196 thoughts on “What Did You Nominate For The 2018 Hugo Awards?

  1. Rats, I forgot about The Secret Life of Bots, which I loved unreservedly. Also, Clockwork Boys (and the second is even better than the first). Plus I forgot about Jemisin’s ukase. Also, note to self, do not save almost all your short fiction reading for the last two weeks, because you never know when something will fall out of the sky to ruin your plans.

    Here are my fiction choices.

    Best Novel:
    Provenance Ann Leckie
    Bannerless Carrie Vaughn
    Raven Strategm Yoon Ha Lee
    The Stone Sky N. K. Jemisin Orbit

    Best Novella:
    Gwendy’s Button Box Stephen King & Richard Chizmar
    The Man Who Put the Bomp Richard Chwedyk
    All Systems Red Martha Wells
    And Then There Were (N-One) Sarah Pinsker
    Passing Strange Ellen Klages

    Best Novelette:
    A Human Stain Kelly Robson Tor.com

    Best Short Story:
    Paradox Naomi Kritzer
    The Martian Obelisk Linda Nagata

    Best Series:
    Ancillaryverse Ann Leckie
    Cainsville Kelley Armstrong
    Indranan War K. B. Wagers
    The Red Linda Nagata
    Confederation/Peacekeeper Tanya Huff

    Best Dramatic Presentation (Long Form):
    Wonder Woman Patty Jenkins
    Star Wars: The Last Jedi

    Best Semiprozine:
    Beneath Ceaseless Skies
    Daily Science Fiction
    Uncanny
    GigaNotoSaurus
    BookSmugglers

    Your nominations for The John W. Campbell Award (not a Hugo):
    K. B. Wagers

  2. @Cassy B: Indeed. And I’m hoping we didn’t all forget the same things. šŸ˜‰

  3. Pingback: Diversity again | File 770

  4. @Kendall

    And Iā€™m hoping we didnā€™t all forget the same things. ?

    If that happened, one can make the argument that those things weren’t very memorable and probably didn’t merit awards anyway. šŸ™‚

    So I count lists for 2018 from 49 people (I’m not counting the Retro-Hugos). Last year, there were only 48. We seem to be very consistent, if nothing else.

    –Greg

  5. Best Series
    Memoirs of Lady Trent by Marie Brennan 11
    Divine Cities by Robert Jackson Bennett 11
    Vlad Taltos/Dragaera by Steven Brust 7
    The Broken Earth by N.K. Jemison 8
    Books of the Raksura by Martha Wells 6
    World of Five Gods by Lois McMaster Bujold 5
    Indranan War by K. B. Wagers 4
    Foreigner by CJ Cherryh 4
    Xuya Universe by Aliette de Bodard 3
    Fitz and the Fool by Robin Hobb 3
    The Queenā€™s Thief by Megan Whalen Turner 3
    Terra Ignota by Ada Palmer 3
    Middlearth/The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien 2
    Ancillaryverse by Ann Leckie 2
    His Dark Materials / Book of Dust by Philip Pullman 2
    Diving Universe by Kristine Kathryn Rusch 2
    The Craft Sequence by Max Gladstone 2
    Chronicles of the Kencyrath by P.C. Hodgell 2
    Shades of Magic by V E Schwab 2
    The Clan Chronicles by Julie E. Czerneda 2
    Kylara Vatta by Elizabeth Moon 2
    Corporation Wars by Ken MacLeod 2
    Hidden Legacy by Ilona Andrews 2
    In Death by J.D. Robb 2
    Rivers of London by Ben Aaronovitch 2
    Mercy Thompson by Patricia Briggs 2

  6. Best YA Novel
    Weave a Circle Round by Kari Maaren 5
    In Other Lands by Sarah Rees Brennan 4
    The Book of Dust: La Belle Sauvage by Phillip Pullman 4
    Dreadnought by April Daniels 3
    Akata Warrior by Nnedi Okorafor 3
    A Skinful of Shadows by Frances Hardinge 3
    Arabella and the Battle of Venus by David D. Levine 3
    Shadowhouse Fall by Daniel Jose Older 3
    Jane, Unlimited by Kristin Cashore 2
    The Art of Starving by Sam J. Miller 2
    Want by Cindy Pon 2
    Thick As Thieves by Megan Whalen Turner 2
    All the Crooked Saints by Maggie Stiefvater 2
    The Glass Town Game by Cathrynne M. Valente 2
    Warcross by Marie Lu 2
    Defy the Stars by Claudia Gray 2

  7. Campbell Award
    Katherine Arden 11
    Vina Jie-Min Prasad 11
    Rivers Solomon 7
    K.B. Wagers 6
    Rebecca Roanhorse 4
    Jeannette Ng 2
    G.V. Anderson 2
    Sarah Kuhn 2
    S.A. Chakraborty 2
    April Daniels 2
    Sylvain Neuvel 2
    Laurie Penny 2
    K Arsenault Rivera 2
    R.E. Stearns 2

  8. Best Related Work
    Luminescent Threads edited by Alexandra Pierce & Mimi Mondal 6
    Crash Override by Zoe Quinn 5
    Iain M. Banks by Paul Kincaid 3
    Invisible 3 edited by Jim C. Hines and Mary Anne Mohanraj 2
    Paperbacks from Hell by Grady Hendrix 2
    Freshly Rememberā€™d: Kirk Drift by Erin HorĆ”kovĆ” 2
    Gender Identity and Sexuality in Current Fantasy and Science Fiction edited by Francesca T Barbini 2

    not sure that these works are eligible, since they contain mostly work published prior to 2017:

    Donā€™t Live For Your Obituary by John Scalzi 3
    Sleeping with Monsters by Liz Bourke 3
    No Time to Spare by Ursula K. Le Guin 2

  9. Best Dramatic Presentation Long Form
    Wonder Woman 20
    Star Wars: The Last Jedi 15
    Logan 10
    The Shape of Water 8
    Thor: Ragnarok 7
    Get Out 6
    Blade Runner 2049 6
    Spider-Man: Homecoming 4
    Guardians of the Galaxy II 4
    War For the Planet of the Apes 3
    Coco 3
    Colossal 2
    Twin Peaks: The Return 2
    The Good Place (Season 1) 2
    The Handmaidā€™s Tale (Season 1) 2
    Stranger Things (Season 2) 2
    American Gods (Season 1) 2
    The Expanse (Season 2) 2

  10. Best Short Story
    Sun, Moon, Dust by Ursula Vernon 9
    Fandom for Robots by Vina Jie-Min Prasad 9
    The Scholast in the Low Waters by Max Gladstone Kingdom 6
    The Martian Obelisk by Linda Nagata 7
    Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experienceā„¢ by Rebecca Roanhorse 6
    Paradox by Naomi Kritzer 4
    Zen and the Art of Starship Maintenance by Tobias S Buckell 5
    Carnival Nine by Caroline M. Yoachim 3
    Donā€™t Press Charges and I Wonā€™t Sue by Charlie Jane Anders 3
    The Library of Lost Things by Matthew Bright 3
    Origin Story by T. Kingfisher 2
    Utopia LOL? by Jamie Wahls 2
    Probably Still The Chosen One by Kelly Barnhill 2
    The Heartā€™s Cartography by Susan Jane Bigelow 2
    Metal and Flesh by Marie Vibbert 2
    Packing by T. Kingfisher 2
    Waiting Out the End of the World in Pattyā€™s Place Cafe by Naomi Kritzer 2
    Henosis by N.K. Jemisin 2

  11. not sure that these works are eligible, since they contain mostly work published prior to 2017:

    That seems to be quite common in this category, the Le Guin and Gaiman works last year being examples: and one of the finalists in 2014 was ‘Speculative Fiction 2012’, which appeared as a collection in 2013, but, as its name suggests, actually consisted entirely of work published in 2012.

  12. Andrew M: That seems to be quite common in this category, the Le Guin and Gaiman works last year being examples: and one of the finalists in 2014 was ā€˜Speculative Fiction 2012ā€™, which appeared as a collection in 2013, but, as its name suggests, actually consisted entirely of work published in 2012.

    That seems to me to be a real oversight on the part of the Hugo Administrators.

  13. I’m definitely not an admin, nor do I play one on TV. But in those cases, I think it’s the collection itself which counts as the work. Choosing which pieces to include, arranging them in a particular order, and providing introductory material. Individual pieces appeared before, but never in this form.

  14. Laura: Iā€™m definitely not an admin, nor do I play one on TV. But in those cases, I think itā€™s the collection itself which counts as the work. Choosing which pieces to include, arranging them in a particular order, and providing introductory material. Individual pieces appeared before, but never in this form.

    The WSFS Constitution actually specifies that such works are not eligible:

    3.2.4: Works appearing in a series are eligible as individual works, but the series as a whole is not eligible, except under Section 3.3.5*. However, a work appearing in a number of parts shall be eligible for the year of the final part.

    3.3.6: Best Related Work. Any work related to the field of science fiction, fantasy, or fandom, appearing for the first time during the previous calendar year or which has been substantially modified during the previous calendar year, and which is either non-fiction or, if fictional, is noteworthy primarily for aspects other than the fictional text, and which is not eligible in any other category.

    * which specifies the rules for the Best Series category

  15. I can’t speak for Sleeps With Monsters, but the Scalzi and the Le Guin aren’t just collections of a series.

  16. Laura: I canā€™t speak for Sleeps With Monsters, but the Scalzi and the Le Guin arenā€™t just collections of a series.

    All 3 works are collections drawn from a series of blog posts.

  17. Both of the ones I’ve read (and admittedly nominated) had pieces which originally appeared in 2017. Perhaps that’s how the Gaiman and Le Guin qualified last year.

  18. Laura: Both of the ones Iā€™ve read (and admittedly nominated) had pieces which originally appeared in 2017. Perhaps thatā€™s how the Gaiman and Le Guin qualified last year.

    The WSFS Constitution leaves it up to the Hugo Administrator to determine the definition of “substantially modified”. I vaguely remember a percentage being quoted when a Puppy story was nominated which was a longer version of an earlier-published story — but I can’t remember what they said they used as a requirement for percentage of “new content”.

    I remember last year noting that a significant chunk (1/4 to 1/3, maybe?) of Kameron Hurley’s The Geek Feminist Revolution was not previously-published on her blog.

    Since the subtitle for Don’t Live For Your Obituary is Advice, Commentary and Personal Observations on Writing, 2008-2017, one would presume that only around 10% of it is 2017 work. But who knows; if it makes the ballot, we’ll find out what sort of call this year’s Hugo Admin decides to make.

  19. If they are considered series, then they do have a final part appearing in 2017. When a graphic novel is a collection of previously published individual issues, it only needs the last issue to have appeared in the qualifying year. (Of course, that’s often a decent size addition.) I remember wondering about Gaiman’s book last year because I think only the intro was new — maybe one other piece. And it definitely wasn’t any sort of series.

  20. This is why I would never want to be the Hugo Administrator, and have to make these calls — because I can see persuasive arguments on both sides, and no matter what you decide, a certain percentage of Hugo voters will be unhappy with your decision. šŸ˜€

  21. Eric really got into this today, and I see he overlapped somewhat with JJ. Not a problem; it’s a useful double-check.

    Novella:
    All Systems Red by Martha Wells (28)
    And Then There Were (N-One) by Sarah Pinsker (26)
    Passing Strange by Ellen Klages (12)
    Down Among the Sticks and Bones by Seanan McGuire (7)
    17776 by Jon Bois (4)
    Binti: Home by Nnedi Okorafor (4)
    The Furthest Station by Ben Aaronovitch (4)
    The Prisoner of Limnos by Lois McMaster Bujold (4)
    The Red Threads of Fortune by JY Yang (4)
    Agents of Dreamland by CaitlĆ­n R. Kiernan (3)
    Dusk or Dark or Dawn or Day by Seanan McGuire (3)
    In Calabria by Peter S. Beagle (3)
    River of Teeth by Sarah Gailey (3)
    The Black Tides of Heaven by JY Yang (3)

    Novelette:
    The Secret Life of Bots by Suzanne Palmer (12)
    A Series of Steaks by Vina Jie-Min Prasad (8)
    Extracurricular Activities by Yoon Ha Lee (6)
    The Dark Birds by Ursula Vernon (6)
    Pan-Humanism: Hope and Pragmatics by Jess Barber and Sara Saab (4)
    Wind Will Rove by Sarah Pinsker (4)
    Come See the Living Dryad by Theodora Goss (3)
    Making Us Monsters by Sam J. Miller and Lara Elena Donnelly (3)
    The Worshipful Society of Glovers by Mary Robinette Kowal (3)
    To Us May Grace Be Given by L.S. Johnson (3)

    Short Story:
    Fandom for Robots by Vina Jie-Min Prasad (9)
    Sun, Moon, Dust by Ursula Vernon (9)
    The Martian Obelisk by Linda Nagata (7)
    The Scholast in the Low Waters Kingdom by Max Gladstone (6)
    Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experienceā„¢ by Rebecca Roanhorse (6)
    Zen and the Art of Starship Maintenance by Tobias S. Buckell (5)
    Don’t Press Charges and I Won’t Sue by Charlie Jane Anders (4)
    Paradox by Naomi Kritzer (4)
    Carnival Nine by Caroline M. Yoachim (3)
    The Library of Lost Things by Matthew Bright (3)

    As with last year, he also produced an Annotated File 770 List for Short Fiction, which includes all these results together with things like links to the stories.

  22. Thanks JJ and Eric.

    Best series – I’m happy to see a fair number of completed series getting nods and I hope that trend continues. For example, while I’d be delighted to see Steven Brust get some recognition as he’s one of my favourite writers, the Vlad series really really isn’t complete and judge-able – the whole metaplot is leading up to…something…as yet unrevealed and it’s impossible to say if it’ll stick the landing.
    (I also see the early lead for Foreigner fell away)

    Best Related – I’ve got to admit I nommed Sleeping With Monsters on the belief that those other collections were nominated in previous years so surely it was eligible too. I may be wrong!

    In the short fiction, I don’t see anything that leaps out as a surprise. It does look like Vina Jie-Min Prasad will be having a spectacular debut year though.

  23. JJ on March 21, 2018 at 7:07 pm said:

    This is why I would never want to be the Hugo Administrator, and have to make these calls ā€” because I can see persuasive arguments on both sides, and no matter what you decide, a certain percentage of Hugo voters will be unhappy with your decision.

    Agreed. Interesting to discuss. Probably not so fun to have to make the hard decisions.

    Thinking about it, I realize I was getting mixed up about 3.2.4 above. Basically, a series of individual works isn’t eligible itself because the parts were/are eligible themselves. A work in parts is eligible in the year it wraps up because the parts don’t stand alone. (At least that’s the idea. Obviously it’s not always clear cut… i.e. seasons as DP-LF vs. individual episodes as DP-SF.)

    To defend my nominations a bit…I feel like choosing specific posts, arranging them by topic rather than original chronological order, and adding intro and contextual notes is enough to make it a new work. As you say, up to Hugo admin if necessary. And as Andrew M pointed out, there’s precedent.

  24. Just to nail this one – collections of essays, the majority of which had previously been published before the qualifying year, have been deemed eligible for the final ballot since Best Related Work was first awarded in 1980.

    See for instance the contents page of Ursula Le Guinā€™s The Language of the Night, a finalist in that first year, where you will see that at least 20 of the 30 essays in the collection date from before 1978; the following year, 1981, saw Warhoon 28 on the ballot, collecting the fannish writings of Walt Willis over several decades, little if any of which would have been first published in 1980.

    There are many other such cases among finalists over the years. Among winners, apart from Ursula Le Guinā€™s Words Are My Matter, which won last year, John Scalzi won in 2009 for Your Hate Mail Will Be Graded, a series of blog posts mostly from before 2008.

    The many art books which have been finalists in this category, and have sometimes won, also tend to include a lot of art from before the year of eligibility.

    Iā€™m aware of only two formal disqualifications for any reason whatsoever in the Best Related Work category. In 2012, The Anticipation Novelists of 1950s French Science Fiction: Stepchildren of Voltaire by Bradford Lyau, which actually topped the nominations poll, was ruled inelgible because it had been published in 2010. And in 2002, L. Ron Hubbard Presents Writers of the Future Volume XVII was determined by the administrators to be insufficiently non-fictional in content. (Iā€™ll be interested to hear of other cases – record from the last century are a bit skimpy.)

    I suspect that successive administrators have taken the view that the ā€œworkā€ nominated by voters in this category and therefore covered by the rules should be considered as a discrete entity which comes into existence when published or released. The phrase ā€œappearing for the first timeā€ refers to the appearance of the work as a whole in its nominated form, and is meant only to catch cases like the Bradford Lyau book which were published in the wrong year. Even that is weakened by the ā€œsubstantially modifiedā€ clause, which allowed the second and third editions of what is now the SF Encyclopedia to win in 1994 and 2012, even though the first edition had won the first Best Related Hugo in 1980.

    (The 3.2.4 parts discussion is not really relevant here. These collections were usually not originally conceived as a single work in many parts, even if that is where they ended up.)

  25. Nicholas Whyte: I suspect that successive administrators have taken the view that the ā€œworkā€ nominated by voters in this category and therefore covered by the rules should be considered as a discrete entity which comes into existence when published or released. The phrase ā€œappearing for the first timeā€ refers to the appearance of the work as a whole in its nominated form, and is meant only to catch cases like the Bradford Lyau book which were published in the wrong year.

    It’s another example where everybody knows what the category was intended to cover, therefore the rule creating it was not written in an entirely thorough and literal way, or appears in conflict with a different literally-worded rule.

  26. Thank you for taking the time to write such a thoughtful clarification, Nicholas! It makes me feel much better, knowing whether I can nominate such things with the confidence that I won’t be wasting a slot on my ballot. šŸ™‚

  27. Itā€™s another example where everybody knows what the category was intended to cover, therefore the rule creating it was not written in an entirely thorough and literal way, or appears in conflict with a different literally-worded rule.

    And speaking as a four-time former Hugo administrator, I can’t begin to count the number of problems those “well, everyone knows what we really mean” rules have caused for me over the years.

  28. Hopefully the Hugo Award Study Committee will come back this year with suggestions which help clarify some of those definitions.

  29. Frankly, I think the rules for “Best Related Work” are so vague that we could nominate the Falcon Heavy+Tesla Roadster launched 2/8/2018 by Elon Musk as the Best Related Work for the 2019 Hugo Awards.

    Hell, it might even win . . .

  30. Greg Hullender: Frankly, I think the rules for ā€œBest Related Workā€ are so vague that we could nominate the Falcon Heavy+Tesla Roadster launched 2/8/2018 by Elon Musk

    Not eligible as Related Work, because it’s eligible for Dramatic Presentation Long Form! šŸ˜‰

  31. John Lorentz: And speaking as a four-time former Hugo administrator, I canā€™t begin to count the number of problems those ā€œwell, everyone knows what we really meanā€ rules have caused for me over the years.

    My comment was inspired by Nicholas’ account of how few finalists in the category needed to be disqualified. Did you have to disqualify a lot of finalists?

  32. Yeah, Best Related Work is definitely a catch-all which I like to see as a feature rather than a bug. Biggest stretch I’m seeing this year is the Dress of Glass and Iron. I could maybe see nominating its creator for Best Fan Artist.

  33. My comment was inspired by Nicholasā€™ account of how few finalists in the category needed to be disqualified. Did you have to disqualify a lot of finalists?

    A few, over the years.

    I was the one who disqualified the L. Ron Hubbard collection, because all it was was a collection of his (old) stories. This after a discussion with someone from Bridge Publications the previous year (at MilPhil). He told me what the plan was (to try to get the then-upcoming collection nominated, so that Hubbard “could finally win a Hugo”), and I pointed out to him then that a simple story collection wasn’t eligible.

    But the current rules on professional and fan artist (well “current” as of Sasquan), as well as semiprozine, make it difficult (even for the nominees themselves) to be absolutely certain what is, and is not, eligible in those categories.

  34. @John Lorentz

    But the current rules on professional and fan artist (well ā€œcurrentā€ as of Sasquan), as well as semiprozine, make it difficult (even for the nominees themselves) to be absolutely certain what is, and is not, eligible in those categories.

    By contrast to the “Best Editor, Long Form” category, where it’s quite easy to know who’s eligible, but absolutely impossible to tell what any of them did to deserve an award.

    Some category cleanup really does seem to be in order. Now that we don’t have to worry about puppies, maybe people will be ready to think about it.

  35. But the current rules on professional and fan artist (well ā€œcurrentā€ as of Sasquan), as well as semiprozine, make it difficult (even for the nominees themselves) to be absolutely certain what is, and is not, eligible in those categories.

    I think the definition of semiprozine and fanzine are a lot simpler than how they’ve been interpreted by Hugo administrators. Did the zine pay contributions in something other than copies? Was it generally available only for paid purchase? If either is true, it’s a semiprozine. Otherwise, it’s a fanzine.

    (Yes, I am still perturbed about Castalia House Blog being ruled a fanzine.)

    The site semiprozine.org makes it easy at voting time to see if your favorite zine appears to be qualified in that category. I was surprised to find Black Gate there this year. Anyone know when that happened?

  36. Professional Editor (Long Form):
    Devi Pillai 6
    Navah Wolfe 4
    Miriam Weinberg 3
    Liz Gorinsky 3
    Sheila Gilbert 3
    Bella Pagan 2
    Gillian Redfearn 2

    (19 others received 1 nomination each)

  37. One of these days I’m going to ask the authors of the novels I liked best in a year to name the editor of that work and vote accordingly.

  38. Professional Editor (Short Form):
    Scott H. Andrews 6
    Neil Clarke 5
    John Joseph Adams 5
    Lynne Thomas & Michael Damian Thomas 5
    Jason Sizemore 4
    Lee Harris 3 + 1 under Long Form
    Ann VanderMeer 3
    C. C. Finlay 3
    Jonathan Strahan 2
    Sheila Williams 2
    Rashida J. Smith 2

    (16 others received 1 nomination each)

  39. Professional Artist:
    Victo Ngai 9
    Galen Dara 6
    Julie Dillon 5
    Jaime Jones 5
    Richard Anderson 4
    John Harris 3
    Yuko Shimizu 3
    Reiko Murakami 3
    Gregory Manchess 2
    Stephen Youll 2
    Goni Montes 2
    Kirbi Fagan 2
    Dan Dos Santos 2
    Chris McGrath 2
    Victor Mosquera 2
    David Palumbo 2

    (16 others received 1 nomination each)

  40. Semiprozine:
    Uncanny 13
    Beneath Ceaseless Skies 10
    Strange Horizons 10
    GigaNotoSaurus 9
    Book Smugglers 6
    Daily Science Fiction 5
    Interzone 4
    Shimmer 3
    Fireside Fiction 2

    (6 others received 1 nomination each)

  41. Fanzine:
    File 770 14
    Nerds of a Feather 8
    Rocket Stack Rank 6
    Black Gate 4
    Quick Sip Reviews 3
    Galactic Journey 3
    Lady Business 3
    SF Bluestocking 3
    Women Write About Comics 2
    Book Smugglers 2
    Journey Planet 2

    (11 others received 1 nomination each)

  42. Fan Writer:
    Camestros Felapton 13
    Mike Glyer 7
    Charles Payseur 3
    Foz Meadows 5
    Cora Buhlert 5
    Natalie Luhrs 4
    Liz Bourke 3
    James Davis Nicoll 3
    Bridget McKinney 2
    Adam Whitehead 2
    Doris V. Sutherland 2
    Paul Weimer 2

    (19 others received 1 nomination each)

  43. Fan Artist:
    Likhain 5
    Jian Guo 3
    Laya Rose 3
    Leon Tukker 3
    Geneva Benton 2
    Megan Lara 2
    Elicia Donze a.k.a. Euclase 2

    (21 others received 1 nomination each)

  44. rcade: The site semiprozine.org makes it easy at voting time to see if your favorite zine appears to be qualified in that category. I was surprised to find Black Gate there this year. Anyone know when that happened?

    Huh. I’m pretty sure that is news to me. They were finalists in the Fanzine category in 2015 (but withdrew in response to having been slated).

  45. I think the definition of semiprozine and fanzine are a lot simpler than how theyā€™ve been interpreted by Hugo administrators. Did the zine pay contributions in something other than copies? Was it generally available only for paid purchase? If either is true, itā€™s a semiprozine. Otherwise, itā€™s a fanzine.

    It’s not the semiprozine vs. fanzine that’s a problem.

    It’s the semipro vs. professional. We had one nominee that withdrew in 2015 becasue they just weren’t sure which side of the split they were on.

  46. rcade: One of these days Iā€™m going to ask the authors of the novels I liked best in a year to name the editor of that work and vote accordingly.

    Over the last couple of years, every time I read a book, I’ve made a note of the cover credits, and scoured the Copyright page and the Dedication and Acknowledgment sections for the name of the editor. (Tor.com is awesome about putting the editor’s name on the Copyright page, and on their website.)

    And you can often see the the Copyright page and the Dedication and Acknowledgment sections on Amazon preview and on Google Books previews.

    I’ve got a long list of books with their editors and cover artists this year, and I found a lot of them in that way.

  47. @Greg Hullender & @JJ: Ahem, ::snorts:: all around at the Tesla launching stuff. šŸ˜€

  48. Kendall: ::snorts:: all around at the Tesla launching stuff.

    Do you seriously think that there won’t be Hugo voters nominating it?

    We’ll just have to bribe next year’s Hugo Admin to find out how many did. šŸ˜€

  49. I think Black Gate got promoted to semiprozine back when they briefly tried a proper magazine format with fiction, but are currently a fanzine – at least I hope so because that’s where I nominated them.

    I’m delighted to see Beneath Ceaseless Skies and Scott H Andrews at or near the top of their categories. BCS has gone from being good to excellent over the last couple of years IMO.

    The fan writer category may be showing some local bias…or not šŸ™‚

    (@JJ either Charles Payseur’s # of noms is wrong or his ranking is wrong)

    (Also @JJ thanks for all the tallying!)

Comments are closed.