Entering the Lists

This is a scorecard of the effectiveness of Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies slates. It is purely binary — did the item make the final ballot or not — because official eligibility rulings and nominee withdrawals are not available at the moment I am writing.

SAD PUPPIES 3: the 2015 Hugo slate

  • Recommended 60 nominees; 51 made the final ballot and 9 did not.


  • Recommended 67 nominees; 58 made the final ballot and 9 did not.


  • A total of 61 nominees from both slates made the final ballot.
  • This consists of 48 items recommended by both lists; 3 items only on Sad Puppies; and 10 only on Rabid Puppies.
  • Failing to make the final ballot were 4 items recommended on both lists, 5 items recommended only by Sad Puppies 3, plus 5 items that only appeared on Rabid Puppies.


  • 24 final ballot nominees did not come from either list.

Comparative lists follow the jump.

Update 04/20/2015: This list has been fully updated to reflect withdrawals and items ruled ineligible in the post Re-Entering The Lists.

Update 04/06/2015: Made a correction to the Combined Scorecard. I had accidentally undercounted some items that failed to make the final ballot which had been recomended only by Sad Puppies 3, even though they were marked on my checksheet.



  • Skin Game by Jim Butcher, ROC
  • Lines of Departure, by Marko Kloos, self-published
  • The Dark Between the Stars by Kevin J. Anderson, Tor Books


  • “One Bright Star to Guide Them” by John C. Wright, Castalia House (Spanish)
  • “Big Boys Don’t Cry” by Tom Kratman, Castalia House (German, Italian)
  • “Flow” by Arlan Andrews Sr., Analog November 2014


  • “The Journeyman: In the Stone House” by Michael F. Flynn, Analog June 2014
  • “Championship B’tok” by Edward M. Lerner, Analog Sept 2014
  •  “The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale”, by Rajnar Vajra, Analog July/Aug 2014
  •  “Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust, Earth to Alluvium” by Gray Rinehart, Orson Scott Card’s InterGalactic Medicine Show


  • “Goodnight Stars” by Annie Bellet, The Apocalypse Triptych
  •  “Totaled” by Kary English, Galaxy’s Edge
  • “On A Spiritual Plain”, Lou Antonelli, Sci Phi Journal #2


  • Transhuman and Subhuman: Essays on Science Fiction and Awful Truth, by John C. Wright, Castalia House
  •  “The Hot Equations: Thermodynamics and Military SF” by Ken Burnside, Riding the Red Horse / Castalia House
  •  “Wisdom From My Internet” by Michael Z. Williamson, self-published
  •  “The Science is Never Settled” by Tedd Roberts, Baen Free Library
  •  “Letters from Gardner” by Lou Antonelli, Sci Phi Journal #3


  • Reduce Reuse Reanimate by Carter Reid, (independent)


  • Guardians of the Galaxy, James Gunn
  • Interstellar, Christopher Nolan
  • The Lego Movie, Phil Lord and Christopher Miller


  • Grimm: “Once We Were Gods”
  • The Flash – “The Flash (pilot)”

BEST EDITOR (Short Form)

  • Jennifer Brozek, Shattered Shields
  •  Bryan Thomas Schmidt, Shattered Shields
  •  Mike Resnick, Galaxy’s Edge
  •  Edmund R. Schubert, Orson Scott Card’s InterGalactic Medicine Show


  • Toni Weisskopf, Baen Books
  •  Jim Minz, Baen Books
  •  Anne Sowards, ACE/ROC
  •  Sheila Gilbert, DAW


  • Carter Reid
  •  Jon Eno
  •  Alan Pollack
  • Nick Greenwood


  • Tangent SF On-line, Dave Truesdale
  •  Elitist Book Reviews,  Steve Diamond
  •  The Revenge of Hump Day, Tim Bolgeo


  •  “The Sci Phi Show”, Jason Rennie
  •  Dungeon Crawlers Radio
  •  Adventures in SF Publishing


  • Jeffro Johnson
  • Amanda Green
  •  Cedar Sanderson


  •  Eric S. Raymond, “Sucker Punch”, Riding the Red Horse
  • Jason Cordova, Kaiju Apocalypse
  •  Kary Englis, Flight of the Kikayon



  • Abyss & Apex *
  • Andromeda Spaceways In-Flight Magazine *


  • Dave Freer *




  • “The Plural of Helen of Troy” by John C. Wright, City Beyond Time / Castalia House **
  •  “Pale Realms of Shade” by John C. Wright, , The Book of Feasts & Seasons / Castalia House **


  •  “Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus” by John C. Wright,TheBook of Feasts & Seasons/ Castalia House **


  • “Turncoat” by Steve Rzasa, Riding the Red Horse **
  • “The Parliament of Beasts and Birds” by John C. Wright, The Book of Feasts & Seasons **


  • Game of Thrones: “The Mountain and the Viper” **

BEST EDITOR (Short Form)

  •  Vox Day, Riding the Red Horse, Castalia House **


  •  Vox Day, Castalia House **


  •  Black Gate, John O’Neill **


  • Rolf Nelson, The Stars Came Back **




  • Ancillary Sword by Ann Leckie (Orbit US; Orbit UK)
  • The Goblin Emperor by Katherine Addison (Sarah Monette) (Tor Books)


  • Ms. Marvel Volume 1: No Normal written by G. Willow Wilson, illustrated by Adrian Alphona  and Jake Wyatt, (Marvel Comics)
  • Rat Queens Volume 1: Sass and Sorcery written by Kurtis J. Weibe, art by Roc Upchurch (Image Comics)
  • Saga Volume 3 written by Brian K. Vaughan, illustrated by Fiona Staples (Image Comics)
  • Sex Criminals Volume 1: One Weird Trick written by Matt Fraction, art by Chip Zdarsky (Image Comics)


  • Captain America: The Winter Soldier screenplay by Christopher Markus & Stephen McFeely, concept and story by Ed Brubaker, directed by Anthony Russo and Joe Russo (Marvel Entertainment, Perception, Sony Pictures Imageworks)
  • Edge of Tomorrow screenplay by Christopher McQuarrie, Jez Butterworth, and John-Henry Butterworth, directed by Doug Liman (Village Roadshow, RatPac-Dune Entertainment, 3 Arts Entertainment; Viz Productions)


  • Doctor Who: “Listen” written by Steven Moffat, directed by Douglas Mackinnon (BBC Television)
  • Orphan Black: “By Means Which Have Never Yet Been Tried” written by Graham Manson, directed by John Fawcett (Temple Street Productions, Space/BBC America)


  • Julie Dillon


  • Beneath Ceaseless Skies edited by Scott H. Andrews
  • Lightspeed Magazine edited by John Joseph Adams, Stefan Rudnicki, Rich Horton, Wendy N. Wagner, and Christie Yant
  • Strange Horizons Niall Harrison Editor-in-Chief


  • Journey Planet edited by James Bacon, Chris Garcia, Alissa McKersie, Colin Harris and Helen Montgomery


  • Galactic Suburbia Podcast Alisa Krasnostein, Alexandra Pierce, Tansy Rayner Roberts (Presenters) and Andrew Finch (Producer)
  • Tea and Jeopardy Emma Newman & Peter Newman


  • Laura J. Mixon


  • Ninni Aalto
  • Brad Foster
  • Elizabeth Leggett
  • Spring Schoenhuth
  • Steve Stiles


  • Wesley Chu

128 thoughts on “Entering the Lists

  1. Sad Puppies was a Voter Registration Drive for the Hugos. And it worked. You’d think that SJW’s would be overjoyed by and supportive of, the diversity, inclusiveness and tolerance thus engendered.

    Apparently, however, that’s not their actual goal…

    Irony….. thou hast it.

  2. THE THREE-BODY PROBLEM will be on our long list for the JWC.

    VD: Note the JWC is for sf, no fantasy, so says nothing about your work. Which is quite good.

    Maybe all this is political somehow but mostly I just see more gangbanging of the awards, more every year.

  3. I am neither a member of SP or RP. (I am, however, a published nonfiction author.) I am happy to see that the Hugo slate this year features works written by authors who are not part of the People’s Ideological Speculative Fiction Bureau. I had until recently given up on literary SF after a lifetime of loyal readership because the vast majority of it seemed to be written by sexual deviants, bitter feminist graduate students, or beret-wearing Communards. Sadly, much of published SF today is overtly hostile to people who look like I do, speak my native languages, and share my religious beliefs; why, then, would I be interested in reading it? As a member of a global ethnic and religious minority (White Christians) I find plenty of bias, discrimination, and open hatred directed at people like me every day; I am certainly not going to pay hard-earned money for a book in which people like me are blamed for the world’s ills, cast as uniquely evil, and even targeted for genocide.

    I am happy to note than many of the artists nominated for Hugos on this years ballot are Christ-positive, White-positive and male-positive. It’s refreshing. Kudos to all nominees, and may the best man win.

  4. VD’s comment at 3:58 lacked an attribution for the quoted ending paragraph. It’s from breitbart.com. The writer apparently is unaware the Nielsen Haydens chose to eschew a hyphen when they married and combined their names.

  5. Voter Registration Drives don’t tell people how to vote. At least the legitimate ones don’t.

    The ones that do are called “ballot-stuffing”.

  6. Gosh, but I’m dazzled by your brilliance, apparently so bright that you can’t see the difference between bloc voting for individual works or persons and voting for an abstraction.

    I’m asking people to vote for No Award (not a person named “Noah Ward,” please note), which is the escape clause the rules give us to signal that the process is broken.

    I don’t expect you to understand how it’s broken. Clearly the principles you’re basing your argument are radically different from mine. In these late days of traditional fandom, as sad as that is, it’s not surprising.

  7. JJ@5:38: Ballot-box stuffing has a definition. That is not it. You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own definitions.

  8. My apologies for not being more responsive, I’m at a Seder in Brooklyn.

    I’ll answer some of the comments later, but overall I’m satisfied that my statement speaks for itself as the reaction of an old-school pro _and_ fan of 45 years standing. I’m sorry if that sounds like an appeal to, or claim of, authority, but that is the simple, accurate description of who I am.

    I learned about fandom from people like Bob Tucker, Walt Willis, Arthur Thomson, James White, Bob Shaw, Chuck Harris, Harry Warner, Jr., Terry Carr, Arnie Katz, Ted White, Dick Lupoff, Richard Bergeron, Donald A. Wollheim, Bob Silverberg, Peter Weston, Bruce Gillespie, Bruce Pelz, Elliot Shorter, Jack Chalker, Dick Eney, Bob Madle, Rusty Hevelin, Jack Speer, Lee Hoffman, Vince Clarke, Shelby Vick, Andrew Porter, Steve Stiles, Len & June Moffat, Buck & Juanita Coulson, Bill Bowers, Mike Glicksohn, Susan Wood, Peter Roberts, Avedon Carol, Rob Hansen, etc., etc. In short, from the people who built today’s fandom before fantasy and SF had achieved mass popularity.

    They all understood that fannish principles are incompatible with bloc voting and consistently spoke against it. They wouldn’t have tolerated what’s happened this year, and neither can I.

  9. I don’t know whether to shake my head or my fist.

    Whichever one rattles less noisily, please.

  10. Bullshit, Torling. You gave us freaking REDSHIRTS. You gave us that idiotic Swirsky DINOSAUR MY LOVE story. You even put bloody ZOE’S TALE on the shortlist.

    And you gave us OPERA VITA AETERNA and spoiler alert: it’s the worst thing ever nominated for an award. Ever.

  11. As far as I can see, the current kerfluffle is because a handful of fans put up a list (or, two groups of fans put up two lists) saying “here’s a bunch of great stuff we really like, vote for these!”
    This is no different than any of the other times other groups of fans have done this, except possibly that they went a little farther out of their way to insult the works they didn’t like. Although that is fannish tradition, too.

  12. Non-Neutral Observer: You can play semantics all you want. Ballot-stuffing, vote-rigging, bloc-voting, vote-fixing — whatever you call it, it may have been legal, but it most certainly was not ethical.

    Trying to pretend that it was a “Voter Registration Drive” is the worst sort of disingenous.

  13. Mr. Landis, I find your ill-informed dismissal of this situation an insult to my intelligence. If I commented on your science based on the same kind of information vacuum you seem to have about this issue, you would be offended too.

  14. “And you gave us OPERA VITA AETERNA and spoiler alert: it’s the worst thing ever nominated for an award. Ever.”

    Worse than, say, ‘They’d Rather Be Right’ ?

    (for the record, I thought ‘If You Were A Dinosaur, My Love’ was very pretty and not at all SFnal, and I ranked it below ‘No Award’.)

  15. “I learned about fandom from people like Bob Tucker, Walt Willis, Arthur Thomson, James White, Bob Shaw, Chuck Harris, Harry Warner, Jr., Terry Carr, Arnie Katz, Ted White, Dick Lupoff, Richard Bergeron, Donald A. Wollheim, Bob Silverberg, Peter Weston, Bruce Gillespie, Bruce Pelz, Elliot Shorter, Jack Chalker, Dick Eney, Bob Madle, Rusty Hevelin, Jack Speer, Lee Hoffman, Vince Clarke, Shelby Vick, Andrew Porter, Steve Stiles, Len & June Moffat, Buck & Juanita Coulson, Bill Bowers, Mike Glicksohn, Susan Wood, Peter Roberts, Avedon Carol, Rob Hansen, etc., etc. In short, from the people who built today’s fandom before fantasy and SF had achieved mass popularity.”

    Is that an appeal to authority?

  16. Pretty sure it’s just more TruFen posturing from someone associated with Tor. You can’t make an AtA unless there’s actual authority; this is in-group shenanigans. Or, in other words, the exact same thing predicted by SP1.

  17. Ballot-stuffing *is* illegal when done in elections for political office and against the rules of pretty much all electoral events. Referring to a get-out-our-vote drive as ballot-stuffing is disingenuous at best and defamatory at worst. Curse them and all they stand for as much as you like. I love a good cursing-out. But don’t lie about what they did.

  18. Moshe: please drop it. Voting campaigns have been instigated and encouraged by certain types of fans– including your coworkers at Tor– for years. All that’s new is that you do not agree with what is on the ballot this year. Why is that so bad?

    I understand you believe this is some kind of political statement. Previous years may have been, but this year is nothing of the sort. As an example: I voted for you in long form editor this year. I voted for you even though I know I do not agree with you political stances on (almost) anything because, in my opinion, you were one of the 5 best editors in our field. The idea was to vote for overlooked, quality professionals who have contributed to the field and have put out the best work of the year.

    Publicly stating that you– an editor for Tor!– is unwilling to read nominated fiction before coming to a conclusion that it is not award worthy illustrates there is something broken in traditional publishing houses. You just proved much of what detractors of traditional publishing have been saying about your house.

    You are a better man than that. Pull yourself together and act like a professional.

  19. Ironic Nigel that you continue to cry rape over literary matters. What on earth does ed Kramer and mzb have to do with this? I thought they were on your team .

  20. “Worse than, say, ‘They’d Rather Be Right’ ?”

    Having read both, I will say yes.

    I read all of the nominated works last year. I put every Sad Puppy nominee on the ballot behind “no award”, because none of them were even remotely as good as the other works on the ballot.

  21. “I read all of the nominated works last year. I put every Sad Puppy nominee on the ballot behind “no award”, because none of them were even remotely as good as the other works on the ballot.”

    That shows that you’re too biased, and that you should not be voting on the awards.

  22. Wow, so because the ‘right’ people didn’t nominate the works, they automatically get ‘no award’.


    TOR has been secretly ‘gaming’ the awards for years, and tried to game them again this year, and that’s okay, but openly promoting a slate and asking people to vote for it is wrong? And please save me the ‘ethical’ crap. Those of you spouting that wouldn’t know what ethics are if they bit you on the butt.

    TOR should have wised up and promoted their slate openly, instead of thinking they could still fix it in the shadows. Who knows? They might have gotten votes from some of the people on the SP side of things. But they didn’t want to give people a choice.

    So get over the butt-hurt and realize that you are the ones who caused all of this with your stupid elitist superiority crap. Stop acting like a bunch of 8-year-olds. TOR lost, PC lost, obnoxious inbreeding lost, get over it.
    Next year put up your own suggested slates. And if you pick works that are good, don’t be surprised if they get nominated. The puppies just did you all a huge favor, but you’re too damn bull-headed to see it.

  23. alauda is of course the noted internet stalker of many, many nicknames who has a hate-on for Vox Day, and even if he were not involved in this year’s awards would be posting here about how horrible he thinks Vox is. If you go around the various Fannish blogs and see someone post a one-line non-sequitur like this, it’s him. And he’s likely to get ANOTHER visit from the police if he keeps it up (He’s not supposed to be accessing the internet unsupervised these days.)

  24. Oh, and as for the nominations, It looks like Steven Stiles is pulling ahead of Taral Wayne in the Fan artist nomination category. I hope THIS year he finally makes it.

  25. Nope. I left them off the ballot entirely. None of them had any business being on a Hugo ballot.

    Given the “quality” of last year’s slate, I’m inclined to be extremely unforgiving with respect to this one. I’ve read some other works by some of the authors on the SP/RP ballot who made the list, and to be blunt, the worst thing that could happen to their reputations is they could have more people reading their work.

  26. “TOR has been secretly ‘gaming’ the awards for years”

    Really??? Evidence is… where?
    And if they’re actually gaming the awards, how come they did such a poor showing this year — when they knew well in advance that they had to offset the Sick Puppy Slate of Rancor?

  27. Dr. Mauser: I will tell you something that is not exactly a secret. I am not the most consistent moderator. My rule of thumb is to allow comments that add substance to the discussion. I tend to be more patient with commenters if I know a little of their history. But I also really dislike to read abuse or to be put in the position of hosting it. Yet it sometimes takes more than one instance for me to call somebody on it. This is especially so if two people are verbally duking it out between themselves in the thread, as opposed to saying stuff about a nonparticipant.

    All to the point that if a commenter is within these boundaries, I’m probably not going to delete his contribution or ban him. But someting like a comment that is just links to feud material on another blog, I’m going to spam that, because it contributes no substance.

    One last thought. When a newcomer tries to add a comment that pushes up against these boundaries, the first thing I now do is verify their registration. If they’ve tried to use a fake e-mail to complete the registry process I”m not going to post their snark or crappy tautological argument.

  28. The whole puppies thing should come as no surprise to anyone. It’s been inevitable since the rules were changed so that one supporting membership allowed you to nominate for three years. Removing this rule would go a long way to stopping any group from doing this in the future.
    Limiting the number of nominations for any one person (to two two?) would also help and is long overdue (Doctor Who anyone?)

  29. “THE THREE-BODY PROBLEM will be on our long list for the JWC.”

    That’s good to hear. It would have been on Rabid Puppies if I had read it sooner. Tor doesn’t send me review books anymore, so I was late getting to it. Great book.

    “VD: Note the JWC is for sf, no fantasy, so says nothing about your work. Which is quite good.”

    Thanks, I appreciate that, especially coming from you.

    “Really??? Evidence is… where?”

    I’m going to assume everyone here understands the concept of statistical variance. Here are the variances compared for the SP2 nominees, the top vote getter in the eight major categories in 2014, and the suspicious Tor darlings from 2008 to 2013. Can you spot the bloc votes?

    Variance (?2): 3773.9 (SP 2014)
    Variance (?2): 1493.8 (SP 2013)

    Variance (?2): 1.6 (Tor 2008)
    Variance (?2): 98.6 (Tor 2009)
    Variance (?2): 119.1 (Tor 2010)
    Variance (?2): 4.7 (Tor 2012)
    Variance (?2): 14.9 (Tor 2013)

    Note that 2008 is when Scalzi posted his most blatant “Award Pimpage Post” and he and Stross finished within 3 votes of each other for Best Novel (41), Best Novel (40) and Best Fan Writer. (43). That same year, Tor editors PNH (70) and David Hartwell (67) were within 3 votes of each other as well.

    By contrast, this year, the leading vote-getter in Best Novel, presumably Correia, received 387 votes, which was similar to the 384 votes in Best Editor Long, presumably Weisskopf. Bloc vote, right? Well, no, that doesn’t hold up because it is far more than the 230 that Wright presumably got in Short Story or the 201 that Johnson presumably got in Best Fan Writer.

    To claim that TWO 3-vote variances in a single year are LESS suspicious than an open slate that differed by at least 186 votes is either dishonest or insane. Don’t forget that both Scalzi and Stross are self-admitted Hugo campaigners.

  30. ‘Culture wars are usually apolitical.’

    Culture is political. Culture wars are a term of art to describe a particular type of political effort to shanghai culture.

    ‘Politics is the crowning moment for a winner of a culture war.’

    Controlling culture would be a crowning moment for a political movement, especially if they are incapable of or ineffective at generating culture.

    ‘Attempting to take a cultural conflict into the political arena before victory had been achieved is often disastrous because the voters (or whoever) can backlash and undo all of the work leading up to that point.’

    That might be a risk, but it’s a risk usually taken by front-line activists and/or true believers who don’t believe they can lose. Won’t stop cannier operatives picking easy targets, though.

  31. ‘Ironic Nigel that you continue to cry rape over literary matters. What on earth does ed Kramer and mzb have to do with this?’

    They’re gamergaters? Who knew.

    ‘I thought they were on your team .’

    No. On the other hand, VD admits to his gaterhood. Is he on your team?

  32. For decades, I have engaged in spirited debates with other sf fans, about sf, science, politics, whatever. With few exceptions, I enjoyed these discussions, even when I drastically disagreed with the other person’s point of view.

    Here’s what’s sad: I set out to write a comment about this whole mishegas, and I ended up deleting everything I wrote because I was afraid. Because I don’t want to be involved in that kind of rancor, in something that reminds me of the furor over the Exclusion Act, which reverberated for decades.

    So trolls and spammers eventually succeed in ruining everything.

  33. Slates hurt all non-slate works equally, including works that the slatemakers would have loved.

    The Puppies kept the Heinlein bio off the ballot when they would have loved it. The Puppies kept _Three Body Problem_ off the ballot when they would have loved *it*.

    The normal nomination process is an opportunity for people to tell you about good works you missed. The Heinlein bio would have had a good chance at a Best Related works ballot. _Three Body Problem_ would have had a good chance at the Best Novel ballot.

    But the Puppies brought us slates, and made sure neither of them would make it.

  34. Correlation is not causation. And I nominated the Stross but not the Scalzi in your “smoking gun” statistics, so right there you cannot really claim that there were 40 people voting in lock-step. It doesn’t happen the way you fantasize it happens.

    Telling people what works you personally published last year is not the same thing as creating a slate of other people’s works deliberately designed to completely take over the entire ballot and then tell people “vote for this because you can stick it to the ‘SJWs'”. Of course you know this, but it’s convenient for you to pretend otherwise.

    And besides, because you can’t have one yourself, you want to destroy Worldcon and the Hugo Awards. And if you do so, you will crow about how wonderful you are.

  35. “And if they’re actually gaming the awards, how come they did such a poor showing this year — when they knew well in advance that they had to offset the Sick Puppy Slate of Rancor?”

    Because they underestimated us. Again. As they’re doing now in their entirely predictable reactions. We are not even remotely surprised at their threats to go No Award; I already have one 6 of 5 award after all. The only thing that surprised us about their attempts to change the rules is that they were dumb enough to start calling for them BEFORE the nominations were even announced.

  36. VD is evading the issue raised by Cat. It seems likely to be the case* that the two slates succeeding in keeping a superior work – even by his own standards – off the novel ballot. This demonstrates a grave drawback of the slating process, which ought to give a rethinking pause to its advocates.

    I would suggest that a Hugo for The Three-Body Problem would have done for the award exactly what the Puppies advocates are claiming their slates were intended to. And now it will never be, the opportunity irrevocably lost.

    It seems to me that some regret is in order, and not in the form of “I would have nominated it on my slate” but “I acknowledge this is as problem with promoting slates and maybe it’s a bad idea.”

    *Kevin Standlee could doubtless confirm this suspicion, but as a person of integrity, he probably won’t until after the awards are announced.

  37. “Correlation is not causation.”

    Correlation indicates causation.

    “It doesn’t happen the way you fantasize it happens.”

    Yes, it most certainly does. Aside from the statistical improbability involved, we came into possession of some of the emails that were used as part of a campaign a few years ago.

    “And besides, because you can’t have one yourself, you want to destroy Worldcon and the Hugo Awards.”

    Do you seriously still believe that? What part of “I don’t care about the Hugo Awards” do you fail to understand? But yes, I will confess that if Worldcon blows its own brains out in a fit of petulance, I will definitely laugh.

  38. Correlation indicates causation.

    I have doubts that that is a cast-iron rule.

    Do you seriously still believe that? What part of “I don’t care about the Hugo Awards” do you fail to understand?

    If you don’t care, why participate in this discussion?

    No, I mean that. Honestly. In the most serious and earnest way possible. You have a limited amount of time on this planet. You have a limited amount of energy to expend per day. Why waste it on something you don’t care about? Why not invest it in something you consider truly important? Do you want to die thinking, “I wish I’d spent less time arguing with idiots on the Internet* and more time on [insert favorite hobby or pastime here]?”

    * Sure, feel free to include me under that heading if it helps you answer the question.

  39. “If you don’t care, why participate in this discussion?”

    Because the Hugo Awards have been wielded as a weapon by those who are enemies to me and my allies in a years-long attempt to discredit and disqualify us. Worldcon should have stepped in and shut Scalzi and company down when he started manipulating the system back in 2008. Mike Glyer even pointed it out and criticized it. But they didn’t.

    Now we’re taking that weapon away from them. That’s all.

  40. I;ve used No Award in categories where I didn;t think anything nominted was the year’s best, for decades. No Awarding hings this year, would not be a new practice for me.

    The hatemongering spitefulness at Tor is jaw-dropping to me. Uh, I seem to recall that Jim Minz was at Tor before going to Baen. I’ve known other pepole who were editors who had been employed at both publishers. Tor authors included David Weber and Orson Scott Card, in addition to Wright. s for claimes that Baen gets overlooked by Hugo nominators, are those Hugo nominations and Hugos that Lois McMaster Bujold has for books and stories published by Baen, illusory?!

    Regarding the number of books nominated for/winning Hugos from Tor over the years (including ones by OSC…), could it possibly be that the Worldcon nominating and voting members -likes- what Tor publishes??! Note that Tor consistently ranks high on the Locus polls for “best SF publisher”

    Regarding “popular books which do not get nominated,” Patricia Briggs, Charlaine Harris, Kim Harrison, Christine Feehan, Sherillyn Kenyon.. are New York Times #1 Bestseller SF/F authors, and none of their books have been on the Hugo final ballot as far as I can remember. Maybe it’s girl cooties? Their books are at least as popular as Jim Butcher’s (and True Blood lasted multiple seasons, unlike the Dresden Files which did not get renewed from its first and only season). But, I don;t seen the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies griping that the authors above don’t get on the Hugo ballot.

    As for “White male Christians” –some of my neighbors are that, some aren’t , e.g. I have neighbors from India, and neighbors who’re black, and a neighbor originally from the other side of the Atlantic from the UK or Ireland. At the local stores, I see fathers going shopping with their kids as much as mothers going sopping with the kids. There was te fellow with the three year old triplets…) I see women dressed in Islamic modesty attire, women in saris, women in dresses, women in pants, and the occasionally married sometimes with kids same gender couple. I don;t live in a world where “everyone is a White Christian Male Heterosexual Income Earner (oops, forgot to mention the crusty old Korea and WWII veterans out shopping by themselves…) .

    I was annoyed back in the Old Days when the standard SF story had white presumably Christian male humans as representatives of homo sapiens and female homo sapiens only as Evil Bitch Queens or trophies to award to the Hero or scut clerical and kitchen help. UGH!!!! I do NOT remember than with fond memories, NFW. And I especially did not appreciate being stuck in ROTC Summer Camp decades ago, with white male Southern Baptist misogynist northern-haters… “Women. They’re women. Women shouldn’t be pilots” was the litany of the most intolerant of the lot. (Not I did not say “racist,” most of them didn;t seem to be racists against -men-. )

    What has that got to do with Hugogate? Simple, the Sad Puppy and Rabid Puppy sorts, sound like the bigots I was subjected to in ROTC Summer camp… right down to the “ha ha ha, can’t take a joke!” faux-humor cruelty and nastiness pettiness, and self-laudatory attitudes.

    Regarding Geoff Landis’ comment, did he actually go to the various weblogs and see what the posters on them were writing? The level of hostility and faux-humor detraction, is hardly the stuff of “inclusivenessm” friendliness to diverse opinions, and tolerance.

  41. Why don;t you go and found your own Sick/Rabid Puppies Con with the Sick/Rabid Puppies Achievement Awards. You want awards celebrating what types of stories and writing and artwork you like? Nobody is stopping you from organizing your own convention and/or set of awards. There are all sorts of groups doing those things–there’s the Prometheus Award, there are the Rhyslings for Science Fiction Poetry, there’s Ohio Valley Filk with awards for filk music, if the Sick/Rabid Puppies want to give recognition to work and individual, go create you OWN set of awards and infrastructure for nominating and voting and promoting!

    Create something/innovate, instead of hijacking an institution a half century old where people are very strongly non-appreciative of your hijacking efforts!!!

  42. ““Correlation is not causation.””
    “Correlation indicates causation.”

    One of these statements is true IMO.

  43. ‘Now we’re taking that weapon away from them.’

    And beating yourself over the head with it. Repeatedly. Now the things that discredit and disqualify you are thrown into sharper relief than ever.

  44. As you’ve noted elsewhere, Correia says (and everything else corroborates) he refused the novel nomination; that would mean +1 for “both slates”.

  45. Shh. Don’t tell the people who hate Tor and love Baen that Tom Doherty put up a lot of the funding to support Baen Books. That might lead to severe cognitive dissonance.

  46. one thing made perfectly clear here is that the sad Puppies demonstrably understand both the hugos and their opposition far better than their opposition understands the hugos or sad puppies. it is as if the entitled throwbacks never played competitive sport.

Comments are closed.