Chicon 7 now has added the material for the Best Fan Writer, Best Fan Artist, and Best Editor – Long Form categories to the 2012 Hugo Voter Packet.
The committee says, “We will be adding the remaining categories progressively over the next few days.”
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Having a little problem logging into Chicon… I used a PIN and “membership” number I was given earlier (by the Hugo committee) but the site doesn’t confirm me. It may be that there’s a different PIN number for this… all I can do is submit an application for a number and wait to see what happens next.
You were a member of Renovation and received a PIN because you were eligible to nominate this year based on that qualification. Unless you bought a Chicon membership you would not be eligible to vote on the final ballot. Did you?
Definitely not, but I had thought I’d be able to see the voting packets since some of my material is displayed among them. I know who to ask about this…
Taral – I am reminded of a letter I saw address to Paul Linebarger (aka Cordwainder Smith) thanking him for his contribution to an essay collection, but since it was a military publication with a high security stamp and Linebarger did not have the proper security clearance the editor was regretfully unable to send him a contributors copy.
It has been straightened out… more or less. On the basis of attending Reno, I was given the magic words to nominate this year, but I am not a member of Chicon, so I cannot even see my own work in the Hugo package. Some of the nominees object to their work being seen without the exchange of filthy lucre. On the other hand, a Hugo is a Hugo, so only registered voters may see. I concede the point, but the irony of being unable to see how my own stuff has been presented is more than a little amusing.
Taral, it more comes down to the fact that Chicon requested and obtained limited distribution rights, especially for the non-fannish categories. It has absolutely nothing to do with any “nominees object[ing] to their work being seen without the exchange of filthy lucre.” We legally can not make those categories accessible to anyone who is not a member. Since generally access to one category means access to all, we’ve had to work out a work-around for your very specific case.
Sorry… that was more or less the expression in the reply when I asked about this. The use of “filthy lucre” is my touch, I grant you. I think what was said was more along the lines, of “work that was copyrighted.” Copyrights, ergo money.