One of the questions when faced with bloc nominating in the Hugo Awards is this: when is something bloc voting/nominating? When isn’t it?
There have been statements about the Sad Puppies slate being a slate because it’s five items in many categories: conveniently the number of possible nominations. And, while that is a compelling argument, that isn’t one I find especially convincing.
A Question Was Posed
In this comment, MC DuQuesne says:
Here’s another obvious slate that should be taken into account
http://aidanmoher.com/blog/featured-article/2015/03/final-2015-hugo-awards-ballot-recommendations/
I’m not going to respond to the sealioning in MC’s comments here (though I did cover the answers in another recent comment on the post they commented on), but Aidan’s post actually is a good compare/contrast to discuss why I believe Aidan’s post was not a slate and the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies was.
Because, frankly, if you don’t think that setting up a sockpuppet site (or a hundred), declaring a slate of “SJW” works, and infesting it with a few pets to write blog comments (perhaps even buying a few fiverr gigs for even more comments) isn’t going to happen, well, that’s naive.
So, what defines a slate, then?
Well, let’s look at a bit of unpleasant second-world history for some actual historic usage, tweets by Rose Lemberg that were storified by Charles A. Tan. Actual gulag tales there.
Clearly, we don’t mean anything that dramatic with bloc voting in the Hugos. One hopes.
For starters, there’s the obvious results-based approach. Let’s look at successful nominations this year:
| Slate/List | Successful Nominations | Failed Nominations |
|---|---|---|
| Rabid Puppies (Slate) | 55 | 12 |
| Sad Puppies (Slate) | 49 | 11 |
| Aidan Moher (List) | 8 | 34 |
Aidan’s list includes two Best Novel nominees, one Long Form nominee (shared with the puppies), one Best Pro Editor Short Form nominee, one Best Professional Artist nominee, and three Best Semiprozine nominees. What’s particularly interesting—and perhaps most compelling given how much of Aidan’s blog is about art—is that his sole Fan Artist nomination wasn’t on the final ballot at all. This was the sole puppy-free category, too.
A Better Measure of Influence: the MilliScalzi
Google ranks pages; Alexa ranks sites. Alexa ranks are used by all kinds of companies to measure influence. The ranking (lower is better) means: how many sites are more influential than you are?
In this case, the milliScalzi is defined as:
1000 * (Scalzi’s Alexa Rank) / (Your Alexa Rank)
| Name | Alexa Rank | MilliScalzis |
|---|---|---|
| John Scalzi | 84,424 | 1,000 |
| Vox Day | 86,085 | 981 |
| Larry Correia | 124,256 | 679 |
| Brad Torgersen | 199,682 | 423 |
| Sarah Hoyt | 238,721 | 354 |
| John C. Wright | 265,307 | 318 |
| Mike Glyer / File 770 | 296,754 | 284 |
| Aidan Moher | 525,045 | 161 |
| Deirdre Saoirse Moen | 579,880 | 146 |
So, given that Aidan and I hang around in the same milliScalzi hood, I feel I can say about how much influence he had this year. Let’s put it this way: it only took 23 nominations to get on the fan artist ballot, and his nomination didn’t make it onto the list.
More Compelling Reasons I Don’t Consider Aidan’s List a Slate
- Aidan didn’t highlight his own work. Do I need to explain how the puppy slates differed in that regard?
- Aidan posted it on March 9th (though he’d posted novel thoughts earlier), and nominations closed less than a week later. The Sad Puppies 3 slate was posted at the beginning of February. While I could also see a case being made for people just nominating without reading, I believe the extra lead time is a significant factor.
- A slate with little to no effective conversions (in the marketing sense, by which I mean people taking action) is not a slate. Given that the fan artist influence didn’t push his candidate up and over, I think the “slate” argument is truly a non-starter.
Just to put this in perspective, here are my blog stats for that same period:
Still, I think it’s poor form to post one’s full nomination list if one has any significant influence—and Aiden having won a Hugo last year means he has some. There are bound to be hurt feelings about who was left out, even if they’d never say so. (And no, I’m not the least bit offended or hurt. I’m glad I’m not on the final ballot this year. I feel for my friends who are.)
Hugo Awards Nomination Ideas
I kind of like this one because I think it’ll take more pressure off people who feel they haven’t read the whole field.
- One nomination per (some new member type) member per category;
- Two nominations (currently 5) per supporting member per category;
- Four nominations (currently 5) per attending member per category.
I think only having one or two things would feel less overwhelming for someone who hadn’t read as widely.
In Other News
In other news, Worldcon has a new gavel (which Rick suggested be named Grabthar’s Hammer), and master filker Tom Smith has a Sad Puppies filk. With a choir.
Puppy nominee Lou Antonelli calls me a Nazi after I tossed him off my blog. (Nazi screencap here.) Protip: when your opening paragraph asserts a position I do not hold and tries to argue with me about it, things will not go well for you.
My honest reaction was amusement: you think you’re a legitimately-nominated Hugo Award nominee for Best Short Story (and Best Related Work)—and that’s the best you’ve got? Really?
Most of the people who read Vox Day’s blog aren’t there for his opinions on science fiction.
That doesn’t stop them from voting like they were. The relative Alexa rankings do show why Vox Day had more pull than Correia + Torgersen + Hoyt. (I’ve treated Alexa ranking as a linear scale, but it’s not.)
I’ll point out, just because it’ll scandalise a bunch of people I don’t mind proddng into frothing, the historical roots of the milliScalzi:
microLenat: the standard unit of bogosity, named for noted CMU computer scientist Doug Lenat for giving a student named Reid a failing grade on a test where Reid wrote only ‘AI is bogus’ as his answer. (Many feel the unit should be renamed microReid.)
millihelen: the amount of beauty required to launch one Homeric ship and burn down a house.
Rick Moen
rick@linuxmafia.com
I really feel for Reid on this one. I’d always expected there to be more there there in the field of AI. (I feel it’s finally getting somewhere.)
Deirdre: Welcome back home.
Thanks for all the meaty stuff. My thoughts –
Regarding Aiden’s list: I myself wouldn’t use the effectiveness of a recommendations list as a criterion for whether it is or is not a slate (your point number 3 under “More Compelling Reasons…”). Stated differently, I would consider the SP and RP efforts to be slates regardless of the number of works on their lists that were nominated. That said, I think you’re spot on with your other reasons and logic about when a slate is a slate.
Your point about the wisdom of a recent winner sharing his/her personal ballot choices made me shudder a bit. I agree with you totally, but am also concerned about whether the SP/RP’s 2016 incarnation will include recruiting volunteers to scour blogs and websites to root out “obvious slates” that really aren’t and then raise a stink. Oh well, that’s next year, not now.
Hugo Award nomination ideas. I have some concerns here. I understand your reasoning as it pertains to people who like sf but ‘don’t eat it at every meal.’ But I think the idea of buying extra nominating votes with more expensive memberships plays into the hands of those who are currently whining about the “elites” who attend Worldcons. Even in the absence of the current kerfuffle, I prefer a process in which a one’s impact on the nominations is not linked to money. [Disclosure: I am a political junkie at heart, which will not spill over to your blog except to say I am intellectually fascinated by the role of money in the post-Citizen’s United era.]
Tom Smith’s song is fabulous, as was Rick’s version. I’ve been writing new lyrics to old tunes based on topical events for years and love being exposed to others’ efforts.
BankerPup, that was kind of you, about my ‘Sad Puppies Aren’t Much Fun’ effort.
IMO, Tom Smith knocked that one completely out of the park, but then, he’s a master filker. I’m just one of his listeners who’s written three filks ever, the Muse having hit me upside the head saying ‘Hey, dimwit, I know you have no musical talent, but here’s an idea to run with’. If interested, you can find the other two linked from my home page at linuxmafia.com .
If Tom had asked my opinion, I’d have said to lose the ‘stuffed the ballot with hate’ line because it’s crude and sloppy rhetoric, because it’s pointlessly inflammatory (especially against authors who themselves have done nothing wrong), and because the War Against Abstract Concepts thing long ago got old.
But good rhymes are difficult to come by, and Tom didn’t ask my opinion anyway.
Good rhymes are hard to come by if the word is “orange” or “silver.” A good rhyme is not the issue here.
Yes, it was mildly inflammatory, but sometimes we intentionally write something knowing it’ll (ahem) “scandalise a bunch of people (we) don’t mind proddng into frothing,” even at the risk of possible collateral damage. Don’t mess with the Muse, yanno? (gryn)
Maybe there should be a Hugo for best filk.
One of the things I meant to cover (but, hey, I finished drafting at 2 am, so I was bound to forget something): it was more the collusion between multiple parties that made SP and RP a slate, as documented here.
I tend to agree with you on “not linked to money” except that I also wish to make it a bit more open for people to get into Worldcon. I myself didn’t join for many years because of cost, but you can bet I saw the ads in the back of Asimov’s and Analog and dreamed about going.
Also, I wanted to head off the next year thing at the pass. At least then I can point to this post and say, “See? I told you so!” I don’t think the puppies expected the level of backlash they’ve seen, and I’m not even talking about my site or File 770.
I’m also fascinated by the role of money in the post-Citizen’s United era. I was an economics minor, though my personal thing is micro economics.
I don’t mind poking the hornets with a stick if it’s funny. Just my opinion, obviously, but ‘stuffed the ballot with hate’ was simply the one line that made me think ‘Really, Tom, yet another reification of “hate” to beat someone with a figurative stick’. For me, it was merely crude and unclever, hence not funny.
But dying is easy, comedy is difficult. And in the eye of the beholder.
(But I still say alleged political songwriter Mark Russell isn’t fit to tie Tom Lehrer’s shoelaces. Roy Zimmerman, OTOH, can hold his head up high.)
(As it happens, earlier this week I penned lyrics about Earth Day to Lehrer’s “Christmas Carol,” but I digress.)
Do you have an opinion on what makes a slate a slate that you’d like to share?
Who, me? I’m not sure I care to editorialise on what is a ‘slate’ and what isn’t — but I’ll chance some metacommentary. I’ve seen a lot of really crappy, time-wasting argumentation in the last few days (such as a couple of jokers over at File770.com) regurgitating various dictionary definitions of ‘slate’ and purporting to prove thereby that some canines or other either did one or not. I don’t propose to add to that pile of dross.
Point is, it’s irrelevant what some dictionary defines a ‘slate’ to be. Irrespective of whether that English word is absolutely ‘le mot juste’, I think it’s abundantly clear what about the Beale and Torgersen campaigning and (apparent) acquisition of nomination votes has made habitual Hugo voters and Worldcon co-goers very annoyed and (in my estimation) in a mood to terminate what they see as behaviour hostile to the Worldcon.
Call it a slate or call it Betsy and put a nightgown on it. Arguing about its correct name is missing the point. I am very sure that habitual Hugo voters have not missed the point, and the only immediate question is which way those amazingly inflated (and spectacularly growing) numbers of supporting memberships are leaning on balance.
The long-term question about which way the Hugos will be going a few years down the road I think is easy to predict: Worldcon con-goers are patient. As I said over on File770.com, Worldcon fandom is already comfortable with building a new house every year, so Mr. Beale twirling his moustache and threatening to burn down the house is a small gain for megalomania but nothing that fandom cannot outlast, because we have the patience and endurance, and I doubt that a bunch of flighty MRAs (for example) have much at all, nor do the various Puppies have anything like the unity of purpose that is often asserted.
The first time I ever saw the ‘milli-‘ construction was from Bell Labs people about Benoit Mandelbrot. A ‘milli-benoit’ was 1/1000 of the arrogance of Mandelbrot. I heard this and I thought “that can’t be right.” and then I met him and I got it. I’ve never met anyone who rates more than 346 millibenoits!
Chris
That is a fabulous story.
I’m sure Mandelbrot of all people would have been fractally arrogant.
A boundary of infinite length!
Aiden’s list is pretty clearly a slate the way I would understand them. We can argue intent, reach, and Rick’s(most excellent) point about the Puppies campaigning, but all in all, probably an ill advised move.
I don’t normally nominate because I don’t read enough to judge well in most categories, but when I vote, I wait till after the voting has closed before I spill who I voted for and why.
Thanks for the comment.
I think more people should nominate. It’s not possible to read the entire field. (Ironically, given the puppy ideas about what’s popular and not nominated, one of the kinds of books that gets left off consistently is speculative romance. Where’s Ilona Andrews’s Hugo? She just won DABWAHA…against herself.)
The whole possibility of a slate is one reason why I’ve only been waxing poetic about out-of-genre books on my blog for the last couple of years (that and I have been reading more romance after years of reading none). I need to come up with a better solution though.
Also, various people will draw their lines in different places on what is/isn’t a slate, and that’s okay. I think there are arguably a few reasonable positions.
The only Romance/SF(not paranormal romance) I have read is some of Anne McCaffrey’s later works, and as much as I love most of her work, her romantic plots sucked(actually I have problems with the way she wrote many of her female characters, but that is another rant entirely).
I haven’t read a lot of her work, but I remember loving The Crystal Singer back when it came out.
Oh yeah, Crystal Singer is great!. I like pretty much everything SF(with one or two exceptions) before 1991 and very little after.
But that gets me most of the important Pern books, Her SF singletons, short story collections, and a few others.
The only Pern book I ever read was The White Dragon, which I bought as a remaindered hardcover. I loved the book, but weirdly never felt compelled to pick up more of the series.
Fair enough, the Pern series is her best known stuff, but like the chat I am having with Rev Bob on another blog, Some you like, some I like.
Exactly. It’s a huge field.
I liked the prequel / spinoff “Moreta” best. The real villain was the humble influenza virus. Even in an extremely exotic alien planet, simple things like that can destroy a civilisation.
“White Dragon” was the weakest of the trilogy. I get the sneaking suspicion that she should have left the whole series at the novella stage. . . “Weyr Search” stood well enough on its own.
Thanks for your comment.
The White Dragon may have been the weakest book, but I liked Ruth as a character. I don’t know that I would upon a re-read (hence why I don’t intend to re-read it), but I loved it then.
Moreta is a great book and the end is particularly effecting. I would like to say more about the end but {spoilers}.
The White Dragon is the book that garnered McCaffery her awards(Ditmar, Gandalf, Locus) and nominations(Hugo), so once again (as comes up again and again;-) ) sometimes people just don’t like some books.
I also like the Harper trilogy(Song, Singer, Drums). Menolly and Piemur are great characters.
Anne McCaffrey’s romantic plots (I agree) sucked (in my arrogant opinion), but the early ones were Of Their Day, hence the creakiness and occasional oddness comes with the territory.
I found myself reading through the sequels of Crystal Singer (increasingly not-very-good), the long, long multiple series of Pern books, and so on until I realised I was ODing on certain pulpish, soapy tropes, lazy writing, and cheap sentiment — and quit. I’d probably have been more forgiving of this if I hadn’t binge-read a bunch of them just because a friend had a pile I could borrow from. The experience served as a lesson that many enjoyable things can become off-putting if you overdo them.
Except Breaking Bad. Brilliant even when binge-watched.
Interesting curio from McCaffrey’s very earliest days: Restoree
I read it and thought it fun but very oddly constructed. Then, I read claims that she’d written the plotline in an odd fashion to psych out editor John W. Campbell: The story goes (attempting to recap this strictly from unaided memory), McCaffrey had pitched a space-adventure story with a female protag but Campbell had (it is claimed) wanted male characters to be forefront in the story. So, McCaffrey wrote a story where the female Earthling protag is abducted by sinister and technologically advanced flesh-eating aliens, escapes with the help of extraterrestrial humans, and make alliance with the humans against the flesh-eating alien invaders. The gimmick was that the humans are mostly make thud-and-blunder neobarb types who are hopeless at strategy against the alien foe, and our protag ends up being the much-needed strategic brains and resourcefulness behind their brawn.
Supposedly, the muscles and blasters made Campell happy, and McCaffrey got to have her Heinlein-hero resourceful female character, albeit sneakily pulling something over on Campbell.
I doubt this story’s framing, and suspect Campbell knew perfectly well the game McCaffrey was playing but liked the idea of selling a lot of copies.
This is why authors should stop at 3 or 4 book series. The longer they go on the more likely readers are going to get bored with their style. After all if I an notice what a hack writer Asimov is by reading 4-5 of his short story compilations in a row, no is immune!
I’ll note that I dislike the nomination idea posted; I haven’t seen any evidence that “previously voted” or “attended” has any bearing on “knowledgeable of the entire field for each category”, and have seen plenty of evidence that it doesn’t. Ideally, you shouldn’t have situations where people are nominating everything they’ve read or seen in that category, but that’s always been a problem.
If I could come up with a fair way to measure that you have to have read/seen at least 3/5/7/whatever examples for every one you can nominate, I’d be down for that. But I cannot for the life of me determine a fair way to measure that for every category that isn’t easier to game than it is to run (and keep in mind Sasquon was hammered by the number of memberships this year – solutions that add to the administration work have to factor that in before changing). I might be OK with something like “X nominations total” for everyone. Alternately, weighted ballots (1st choice gets 5 points towards nomination, second four) would make it easier to stack 1-2 works onto the ballot but hard to stack 5.
I’d also be fine with expanding the list of allowed nominees based on some quantifiable metric, like the post linked a few weeks back (I’d rather see more nominators, more nominations, more nominated works, than anything that reduces either number).
Limiting nominations based on attendance also discriminates based on geography, economics, and physical/social/psychological Limitations that prevent travel or attendance but do not affect knowledge of the field (well, economics can, particularly in areas without a solid library system available). Might be necessary, but I’d prefer not to see it unless no other method can accomplish the goal.
Indeed. There are a fair number of people for whom their primary interest in fandom and Worldcon are things that have never/rarely been nominated for (or won) a Hugo.
Costumers, for example.
Filkers, for another, though Rachel Bloom’s Fuck Me, Ray Bradbury was nominated a few years back.
As far as attendance—I think the proposals are mostly for attending memberships as opposed to attendance per se. I see the issue conflated and it’s worth noting that the two are different. Apart from the cost issue, one particular problem of the attending membership in the current convention as a barrier to voting: how is the convention going to know how many people are going to show up? Traditionally, the attending membership has been how they know that, but if one changes the meaning of supporting/attending memberships, then there are going to be harder problems involved in estimating attendance and doing space planning, budgeting, etc.
Yeah. I have a lot of sympathy for the con organizers; anything that makes their job harder needs to be weighed carefully.