Hugo awards and puppies...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2016, 12:43 PM (This post was last modified: 12-01-2016 02:42 PM by Naridar.)
Hugo awards and puppies...
Okay, I'm sort of a sci-fi amateur - have read some of the basics, but don't follow the scene too much even though I find it interesting - and just browsing about I came across a story that evaded my attention when it actually happened (last August), and I haven't found a topic on these forums (there might have been, I'm not that long since a member - I hope it's not because they've all been deleted and banhammered), but wanted to discuss it (and/or vent, decide what this falls under) because it just makes my blood boil. So, a breakdown of what happened is:

- 2013 Hugo Awards (one of the biggest sci-fi/fantasy awards, possibly the biggest after Nebula but this includes the entire world, former winners include Asimov, Frank Herbert, Phillip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke, Orson Scott Card and J.K.Rowling), author Larry Correia starts a voting bloc to nominate more, as claimed "traditional, adventurous, swashbuckling" sci-fi instead of "heavy-handed messages" and left-leaning works that bore most fans, and names the initiative "Sad puppies", named after a backhanded compliment he received after losing to another author a year before. Voting blocs in and of itself aren't uncommon in Hugo awards. The initiative fails to push works into the final ballot.
- 2014, "Sad puppies 2", this time, multiple categories' final ballot contained a candidate of the initiative, but as the final decision is also decided by voting, none of them won the award.
- 2015, "Sad puppies 3", this time led by another author, Brad R. Torgersen. This is where sCensored hit the fan. This year, the initiative was joined by (in my opinion, cannibalized by, since even Torgersen washed his hands of them in a blog post) another, much more unsettling one, called "Rabid puppies", led by Theodore "Vox Day" Beale, a fundamentalist christian, openly sexist and racist author who encouraged the voting bloc to nominate two of his own works and several from a small finnish publisher for whom he's lead editor. With several thousand votes, almost all categories have had multiple entries pushed by Sad puppies and Rabid puppies and 5 categories had only their entries, with their nominees making up ~50% of total. Note that both groups held firmly to the rules of nomination, and campaigning was not forbidden at all.
- Come voting day for Hugo 2015, and attendees of the event (all who attends for 40$ is eiglible to vote), instead of picking their favourite from the 5 nominees in the categories filled by Sad puppies' (whose nominations were, by internet consensus generally of a high quality) and Rabid puppies' entries (whose not so much so), which would've been their job, they collectively vote "No award", basically denying to give the Hugo award to any of the nominees. Note that out of the 10 times this happened during the 60+ years of the award's history, 5 were that year, the rest interspersed during those 60 years and never so collectively or maliciously. Now THIS is what fCensored my head up. Such provincial, underhanded, immature, uncivilized, sore loser temper tantrums worthy of f Censored ing KYLO REN! Just because you don't agree with the political views of whoever nominated an author, if you consider yourself a civilized human, you don't say fCensored you to them! YOU! JUST! FCensored! DON'T!

No, it's not coincidental. To have all 5 categories in which all 5 nominees came from the puppies end up at an impasse and only those 5, while exactly 1 other puppy-nominated entry ended up winning (Guardians of the Galaxy film), there's just no coincidence like that.

There's still Hugo 2016, and "Sad puppies 4" seems to be underway. Peace and discussion was an option with the sads, but not with the rabids. Science fiction was meant to discuss topics like cloning, cyborgs' and robots' rights and AIs' benevolence or malevolence, not contemporary PC topics shoved down everyone's throats every day. Sci-fi was always the way of leaving the mundane behind, and for us atheists, having novels that lead people to study actual science is always good. One realizes that, or the sad puppies become rabid dogs too, and reason loses. Works should be rewarded because they're good, not because of their message or their author. And that should be done before the mutts mangle that plastic rocket to death.

Have you heard of this? Opinions? Many claim it's puppies vs. SJW - I deliberately avoided that term since it carries some pejorative weight.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2016, 01:18 PM
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
First I've ever heard that Hugo awards were awarded by vote Undecided I generally look at winning an award as a sign that a book is good, not that the author was some kind of rabble rouser in the voting process. I've not read recent Hugo award winners but the old ones, some of them, were damn good reads...

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2016, 01:24 PM
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
(12-01-2016 12:43 PM)Naridar Wrote:  Okay, I'm sort of a sci-fi amateur - have read some of the basics, but don't follow the scene too much even though I find it interesting - and just browsing about I came across a story that evaded my attention when it actually happened (last August), and I haven't found a topic on these forums (there might have been, I'm not that long since a member - I hope it's not because they've all been deleted and banhammered), but wanted to discuss it (and/or vent, decide what this falls under) because it just makes my blood boil. So, a breakdown of what happened is:

- 2013 Hugo Awards (one of the biggest sci-fi/fantasy awards, possibly the biggest after Nebula but this includes the entire world, former winners include Asimov, Frank Herbert, Phillip K. Dick, Arthur C. Clarke, Orson Scott Card and J.K.Rowling), author Larry Correia starts a voting bloc to nominate more, as claimed "traditional, adventurous, swashbuckling" sci-fi instead of "heavy-handed messages" and left-leaning works that bore most fans, and names the initiative "Sad puppies", named after a backhanded compliment he received after losing to another author a year before. Voting blocs in and of itself aren't uncommon in Hugo awards. The initiative fails to push works into the final ballot.
- 2014, "Sad puppies 2", this time, multiple categories' final ballot contained a candidate of the initiative, but as the final decision is also decided by voting, none of them won the award.
- 2015, "Sad puppies 3", this time led by another author, Brad R. Torgersen. This is where sCensored hit the fan. This year, the initiative was joined by (in my opinion, cannibalized by, since even Torgersen washed his hands of them in a blog post) another, much more unsettling one, called "Rabid puppies", led by Theodore "Vox Day" Beale, a fundamentalist christian, openly sexist and racist author who encouraged the voting bloc to nominate two of his own works and several from a small finnish publisher for whom he's lead editor. With several thousand votes, almost all categories have had multiple entries pushed by Sad puppies and Rabid puppies and 5 categories had only their entries, with their nominees making up ~50% of total. Note that both groups held firmly to the rules of nomination, and campaigning was not forbidden at all.
- Come voting day for Hugo 2015, and attendees of the event (all who attends for 40$ is eiglible to vote), instead of picking their favourite from the 5 nominees in the categories filled by Sad puppies' (whose nominations were, by internet consensus generally of a high quality) and Rabid puppies' entries (whose not so much so), which would've been their job, they collectively vote "No award", basically denying to give the Hugo award to any of the nominees. Note that out of the 10 times this happened during the 60+ years of the award's history, 5 were that year, the rest interspersed during those 60 years and never so collectively or maliciously. Now THIS is what fCensored my head up. Such provincial, underhanded, immature, uncivilized, sore loser temper tantrums worthy of f:censored:ing KYLO REN! Just because you don't agree with the political views of whoever nominated an author, if you consider yourself a civilized human, you don't say fCensored you to them! YOU! JUST! FCensored! DON'T!

No, it's not coincidental. To have all 5 categories in which all 5 nominees came from the puppies end up at an impasse and only those 5, while exactly 1 other puppy-nominated entry ended up winning (Guardians of the Galaxy film), there's just no coincidence like that.

There's still Hugo 2016, and "Sad puppies 4" seems to be underway. Peace and discussion was an option with the sads, but not with the rabids. Science fiction was meant to discuss topics like cloning, cyborgs' and robots' rights and AIs' benevolence or malevolence, not contemporary PC topics shoved down everyone's throats every day. Sci-fi was always the way of leaving the mundane behind, and for us atheists, having novels that lead people to study actual science is always good. One realizes that, or the sad puppies become rabid dogs too, and reason loses. Works should be rewarded because they're good, not because of their message or their author. And that should be done before the mutts mangle that plastic rocket to death.

Have you heard of this? Opinions? Many claim it's puppies vs. SJW - I deliberately avoided that term since it carries some pejorative weight.

SJW being single Jewish Woman? Lot of rambling that made no sense to me, and I have been reading science fiction since 1955.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DerFish's post
12-01-2016, 01:42 PM (This post was last modified: 12-01-2016 01:46 PM by Naridar.)
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
Social Justice Warrior - basically a derogatory term for people who want to enforce respect for "oppressed" groups (women, ethnical minorities, non-heterosexuals) by vilifying the "oppressors" and demanding they get no platform at all for merely having word would "oppress" them. I doubt that on their terms, Dune could win an award for how it depicted Baron Harkonnen

Also, "plastic rocket" refers to the award trophy itself, since it's in the shape of a rocket and is oftentimes made of plastic from what I've read.

EDIT: TL;DR: right-leaning author's nomination list was entered into the final voting, voters flipped the bird.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2016, 02:05 PM
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
(12-01-2016 01:42 PM)Naridar Wrote:  Social Justice Warrior - basically a derogatory term for people who want to enforce respect for "oppressed" groups (women, ethnical minorities, non-heterosexuals) by vilifying the "oppressors" and demanding they get no platform at all for merely having word would "oppress" them. I doubt that on their terms, Dune could win an award for how it depicted Baron Harkonnen

Also, "plastic rocket" refers to the award trophy itself, since it's in the shape of a rocket and is oftentimes made of plastic from what I've read.

EDIT: TL;DR: right-leaning author's nomination list was entered into the final voting, voters flipped the bird.

Thanks. I always get confused by invented abbreviations. You are maybe talking about the mayor of Philie who announced that the robed guy who announced that he shot at a cop and in a dozen shots was not able to kill him did his shooting in the name of Islam, but the mayor of Phillie wants everyone to know that it had nothing to do with Islam!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2016, 02:06 PM (This post was last modified: 12-01-2016 02:09 PM by morondog.)
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
(12-01-2016 01:42 PM)Naridar Wrote:  Social Justice Warrior - basically a derogatory term for people who want to enforce respect for "oppressed" groups (women, ethnical minorities, non-heterosexuals) by vilifying the "oppressors" and demanding they get no platform at all for merely having word would "oppress" them. I doubt that on their terms, Dune could win an award for how it depicted Baron Harkonnen

Rolleyes

Not this fucking shit again. Wanna tell me about how being a humanist is better than being a feminist?

ETA: To be fair you did say you were trying to avoid using the term.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2016, 02:11 PM
RE: Hugo awards and puppies...
That's what the sides are calling each other, I avoided that term in the description to be objective and avoid flaming. Not saying either group is in the right (only thing I can say with certainty is that "Rabid puppies" aren't and its' leader is a creep), I'm simply fed up with the political bickering that has already nearly ruined a once-great trophy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Naridar's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: