629 thoughts on “Measuring The Rabid Puppies Slate’s Impact on the Final Hugo Ballot”

1. Hi Kendall,

   I couldn’t leave the thread alone because, well, ruminating. Tbqh I didn’t even check who had used the word because, to me, that wasn’t the important matter. I realized with the current anger and distress over the actions of the Rabid faction that it was almost inevitable that someone would use that type of language. I was hoping to make it a more general request.

   (I was starting to feel pretty shitty about saying anything at all.)

   That being said, I appreciate the apology and gladly accept.

   Stepping back again because this whole mess with the Hugos makes me angry and I don’t handle anger well. Working on it with my therapist 😛

2. @Lis Carey,

   Thank you for the librarian’s perspective. I guess Marc Aramini wanted the hardcover version badly enough to enter a contract with Vox Day despite knowing his history (I assume*).

   *Even in mid 2014 a brief Google of “Vox Day” or “Theodore Beale” would have revealed much to cause one to be concerned, and it’s hard to believe Aramini didn’t know full well the character of the person he signed a contract with.

3. Kendall: I’m bookmarking things to return to/refresh, as I just can’t trust the system

   Yes, I’m sorry that problem has cropped up. I have inspected my settings, checked to see I am using the latest Jetpack plug-in which delivers this service, and there’s nothing needing a fix there.

   In the middle of Tuesday’s problems there was a WordPress update automatically installed. When I will have time I will search WordPress support site for any posts about this disrupting notification delivery.

4. @various: The language discussion

   This is just a brief comment to acknowledge that I’ve seen the various statements from assorted parties and am not responding. This is in accordance with what I read as a consensus that nobody intended any insult or harm, we’ve all gotten some food for thought, and none of us are particularly interested in continuing the discussion.

   IOW, the can of worms appears to be closed and I ain’t gonna reopen it. 😉

5. Aaron: In those cases I have bad news for those people about the history of the Hugos, because stories of this tenor have been getting on the Hugo ballot for many decades.

   A propos to the current discussion, I first read this as “stories of this tenor have been getting on the Hugo ballot for manly decades”.

6. @Dawn Incognito: Oh, with respect, IMNSHO, you shouldn’t feel shitty about saying something. Anyway, thanks to both you & @Tasha Turner. (bowing)

   @Rev. Bob: (bowing) to you as well.

   @Mike Glyer: Thanks, and I hope I’m not a pest about it.

   @JJ: And I read you as quoting him as saying “stories of this terror.” Gah, I think I need sleep!

7. Cora Buhlert: For those who are interested, here is David VanDyke’s statement regarding his nomination in a comment on the KBoards forum.

   Maybe I missed something in that thread, but I am not terribly impressed by Mr VanDyke’s statement. He seems to be attributing his Hugo nomination to years of hard work and luck, rather than recognizing that he got onto the ballot as part of a cheat. 😐

8. Kendall on April 28, 2016 at 9:26 pm said:

   @rcade: “I’ve got wood.” – LOL, ObCatan: I’ve got sheep for wood. ?

   I think you flubbed the Catan line. It’s “I’ve got ore for sheep.” No, wait, that’s not it either. Darn… 🙂

   (For those who are fans of board games in general, BoardGameGeek has a thread on game-specific bits of innuendo.)

9. With regard to the AWOL thread post e-mail notifications, I have been unsubscribing on my WP subs management page

   https://subscribe.wordpress.com/?email=[insertyouremail@here]&option=comments

   to a thread immediately before posting a comment with the ticky box re-ticked, and it seems to be working; threads thus subscribed to then start sending me notifications.

10. We are currently $71 from having an Ancillary Park (the goal had to be bumped up a hair because the average of funds processing fees charged so far is just over 10% right now).

    The Fan Village manager has been contacted to ensure that our benches and mini-parks will be reserved, and funds will be transferred to MAC II as soon as those reservations are made.

    Just a reminder, there will be a separate File770 Thank You post after the campaign is over, acknowledging either by name or nym those sponsors who wish to be acknowledged in the post, and as an incentive to reach the stretch goal of the second Mini-Park, if we make $1110, sponsors will each be permitted to send ONE photo of their SJW credentials (whether feline, canine, piscine, reptilian, tiny human, etc) to be included in that post.

    If you’re not in a position to contribute, your well-wishes are just as much appreciated. 🙂

    It’s amazing what 50 Filers have managed to accomplish in 2 days. It’s a good thing that Filers haven’t decided to take over the world!

11. Self-publishing is still an option for hardback books though. The only one of my book-length works that *hasn’t* had a hardback version, in fact, is the one that was published through a conventional publisher rather than self-published.

12. @Kendall – no worries, I can see where I created the confusion. I LOVE debate and differing opinions, I am less cool with gatekeeping and people being jerks.

    @Tasha – that’s totally cool, I really didn’t expect a response from any of the players of this particular discussion, and if my outreach of solidarity made anyone feel more negatively rather than supported, that’s definitely my bad and I apologize. Definitely happy to leave the can of worms on the shelf, or uh wherever one keeps worms. (I don’t recommend the fridge, even though that’s the best place to keep live bait like worms, it tends to freak people out when they find them in there :X)

13. @Sunhawk:

    True story – the convenience store where I was employed when 9/11 happened had a live bait vending machine outside. I think it dispensed worms (and crickets, etc.) in cups rather than cans, though. 🙂

14. JJ on April 29, 2016 at 2:12 am said

    If you’re not in a position to contribute, your well-wishes are just as much appreciated. ?

    Just a well wish from me as I’ve worn the credit card a bit thin this month. Have some positive psychic energy though: 🌈 🌈 🌈 🌈

15. @Rev. Bob – yes I’ve seen those machines in cottage country north of me, like a pop machine except it gives you live squirmy things when you push the button lol It’s true, live bait is usually in a dirt-filled styrofoam cup with lid rather than a can. The only canned worms I can think of would be something like meal worms meant for some reptile pets, and from what I’ve read they are considered to be the equivalent of cheap dog food – inferior to the live stuff.

    *inserts The More You Know Rainbow Star with new text: Sunhawk Is Full of Random Nature Facts*

16. @Sunhawk
    Your response was supportive. I’m sorry my response didn’t some through that way. Which is why I was stepping out of the conversation – I was having a problem with words yesterday and recognized it. I also rarely re-enter a discussion I’ve said I’m done with. I try to stick with my flounce but I didn’t want you to feel ignored as your new here.

    I’m sorry. By not sticking with my flounce and responding to you I miscommunicated and made you feel bad. In the future I will do better at sticking to my flounces. Please forgive me.

    ETA: cans of worms below in the fridge but they should have some kind of mesh covering so guests don’t need to worry they might be crawling all over the place. 😉

17. Regarding Aramini’s difficulty finding a different publisher–I looked at his Goodreads author page and based on that, it seems he does not have a PhD (he has a Masters) and he is not currently affiliated with a college or university. For better or worse, I suspect that most academic publishers look askance (if at all) at submissions from people outside the academy. Glancing at Aramini’s book, the intro does not strike me as the kind of thing I expect in an academic work (that doesn’t make it bad, of course, just not conforming to a certain model). So the length is probably an issue, but it’s not the only issue, and I am sure he did indeed get little response from academic presses.

    That said, if Aramini wants his work to be read and respected (which is my interpretation of his posts on the matter), the whole Rabid thing seems like a taint he’d want to avoid.

18. @Tasha – hey, really, no harm done at all *hugs* After I posted last night, I was in bed going “Maybe I shouldn’t have said anything period, even in support, since people wanted to move on, maybe I was letting my ego take the wheel” so my apology was just my way of owning up to the judgement mistake, if that was the case. I appreciate you going out of your way to acknowledge my post, even as you were struggling, you’re a good egg! (I think all eggs are delicious but good eggs are to be prized above all)

    The thing about worms in the fridge is that people seem to think they will contaminate the whole fridge even with the lid on, the worms don’t seem inclined to escape, they much prefer to stay in the soil lol Plus I think the cold temperature puts them into a torpor anyway.

19. This year’s finalists clear up a few lingering questions from last year. Like, do we need EPH or do we just need more nominators? Answer: EPH. Is this a culture problem with a cultural fix or a math problem with a math fix? Answer: Math. Was it Rabids or Sads who made the difference on the final ballot last year? Answer: Rabids.

    Were the slates the last desperate action of of poor innocent SF fans who just like a good old-fashioned nuggety space opera and felt shut out by all this literary business with dinosaurs* and whatnot, fighting for representation? Or was it Mr. Beale, self-styled king of the garbage people, winding up his garbage followers to troll the Hugos just because he could? Answer: Garbage people spreading garbage. They seem to feel particularly pleased with themselves for the Chuck Tingle story — right after the shortlist announcement they were all over #HugoAward on Twitter going, basically, “Hurr, hurr! You said butt!” So, you know, that answers another question. What’s the average mental age of a Rabid? Answer: Twelve.

    At least this year, I don’t anticipate nearly the amount of sanctimonious self-justifying claptrap from Mr. Wright and Mr. Torgersen, so there’s that.

    The novel and novella categories are strong, anyway.

    *Thanks for your comment on the story, Rachel Swirsky. It was a very good read.

20. JJ on April 29, 2016 at 12:19 am said:
    Cora Buhlert: For those who are interested, here is David VanDyke’s statement regarding his nomination in a comment on the KBoards forum.

    Maybe I missed something in that thread, but I am not terribly impressed by Mr VanDyke’s statement. He seems to be attributing his Hugo nomination to years of hard work and luck, rather than recognizing that he got onto the ballot as part of a cheat. ?

    The whole Hugo/slate thing apparently doesn’t matter, since he himself is “apolitical.”
    If it’s in the packet, I’ll read it, but my expectations aren’t high, given the statement.

21. Requiring something be published in *hardcover* is fairly ridiculous. It’s not the predominant mode of publishing things, especially things that aren’t going to sell well.

    I’m certainly not taking “My desire for a hardcover is more important than not associating myself with white supremacists” as a decent excuse.

22. Oh, going with Castalia House was certainly, even in the most charitable reading, very poor judgment.

    I’m not going to be nearly as dutiful this year. No reading anything from Castalia House, and they won’t be on my ballot, even below No Award. Likewise Space Raptor Butt Invasion, because even aside from the slating, no, sorry, seriously not my thing.

    Things I believe would have been on the ball to anyway, especially things I nominated myself, I will evaluate on their merits as perceived by me. No, I’m not letting Teddy decide who I have to vote against, or take all the enjoyment out of the Hugos.

23. @Rachel Swirsky I’m certainly not taking “My desire for a hardcover is more important than not associating myself with white supremacists” as a decent excuse.

    Nope in my mind it’s just an excuse. Whining about the consequences of one’s actions is something my 8 year-old stepson* learned to stop doing within a couple months of meeting me. I find if strange when adults do it. Personal responsibility is a thing.

    *hard to believe he’s 36 and married now. Wow has time flown.

24. @JJ: I’ll try that with this thread; I’m already not subscribed, so I’ll just subscribe again and see what happens!

    @Xtifr: Well, it should be “I’ve got wood for sheep,” but since @rcade already had wood, I figured his wood must be for the sheep I had. 😀

    @McJulie: Excellent summary! Also: I’m confused; sometimes they don’t like dino fic (Swirsky), sometimes they do like dino fic (Tingle) – is it too much to ask for a consistent Rabid stance on dinosaurs?!

    @Lauowolf: Thanks for reminding me to say that I’m really super sick of people (like VanDke) claiming they’re apolitical. No, they just don’t want to get in the middle of a shirtstorm. Fair enough, but don’t pretend to have no opinion on whether trying to ruin SFF awards is a good thing or a bad thing. Le sigh.

25. Kendall: Thanks for reminding me to say that I’m really super sick of people (like VanDke) claiming they’re apolitical. No, they just don’t want to get in the middle of a shirtstorm. Fair enough, but don’t pretend to have no opinion on whether trying to ruin SFF awards is a good thing or a bad thing.

    Yeah, anyone who does that — or who pretends that they/their work got onto the ballot on their own merits, rather than acknowledging the unfair advantage of the Puppy Slate — pretty much goes onto my Puppy Supporter list.

26. @JJ: I’m going to jinx myself by saying that I got an e-mail notice of your comment.

    ::computer implodes:: 😉

27. Posting here as well as in the Bench thread because of the subscriber count:

    I have upped the goal slightly to add an Ancillary Plaque. If we make it, great; if not, we’ll just throw the extra amount in with the two Mini-Parks.

    Please go over to the Sponsor a Bench at MidAmeriCon II thread and post your suggestions for:

    1) the plaques on the two benches
    (my suggestion for one is File770 Ancillary Bench)

    2) the signs which will stand in the two Mini Parks
    (my suggestion for one echoes Hampus’ suggestion):
    Park770, In All Modesty, One of the Finest Parks Parking Today
    and for the other
    File770 Ancillary Park, with a list of the sponsors’ names/nyms

28. @JJ: I know the JCW quote is a favorite around here and folks like parodying it, but rather than a jab at JCW, I’d rather something pro-File770. Just my take on it – take with a grain of salt, as I don’t feel strongly.

    Hmm, File770 Ancillary Godspark (how many things can I cram into one phrase).

29. “Mount Tsundoku” would be a pro-File770 name. Just putting it out there…

30. @Soon Lee: Oh gosh, that describes me, I believe. Gak!

31. I like File770 Ancillary Park (and Ancillary Bench). I also like the idea of celebrating the positive for our primary bench/park. (Well, it’s not the ancillary one…) I’m not sure that Tsundoku is the best name; it’s about buying books but not reading them, and we all DO plan to get around to reading our TBR mountains one of these days. Right? Right???

    I’m terrible at naming things, though.

32. Pingback: Top 10 Posts For April 2016 | File 770

33. A Few Thoughts about Nominating and Slates

    1) Nominating best works is not easy. Why? Because most of us read a novel yet do not write down in a list the name , date of publication and author for later use. Those few that do will have a greater ability to nominate. I think that is why people who accuse Tor of ;logrolling seems probable. Those people in the business will keep lists, so have a better handle on what is eligible. and they do make recommendations on stories. Is that wrong?. Not really but it does lead to a group think that rejects some readers tastes.

    2) Nominations done on individual basis will be all over the map unless a particular work is recommended in various forum Novik comes to mind for that example.

    3) Narrowing the field. If there are 200 people voting on nominations . It is possible that none will get a majority. Or the majority can be decided by 4-5 votes. The voters have to have a consensus on picking the best 5 . How that is done? . Word of mouth, recommendation lists and slates.
    The difference between a recommendation list and a slate in not great. The list may have more than 5 choices or the person promoting the list tries not to direct people

    3) Slates. As people differentiate among themselves and self congregate they create groups that have differing ideals and goals. IE: a party. Parties in order to help their members vote and to maximize their influence create slates to choose from.

    SF&F community has differentiated and become polarized . A reflection of our times. So slating will become more common not less. It is human nature.

34. RAH: Nominating best works is not easy. Why? Because most of us read a novel yet do not write down in a list the name , date of publication and author for later use. Those few that do will have a greater ability to nominate. I think that is why people who accuse Tor of ;logrolling seems probable. Those people in the business will keep lists, so have a better handle on what is eligible. and they do make recommendations on stories.

    Instead of saying “most of us”, you need to say “I” and stop presuming to speak for other people. You apparently haven’t done much reading on File770 in the last year — or in dozens of other blog and review sites on the internet, where tons of people talk about what they’ve read, and whether they liked or didn’t like it, and why. People do make note of what they liked, and whether it’s eligible for the coming year’s Hugos. Just because you don’t, you assume that most other people don’t, either. This is a fallacy.

    However, you may be right in one respect… it may never have occurred to Puppies to do any of that, so like you, they just assume that no one else does it either (they’ve repeatedly demonstrated that they don’t read much outside of their own small circle of blogs, and seem to have very little awareness of what the wider group of SFF fans are doing).

    Even so, their accusations of rigging and logrolling are just sour grapes on their part, with no basis in fact, and not an acceptable justification for the rigging that they’ve done on the Hugos.

     
    RAH: SF&F community has differentiated and become polarized . A reflection of our times. So slating will become more common not less. It is human nature.

    No, it’s not “human nature”. It’s the nature of people with an unjustified sense of entitlement who feel that they should be able to have everything their own way.

    It’s funny how the Hugos managed to avoid the phenomenon of slating for 60 years, until the Puppies came along. It’s funny how non-Puppies have managed to still continue not slating even after the Puppies started doing it.

    People who do shitty things like to tell themselves that everybody else does shitty things, too, so that they don’t have to feel bad about themselves. This seems to be particularly a problem with the Puppies.

35. N.K. Jemisin wrote: “So as much as I like CT, it is bugging me that CT is trying to play off the harm their presence does. (CT is a pseud. Going with “they”.)”

    We learn:
    (1) CT, that is, Dr. Chuck Tingle, author of Space Raptor Butt Invasion, has a budding fan in N.K. Jemisin. Love is already winning.
    (2) Jemisin is questioning Dr. Tingle’s motives. That is sad and hurtful, but to be expected as Dr. Tingle navigates the dangerous edge of the new *new* **new** Civil Right, on behalf of all of us. Thank you, Dr. Tingle.
    (3) Jemisin uses the prounoun “they”. Here Jemisin shows her hateful ignorance, as the correct pronoun is twir# (the # is silent), but this painful era shall pass for as surely as the arc of history bends toward justice, love will win. It always does!

36. @RAH, people who have keyboards can comment on the rest of your post, which seems sincere but largely wrong in fact and analysis. I’d like to address this particular error, though:

    SF&F community has differentiated and become polarized . A reflection of our times. So slating will become more common not less. It is human nature.

    I read hundreds of books every year and while most of my SFF reading is shorter fiction, I still manage something over 50 genre novels each year. This is the first year in over 30 years that I’ve read more than two of the finalists for best novel. I don’t mean read the novels in the years they were published, I mean at all. That’s more than half the time the Hugo’s have been in existence.

    It’s pretty common to notice something and think it’s a new phenomenon, but that doesn’t make the observation correct. SFF has long been filled with all sorts of divides and, except in imagination, it hasn’t been possible for most fans to read everything that is published or to have anything like a complete shared experience of the field.

    Slating happens because shitty people feel entitled, whether to more representation than their numbers merit or to someone else’s ice cream cone.

    @Dan, thank you for that moment in the Tingleverse.

37. @RAH: Claiming people don’t keep track of what they read is hilarious, given the huge number of people using GoodReads. I don’t use it, but it boggles my mind (a) how many people use it and (b) that you don’t seem to know this. I can’t turn around on the ‘net without tripping over a mention/link to GoodReads.

    Re. Tor, logrolling, etc. – ah, more Puppy Troll baseless accusations of bad acting without evidence. (yawn) On the other paw (ahem), we have actual evidence and proof of slating by RPs and (in the past) SPs. Hmm, which to believe, which to believe. I know, the one with proof!

    Finally, no, recommending stories is not rejecting anyone’s tastes. No matter who does it. (BTW do you realize most pros are also fans?) Someone saying “I like X, it was really cool! Check it out!” – even if the speaker works for Baen – is not a rejection of anyone’s tastes. You’re making no sense at all in this part, IMHO.

    BTW, I read a lot of review blogs, File770.com, other general SFF sites, and people don’t all recommend the same stuff. I also see diverse and contradictory opinions about everything. The same happens here; witness discussions about Uprooted, Planetfall, hell even God Stalk. So with all due respect, if you’re seeing “group think,” this simply means you need to get out (to different blogs/review sites/etc.) more, methinks.

    Maybe I’m weird, but you know what first draws me to a book? The freaking description! If that doesn’t grab me, someone saying it’s great doesn’t help nearly as much as one might think. I can’t be alone in this. A bunch of “OMG GREAT” reviews may make me rethink this, but honestly, I don’t bother reading a ton of reviews for books that don’t already sound interesting to me.

    There are exceptions, sure. And if I’m unsure how interesting something sounds, strong recs from people/sites I have reason to trust can make me give it a second, third, fourth look. Also, the sample is important; if I can’t get into it, do you think I’m going to buy it? Not that I always read the sample first – I’m human, and some books just sound so flipping cool – but more and more often, I at least peek at a few pages.

    Anyway, that’s me. Again, maybe I’m weird in this, but I can’t imagine I’m the only one for whom “does it intrigue me” is a pretty important (if not critical) first step to even paying attention to anything about a book.

38. @CSS Mavens Familiar With the CSS Plonk:* I use a variation so I can mouse over a name to reveal the comment. I want to refine it so that the name (preferably, the whole line) is always visible, so I can see whether I want to reveal the comment. Unfortunately, my attempts just break it in various fun ways. Maybe it’s not possible, but if any CSS experts here can think of how to do this, let me know. Thanks!

    * ETA: What some people refer to as the “Stylish script” for blanking out troll comments.

39. @RAH
    I don’t just recommend books I like. Based on the person asking I may recommend a book I didn’t like due to subject matter, PTSD triggers, or tropes that was well written. I also recommend books I’ve heard buzz around but won’t be reading due to subject matter or trigger issues.

    I don’t know where you hang out if your only seeing people agree on books but I’ve never been anywhere online where the group I was hanging out with all agreed on any book.

    Goodreads, librarything, a number of other sites lets one easily keep track of the books they read and if one’s left a review or made private notes one has a quick easy resource at nominating time for fiction.

    I use the notes in my iPad which sync across my iPhone and my computer for tracking all categories. This past year I had discussions on a number of places with others who were doing the same as early as June 2015. If you and your friends don’t do so it doesn’t mean your the majority of Hugo nominators or voters. Once one has participated a couple of years it just makes sense to many to use a variety of tools to keep track of things one wants to nominate.

40. I wanted numbers and didn’t note them. I think this is the count:

    Nominations by category Rabid Puppies List Sad Puppies List Neither list
    
    Novel 3 4 1
    Novella 4 4 0
    Novellette 4 3 0
    Short Story 5 1 0
    Related Work 5 1 0
    Graphic story 5 1 0
    Drama, long form 2 4 0
    Drama, short form 3 2 1
    Editor, short form 1 2 3
    Editor, long form 2 3 2
    Artist, pro 5 2 0
    Semiprozine 4 1 1
    Fanzine 5 2 0
    Fancast 5 1 0
    Fan writer 4 2 0
    Fan artist 4 1 0
    Campbell 4 4 0
    Total 65 38 8

41. tomas: I think just counting the numbers like you do overestimate the impact of the Sad Puppy lists. Most, possibly all, sad puppy picks on the shortlist are either also on the rabid slate, or they are works that have generated a lot of buzz among non-puppies. It’s possible that some finalists have been helped by a slight boost from the sad lists, but basically SP seem to have had almost zero independent impact.

42. Worth noting: Much has been made that in several categories, 1 or 2 of the RP picks were plausible Hugo contenders. That is reason to dread this year’s reading and voting stages a little less than last years. But: if the LEB had decided to fill up his slate with nothing but dreck, the dreck would still have made it into almost all categories.

43. Johan: The numbers are 12 SP-but-not-RP, 26 in common, and 39 RP-but-not-SP.

    What is more interesting than the size of the difference is the category distribution of the difference.

    The four categories in which more Sad Puppies nominees showed up attracted an average of 1173.5 nominating ballots with an average threshold of 186.5 to get on the ballot back in 2015.

    The eleven categories with more Rabid Puppies nominees showed up attracted, in 2015, an average of 800.7 nominating ballots with an average threshold of 91.1 nominations to get on the ballot.

44. @Jim Henley: I keep seeing “LEB” around here, but I missed the memo re: what it means. Lead Elk Buffoon? Lord Elk Butthead? I can’t figure it out. Help?

45. @Kendall: “Little Elk Boy”, a non-flattering nickname for Beale. I generally don’t like using it, because coming up with insulting nicknames for those one dislikes is something the Pups love to do, and I think non-Pups are generally better than that, but as nicknames go, it is one of the least offensive I’ve seen.

46. AFAIK “Little Elkherd Boy” is another formulation the canonical formulation.

47. Thanks, @Aaron & @Soon Lee. Good point, Aaron.

48. I’ve gone back to calling him Vox Day on the rare occasions I refer to him.

49. tomas:

    The numbers are 12 SP-but-not-RP, 26 in common, and 39 RP-but-not-SP.

    And the 12 SP-but-not-RP are things like Ancillary Mercy, Fury Road, and The Force Awakens. It is safe to say that these are on the shortlist because they are generally popular, not because they are SP recommended. Some, like Ancillary Mercy, are also so strongly infused with SJW smell that they are unlikely to have gained any votes from people looking for recommendations on the SP list. It’s meaningless to talk about these as “Sad Puppy nominees”.

    To measure the strength of the Sad Puppy campaign, you must identify and count finalists who are finalists primarily because of the sad puppies. As far as I can tell there is at most 1 of those: Jim Minz in Editor Long Form might be be a “Sad Puppy nominee”. Apart from him the Sad Puppy list does not seem to have made any impact on the list of finalists.

50. Johan:

    That would be an ill-supported conclusion.

    There are reasons to believe that Vox Day’s supporters were a relatively disciplined slate. Now, look at the novella category. All five nominees are from the Sad Puppies recommendation list. Can we be that sure that, say, “Binti” was more than a handful of votes from being displaced by “Fear and Self-Loathing in Hollywood”? No. Can we also know that whatever item was next on the list for Hugo nominations was more than a handful of votes away from breaking past the weakest of the four RP-nominated works? No.

    It seems quite clear that Vox Day has enough electoral strength to swamp categories with low numbers of nominating ballots, but not enough to place any nominees into the category with the highest number of nominating ballots without help from other voters. That is a relatively narrow window.

    Because of the nature of the Sad Puppies list this year, I do not think that it’s really possible to measure the impact very well without access to full nomination data (and then still fairly difficult), but it is quite likely, given the dynamics of this sort of election process and the numbers involved, that if the Sad Puppies list influenced several dozen voters, it would have been sufficient to move works above and below the threshold for elimination from consideration.

    This seems likely. (There’s been some attempt to quantify the size of Vox Day’s following in the voting process over on Rocket Stack Rank, you may wish to look there.)

Comments are closed.