Hertz: Byers’ Blue-Ribbon WOOF

By John Hertz: Only a few days after Renovation, the 2011 Worldcon, WOOF contributors who could not attend had received their copies of WOOF 36 by mail or courier.

WOOF, the World Organization Of Faneditors, was one of Bruce Pelz’ ideas, an amateur press association in which zines are collated annually at the World Science Fiction Convention.

Most s-f apas are collated quarterly, or monthly.  There have been dozens over the years.  FAPA (Fantasy Am. Pr. Ass’n), our first, founded in the mid-1930s, is still ongoing.  So is APA-L (Am. Pr. Ass’n – LASFS, produced at but not by the Los Angeles S-F Society), another Pelz project, founded in the mid-1960s, collated weekly – a shocking frequency before the rise of E-mail, still remarkable; so is WOOF, founded in the mid-1970s.  The chief procedural honcho and Great Panjandrum of an apa is the Official Editor (sometimes by local custom, or deserving, called other things).

Randy Byers was the OE of WOOF for 2011, following Lloyd Penney and Alan Stewart.  WOOF contributions are even less governed by rule than other fan activity.  Byers was bodacious.  In fourscore pages he got a Stu Shiffman cover, photos from Stewart’s 1994 DUFF (Down Under Fan Fund) trip to Winnipeg, David Cake the current DUFF delegate, John Coxon the TAFF (Trans-Atlantic Fan Fund) delegate, Claire Brialey & Mark Plummer, Chris Garcia, Guy Lillian, Penney, regulars Dean Gahlon and Roger Hill, and a host of others.

He modestly said he took up the task because some idealist in a funny hat persuaded him.  This like many modest disclaimers is a half-truth.  He’s willing to wade in the water, and he quotes Chuang Tzu.  His bark is worse than his bytes.

Pinch Hitters of Honor

Context: Carol A. Modesitt is yet another person who fell seriously ill at Renovation. As a result, her husband L.E. Modesitt has withdrawn as one of Context 24’s Guest of Honor.  The convention is happening this weekend (August 26-28) in Columbus.

The committee turned to their fellow Ohioan, John Scalzi, who agreed at the last minute to come and “help fill the sudden gap in their programming.” Scalzi can’t attend the entire convention but will do a full block of programming on Saturday, August 27 from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m.

I thought that was pretty cool.

VCON: Larry Niven deserves kudos, too, for helping out  VCON 36 (September 30-October 2) on short notice.

Gregory Benford, initially announced the con’s Author GoH, will be unable to attend VCON this year “due to an unavoidable summons from DARPA” (the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency). He must attend its meeting on September 30.

Now Benford will be among next year’s guests at VCON 37 while Niven has stepped in as VCON 36’s Author Guest of Honour.

The committee also announced that program participant Robert J. Sawyer will miss the con because he, too, was “swept up by DARPA.” The committee called it, “A signal honour for a Canadian Author.”

Renovation Attendance Estimate

How many people came to Renovation? John Lorentz is working on the database and will soon have an official number. In the meantime he says, “We can safely say we had (after excluding folks like vendor comps) well over 4000 warm bodies, possibly more than 4100.”

As of the close of pre-registration on August 14, Renovation had 4875 members of all types which included 3503 attending members.

Inside the 2011 Hugo Voting Statistics

Hugo Awards Administrator Vincent Docherty has posted his report of the 2011 voting statistics [PDF file] at the Hugo Awards site. There are tables showing the progress of the automatic runoffs in each category, and lists of runners-up from the nominating phase that reveal for the first time who else nearly made the final ballot. Here are some things that caught my eye.

Hugo Bleeps: A Hugo winner must get a majority of the votes. If, at the end of the first round, the nominee with the most first place votes hasn’t topped 50% there is a runoff. The lowest ranking nominee’s votes are redistributed to the people’s second choice (or next highest choice still in the runoff). The process repeats until someone or something gets a majority. The runoff in the Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form category illustrates how this works.

Rachel Bloom’s music video F*** Me, Ray Bradbury led after the first round with 366 first place votes. Fans of Doctor Who had scattered their votes among three nominated episodes but they generally ranked every Doctor Who entry ahead of Bloom’s song, so although Bloom led through the early elimination rounds she was destined to lose.

Collectively, No Award and the first two Doctor Who episodes to be eliminated received 535 first place votes. When they were redistributed in subsequent rounds FMRB picked up only 45 of these votes, while Doctor Who:The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang gathered in 296 and moved into first place.

Still, none of the three nominees left in the runoff had achieved a majority. The Lost Thing was eliminated next: its votes broke 152 for Doctor Who and 106 for FMRB, sealing a win for the Doctor.

(By the way, can anybody explain why, when clips from the Best Dramatic Presentation nominees were shown during the Hugo Ceremony, FMRB was cut off right before Rachel Bloom sang the title phrase? The unexpurgated title was all over the video screen and freely used by the presenter. It seemed strange that anyone was so demure about editing the clip.)

The Closest Races: The tightest races this year were in the two artist categories.

Brad Foster won the Best Fan Artist Hugo by a single vote over Randall Munroe. Foster trailed far behind Munroe in every round until Maurine Starkey was eliminated. When her votes were redistributed they broke 99 for Foster and 42 for Munroe, a wave of support that was just enough to put Foster over the top.

The Best Professional Artist category was not as dramatic but it was close, with Shaun Tan edging Daniel Dos Santos by 14 votes.

Can’t Explain It: When File 770 got eliminated from the runoff in the Best Fanzine category, 36 of its votes went to StarShip Sofa, 96 to The Drink Tank. I was croggled to discover anyone who’d vote for File 770 would rank StarShip Sofa ahead of Chris Garcia’s fanzine. Another stereotype bites the dust.

No Award: Voters cast 870 ballots in the Best Fanzine category but 110 had No Award in first place. That was just about the weakest showing overall. No Award votes by category:

Best Novel 37, Novella 57, Novelette 57, Short Story 86, Related Work 46, Graphic Story 70, BDP Long 55, BDP Short 85,  Best Editor Short 67, Best Editor Long 91, Best Professional Artist 37, Best Semiprozine 56, Best Fanzine 110, Best Fanwriter 133, Best Fanartist 134

Altogether, five Hugo nominees received fewer first place votes than No Award — 2 in Best Editor Long Form, 1 in Best Fanzine, 1 in Best Fan Writer and 1 in Best Fan Artist.

The Missing Short Story: The report of nominating votes revealed the unlucky author of the fifth Best Short Story nominee which was ruled out of competition by the 5% rule: “Elegy for a Young Elk” by Hannu Rajaniemi (4.85%).

Dramatic Anticlimaxes: I was interested to see that Metropolis (2010 restoration) got as many as 18 nominating votes, regardless that it fell far short of the final ballot.

On the other hand, no one will be surprised to learn that besides the 3 Doctor Who episodes which made the final ballot in Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form, another 4 episodes were among the next 6 works getting the most nominating votes.

More Bang for the Buck: There were 7 nominees for Best Professional Editor, Long Form instead of the usual 5 this year, and everyone knew the extra ones had to be the product of a tie for fifth place.

Now we know the rest of the story. David G. Hartwell and Patrick Nielsen Hayden declined nomination in the Best Professional Editor, Long Form category after receiving sufficient votes to qualify. Their gracious gesture ended up lifting not two but three other editors onto the final ballot — a trio originally tied for 7th place.

Fanzines Without Pages: How did non-magazine contenders for the Best Fanzine Hugo fare? Podcasts receiving significant nominating votes besides StarShip Sofa were Jonathan Strahan’s Notes from Coode Street blog and podcast (6th, just 1 vote shy of reaching the final ballot) and Galactic Suburbia (10th). Website SF Signal ranked 11th.

Just Missed: Dave Langford’s Ansible and Cheryl Morgan’s Salon Futura were the two semiprozines receiving the most nominating votes, apart from the five finalists.

In the Best Fan Artist category, Spring Schoenhuth came within one vote of making the final ballot (which would have tied her with Randall Munroe). She is a popular Bay Area jewelry maker, designer of the Campbell Pin and has written for The Drink Tank.

2011 Hugo Award Winners

Here, let me be the last person on the internet to report that Renovation, the 2011 World Science Fiction Convention, announced the 2011 Hugo Award winners on August 20.

BEST NOVEL
Blackout/All Clear by Connie Willis (Ballantine Spectra)

BEST NOVELLA
The Lifecycle of Software Objects by Ted Chiang (Subterranean)

BEST NOVELETTE

“The Emperor of Mars” by Allen M. Steele (Asimov’s, June 2010)

BEST SHORT STORY
“For Want of a Nail” by Mary Robinette Kowal (Asimov’s, September 2010)

BEST RELATED WORK
Chicks Dig Time Lords: A Celebration of Doctor Who by the Women Who Love It, edited by Lynne M. Thomas and Tara O’Shea (Mad Norwegian)

BEST GRAPHIC STORY
Girl Genius, Volume 10: Agatha Heterodyne and the Guardian Muse, written by Phil and Kaja Foglio; art by Phil Foglio; colors by
Cheyenne Wright (Airship Entertainment)

BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION, LONG FORM
Inception, written and directed by Christopher Nolan (Warner)

BEST DRAMATIC PRESENTATION, SHORT FORM
Doctor Who: “The Pandorica Opens/The Big Bang,” written by Steven Moffat; directed by Toby Haynes (BBC Wales)

BEST EDITOR, SHORT FORM

Sheila Williams

BEST EDITOR, LONG FORM

Lou Anders

BEST PROFESSIONAL ARTIST
Shaun Tan

BEST SEMIPROZINE
Clarkesworld, edited by Neil Clarke, Cheryl Morgan, Sean Wallace; podcast directed by Kate Baker

BEST FANZINE
The Drink Tank, edited by Christopher J Garcia and James Bacon

BEST FAN WRITER
Claire Brialey

BEST FAN ARTIST

Brad W. Foster

JOHN W. CAMPBELL AWARD FOR BEST NEW WRITER

Award for the best new professional science fiction or fantasy writer of 2009 or 2010, sponsored by Dell Magazines (not a Hugo Award).

Lev Grossman

LoneStar Con 3 Announces Guests

The Texas bid for the 2013 Worldcon was officially declared the winner at Renovation’s Saturday business meeting. It had been essentially unopposed and received 694 of the 760 votes cast, with 14 other choices receiving votes.

Co-chairs Laura Domitz and Bill Parker announced the con will be called LoneStar Con 3 and will be held in San Antonio from August 29-September 2, 2013.

The guests of honor will be James Gunn, Norman Spinrad, Darrell K. Sweet, Ellen Datlow, and Willie Siros. Toastmaster will be Paul Cornell. There also will be two Special Guests, Leslie Fish and Joe R. Lansdale.

At this time a new adult attending membership costs $160, young adult (under 21) $110 and Child $75.   

The detail of Site Selection voting is: Texas 694, None of the Above 14, and write-ins — Xerpes 6, Minneapolis in ’73 5, Denton, the Happiest Place on Earth 4, Boston 2020 Christmas 3, and the following each received 1 vote, Antartica, Babylon 5, BSFS Clubhouse, Chicago, Cincinnati, Fred Duarte’s House, Peggy Rae’s House, Spuzzum, Unalakleet (AK). There were also 14 invalid ballots submitted.

The full press release follows the jump.

[Thanks to Patrick Molloy for a copy of the voting stats.]

Continue reading

Business Meeting Votes
Hugo Zine Category Changes

Friday’s session of the Renovation business meeting ended with a remarkable display of consensus as fans voted in a collection of changes to the Hugo zine categories with only four opposing votes.

Best Fancast: The business meeting had to winnow through competing proposals affecting the zine categories. The first step was separately considering the two motions to create a new Hugo category for “fancasts,” which would (if adopted) inferentially redefine the zine categories by removing audio and video items.

The business meeting then voted to direct Andrew Trembley and Rich Lynch to reconcile their two versions into a single proposal for the meeting to consider. Many fans consulted on the revision. Friday’s meeting passed it 75-11.

(Caution: The wording quoted here is based on my notes.)

Insert a new section after existing section 3.1.13 to create a new category:
3.3.X: Best Fancast. Any generally available non-profesional audio or video periodical devoted to science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that by the close of the previous calendar year has released four (4) or more episodes, at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and that does not qualify as a dramatic presentation.

The proposal includes a sunset provision that it unless it is re-ratified by the 2016 business meeting it shall be repealed.

Report of the Semiprozine Committee: There followed a whole series of procedural steps to allow the meeting to consider competing rules changes offered by the Semiprozine Committee (the fruit of two years’ work), and Rich Lynch.

Despite several attempts to introduce different ideas or language, and a considerable amount of maneuvering generally, the proposals of the Semiprozine Committee on the whole were passed, (1) with necessary wording to reconcile them to the creation of the fancast category, and (2) to incorporate Lynch’s key ideas, the deletion of “equivalent in other media” from the fanzine category, and addition of the word “periodical” to modify “publication.”

Here is the result:

Added a new section
3.Y.Z: A Professional Publication is one which meets at least one of the following two criteria:
(1) it provided at least a quarter the income of any one person or,
(2) was owned or published by any entity which provided at least a quarter the income of any of its staff and/or owner.

Amended sections 3.3.12 and 3.3.13, by replacing them with:
3.3.12: Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, which does not qualify as a fancast and which in the previous calendar year met at least one (1) of the following criteria:
(1) paid its contributors and/or staff monetarily,
(2) was generally available only for paid purchase,

3.3.13: Best Fanzine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, which does not qualify as a fancast and which in the previous calendar year met neither of the following criteria:
(1) paid its contributors and/or staff monetarily,
(2) was generally available only for paid purchase,

Add to the end of Section 3.9 (Notification and Acceptance):
“Additionally, each nominee in the categories of Best Fanzine and Best Semi-Prozine shall be required to confirm that they meet the qualifications of their category.”

Each of these amendments will have to be ratified by the Chicago 2012 Worldcon business meeting in order to take effect.

Rich Lynch and Steven H Silver believed that the changes made to the fanzine category will still allow some websites or blogs to be eligible if they are not “continually updated” but take down and archive the previous material. SF Site is an example of a website that already follows this practice. The final verdict will rest with the voters and the Hugo Administrator.

The Rest of the Story: The Business Meeting made many other decisions this week.

Mark Protection Committee: Linda Deneroff, Dave McCarty, Warren Buff and Stephen Boucher were elected to fill the open seats on the Mark Protection Committee. Besides vacancies caused by three members’ expiring terms, a fourth vacancy had been created by Ruth Sachter’s resignation from the committee.

Business Passed on from Aussiecon 4: A series of amendments to the WSFS Constitution passed on from Aussiecon 4 were ratified unchanged at the Renovation business meeting.

These amendments (1) altered the Worldcon membership rate limits, (2) made explicit the authority to conduct electronic voting for the Hugo Awards and Site Selection (in addition to paper voting), (3) allowed cons to comply with the requirement to distribute WSFS rules to members via electronic distribution, on an opt-in basis, (4) clarified reference to “run-off candidate” in the constitution, and (5) updated the language of the service mark notice to include the Hugo Award logo and trophy.

New Business: A proposed amendment to the WSFS Constititution directing the Mark Protection Committee to “protect likely internet domain names of future worldcons for years not yet selected” was referred to the Mark Protection Committee for refinement.

An amendment was introduced to prevent the Mark Protection Committee from imposing more stringent membership eligibility rules than are already present in the WSFS Constitution. This was a reaction against a rules change made at Aussiecon 4, and was a source of high emotion because the rule change had only affected Cheryl Morgan. The meeting did repudiate that change but by another route, see full details on Kevin Standlee’s LiveJournal. Kevin also covers the other housekeeping rules changes that were passed.

Hi Ho, It’s Off to Worldcon I Go

Renovation is a few hours away and I’m ready with my markup of the pocket program.

PANELS I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE

Wednesday 5:00pm 1hr C04
Dr. Demento Special Guest Item
Dr. Demento’s Greatest Hits, including Dare to Stupid, Fish Heads, Dead Puppies Aren’t Much Fun, and Shaving Cream. An audio and visual spectacular.

There will be several programs devoted to Doctor D, this is just the first. Although the good Doctor came to a Loscon years ago he was only there to sign, so I’ve never seen him take the stage before.

Thursday 2:00pm 1hr D05
Short but Containing the World: A Look at Novellas
Novellas (often called simply short novels outside the genre) have been described as long enough to contain the world but short enough to be read in an afternoon. Some of the great works of fiction both in SF and elsewhere are in this form. What makes novellas such a good form and what are some of the best examples.
Gardner Dozois (m), Richard A. Lovett, Robert Reed, Robert Silverberg, Jonathan Strahan

Once again, a generic topic is made compelling by the right mix of panelists

Thursday 4:00pm 1hr A01+6
My Trip to Mars
David D. Levine was part of a group who lived in a simulated Martian environment. Sponsored by the Mars Society, the Mars Desert Research Station gives researchers of all kinds the opportunity to see what exploring Mars could be like.

Having followed the story when he did this, I’ll be interested to hear David speak about it in person.

Friday 1:00pm 1hr A04
Selecting the Best Short Fiction of the Year
The editors discuss how they put together their best of the year anthologies. They look at their philosophies, the results, and the importance of such anthologies. Great Best of the Year series of past years may be used as examples.
Ellen Datlow, Gardner Dozois, David G. Hartwell (m),Jonathan Strahan

I love power panels that assemble the giants of science fiction, these being some of our most renowned annual anthologists.

Friday 1:00pm 1hr A05
Who is this Robert E. Lee person? How Much Background Information is Really Needed in Historical Fiction
Writers of SF and mysteries based set in historical periods or of alternate histories have to maintain a fine line between supplying enough information that the reader understands the situation but not so much as to insult most of the readers. Does a writer need to explain what Gettysburg was? How about the Little Round Top? How about who Robert E. Lee was?
Walter H. Hunt, Caroline Mullan, John Maddox Roberts, Harry Turtledove (m), Connie Willis

These leading practitioners of alternate history are likely to dispose of the faux question and move onto an alternate topic – isn’t that exactly what we want them to do?

Friday 3:00pm 1hr 30min A01+6
Three Interviews about Charles N. Brown
Charles N. Brown passed away in 2009 just a month before he was announced as a Guest of Honor at Renovation. Charles was recognized for his many contributions to science fiction and fandom, from before the early days of Locus through the present day. Gary K. Wolfe interviews three of Charles’s friends and colleagues from his long life in fandom.
Robert Silverberg, Jonathan Strahan, Connie Willis, Gary K. Wolfe

Some of the Worldcon’s liveliest raconteurs are on this one.

Friday 5:00pm 1hr D03
Post-Modern Fantasy, Epic and Otherwise
There’s been considerable discussion of Fantasy, Fantastika, and Post-Modernism. What is this about, and why is it interesting for those who read, review, or critique present day fantasy?
N. K. Jemisin, William Lexner, Nick Mamatas, Peadar Ó Guilín (m), Brandon Sanderson, Brent Weeks

I haven’t seen Jemisin on a panel before and after reading her Hugo-nominated novel I’m curious about what she will say.

Saturday 10:00am 1hr A03
SF Physics Myths
The panel looks at scientific misconceptions that authors have inadvertently promoted to the extent that they have become “common knowledge”.
Gregory Benford (m), Michael F. Flynn, Joe Haldeman, Corry L. Lee, Alastair Reynolds

They’ve got me hooked with the premise.

Lastly, I took note of this curiosity —

Saturday 8:00pm 1hr 25min Roma 1
Soul Eater (TV-14)
Three teams, each with a human weapon, must collect the souls of ninety-nine evil humans and one witch to make their human weapon unstoppable.

I’m pretty sure it’s no coincidence that this is scheduled in the same time slot as the Hugo Ceremony.

Scoring the Proposed ‘Zine Hugo Amendments

What any fan thinks about the Semiprozine Committee’s and Rich Lynch’s proposals to change the fan publishing Hugo rules will inevitably depend on what he or she thought needed to be fixed in the first place.

So I’ll lead into my comments by listing what I believe, with a brief explanation:

  • Audio and video presentations should be ruled out of the fanzine category.

Text-based publications should not be grouped with unrelated items for the same reason we don’t lump novels and dramatic presentations into a single category.

  • Zines that pay contributors, owners or staff, which otherwise qualify in the fanzine category, should compete in the semiprozine category.

I advocate this as a way of creating an enforceable definition of semiprozine.

  • All rules must define the terms they use – professional, nonprofessional, issue, “equivalent in other media.”

The current rules define none of these terms. People cannot be sure what is eligible in the fanzine category, which deters participation.

  • No standard of performance or measurement ought to part of a rule unless the data needed to evaluate it can be easily obtained by the Hugo Administrator.

There must be practical means of enforcing any rules. Fandom neither wants nor rewards activist Hugo Administrators.

I. The Committee’s Report: Did the Semiprozine Committee report deliver? Let’s see.

The majority report proposes four changes.

(1) New criteria for semiprozine:

Amend the sections 3.3.12 and 3.3.13, by replacing them with:

3.3.12: Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which in the previous calendar year met at least one (1) of the following criteria:
(1) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(2) was generally available only for paid purchase,

(Cited sections are in the WSFS Constitution.)

The proposed amendment’s most impressive feature is that it discards the antiquated criteria regarding printed copies and advertising space. I’m satisfied the two remaining criteria are the best litmus tests for semiprozines – payment to participants, copies primarily available to purchasers. And these are performance/measurement-based criteria a Hugo Administrator can evaluate from readily-available information.   

Interestingly, the Committee’s proposal eliminates the right an editor currently has to move a zine into semiprozine category by declaration. As a result, Langford’s Ansible would be welcomed back to the fanzine category.

The amendment’s main shortcoming is its failure to define “issue” and “the equivalent in other media.” One virtue of Rich Lynch’s proposal (discussed below) is that its terms are defined.

(2) Best Fanzine modified: The Committee has made neutral changes to the Best Fanzine rule to conform it to the revised semiprozine criteria:

3.3.13: Best Fanzine. Any generally available non-professional publication devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which in the previous calendar year met neither of the following criteria: 
(1) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication, 
(2) was generally available only for paid purchase,

The old rule excluded anything that qualified as a semiprozine; the new wording serves the same purpose.

Unfortunately, the Committee has done nothing about the eligibility of podcasts and its report explicitly states StarShip Sofa will continue to qualify as a fanzine under its version of the rules.

(3) A definition for “professional publication”: The Committee proposes to put a working definition of “professional publication” back in to the WSFS Constitution. Their intentions are right on target, the rules have been in want of a new definition of “professional” since the old one was erased as a side-effect of other changes.

However, the reason a definition of “professional” is needed is not to keep Asimov’s, Analog and F&SF out of the pastures of fandom. Almost none of the “pro” Hugo categories – for fiction, editing and art – actually includes “professional publication” as a condition of eligibility. Best Professional Artist alone has that requirement.

The real need for defining “professional” is to disqualify ineligible entrants from the semiprozine and fan categories by giving constitutional meaning to the antonym “non-professional publications.”

The Committee’s definition is in this proposal:

Add a new section: 3.Y.Z: A Professional Publication is one which meets at least one of the following two criteria:
(1) it provided at least a quarter the income of any one person or,
(2) was owned or published by any entity which provided at least a quarter the income of any of its staff and/or owner.

The proposed language sounds very precise, which is of little help because in practice the rule will depend on voluntary compliance, being impractical to enforce.

Consider: Semiprozines aspire to commercial success, whether or not they depend on it. If lightning strikes, what then? Charlie Brown once told me he depended on winning the Hugo every year to drive Locus’ subscription sales. That leads me to believe no semiprozine publisher will want to give up the market appeal of a succession of Hugo nominations.

In Charlie Brown’s day the print media criteria were sufficient to classify Locus as a semiprozine. Nobody had to ask him for income information to apply this new one-quarter test, which presumably would lead to Locus being reclassified as a prozine. Can you imagine how Charlie would have answered? Business reasons and privacy motives will keep prospective nominees from cooperating with the enforcement of this rule.

(4) The Hammer? The Committee already anticipated my last criticism with its final proposal:

Add to the end of Section 3.9 (Notification and Acceptance): 
Additionally, each nominee in the categories of Best Fanzine and Best Semi-Prozine shall be required to confirm that they meet the qualifications of their category.

But what will that mean in practice? The rule doesn’t define what prospective nominees will be required to do to confirm eligibility. Does that mean continuing the policy of self-certification with polite “do-you-think-you-are-eligible?” e-mails of the sort this year’s Hugo Administrator sent out? If the plan is to take everybody’s word for it, there’s no need for this rule.

Saul Jaffe’s minority report, appealing for better draftsmanship, is on target. If it is not fairly obvious who is eligible in a category there is a major problem with the Hugo rule, because it will never be cured by enforcement.

II. Rich Lynch’s Amendments

The latest version of Rich Lynch’s proposals I know about are on his LiveJournal:

Proposed WSFS Constitutional Amendments to keep the Fanzine Hugo non-professional and limited to words on paper or video screen.

(Note: strikeouts indicate proposed deletions and underlined text proposed additions.)

3.3.12: Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which in the previous calendar year met at least two (2) one (1) of the following criteria:

(1) had an average press run of at least one thousand (1000) copies per issue,
(2) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(3) (2) provided at least half the income of any one person,
(4) (3) had at least fifteen percent (15%) of its total space occupied by advertising,
(5) (4) announced itself to be a semiprozine.
Audio and video productions are excluded from this category.

3.3.13 Best Fan Audio or Video Production. Any generally available non-professional audio or video production devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has had four (4) or more episodes or podcasts, at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year.

3.3.13 3.3.14: Best Fanzine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which does not qualify as a semiprozine. Audio and video productions are excluded from this category, as are publications that pay their contributors and/or staff monetarily.

Lynch’s amendments make changes I support. They

  • Identify semiprozines and fanzines as reading experiences — words on a page (appearing on paper or screen) — by ruling audio and video productions out of the category
  • Define semiprozines and fanzines as periodical publications – appearing in discrete, individual issues (similar to a magazine)
  • Limit eligibility for Best Fanzine to amateur zines by restricting those that pay contributors or staff

Some other features trouble me. His Best Fan Audio or Video Production amendment creates a new category for podcasts, videocasts, etc. – like last year’s winner StarShip Sofa – that would be excluded from the Best Semiprozine and Best Fanzine categories if his changes go through. I think that idea for a new award category should be left to find its own supporters, and not be packaged as though it is a goal of fanzine fans. It rings a false note.

Lynch’s semiprozine definition fails to go far enough, leaving in place outdated print media criteria (average press run), criteria an external observer can’t check (income), or have no practical application for blogs and websites (15% of space occupied by advertising). However, Lynch would argue my last complaint isn’t a problem — he interprets his amendments to rule websites and blogs out of contention in the zine categories.

III. Thinking Out Loud

Rich Lynch has my thanks for advancing the public discussion of these issues with his motions. And they are the only proposals to plainly state that fanzines are text-based and should not be competing with items that resemble dramatic presentations.

While I like several of the Semiprozine Committee’s ideas for changing the semipro and fanzine category definitions, more needs to be done. I’d like to see the “issue” definition problem solved by including Lynch’s chosen word “periodical.”  And I would like to focus the zine categories on text by adding Lynch’s phrase “Audio and video productions are excluded from this category” to the Committee’s semiprozine and fanzine rule proposals.

We’ll see how it all plays out next week at the 2011 Business Meeting.

Byers: WOOF Reminder

By Randy Byers: This is just a reminder to anyone who is planning to submit a fanzine to WOOF (the Worldcon APA) this year.

Copy count is 69.

I need to know the title and page count of your zine so I can add it to the ToC.

THIS IS A CHANGE SINCE MY LAST ANNOUNCEMENT: If you are mailing your zines to me rather than delivering them (or having them delivered) to the convention, I need to receive them by Monday, August 15th. I had previously said the deadline was the 16th, but it turns out I’m leaving for Reno before mail arrives on Tuesday.

There will be a drop box in the fanzine lounge for anyone who brings their fanzine to the convention. Please drop them off by noon Friday.

Collation will be at noon on Saturday in the fanzine lounge.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions at [email protected].

Cheers,
Randy Byers
2011 OE for WOOF