aka Through the Drowsy Bark: Slates, Fisking, & Puppies
Today’s sled is drawn by David Gerrold, Vox Day, John Scalzi, Alexandra Erin, Damien G. Walter, Lisa J. Goldstein, Mark Ciocco, William Reichard, P. Llewellyn James, Jeffro Johnson, Jim C. Hines and Logan Brooker. (Credit for the subtitle goes to File 770 contributing editor of the day DMS.)
David Gerrold on Facebook – May 10
My irony meter is broken.
I was reading Mike Glyer’s latest File770 report on the Hugos, and one of the sad puppy defenders said something about how intolerant those mean old SJWs are and how the sad puppies are really about building a more inclusive community. (ie. Including themselves, because obviously they’ve been locked out for like forever.)
I had to read it several times to make sure I had read it correctly.
Okay — if that’s truly how some of the puppies perceive the situation — that’s a very sophisticated iteration of the victim racket.
But it also shows something else that’s happening in the political arena. The conservative think tanks have been doing this for a long time — coopting the language of the left, so they can claim the moral high ground.
For instance, if a progressive leader talks about racism, the conservative opponent comes back with, “Now you’re playing the race card.” Another variation is how the democrats’ economic oppression keeps black people stuck in welfare. And of course, we’re also hearing how LGBT people are intolerant bullies.
Vox Day on Vox Popoli
“We’re not fighting fire with fire” – May 10
An SJW is an individual who fundamentally rejects the Ellisonian vision of science fiction as a place that welcomes dangerous ideas. All dangerous ideas.
For example, if you think there is no place for racism in science fiction, you are an SJW. It is no different than if you think there is no place for atheism or for women in science fiction. Either all ideas, however controversial, are welcome and legitimate, or the science fiction community is engaged in a straightforward power struggle to determine whose morals will be imposed on everyone else in the field.
Science fiction can either reject the SJW ideology and abandon all the imposed diversity thought-policing or accept a long and vicious war over which moral code shall be law. Rabid Puppies is presenting the SF community with two choices: either embrace and defend the idea of complete intellectual freedom in science fiction or fight us over the shape of the Science Fiction Code Authority of the future.
John Scalzi on Whatever
“The Hugos Not Actually Being Destroyed, Part the Many” – May 10
It’s been a week or so since I’ve posted about the Hugos here, so that’s good. But there’s a persistent shibboleth I see bruited about, which is that the events of this year have in some way destroyed the Hugos (most recently here, in an otherwise cogent set of observations). I’ve addressed this before, but it’s worth addressing again. Here it is:
- No, the Puppies running their silly slates have not destroyed the Hugo Awards. What they have done is draw attention to the fact that the nomination system of the Hugos has a flaw.
- The flaw: That an organized group pushing a slate of nominees can, if the group is sufficiently large, dominate the final ballot with their choices.
- The flaw was not addressed before because, protestations to the contrary, no one had run a comprehensive slate before. No one had run a comprehensive slate before because, bluntly, before this year, no one wanted to be that asshole. This year three people stepped up to be that asshole and got some party pals to go along.
- The flaw is fixable by addressing the nomination process so that a) slating is made more difficult, while b) the fundamental popular character of the Hugos (i.e., anyone can vote and nominate) is retained. There are a number of ways to do this (the simplest would be to allow folks to nominate three works/people in each category and have six finalist slots on the ballot; there are more complicated ways as well), but the point is that there are options.
Alexandra Erin on Blue Author Is About To Write
“A Critique of Impure Reason” – May 10
If you start a syllogism with rhetorical premises, you reach a rhetorical conclusion. Vox freely admits that his oft-repeated line of “SJWs always lie.” is only rhetorically true (which you might recognize is just a fancy way of acknowledging it isn’t true). It’s a statement of rhetoric. The act of labeling someone a “Social Justice Warrior” is also similarly an act of rhetoric. You’re slapping a brand on someone and hoping it affects the way people see them.
If you take two pieces of rhetoric and put them through the form of a syllogism, you arrive at a conclusion that is also nothing more than rhetoric.
Or to put it more succinctly: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
But to someone who is both invested in believing you and invested in believing themselves to be intelligent, reasoned, and calculating, it is elegant and attractive garbage. You’re describing what you’re doing with big, lofty words like “dialectic” and “syllogism” and “Aristotlean”, after all. You can show people the inescapable mathematical logic of if A and B, then AB, knowing that no one in your audience will bother to ask how you arrived at A and B. They’re taken as given. The form of the syllogism not only does not require you to question A or B, it doesn’t work if you do. As soon as you delve into examining the premises, you’re no longer engaging in syllogism.
The fact is that Vox stoops to engage in the actual construction of syllogism fairly rarely, compared to how often he simply bloviates on in a purely rhetorical fashion while peppering his speech with whatever words best flatter his and his loyal readers’ intellects. But even when he does, he’s not engaging in actual dialectic but mere rhetorical sophistry. He starts with unvarnished garbage as a premise, and so he arrives at a similarly tarnished conclusion.
https://twitter.com/damiengwalter/status/597391760235503616
Vox Day at Vox Popoli
“SJW summarizes SJWism” – May 10
Tolerance does not demand toleration. Inclusivity justifies exclusion. Did Orwell have them pegged or what? Black is white. War is peace. We have always been at war with Eastasia. And notice the claim that it is “their society”. Not ours. Not the moderates. The SJWs.
Lisa J. Goldstein on inferior4
“The Hugo Ballot, Part 6: Novelettes” – May 10
I feel like singing. Really, I’m giddy. I found a story on the ballot that’s pretty decent. Oh, what a beautiful morning….
Ahem. Where was I? Right, “The Triple Sun: A Golden Age Tale,” by Rajnar Vajra. It’s from Analog, and it’s a typical Analog story — three EE (Exoplanetary Explorers) cadets get into a bar fight, and as punishment they are sent to a distant planet to help the scientists there dismantle their camp. The scientists are returning home because they failed to establish contact with the planet’s intelligent species. On the journey over one of the cadets, Priam Galanis, asks for a chance to salvage the project, and his superior grants him his request but with one condition: “If you can offer nothing new and useful… I will consider your triad as having failed this mission… Upon our return to Earth, you will all be discharged from the EE.”
This is how you do it, people. Raise the stakes. Give the characters something to be invested in.
Mark Ciocco on Kaedrin Weblog
“Hugo Awards: The Goblin Emperor” – May 10
Among high fantasy tropes, the goblin is not a particularly prized character. What you’re thinking of when I say “goblin” is probably some combination of attributes from J.R.R. Tolkien’s grotesque orcs in Lord of the Rings, the bumbling, low-level scamps from D&D (or, more recently, World of Warcraft), and maybe the terrifying codpiece of David Bowie in Labyrinth (amongst other, even more ridiculous 80s movies). Even more sympathetic portrayals, such as the goblins of Harry Potter, generally portray goblins as mischievous and greedy. For the most part, goblins are evil, villainous monsters that are, nevertheless, little more than cannon fodder in larger conflicts.
Katherine Addison’s novel The Goblin Emperor challenges this starting with the title of the novel itself. We’re clearly going to delve into the world of goblins here. While I’m not going to claim anything near a comprehensive knowledge of high fantasy, I know enough to be intrigued by the concept, and the possibilities are endless. The novel doesn’t quite deliver on that axis of potential, but rather tries for a more subtle novel of characterization. There is, of course, nothing wrong with characterization, but when that’s all there is, I’m usually left unsatisfied. This novel makes overtures towards a more gripping story, but generally seems content to stick with its character sketch.
William Reichard
“A new and improved Bistromatics? The power of Fandom” – May 10
I did not know about fandom until this week. It’s like finding out there’s an entire subterranean world beneath your feet–many such worlds, in fact. What goes on down there is just…dang. And it draws you in, because it’s about stuff you care about. You want to know. But you must be careful. You might never make it back to the surface.
It’s a primal place of demagoguery and mob dynamics and whispers and memes and shadowy monsters and a sense of what McLuhan called “moreness“–an insatiable need for the discussion to continue no matter what.
P. Llewellyn James on The Refuge
“Worldcon Loses Control of Hugos” – May 10
Presumably most of those have been drawn by the controversy over the nominations. Which side of the culture wars the new members are on isn’t known, but one thing is for sure. WorldCon attending members no longer control the Hugos.
Jeffro Johnson on Jeffro’s Space Gaming Blog
“Hugo Packet Sent” – May 10
Hugo Packet Sent
The Hugo Packet Coordinater contacted me last week asking for “up to four short examples of your work from 2014?, so this is what I gave them:
Jim C. Hines
“Gender Balance in Hugo Nominees” – May 10
I’ve seen a lot of back-and-forth about whether or not the Sad and Rabid Puppy campaigns were racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. I highly doubt Brad Torgersen (leader of the current Sad Puppy campaign) was deliberately, consciously, and intentionally trying to favor men over women. That said, the effect of the campaigns is pretty clear here, and breaks a pattern of better gender balance going back at least five years.
https://twitter.com/woodenking/status/597564428049993728
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Cliff–“just out of curiosity, and anybody is free to throw ideas out, what would a “major SF collection” consist of? First editions of obscure SF authors? ??”
Complete runs of Astounding, Unknown Worlds, the British New Worlds, Galaxy, and Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction. All of the best of the year anthologies. All of the Hugo and Nebula nominated novels. All of the histories of SF and most of the pre-1926 books mentioned therein. Add more magazines as space is available. Make a list of the 100 most important SF writers and get all of their novels and short story collections.
@ Ken Jose Hans.
I think it’s largely the pressures of marketing. Easier to sell a new x story to an already defined market than selling something new every time.
The magazines got killed by the disemboweling of news distribution companies, who were killed by fuel costs and other constraints (like e-publications)
I pretty much hate it. It was so much easier to drive to the news shop once a month and pick up 5 or 6 or 7 digests and slicks; and those 200 page novels – one or two a day. Who couldn’t keep up?
Maximillian
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is past brilliant. I absolutely adored it and have it in hard copy, Kindle, and book on tape. As someone else mentioned, it is also really, really long and has footnotes. The length of the novel and the footnotes especially seemed to grate on some people so it might have served Susanna Clarke’s publisher well to have broken the book into two parts. As to the footnotes, I thought that they added tremendously to the book and added to my overall enjoyment of the story.
Peace, got me beat. I ALMOST have a degree in Nuclear Engineering. Degrees are not like horseshoes, hand grenades, or nuclear weapons unfortunately.
I ALMOST have a degree in Nuclear Engineering. Degrees are not like horseshoes, hand grenades, or nuclear weapons unfortunately.
I almost got one in computer science. Then I needed to get a job, and never did finish those last few classes. (I doubt that compiler design and diff.eq. would be useful in the real world. But C.S. does have its benefits: I can tell crap software when I meet it. And all the engineering classes before that helped at work, where I matched up maps and engineering drawings, and sometimes found myself drawing the stuff to figure out what I was actually looking at, when given three or more views of a complex bit of piping.)
PJ Evans: I have a comp sci degree, not sure if I’ve ever needed it in terms of getting a job, but I’ve got a bunch of useful understandings and odds and ends of skills that help me in what I have ended up doing (I’m a network/security person)
“I pretty much hate it. It was so much easier to drive to the news shop once a month and pick up 5 or 6 or 7 digests and slicks; and those 200 page novels – one or two a day.”
I don’t miss the era when short fiction magazines were dominant, but I do miss shorter SF/F novels.
@rcade,
I’m with you on that. I love me some 200 page standalone novels.
@rcade:
Simon R. Green puts out some solid 200-page novels. That’s how I got hooked on the Nightside series, then the Secret Histories, and now the Ghost Finders. All of which are set in the same universe, of course, and occasionally cross over not only with each other, but with Deathstalker and Haven.
I blame Merlin and the Traveling Doctor.
Damnit, I wish that the Deathstalker novels were on Bitlit.
Ah, good old Vox Day. Racism is just an “idea,” and since all ideas are equally valid, it deserves its fair place to compete in the marketplace of ideas that is science fiction. Because God knows it hasn’t had its fair chance to be practiced in the real world marketplace of ideas and see how THAT pans out.
Recently people have posted a great deal of numbers about the Hugo awards and gender divisions.
Posts such as:
http://www.jimchines.com/2015/05/hugo-gender-balance/comment-page-1/#comment-280799
And more importantly:
http://www.badmenagerie.com/statistics-of-gender-on-the-hugo-writing-nominees-probabilities-and-standard-deviations/
The usual initial assumption seems to be that men and women are just as likely to write literature eligible for the Hugo awards. Yet if there is anything certain about our modern world, it is how certain fields and profession do attract more members of specific gender than the other. Thus can anyone deny the possibility that similar preferences could also exist when an authors chooses their preferred genre of literature?
To give the exact answer to the above question; we would need to know how many authors there are, what are their genders, and what kind of literature they are writing. Regrettably I am not aware of any individual or organisation that could provide the data.
Therefore in regards to science fiction and fantasy; the best data we have publicly available comes from the following article:
http://www.torbooks.co.uk/blog/2013/07/10/sexism-in-genre-publishing-a-publishers-perspective
In that article it stated that 32% of submissions to Tor were by women, while the remaining 68% were by men.
We could criticise how the above data comes from only one publisher from a specific country. Yet in its defence Tor remains a popular and well established genre publisher. Therefore, I cannot fathom a reason why women would be less willing than men to submit their works to Tor.
Thus I assume that that the gender division for science fiction and fantasy authors is not considerably far away from the results Tor found in 2013.
32% of authors are women. 68% of authors are men.
If we focus on the literature categories of the Hugo awards; novel, novella, novelette, and best short story, we have a total of 20 possible nominations.
You can use this calculator: http://graphpad.com/quickcalcs/probability1/
The number of trials is 20, and the probability of success is 0.32
Thus for 95% of the time we should expect to see 2 to 10 women get nominated in the four mentioned categories.
2015: 3 women, 17 men.
2014: 7 women, 12 men (only 4 short stories were nominated)
2013: 11 women, 7 men (only 3 short stores were nominated)
2012: 11 women, 10 men (one extra novella was nominated)
2011: 10 women, 9 men (only 4 short stories were nominated)
Therefore, the years 2012 and 2013 contain statistically significant number of female nominations based on the 95% confidence interval.
Thoughts?
Oh look. Tomas once more does some statistical analysis.
He performs the exact same flawed analysis and due diligence as when he just grabbed some random Amazon reviews, he
I.E. SOMEONE ALREADY DEBUNKED THAT.
Can you elaborate? (Silence from my part after my previous post on File770 has been largely due to going to bed so I do not know what exactly you refer to.)
Let me put this gently: UK figures do not reflect the rest of the world and are known to be especially problematic compared to, e.g. North America with regard to women as authors generally and SFF authors on particular.
In fact, there’s been a lot of discussion about it over the past few years, in the SFF community generally.
Thoughts?
What do you thing about the stories they were nominated for?
@James, which begs the question. Are North American figures lower or higher? Problematic implies that the numbers do not match, and I am curious to hear how.
@Matt Y, whatever got nominated deserved its nomination. After all, it was voted there by fans.
Tuomas, this is the second time you’ve posted those figures. Please hunt down your previous post, and read the responses to that, before coming back for a second bite of the apple?
Separately, apropos re: Day’s (and some Puppies) confusion over their “rights”:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png
@snowcrash https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260125
This is the first time that I post those figures on File770. Could you possibly finish the rest of the post, if you have not already?
And additionally, if the percentages presented by Tor are already discredited, it should be no task whatsoever to tell my how and why.
Tuomas: you might be taking the “la la la la, not listening” defense a little far there.
@Tuomas- “@Matt Y, whatever got nominated deserved its nomination. After all, it was voted there by fans”
So what was your opinion of Turncoat, for example? What about the story made you think it was Hugo worthy?
http://www.strangehorizons.com/2015/20150330/sfcount-a.shtml
I think it would also be interesting to see magazine composition, but that’s a project in and of itself.
whatever got nominated deserved its nomination. After all, it was voted there by fans.
If we’re voting on good stories, and the stories are good, than I’m not really all that worried about who wrote them. Be they male, female, conservative, liberal, android, alien, etc. It’s an interesting footnote!
@Tuomas- I agree with the suggestion that you try reading what people said the last time you posted these numbers. It would save a lot of time.
One thing that I don’t remember seeing mentioned in the last discussion is that these numbers are not from ‘Tor’, they are from ‘Tor U.K.’, which is smaller, which means that conclusions drawn from their numbers are less statistically reliable.
Tuomas Vainio,
Mildly put – using UK data for the Hugos is like taking data for the distance from the Sun for Mars and applying it directly for calculations for Neptune’s orbit. This data point is just not enough. It is part of what you need to get the Neptune distance but you need a lot more than knowing the Mars one and the numbering of the planets.
Find data for all eligible works in a year (all works in English or translated into English) and you will have something to base your calculations on. Or get the data from USA at least where things look very different. The percentages shift.
And even if they did not… the ratio in all the works is not in a direct correlation to the ratio in the best works – unless if we first split in genders, then choose best in each group.
So let’s take the 5 years you are so keen on showing us data for above – what do you think should have on the ballots if not those works? After all if you think that the stories by women were nominated because they were by women, you have some better alternatives? Or is it really because the ratios do not match so… we have a problem. In this case see the previous paragraph.
If this is all about the numbers – what exactly is bothering you in the above ratios?
That particular article was cherry-picked by the puppies because the UK is an especially dismal place for women SF authors, in terms of percentages of authors.
(As bad as it is, unless I have done the math wrong it has better percentages than the Puppies’ slates, with their single woman writer amongst all the men.)
The US SF publishing scene is more evenly-balanced for the genders. So is the rest of Europe, I hear.
The UK in particular is *unusually* bad for women SF authors. It is the only country I have seen the Puppies citing when they talk about the proportionate representation of women on their slates.
@MickyFinn https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260128
Except that what I am saying is: “I am all ears.”
@Maximillian https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260129
You have to ask that from the fans that happened to nominate it. (I have not purchased the supporting membership, so I cannot nominate or vote.)
Nat: that breakdown appears to have neglected to discuss my go-to book review source. http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
And of course while I was typing, a lot of messages went through. 🙂
@Tuomas “This is the first time that I post those figures on File770”
I believe that we all saw that post from you yesterday. I know I don’t usually read Jim Hines’ blog.
I suspect that you posted it when you were very tired last night and just forgot. There was a brief discussion on it.
@Tuomas- “You have to ask that from the fans that happened to nominate it. (I have not purchased the supporting membership, so I cannot nominate or vote.)”
So let me make sure I understand you correctly:
1) You are sure that most of the Hugo winners of the past ten years were bad and should not have won, because even though you didn’t read them, you found some bad reviews on Amazon.
2) You feel sure that the pieces on the slates should win this year, even though you have not apparently read them either.
What exactly do you read, and what would you be qualified to talk about? Your opinion on a whole pile of things you have not read is not particularly useful to this discussion.
Here, Tuomas, is where you previously posted those statistics: https://file770.com/?p=22418&cpage=3#comment-259381
That’s not even getting into the fact that the article is about female SF authors, and Hugos is SF and Fantasy.
MickyFinn, my site’s tragic absence is dealt with in the comment that begins:
“Hi, James — I’m reluctant to open up the rabbit-hole of individual, independent reviewers, to be honest.”
So I will seek a terrible revenge, that of reviewing more books than any one of the sites that did make SH’s cut.
Seventeen of my reviews appeared in Romantic Times, and that got counted.
There’s a form of trolling that seems familiar to a few posts here that are similar to hat is called Just Asking Questions, but is informally known as JAQing off. Don’t JAQ off.
@Annie Y https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260133
For the Mars-Neptune statement, all you need is the correct multiplier and you can in fact use the distance between Sun and Mars to calculate the rough estimate of Neptune’s orbit.
As for finding the data of all eligble works. Are you going to pay me a living salary to do it? If not, we are stuck using the data that is readily available.
And if such data can be fround from the USA, could you direct me to it. I mean, people keep mentioning how it exists… so there should be something concrete to present.
As for the correlation of best works. I do not know about you, but I assume that both men and women are equally talented. Therefore the number of brilliant works can be expected to correlate with the number of completed works. Just as the number of published works can be expected correlate to the amount of submitted works, if the the criteria behind publishing is simply quality.
As for what works. should have been on the ballots. Once again. Fans voted for what they thought was best. Who am I to judge their decision?
As for statistics themselves, if the women’s gender ratio for SFF is 32%, then on 2012 and 2013 the number of female nominations was statistically significant. In otherwords an unlikely occurance while still remaining in the realm of reasonable possibility. It is almost like rolling a d100, and getting 1,2,3,4, or 5.
As for am I bothered by the results? No. It just appears statistically significant.
@Peace Is My Middle Name https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260134
I picked the article because it was the only thing I could find. (The nearest alternative was diagrams on the percentage of authors reviewed by newspapes. And those figures were even smaller for women.)
And as for your claim of UK being terrible for female authors, please back it up. Hearsay, is hearsay.
Just finished The Goblin Emperor. The 2015 novel category is going to be just fine. There’s at least one novel with likable and sympathetic characters, good plot, and good world building. The punctilious steampunk elves are definitely not Tolkein.
@Maximillian https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260138
It is not the same post. And as stated before, I went straight to bed after hitting submit. So whatever discussion followed, I have no idea.
@Maximillian https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260139
1) In the past I have tried to explain that it is possible to not like the works that get nominated or even win the Hugo.
2) They were voted there by theirs fans even if the fans gained mobility through the Puppies slate. Hence, where I stand, the nominated works are no different from those of the earlier years.
@Nat Lovin https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260141
Thanks, I tried to skim through, but do not really see any of the claimed discussion. I see stuff about Nick Matamatata’s blog post.
@alexvdl https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260144
If you look at the article, look at the various categories and percentages, you can find fantasy in there.
@Matt Y https://file770.com/?p=22445&cpage=7#comment-260147
If that is how you feel, it is how you feel. I just want to see if people can back up their claims with facts.
It seems my previous comment remains stuck in moderation, I do not know when it will pop out. Or what else has been said in between, but I am now heading to bed: so I wish you good night.
James: over half of my current TBR pile comes from your reviews, so I may be a little biased in how significant I think your site is.
That being said, I can understand not wanting to include your site in the statistics, as a one person operation it isn’t a good test of industry biases.
So. Am I likely to bounce off Ancillary Sword if I don’t read AJ first?
Does anyone have the Vegas odds of a flounce and return by Tuomas?
Quoth Tuomas:
“@Matt Y, whatever got nominated deserved its nomination. After all, it was voted there by fans.”
So according to Tuomas, the Puppies have no reason for what they’ve been doing the last three years – after all, everything that has ever been nominated for a Hugo in past years was nominated by fans and therefore deserved to be nominated.
@Tuomas – how about you go to Brad Torgerson’s blog and other puppy hangouts and share this insight of yours with them? Surely they deserve to have the error of their ways explained to them just as much as we do here and will be grateful to you for setting them straight. Or have you already done so? Links, please, if so. Thanks.
Will: I’d advise reading AJ first. It decreases the odds of bouncing off AS, and AJ is best read without having all the info from AS in your head. Also, you’d be best off without having read threads worth of people discussing the details of AJ, but it is possible that that ship has sailed.
Tuomas Vainio: Saying “11 women, 7 men” for 2013 is kind of disingenuous, since the authors nominated for fiction categories that year were:
John Scalzi
Kim Stanley Robinson
Mira Grant/Seanan McGuire – 4 nominations
Lois McMaster Bujold
Saladin Ahmed
Brandon Sanderson
Nancy Kress
Aliette de Bodard – 2 nominations
Jay Lake
Pat Cadigan
Thomas Olde Heuvelt
Catherynne M. Valente
Ken Liu
Kij Johnson
All of the authors on that list (at least the ones I’ve read) are excellent writers. Half of them are women. I don’t see the problem here.
@Will McLean @7:01 pm
Badly. 🙂 Read AJ first – the Sword does not stand on its own – it has its internal story that is open and shut but without the context of the AJ, it makes no sense (and is somewhat boring). Plus you cannot return to not knowing the things from the Sword when you decide to read the Justice down the road. Plus – the Sword makes the Justice a lot better book (and that is a hard thing because the Justice on its own is a pretty good book).
@Tuomas Vainio
Which is my point – you are missing the constant but still doing the calculations. Someone already posted the link to the Strange Horizons data for received books in USA.
So if you are not bothered by this, what made you post them here or actually support the Puppies? What did bother you in the Hugos in the last 5 years?
@alexdvl- I can’t speak to the rest of the stats, but if you follow the links, the 32% figure is for total submissions of all types by Tor UK, not just SF.
If that is how you feel, it is how you feel. I just want to see if people can back up their claims with facts.
Who made claims? You’re original post with the data was asking what people thought your carefully selected data meant and wasn’t counter or in question of any claims.
Instead of leaving the data there, what do you think it means? Why do you believe the UK imprint’s data is applicable? If the stories nominated are good than how is the background applicable, it would appear the system is working? Americans are the third fastest eaters in the world, do you think that this gives them more time to write better stories and that’s why the awards are so American centric?
I’m just asking questions.