Sweeny Terrier: The Demon Nominator of Slate Street 6/28

aka Dandelion Whine

In the roundup today: Vox Day, Gary Denton, Spacefaring Kitten, Alexander Case, Leonie Rogers, D. Douglas Fratz, S.C. Flynn, A.J. Blakemont, Kary English, Damnien G. Walter, Mark Ciocco and Declan Finn. (Title credit belongs to File 770 contributing editors of the day ULTRAGOTHA and May Tree.)

Grimlock * The Vision

“Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, Irene Gallo and Jim Butcher…” – June 28

Jim Butcher takes a lot of offense at what Gallo said, and yet he stands up for her when people harass her: ….

Classy, Mr. Butcher.   Very, very classy.

I’ll be reading more of the books I have, even though I was like, ‘meh.’  I keep thinking I might because I heard they got better, and now I want to do it to support Butcher for standing up against harassment, even when he was offended by that person.

 

Vox Day on Vox Popoli

“I don’t care what you do” – June 28

Rabid Puppies is not, and has never been, a marketing campaign of any kind. We don’t need it. Rabid Puppies is about one thing and one thing only: to prevent the SJWs in science fiction from imposing their thought-police on the genre. I’m no more interested in marketing myself in this regard than Charles Martel was when he led the Franks against the Umayyads.
As several of the VFM have pointed out, the SJWs have it all backwards. They have to think that I am somehow duping thousands of idiots and fools into openly opposing them because the alternative is to accept how massively unpopular they are and how dismally their decades-long campaign to tell people what science fiction they may and may not read has failed.

 

 

Spacefaring Kitten on Spacefaring, Extradimensional Happy Kittens

“Kitten/Puppy Dialogues (on America)” – June 28

I have to say. In my opinion, Captain America is a boring, one-dimensional (well, I did claim he is zero-dimensional, but I’m not sure if that’s possible) character. Therefore, you seem to think, I also want all men put down. There’s a logical leap I don’t quite follow. I also don’t think you should do too hasty conclusions about what my gender is, because you know nothing about it.

But let’s dissect your statement a bit further.

What I’m actually disliking here is a Hugo finalist that was not on either of the two Puppy slates you’re probably promoting. In fact, I believe Captain America: The Winter Soldier was plugged by some actual, outspoken feminists, such as the smart and wonderful Book Smugglers Ana and Thea. For the record, I don’t think they are in league with the imperialist patriarchy there. Rather, they and I have a somewhat different taste as far as superhero movies are concerned.

I have every reason to believe that the Puppy-supported Hugo finalists Lego Movie, Guardians of the Galaxy and Interstellar will all be better, even though I haven’t seen the first two of them yet. What I know of them so far seems promising. A Puppy supporter criticizing me for this seems odd.

 

Alexander Case on Breaking It All Down

“Small thing bugging me about the Hugo Awards” – June 28

All You Need Is Kill, by Hiroshi Sakurazaka, is published in English by Haikasoru in 2004. Gets an nomination for the Seiun Awards (Japanese version of the Hugos) in its home country, nothing at the Hugo awards.

Then, All You Need Is Kill gets a manga adaptation, with art by Takeshi Obata (of Death Note and Bakuman fame), which is published in the US by Viz in 2014 – both volumes and an all-in-one omnibus. Does not get a Hugo nomination for Best Graphic Novel.

The film version, on the other hand, with a white director, white stars, white screenwriter, and which generally is as white as hell, gets a Hugo Award nomination for Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form.

That doesn’t seem right to me.

To be clear, I’m glad the film was nominated. However, the lack of nominations for any versions of the story made by, you know, Japanese people, gives a vibe that the only way a work of Japanese speculative fiction can get for a Hugo Award.

 

 

Leonie Rogers

“Frustrated” – June 28

Over the past couple of weeks I’ve been working my way through the packet – which is what Hugo voters get in case they haven’t read the appropriate nominations. (I might add that I’m a prolific reader of Spec Fic, but there’s so much stuff to read, that I just don’t have enough time to read it all, so a lot of the stuff in the packet is quite new to me.)

The title of this post is ‘Frustrated.’ And I am. I’ve read quite a few Hugo nominees and winners over the many years I’ve been reading Spec Fic, and I’ve enjoyed pretty well all of it in all its varied forms. But this lot? I’m struggling through a lot of it. I’ve read all the short stories and novelettes and most of the novellas. Ho hum. Sigh. Honestly….sigh….

As an early career writer myself, I appreciate good writing. I also know that I don’t always get it right, but I really thought Hugo nominees would have it down pat. Nope. Or at least not this lot. Don’t get me wrong, there are some decent stories, and some of them are decently written, but so far, the vast majority are not exciting me at all. And as far as a couple of them go, they’re not well written at all.

I do have to thank the Hugo Packet for introducing me to Ms Marvel, though. I will actively go out and find more of her. (Apart from Phantom comics, I haven’t really read a lot of graphic novels.) In the meantime, I will continue to slog through the rest of the packet, hoping to find a gem here and there. Then I shall vote accordingly. On the upside, I’m feeling pretty happy about some of my own short stories right now….

 

D. Douglas Fratz on SF Site

“The Alienated Critic: Wherein the columnist endeavors to make restitution for his most recent profound death of productivity and steps into the fray on Puppygate”

As a result of all this, the Hugo Awards are now famous outside the field for all the wrong reasons. The New Republic even covered Puppygate, and sensible blogs were written by top authors — most notably serial blogs by George R. R. Martin — that made sure all of broader fandom knew what had happened. Connie Willis, Robert Silverberg, David Gerrold, and other deans of SF have all weighed in with level-headed views. The big losers here, of course, are the many fine authors who produced superior works in 2014 that should have been nominated, including many mentioned above, and we will know who they were when the full voting is announced.

But we all lost here. In the past, I would estimate that 90 percent of those nominated on the Hugo ballot are among the top 10 percent of candidates, making it a reliable index of quality. Everyone who relies on the Hugo Nominations and results to help choose future reading lost something this year. (Also everyone who wishes that those hours Martin, Willis, Silverberg, and others spent addressing the issue were used to write new fiction!) Thank goodness there are still other awards, including the Locus Awards and even the sometimes quirky Nebula awards, for this purpose. I hope that the Worldcon administrators will find a way to prevent future block voting, but there is some chance that (like our own government’s counter-terrorism policies) the solutions will simply make things slightly worse for all. Which is, in the end, just what terrorists seek to have happen.

 

S.C. Flynn on Scy-Fy

“Interview with A.J. Blakemont” – June 28

SCy-Fy: Thanks! What potential traps do you see in SFF blogging?

AJB: Let’s be respectful! It is always possible to express one’s opinion or disagreement without hurting other people’s feelings. SF fans tend to be passionate and opinionated, and, sometimes, they get carried away. The current debate about the Hugos is a good example. No one owns the truth: not me, not you, not this guy with hundreds of thousands of followers. No one….

SCy-Fy: Posts of yours that have had the most impact or controversy?

AJB: My recent post on the Hugos: “Is the system broken?” caused controversy. Sad Puppies’ campaign manager wrote to me. Something tells me that my chances of being nominated for a Hugo are close to zero. Well, fortunately I care naught for awards! A writer should care only about readers, period. I wanted my readers to hear my opinion, and if it means being at variance with influential people in fandom, so be it.

 

Kary English

“An open letter to Puppies and everyone” – June 28

If you read Totaled and loved it enough to nominate it, thank you. That’s exactly how the Hugos are supposed to work, and it shouldn’t matter to me or anyone whether you identify as a Puppy or not. So if you’re one of those readers, then rock on. I am humbled and grateful for your support.

But as we know, Bob, there was a push this year to nominate things sometimes without having read them, and for reasons that had little to do with fannish enthusiasm. I never asked to be part of that, and had I been given the choice, I would not have wanted my work used that way.

I’m also not comfortable with the ballot sweep. My sense from the Sad Puppies is that locking up the ballot was never one of the goals of the movement, and that it was accidental, unintentional and unforeseen. If I’m wrong, and nominating five works in some of the categories was a deliberate attempt to sweep the ballot, then I wouldn’t have wanted to be part of that, either.

The Hugos should represent all voices, so if Sad Puppies is about drawing attention to works that might otherwise be overlooked, I can support that and I’m happy to stand for it. But if it’s about shutting out other voices and other work, if it’s about politics or pissing off certain segments of fandom, that’s not something I can get behind.

The whole point of fandom is that our love for the genre unites us. It’s about having a place where genre is paramount, where literature comes first. So if that’s who you are, and that’s what you want, then I’m with you. That’s why I invited everyone to talk about books here on my blog.

But if you’re in this with some other agenda, take it elsewhere. I don’t want to be part of it.

 

Kary English on Facebook – June 28

Here’s what I hope will be my final comment on the Hugos.

As a result of this statement, I have been delisted from Vox Day’s voting preferences, which is fine with me since I never agreed to be part of that in the first place…..

 

Vox Day on Vox Popoli

“Hugo Recommendations: Best Short Story” – June 28

This is how I am voting in the Best Short Story category. Of course, I offer this information regarding my individual ballot for no particular reason at all, and the fact that I have done so should not be confused in any way, shape, or form with a slate or a bloc vote, much less a direct order by the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil to his 386 Vile Faceless Minions or anyone else.

  1. “Turncoat”, Steve Rzasa (Riding the Red Horse, Castalia House)
  2. “The Parliament of Beasts and Birds”, John C. Wright (The Book of Feasts & Seasons, Castalia House)
  3. “On A Spiritual Plain”, Lou Antonelli (Sci Phi Journal #2, 11-2014)
  4. “A Single Samurai”, Steven Diamond (The Baen Big Book of Monsters, Baen Books)

 

Mark Ciocco on Kaedrin Weblog

“Hugo Awards: Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form” – June 28

…. This year, we have at least two nominees that were deserving (and that didn’t have Upstream‘s impenetrable style), including Coherence (to be fair, there are some eligibility concerns on that one), The One I Love, and maybe even Snowpiercer (a film I kinda hated, but it seems up the voters’ alley). Alas, they did not make it, and to be sure, Hollywood had a pretty good year, putting out plenty of genuinely good movies. Indeed, I even nominated 3 of these, so I guess I shouldn’t complain! My vote will go something like this (I’m going to be partially quoting myself on some of these, with some added comments more specific to the Hugos)….

[Comments on all five nominees.]

 

[Very brave, Declan, pretending what I said about you was addressed to Sad Puppies in general. Now go and change your armor…]

758 thoughts on “Sweeny Terrier: The Demon Nominator of Slate Street 6/28

  1. I like you, but let’s be clear here. I am not Damien G Walter’s social media consultant, career guidance counselor, HR director, best friend from college, priest, or tennis partner, and we don’t follow each other on Twitter. (I Tweeted once in college and never tried it again.) Why should he answer to me?

    Yes, the barriers to asking him directly for clarification are utterly insurmountable, beyond the ken of men and gods. Easier to literally ask every single man, woman and child on the planet who isn’t him what they thought he might have meant, rather than ask him.

  2. Mike linked to something topical, and I said, in a quite a brief comment, actually, what I thought about it, like one does here, in a discussion thread devoted to discussing these links.

    Ahhh, this is much better trolling Brian. The air of wounded innocence is a nice touch too.

    BtW, just to keep with the “Brian always misrepresents” theme that you go for, just to remind you, only in your first comment about Walter’s tweet did you ask who Walter’s wanted to have removed from an annamed shrotlist (that you interpreted as the Hugo’s). When no one went for that bait, you decided to escalate by moving to saying that Walter’s was calling for a blacklist in your next two comments. That’s when people pointed out to you that you were being…well, you.

    But no, keep going man. Perfect your artform. You may make an actual reality-based point sometime.

    ETA: LOL, guys let’s all please stop piling on poor Brian and his obvious reality re-writes. He might feel hurt and may stop misrepresenting.

  3. This comment is also asking someone entirely different what they think whatsisface meant. This thing, right here, and your first comment, that’s one specific thing that definitely, provably annoys people without having any noticable gains for whatever your goal is. Its basically a form of JAQing off.

    I still think people are harsher on you than you deserve, but you make zero effort to stop doing the things that reliably annoy people every single time. Its silly. There’s a quote somewhere about doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results.

  4. Meredith, am I misremembering my concern that Damien would link the authors in the excerpts I quoted to Charleston? That I asked if he has named names? Or that I wondered why the Guardian is criticizing genre authors for being conservatives while they laud dead conservative literary authors on another page?

    Nigel, if I’m asking every man, woman and child on Earth, then I suppose I’m asking Damien G Walter.

    snowcrash, I didn’t escalate to saying he is calling for a blacklist. He is just calling for a blacklist.

    ETA: snowcrash, just saw your ETA. Good call!

  5. Tuomas Vainio: In other words, it appears that our blogger did not consider or notice certain aspects that were portrayed in the film, such as Steve Rogers’ problems trying to find his place in the modern world.

    Partly because that plot point was actually Rogers’ character development in Avengers Assemble*. In Winter Soldier he has come to terms with it, does his job, catches up on stuff and deflects people who want to interfere with his (non-existent) lovelife. His way of coping is stable and not challenged by the events of the film. I do think one-dimensional is a bit unfair; he manages to have two dimensions what with the tension between loyalty, duty and THE RIGHT THING. What he never has is doubt, which is a drawback in a film that wants to be a paranoid conspiracy thriller (bolted to superhero action).

    Someone suggested he should have called in the other Avengers, or at least thought of it, but I think this can be resolved fairly easily: Stark is unreliable and having his own problems** and Thor is in another dimension; he’s working with Natasha. If we assume Banner is missing-not-wanting-to-be-found then the only mystery is what’s up with Hawkeye.

    * Known as The Avengers in other parts of the world.
    ** And may have given up being Iron Man after the events of Iron Man 3 as far as we know when the film came out.

  6. Nigel, if I’m asking every man, woman and child on Earth, then I suppose I’m asking Damien G Walter.

    Tell you what, you could even start with him and not have to bother anyone else.

  7. snowcrash, I didn’t escalate to saying he is calling for a blacklist. He is just calling for a blacklist.

    He asked for people to be removed from a shortlist. This is different in that
    – The ban is applied after a prior hurdle/criterion has been met. Nothing happens to objectionable people not on the shortlist.
    – Blacklist are hence predetermined, proactive. Striking someone off a list is reactive.
    – Blacklists are records to be kept and reused, removing someone is a one time act.
    – Blacklist carry the bagage of the Hollywood blacklist, whereas the Hugo admins remove works which are not eligible every year so striking items off the list has precedent. That’s a difference in approach and intent.

  8. @Brian Z

    Well, that’s the thing, you didn’t make that comment. I’m not sure whether you deliberately insinuate or whether you honestly forget to put the linking statements in, but your habit is to put unconnected statements together without actually making your argument plain. This bit:

    That I asked if he has named names?

    Was what was in your comment and was also part of what I was pointing to as a specific, fixable quirk of yours that pisses people off. Everyone can see the same thing in the round-up as you. Don’t ask other people to speculate what someone meant or to go looking for more information for you, because it pisses people off.

    @Neil W

    They had to drop it, but there was originally going to be a sequence of Hawkeye chasing Captain America down as if he was Hydra, then when he got close warning him about an electronic tracker and getting knocked out. It would’ve been cool, but time constraints got in the way.

  9. @RedWombat: Respecting Sir Pratchett

    Tut. Knights of the Realm are always Sir or Dame Firstname, or optionally Sir or Dame Firstname Lastname or Sir or Dame Firstname of Location if you need to distinguish between more than one. Never just by last name.

  10. Well Meredith, I really don’t use Twitter, but based on your urging I went to look anyway.

    Based on a cursory reading of his barrage of Tweets, I gather he want removed from the Hugo shortlist the “racists,” which includes:
    – “white supremacists”
    – those associated with gamergate
    – those who “publicize a racist cause”
    – “insane racist nazi stuff”
    – assholes with fedoras and neckbeards

    Well, that was indeed quite informative. So thank you for urging me on.

  11. Brian Z on June 30, 2015 at 1:27 am said:

    What is blindingly obvious is that you are vehemently opposed to EPH getting passed, and you have been doing your best to sow as much fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the proposal as possible, in the hope that the people here would be too stupid to see through your painfully-transparent posts.

    JJ, nope. I just think EPH fails to address the root problems by simply pointing at “puppies” and emitting a kind of Donald Sutherland shriek.

    Oh, gross. That Donald Sutherland thing has been a specifically Puppy meme since before the wet newspapers hit the fan. I was startled to see it show up so often in triumphant and gloating Puppy posts this past spring. Why would anyone of good will use it?

    Despite many and frequent attempts to whip up a mob of unforgiving Puppy-haters over here, mostly what I have seen on the part of commenters her is a willingness to live and let live as long as people don’t try to crowd out those who don’t share their tastes.

    You know, inclusiveness rather than casting basically unobjectionable people out.

  12. @Brian Z

    He’s shit outta luck because the Hugos don’t work that way and a motion to make them work that way will never (and should never) get past the Business Meeting, which I think got covered at some point near the beginning of this thread. Political litmus tests for apolitical organisations are bad news.

    I do wish people could tell the difference between a fedora and a trilby. They’d never pass an eye test on The Avengers (British tv show, not the American comics).

    I’ve been quite hard on you, but I hope its clear that my aim is to stop having to watch you (metaphorically) repeatedly slam your head into a brick wall. You can do better! I believe in you!

  13. I’m supporting EPH not because of the politics but because of how Hugo nomination slates have clearly been shown to be effective in allowing a minority of nominators to have a disproportionate impact on the nominees. It would have been just as unfair if it had been the dread pirate SJW’s slate.

    As regards politics, sheesh, as if those haven’t been present in fandom since, like, forever. We’ve managed to live with teh politics, mostly. That politics is a motivating factor in the SP/RP slates is clear, but it’s the slatening that’s the real problem.

  14. @David W

    Yup, exactly. The politics in question are unpleasant, but if it were a slate run by people who agree with every political stance I take I would still vote it under No Award and still want the rules changed to prevent it happening again.

  15. So thank you for urging me on.

    And are you his tennis instructor now, or did that info come without adopting some sort of personal or professional role in his life?

    I should probably add some sort of obligatory comment about not trusting the way you paraphrase others, but I’m not sure I care in this instance.

  16. Nigel, nope! I still don’t know what names are on his proposed blacklist, and I still haven’t asked him!

    ETA: Hang on a minute: who’s trolling who???

  17. I’ve been quite hard on you, but I hope its clear that my aim is to stop having to watch you (metaphorically) repeatedly slam your head into a brick wall. You can do better! I believe in you!

    You haven’t been too hard on me, Meredith. You may have been misreading my intentions.

  18. Nigel, nope!

    Well, I guess I’m glad you’ve finally found a meaningful hill to plant your flag on. Thus far and no further! I’ll scan his tweets, but I’ll not seek clarification just keep asking others to speculate on his behalf in a manner that vaguely and insultingly implies some sort of widely shared support for his ideas! Whatever they are!

  19. ETA: Hang on a minute: who’s trolling who???

    Ask not for whom the Nigel trolls.

  20. Brian Z.: I still don’t know what names are on his proposed blacklist, and I still haven’t asked him!

    … yes, after 13 posts on the subject in 36 hours, I’m still wanking on about it here, but I haven’t actually bothered to ask him! Gosh, I’m so offended that you all have this utterly mistaken, mistaken, I tell you! misunderstanding that I’m a troll!

  21. @Brian Z

    I suppose it depends on whether your intention is to piss people off. If you are trolling, then yes, I have misread them.

  22. sez brian z: “I like you, but let’s be clear here. I am not Damien G Walter’s social media consultant, career guidance counselor, HR director, best friend from college, priest, or tennis partner, and we don’t follow each other on Twitter. (I Tweeted once in college and never tried it again.) Why should he answer to me?”
    It is true that Damien G Walter does not have any reason to “answer to you”. This being the case, the best way to find out what Damien G Walter means when you aren’t sure what they’re saying, is to ask a number of random people, none of whom are Damien G Walter, and all of whom also do not have any reason to “answer to you”. That’s just simple logic, that is. Yes, indeedy-do.

  23. David W,

    I’m supporting EPH not because of the politics but because of how Hugo nomination slates have clearly been shown to be effective in allowing a minority of nominators to have a disproportionate impact on the nominees. It would have been just as unfair if it had been the dread pirate SJW’s slate.

    As I’ve mentioned before, the way political clashes and the technicalities of what happens when there is bloc voting are being (in my view) muddled together, a la DGW’s well thought out Tweets, is (in my view) a very good reason to slow down.

    Ask the Spokane organizers to host face to face panel and community discussions. Pass a resolution that WSFS does not encourage bloc voting if you want to. Ask a committee of people with a variety of different backgrounds and types of expertise to hold conversations with all the parties involved and draft “big picture” recommendations before geeking out on algorithms. Wait a year before voting on constitutional amendments. In my view, that would still, even at this late date, be the most healthy and effective response.

    (Cue the peanut gallery yelling that I’m just saying that to give Vox Day a Hugo.)

  24. Brian Z.: Ask the Spokane organizers to host face to face panel and community discussions. Pass a resolution that WSFS does not encourage bloc voting if you want to. Ask a committee of people with a variety of different backgrounds and types of expertise to hold conversations with all the parties involved and draft “big picture” recommendations before geeking out on algorithms. Wait a year before voting on anything. In my view, that would still, even at this late date, be the most healthy and effective response.

    … but dear gods, whatever you do, do not pass the EPH nominations process changes which will disempower slates, I beg of you!

  25. @Brian Z

    Well, luckily, nothing goes into the rules without being voted in two years in a row. EPH won’t be live for next year whatever happens, so you’ll get your year regardless.

  26. Ask the Spokane organizers to host face to face panel and community discussions. Pass a resolution that WSFS does not encourage bloc voting if you want to. Ask a committee of people with a variety of different backgrounds and types of expertise to hold conversations with all the parties involved and draft “big picture” recommendations before geeking out on algorithms. Wait a year before voting on anything. In my view, that would still, even at this late date, be the most healthy and effective response.

    It has been explained to you multiple times, so this is just for Meredith:

    – I have a solution I’m happy with: EPH. If you are unhappy, again, don’t ask other people to do your work for you. Draft a resolution for the business meeting, gather supporters. Come up with a list for the committee and write to those people or write to the people who you think might be willing to intervene on your behalf.
    – Vox Day said his group does not negotiate. Therefore, all proposed social solutions won’t fix this part of the problem. EPH will.
    – There is, fundamentally, nothing to discuss. Worldcon is open to all. There was and still is an implicit agreement to vote independently. People are welcome to join. That’s your “big picture” right there.
    (You’re once again recycling a puppy talking point btw. The fairy tale of some mysterious exclusion, suggestions of victimhood which are then used to imply a right to unspecified concessions. The unspecified is key here.)

  27. Meredith, the point is to make a firm demonstration that this is not anything remotely similar to Donald Sutherland shrieking.

    The point is to show that people from Wiscon to Eastercon to Libertycon can all work together to resolve the conflicts in our community.

    (Sorry Wombat.)

  28. Brian Z, as I said and will repeat, fannish politics are what they are and will be what they will be. So it goes. Que sera sera. EPH is strictly a ballot counting change that makes slate nominee voting less effective in dominating the Hugo nominations. I support it and the EPH proposal will get a fair hearing and vote at Sasquan during the WSFS Business Meeting and the same again at MidAmericon II in Kansas City next year before it can go into effect, if approved at both meetings. So I think your concern about not giving sufficient time to discuss EPH is unwarranted. In the meantime, we know full well that slates do work and that they pose an immediate problem to the integrity of the Hugo Awards. So twiddling our thumbs about it in hopes it won’t be a problem in the future is like saying maybe if we wait the cow will come back to the barn on its own. Me, I’m for sending Lassie after the cow.

  29. @mk41

    =^_^=

    I hope EPH gets voted in this year, and I hope that if in the intervening period a massive flaw is found then it doesn’t get voted in but something else does, because the current system is vulnerable to bad faith actors. My feelings on social solutions can be summed up with “I do not negotiate with terrorists”, even pathetic ones whose main ambition is disrupting a fandom award and ruining everyone else’s fun.

    Still, there’s nothing to stop someone else going for a social solution, I’m just not going to volunteer my spoons for it. The list of things I’d rather do than have a friendly chat with certain Puppies isn’t going to be exhausted any time soon. (At least not at the rate book recommendations happen around here!)

    @Brian Z

    EPH doesn’t discriminate by politics – as you handily proved when you were worrying about Whovians being affected. I don’t really care what people who frequently get upset over ridiculous things think of it, because they will take any excuse to get upset. (See: Hoyt and Hydrophobia.) I’m not going to walk on eggshells because some people are very, very silly. Fandom does not have to cater to whoever screams the loudest. (And in general, I don’t view people who scream about everything very favourably. They’re very draining on the spoons to be around, and at some point they ought to grow up and figure out that not everything is about them.)

  30. The point is to show that people from Wiscon to Eastercon to Libertycon can all work together to resolve the conflicts in our community.

    Resolving political differences, I’m rather dubious about given fannish history, so I’m happy if we can keep the disagreements down to a dull roar myself. But we can resolve how nominee slates distort the Hugo nominations in the meantime at least, hence the EPH proposal.

  31. So twiddling our thumbs about it in hopes it won’t be a problem in the future

    I know what you are saying, David, but I didn’t say twiddle our thumbs, I said task a committee with a diverse bunch of people on it with talking to everybody – even those recalcitrant puppies – and see if there is a solution that everybody agrees with. Maybe it is EPH. It is just that such a process will take a year. I think we can take a year and do it properly. Fandom will survive.

  32. @Brian Z

    I’m still not clear on why that’s mutually exclusive with voting for EPH this year, considering the two year process inherent to the WSFS.

  33. Brian Z.: I said task a committee with a diverse bunch of people on it with talking to everybody – even those recalcitrant puppies – and see if there is a solution that everybody agrees with. Maybe it is EPH. It is just that such a process will take a year. I think we can take a year and do it properly. Fandom will survive.

    That’s already being done, and it’s being done properly. If the Puppies choose not to participate, that’s on them. The solution “that everybody agrees on” will be selected at Sasquan. Again, if the Puppies choose not to participate in that, that’s on them.

  34. No, no listen. The solution to slates is EPH. We’re done.
    Whatever else we do, we can do, but there is not a single good reason not to pass EPH this year.

  35. mk41 on June 30, 2015 at 5:16 am said:
    No, no listen. The solution to slates is EPH. We’re done.
    Whatever else we do, we can do, but there is not a single good reason not to pass EPH this year.

    Where’s a Wombat when you need one?

    (I just mean the “we” part.)

  36. I know what you are saying, David, but I didn’t say twiddle our thumbs, I said task a committee with a diverse bunch of people on it with talking to everybody – even those recalcitrant puppies – and see if there is a solution that everybody agrees with.

    As there’s already a mechanism in place to amend the Hugo process, namely the WSFS Business meeting, there’s no purpose in having a redundant committee to regurgitate a solution, which may or may not be a dog’s breakfast. But perhaps you could talk our gracious host into forming an ad hoc File770 Committee for that purpose. On the other paw, that already exists. 🙂

  37. David W., is that why I can look forward to voting for the Best YA Novel award this year? These things just take time. No need to rush them.

  38. Brian another annoying habit of your is just changing the topic when you run out of talking points. Again, easily fixed: Adress the arguments made to you, say you concede the point or argue against it.

  39. That would require Brian to acknowledge the fact that he could be wrong. That’d be a very large evolution in his character development, I don’t think his author has those kind of writing chops.

  40. David W., is that why I can look forward to voting for the Best YA Novel award this year?

    At the last NASFiC in Detroit they did give YA awards, so it definitely can be done. I’m of three minds about it myself.

  41. Meredith on June 30, 2015 at 4:16 am said:
    I do wish people could tell the difference between a fedora and a trilby. They’d never pass an eye test on The Avengers (British tv show, not the American comics).

    Ah gods, trilbys and those awful little pork pie hats. It bugs me no end that people refer to them as fedoras.

    Does anyone see irony in the fact that both fedoras and trilbys were originally women’s hats, named after women?

  42. Brian is really, really determined to get other people to do a lot of work to assuage concerns that he has but they don’t.

    I figure if Brian was actually concerned enough, he’d try to do the work himself rather than insisting on people who don’t see the need for it doing it, and insulting them at virtually every turn while insisting they address his never-ending concerns that are impervious to explanation.

    And if he’s not willing to do the work, then he’s not as concerned as he claims.

  43. @Peace

    Does anyone see irony in the fact that both fedoras and trilbys were originally women’s hats, named after women?

    I edited out my minirant about the appropriation of women’s hats (with distinctly feminist overtones, too) by sexist twits. I’m sure you’re all grateful to be spared it. 😀 I’m more of a bowler hat sort of person but I occasionally think about branching out and reclaiming fedoras and trilbys for women.

  44. My xkcd guy is definitely wearing a trilby, not a fedora. You can tell by the upturning pixels.

    I am officially better informed about the origin of the name though.

  45. Will R.:

    That Jodorowski movie really was an amazing thing. Almost better than if he’d actually realized Dune.

    After hearing Jodorowsky’s thoughts on adaptions in general, and seeing what he planned to do with the ending, I think it is better that he didn’t get to make the movie. Still a terrific documentary, though. From the amount of buzz it was getting, it may turn out to be one of the works pushed off the ballot by the slate. 🙁

  46. Although I’m confident that the team we’ve assembled to manage this year’s WSFS Business Meeting is up to the challenge, there are times (like when reading these comments) when I start to think I’d be much happier if the biggest controversy we were facing this year was the proposal to create a Best Anthology/Collection category.

Comments are closed.