The Puppies asked for recommendations, then created a finished slate from a few of the recommendations, but mostly their own favourites.

    And Beale, of course, said that you didn’t have to read anything. Only follow the slate. Like the car dealer said: “Trust me, I know what is best for you”.

  41. Steve Moss: I basically agree with you and with Shetterly. Much as I like Scalzi and TNH dearly and tend to share their pinko liberal worldview (in general), it would be better if they would switch to decaf or turn it down a notch, and do less ideological sabre-rattling (not that either asked my advice). It’s possible your theory is correct and Larry & Brad would have been less inclined to get stuck in Conservative Persecution Complex had their been less taunting and tone policing, though I personally have my doubts, as abstract theoretical martyrdom has always been difficult for some to resist, especially those surrounded by groupies.

    (It should be noted that Shetterly has sworn off any further commentary to his ‘sjwar’ blog because taking flak from all sides was eating his life. Can’t blame him, but next time I see him I intend to offer him a pint of his favourite brew and thank him for being the Sanest Man in Fandom for so long.)

    Rick Moen
    [email protected]

  42. Mr Glyer,
    I posted a comment here not so long ago that was, in retrospect, unnecessarily critical of you. For that I apologize. Regardless of whether I agree with your opinions (or what I may believe your opinions to be) or not, I acknowledge that you have been fair to any and all sides of the puppies issue, and that your coverage has been far more professional than any other outlet I can name or think of. Please accept my apologies for any and all offense I may have caused you.

  43. @Hampus
    “And Beale, of course, said that you didn’t have to read anything. Only follow the slate. Like the car dealer said: “Trust me, I know what is best for you”.”

    I don’t like what Beale did. And I think it is worse than that, because he says:

    “(Have no fear, the awards are worth absolutely nothing to us in financial terms, because the gatekeepers who value them for marketing purposes won’t publish even national bestselling authors of the Right; they are far more driven by intersectional equalitarian ideology than by evil capitalist business sense.)”

    I don’t buy that the awards and all of this press are worth nothing financially to Castalia House.

Comments are closed.