rooshvforum.network is a fully functional forum: you can search, register, post new threads etc...
Old accounts are inaccessible: register a new one, or recover it when possible. x


SJWs shut down Hugo awards
#1

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

The champions of tolerance made it so that no Hugo awards were given this year:

SJWS BURN DOWN THE HUGO AWARDS TO PROVE HOW TOLERANT AND WELCOMING THEY ARE

At the seventy-third annual Worldcon science fiction convention on Saturday night, social justice warriors did their best impression of the nightmare firemen of Ray Bradbury’s classic Fahrenheit 451, choosing to burn down the Hugo Awards and damage science fiction instead of seeing works of heretical authors outside of their exclusive clique winning awards.

As they didn't manage to have awards given to such literary masterpieces as If you were a dinosaur, my love, they chose to shut down the award instead.

But somehow, we are the intolerant bastards, because reasons!
Reply
#2

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Since I have seen this on Amazon kindle section:

Kindle Store : Kindle eBooks : Science Fiction & Fantasy : Science Fiction : LGBT


Something died inside

Deus vult!
Reply
#3

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/24/the-...qus_thread

Quote:Quote:

To put this in perspective, imagine that the Academy Awards voters had refused to pick a winner for “Best Director” or “Best Picture” at all because none of the films were about gay rights or personally endorsed by Harvey Weinstein. And imagine a very flummoxed presenter standing onstage at the Academy Awards having to say, “And the award goes to…no one?”

Quote:Quote:

After all, when it came to free discussion, the Puppies’ main complaint was less that ideological disagreement decreased a work’s quality, and more that their own ideologies were being unfairly considered a strike against their work, even when their work did nothing to reflect those ideologies. And as for free association, their objection to the dominance of publishing houses like TOR books seems to have boiled down to a concern that cliquishness was preventing even people who actually did want to be part of the community from joining it.

Quote:Quote:

When your standard for who deserves to be awarded by the Sci-Fi community actively writes out some of that community’s idols, you may want to consider that you’re not engaged in art criticism so much as McCarthyist blacklisting.
Reply
#4

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

It appears that all the categories with only Puppies nominations had the "no award" (5 out of 17 categories).
Reply
#5

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Did understand wrong, or did they actually set fire to the awards ceremony? How many dead/injured?
Reply
#6

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-24-2015 07:54 PM)Killer Joe Wrote:  

Did understand wrong, or did they actually set fire to the awards ceremony? How many dead/injured?

Right wingers aka the puppies used the process of the Hugos to keep out women, minorities, and other undesirables. Tired that too many guys like Scalzi or the chick that won last year were getting all the attention. They cloak it bullshit like "hard science", but it's obvious that they feel like they're losing "science fiction".

Left wingers responded to the jury rigging of the system with the No Awards.

Meanwhile, a translation by a Chinese American of a Chinese (mainland) Science Fiction novel took the top spot.

Same bunch of neckbeards have no problem believing in Faster than Light Travel, green humanoid aliens having sex with Captain Kirk and Elves, Orc and Dragons, but will flip their shit if Captain America, James Bond, or the Human Torch is black.

And most of these dudes are "smart" and have technical backgrounds. So they'll assiduously back up all of their claims with "science", and calls to authority, history, and tradition. Same "engineering logic" is all over the web. Shows up in technolibertarianism, people talking about gold as a reserve currency, and bunch of other shit that "would be great if only people listened man, and were logical dude"

Fighting for the Soul of the Genre, when back in the 80's nobody gave a fuck.

It's because of Silicon Valley, and the rise of nerd money, thus nerd power, that you see these things. Hashtag activism for the people who wrote the code for Twitter.

Same bunch of dudes who all throughout college complained that there were no chicks coming to the anime night @ Chemistry building, are mad as fuck that cosplay bitches run Comic Cons now. And have no problem being skeevy with the few bitches at work .

WIA
Reply
#7

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-24-2015 08:47 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Quote: (08-24-2015 07:54 PM)Killer Joe Wrote:  

Did understand wrong, or did they actually set fire to the awards ceremony? How many dead/injured?

Right wingers aka the puppies used the process of the Hugos to keep out women, minorities, and other undesirables. Tired that too many guys like Scalzi or the chick that won last year were getting all the attention. They cloak it bullshit like "hard science", but it's obvious that they feel like they're losing "science fiction".

Left wingers responded to the jury rigging of the system with the No Awards.

Meanwhile, a translation by a Chinese American of a Chinese (mainland) Science Fiction novel took the top spot.

Same bunch of neckbeards have no problem believing in Faster than Light Travel, green humanoid aliens having sex with Captain Kirk and Elves, Orc and Dragons, but will flip their shit if Captain America, James Bond, or the Human Torch is black.

And most of these dudes are "smart" and have technical backgrounds. So they'll assiduously back up all of their claims with "science", and calls to authority, history, and tradition. Same "engineering logic" is all over the web. Shows up in technolibertarianism, people talking about gold as a reserve currency, and bunch of other shit that "would be great if only people listened man, and were logical dude"

Fighting for the Soul of the Genre, when back in the 80's nobody gave a fuck.

It's because of Silicon Valley, and the rise of nerd money, thus nerd power, that you see these things. Hashtag activism for the people who wrote the code for Twitter.

Same bunch of dudes who all throughout college complained that there were no chicks coming to the anime night @ Chemistry building, are mad as fuck that cosplay bitches run Comic Cons now. And have no problem being skeevy with the few bitches at work .

WIA

The Sad Puppies claim that SJWs were systematically excluding straight white men (and even straight viewpoints) in favor of science fiction about gay/transgender issues that people generally weren't reading or buying in real life. They were throwing out the superior sales of excluded authors as evidence (don't know enough about the modern genre to judge their veracity).

I don't have a hard time whatsoever believing this happened to some degree or another (especially based on the nerdy white demographic they're generally selling to). However, at least one of the Sad Puppies/Rabid Puppies seems a little wacky/White Powerish at a glance but hell, violence begets violence, hate begets hate, bigotry begets bigotry etc.. When you engage in identity politics, you're going to draw opposition from people doing the same on the other side.

The angry straight white guys selling traditional sci fi to the traditional sci fi nerds that actually buy these books got CREAMED by the SJWs at the Hugos, with coordinated applause every time a "No Award" was awarded. Their entire recomended list got blanked, and a bisexual author that got a recomendation from them (for writing good sci fi) withdrew her nomination to avoid the poison.

This was a straight up ass kicking by the SJWs by the way, they really couldn't have played it better if they wrote it. And the Rabid Puppies even acted like schlocky sci fi villains.
Reply
#8

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Instead of trying to mess with the Hugo Awards, which don't sound all that important anyway, they should've just created their own explicitly right-wing Sci-Fi awards ceremony to exclude all the left-wing drivel. If the SJWs tried to invade and fuck them up then it'd be clear to the world what a bunch of faggots they really were.

I haven't really been paying close attention, but when something's a neutral organization it'll eventually be taken over by left-wing forces.

Robert Conquest’s Three Laws of Politics:

1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
3. The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

"Men willingly believe what they wish." - Julius Caesar, De Bello Gallico, Book III, Ch. 18
Reply
#9

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-24-2015 09:36 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  

The angry straight white guys selling traditional sci fi to the traditional sci fi nerds that actually buy these books got CREAMED by the SJWs at the Hugos, with coordinated applause every time a "No Award" was awarded. Their entire recomended list got blanked, and a bisexual author that got a recomendation from them (for writing good sci fi) withdrew her nomination to avoid the poison.

This was a straight up ass kicking by the SJWs by the way, they really couldn't have played it better if they wrote it. And the Rabid Puppies even acted like schlocky sci fi villains.

I think it'll be an own goal by the SJWs in the long run. The lefties in rough control of the Hugos were only succeeding at their tactics because they didn't draw attention to what they were doing. They were trying to use the LGBT subject matter, bias, and viewpoint in Hugo award winners as proof that society itself was changing in favour of LGBT agendae and that the autistic geek crowd ought to therefore get on board with it.

The Rabid Puppies made the SJWs pull down the very awards the SJWs owned. The Rabid Puppies did not even have to win in order to make the point. Indeed if they had won it would have been counterproductive. As it is, not one SJW on the face of the planet can now say the Hugo awards are merit-based; this exercise has proved entirely the opposite. At least for the moment, it destroys the Hugos' credibility. Bitter as it is for me to say so, that's a good thing. Biased institutions like this one cannot restore their credibility by reform. I see this as similar to Alfred's story in The Dark Knight: in order to find the bandit involved, when all manner of bribes had failed, the point was eventually reached where it became necessary to literally burn down the entire forest in which the bandit was hiding.

There's also a larger lesson about combating the Left which can be found here, too. It's much the same lesson as the one coming out of Montreal and Toronto: when you bring lefties out into the open, let them parade themselves in forums other than Instatwit or as unelected "gender advisors" to panels of bureacrats, their own behaviour convicts them. It is an exercise in giving them enough rope and more to hang themselves. I might be convincing myself somewhat, but 2014-2015 was a very important year: it was the first rough time that people actually blinked and saw the (not infrequently) mentally ill crowd disguising itself as modern leftie activism and "intellectualism". The Rolling Stone UVA scandal was the starting point, if not the prosecution of Christians for refusing to bake gay marriage cakes -- it might be my perception, but some invisible barrier was crossed at those points, some indefinable point in the public conscience that the pendulum had swung too far. Incidents like this are only going to wake more people up or start pushing the pendulum back the other way.

Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
Reply
#10

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

First of all, the Hugos are one of the big two Science Fiction awards, the other one being the Nebula awards. They have been considered one of the most prestigious awards to win for SF for as long as I can remember.

Here are two articles which show both sides of the Puppygate scandal. The nice thing about this scandal is that it involves professional writers, so they do a really job of describing what's going on.

First, some from George "Game of Thrones" R. R. Martin's Live Journal http://grrm.livejournal.com/418285.html

Quote:Quote:

Now we get to the crux of the matter.

So... what is behind Puppygate? What is it the Sad Puppies want? They have been doing this for three years now, three separate campaigns, with a fourth threatened... and presumably a fifth, a sixth, and a seventh if this goes on. That's a lot of effort, a lot of hours, a lot of commitment. To what end? What's their grievance?

I've read Brad Torgensen's statements on this point, and I've read Correia's MONSTER HUNTER NATION, and I've read hundreds of comments from their supporters. As with any large group, there is a wide range of opinion. Some of the Puppies are relatively moderate and reasonable. Others, I fear, are beyond the pale, raging and ranting about SJWs and cliques and secret conspiracies.

Digesting all of this, and trying to filter out the rabid extremists who seem mostly just to want to hurt liberals and feminists and gays, the essence of the Puppy complaint seems to be that the Hugo Awards have been taken over by the left, by their "Social Justice Warriors," and these "CHORFs" (another offensive made-up term, like SJWs) have rigged the awards somehow so that only members of their own leftish "clique" or those writer who are willing to "kiss their ass" win, while other books and stories are ignored or excluded, and other writers are "blacklisted."

Breaking down the complaints further, this purported exclusion seems to take several different forms, which vary according to which Puppy is speaking:

(1) some say the exclusion is political in nature, that conservative and libertarian writers are being unfairly shut out,

(2) others charge religious discrimination, insisting the Christian writers and "writers of Faith" are the ones being excluded,

(3) there's a racial component in some comments (not from the Puppy leaders, but from their followers), wherein we are told that "straight white men" are the victims here,

(4) and finally, there's the literary argument, wherein we are told that the ballots are full of bad boring crappy stories that no one really likes, placed there in some nefarious manner by the secret SJW cliques, whereas good old-fashioned SF and fantasy, the stuff the readers really love, is shut out and ignored.

Do I have the essence of it, Puppies and Puppylovers? I am leaving out any of the charges? Is this the source of all the anger, of this "revolt," of this determination to "take back SF?"

Because if it is... well, someone has sold you a bill of goods.

Let's look at the facts, shall we? I accept and acknowledge that some of the Puppies may feel excluded, disrespected, shunned... but feelings and facts are two different things.

Number (3) is the easiest to disprove. Straight white men are being excluded. Really? Really? C'mon, guys. Go look at the last five, ten years of Hugo ballots. Count how many men were nominated. Count how many women. Now count the black writers and the Asian writers and the foreign-language writers. Yes, yes, things are changing. We have a lot more women and minorities being nominated than we did in 1957, say, or even 1987... but the ballots are still way more white and way more male than not. Look, I am hardly going to be in favor of excluding straight white men, being one myself (and no, I am not a fan of Tempest Bradford's challenge). I am in favor of diversity, of inclusion, of bringing writers from many different backgrounds and cultures into the field. I don't want straight white writers excluded from the ballot... I just don't think they need to have ALL of it. I mean, we're SCIENCE FICTION AND FANTASY FANS, we love to read about aliens and vampires and elves, are we really going to freak out about Asians and Native Americans?

Let's put that one aside, and look at the other three allegations. Are the Hugos biased against conservative writers, religious writers, or writers of the "good old stuff," military SF, planetary adventures, space opera, sword & sorcery, hard science, and the like?

The Puppies say yes. I say no. The facts agree with me.

This chart is couple of years old, and therefore outdated a bit, but it still provides a very valuable overview of the history of the awards, who has won them, who has been nominated. So here are the records, albeit a few years out of date:

http://www.sfadb.com/Hugo_Awards_Tallies

(Before we get into the listings, let me repeat once again my contention that IT IS AN HONOR TO BE NOMINATED. Sure, it's a bigger honor to win. But being on the shortlist is nothing to sneeze at, and I say that as the co-founder of the Hugo Losers Club).

What do we see on that list? Well, for a start, it is much easier to rack up lots and lots of nominations in the categories where one votes for a person rather than a work (Best Artist, Best Editor, Best Fan Writer). British humorist Dave Langford leads everyone with 55 nominations and 29 wins. Mike Glyer of FILE 770 is close behind with 52 nominations but only 9 wins. Then comes the late Charles N. Brown, editor and publisher of LOCUS, and Tor/ Signet/ Timescape/ Berkley editor David G. Hartwell, and Mike Resnick, and then Stan Schmidt, editor of ANALOG.

Some of these perennial nominees are liberal politically, I suspect, but none of those could be said to push a political agenda, or wear their politics on their sleeves. No SJWs here. On the other hand, Stan Schmidt edited ANALOG for longer than John W. Campbell did, and during all those decades it was the most conservative magazine in the field, the hard science mag, the choice of engineers everywhere, where the flag of Campbellian SF flew high. Now it is true, Stan never won, not until the year he retired. But he was nominated thirty-five times. Is that your definition of exclusion? Resnick... a very prolific writer, and by this list, the guy with the most nominations ever for fiction, rather than fanac or editing. Resnick, as I am sure the Puppies know, was at the center of the SFWA BULLETIN flap and lost the column that he and Barry Malzberg had written for decades... which hardly makes him a poster boy for the left. David Hartwell... well, Dave works for Tor, which some of the more extreme Puppies may count against him, but he's also worked for many other publishers, and he's edited many many writers from both right and left. I seem to recall it was Hartwell who first discovered John Wright, this year's six-time Puppy favorite nominee.

So far I see moderates, conservatives, Campbellians, and the apolitical. I see no SJWs.

How about total number of WINS? Well, once again you've got Langford, the fannish humorist and wit, publisher of ANSIBLE, at 29, tied with Charlie Brown of LOCUS. Charlie was champion of a more ambitious, literary style of SF, but he loved the classic old stuff too. A Vance fan, a Heinlein fan. Gardner Dozois and Michael Whelan each had 15 when this list came out. Gargy's an editor, a very important and influential editor, and yes, he's a liberal... but once again, he also loves a good story. He's edited space opera anthologies (THE GOOD OLD STUFF and THE GOOD NEW STUFF) and with me, OLD MARS and OLD VENUS, retro-SF that PLANET STORIES would have loved. Whelan's an artist. A brilliant one. And next down... CONNIE WILLIS. It says here she's won 11 times, but I think she's won a few more since. Connie's a woman, yes, and she's liberal politically (though far from radical). She's also religious. She has been singing in her Church choir for decades, she attends church regularly. Of course, she's Episcopalian, so I am not sure that "counts" for some of the Puppies, who only seem to grant that a writer is religious if he or she shares their own religion.

Going further down the all-time list... there's Richard E. Geis (politically hard right, sexually and socially left) with 34 nominations, Robert Silverberg (conservative) with 28. Further down, past some fans and artists, there's liberal old me with 19 nominations (15 losses and 4 wins when this list was drawn up), tied with conservative Larry Niven.

One huge name not on the list: Robert A. Heinlein. Heinlein did not rack up a lot of noms, since most of his short work was done before the Hugos were created. But he won Best Novel (the Big One) FOUR TIMES, a record that stands to this day (Lois McMaster Bujold tied him, but no one has yet exceeded him). RAH is not easy to characterize politically... he started out as a New Deal Democrat, even ran for office on the EPIC ticket, later became Republican and conservative on many issues... but socially was extremely progressive in his youth, and retained many liberal and libertarian opinions on sexuality and religious matter right up to his death in 1988.

If you're looking for SJWs on this list, well... there's Harlan Ellison and Ursula K. Le Guin. Harlan was certainly a firebrand, and Ursula was the field's most eloquent and respected feminist for decades. They are also two of the greatest talents that SF has ever produced. Both SFWA Grandmasters, both firmly ensconsced in the Science Fiction Hall of Fame, beloved of generations of readers. It would be hard to argue that either was created by a "clique."

Oh, oh, okay, I can hear the Sad Puppies barking out their objections. "We never said the Hugo Awards were ALWAYS dominated by a leftist clique," they are barking. "We only said that the SJWs took them over recently, and ruined them. That's when all the good books and all the writers we like got excluded."

Okay, fine. Fair enough. Let's narrow our focus, then, and look only at the recent past, at the ballots that somehow triggered Puppygate. No rhetoric, just facts.

We know about this year's ballot, the Sasquan ballot. Puppies puppies everywhere, thanks to Sad Puppies 3 and the Rabid Puppies. Last year, the Loncon ballot... well, that was the year of Sad Puppies 2, and that campaign, if not quite the sweep, did put Vox Day and Larry Correia and several other Puppy faves on the shortlist, so we'll pass over that one too. To see how powerful the liberal SJW cliques truly were, we need to go back to a time before Correia and Day and their followers rose up to smite them.

Let's look at 2012. LoneStarCon 3, San Antonio, in that notoriously liberal state of Texas. 1343 nominating ballots were received. 1848 final ballots chose the winners.

The Big One, Best Novel, went to John Scalzi for REDSHIRTS.

Let me make a note here. John Scalzi, who GRRM mildly describes as "liberal" is a flaming SJW. He wears women's clothing in public and considers pretty much any approaching of women "creeping". For the record: I'm quite liberal, as anyone who has seen my discussion of the current supreme court or support of Obamacare can see for themselves.

Quote:Quote:

[Scalzi] won out over 2312 by Kim Stanly Robinson, THRONE OF THE CRESCENT MOON by Saladin Ahmed, BLACKOUT by Mira Grant, and CAPTAIN'S VORPATIL'S ALLIANCE by Lois McMaster Bujold. Three men, three women. Two white men, one Arab-American. Do the Puppies object to these nominees? Is this the clique slate? Hard to see why. One Tor book, one from DAW, one from Baen, two from Orbit; no publisher had a stranglehold here, certainly. Scalzi -- look, I know Scalzi is liberal, and I know that the Puppies seem to hate him, though I can't for the life of me understand why -- but whatever you think of the writer's politics, REDSHIRTS is a light, fun, amusing SF adventure, an affectionate riff off of STAR TREK, Ghu help us. And the other nominees... only the Robinson could even remotely be considered "literary SF" of the sort the Puppies seems to hate. Saladin's book was sword & sorcery, a rollicking swashbuckler in the tradition of Robert E. Howard, Harold Lamb, and the Thousand and One Nights. Bujold, well, you could call her Miles Vorkosigan series space opera, or maybe military SF, but her novels are never less than entertaining, good reads all. The Mira Grant is a zombie novel. Zombies, guys.

Now, do I think these were the best five novels of 2012? Actually, no. As best I recall, I only nominated one of them... along with a couple of books that did not make the ballot. (You can find out which ones if you look back on my Not A Blog for that year's recs). But it's a pretty typical ballot, worse than some, better than others, with ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE of any kind of "social justice" agenda or conspiracy.

Let's look further down the LoneStarCon ballot. Novella: won by "The Emperor's Soul," by Brandon Sanderson, a pretty traditional story by an epic fantasist who also happens to be Mormon. (Where is that religious bigotry? Did the SJWs miss him?) One of the other nominees was by Aliette de Bodard, who many Puppies seem to count as one of the despised SJWs, but if the secret cabal was working for her, they fucked it up, because she lost. The other nominees were Nancy Kress, Jay Lake, and (again) Mira Grant. So far maybe we have some evidence of a Mira Grant clique, but none of a Social Justice clique.

Go to Novelette. Won by "The Girl-Thing Who Went Out for Sushi," by Pat Cadigan. A brilliant story from a long time fan who had never won a Hugo before, and hadn't even been nominated for decades. The most popular win of the evening; the crowd in the hall went wild cheering. Pat won over two stories by Seanan McGuire (also known as Mira Grant), one by Catherynne Valente, and one by Thomsas Olde Heuvelt. Was it this shortlist that provoked the Puppies? Four women and only one man there, is that the issue? A surfeit of McGuire/ Grant, maybe? Or were there some brilliant conservative novelettes that year that were overlooked? I honestly do not know.

Short Story only had three nominees. Ken Liu won over Aliette de Bodard and Kij Johnson. The SJWs are really letting down the side, that's twice they left de Bodard lose. (I hope I remembered to give her a Hugo Loser ribbon, she certainly earned it). No other short story had 5% of the nominating ballots, which is why the list was too small. When there are no slates, that happens: everyone has their own favorites, votes scatter.

Further down the ballot, Brandon Sanderson won again for Best Related Work, together with a bunch of friends. SAGA won Graphic Story, damn good comic, damn good choice. That radical leftist film THE AVENGERS won Long Form Drama, and something called GAME OF THRONES won Short Form. And for editor -- hey, Stanley Schmidt finally won for ANALOG... but oh, dear, Patrick Nielsen Hayden won for Long Form Editor. Now we see the power of the SJWs: they won, oh, wow, ONE whole Hugo at LoneStarCon.

That's just one year, though. Let's turn the clock back further, to Chicon 7 in Chicago, and the nominees for the best work of 2011.

The Big One went to Jo Walton and AMONG OTHERS. My own nominee, A DANCE WITH DRAGONS, finished last. In between you had EMBASSYTOWN by China Mieville (who is a vocal and passionate leftist, yes, but also a helluva powerful writer), LEVIATHAN WAKES by James S.A. Corey (a rousing space opera that any fan of the Good Old Stuff should love, soon to be a major TV series from the SyFy Channel), and DEADLINE by Mira Grant. Another zombie story, I seem to recall, same world as her other Best Novel nominees. Kij Johnson, Charlie Jane Anders, and Ken Liu won the Short Fiction Awards. Is there something about them or their stories that the Puppies object to? What could it be? Their literary style? Or...

Actually, looking at the other nominees, maybe THIS is the ballot that provoked the Proto-Puppies to sadness. Mira Grant has another nominee in novella. Mary Robinette Kowal was also up there, and MRK seems widely hated by the right for her work as SFWA Vice President ( a thankless job that I did onece). Ken Liu won for Short Story but lost for novella. Catherynne Valente had a losing novella. And Short Story, seven hells, look at that ballot: beside Liu there is E. Lily Yu, the despised John Scalzi, Nancy Fulda , and... oh, look, Mike Resnick, however did the liberal cabal ever let HIM sneak in?

Novelette is pretty interesting too. Charlie Jane Anders won out over Paul Cornell, the affable Brit, Geoff Ryman, the affable Canadian, Rachel Swirsky (author, a few years later, of that dinosaur story that has all the Puppy Panties in a twist), and... "Ray of Light," by Brad R. Torgersen, from ANALOG.

Condolences, Brad. You are a Hugo Loser. But hey, congratulations. You are a Hugo Loser. It's an exclusive club. We get together annually, clank our beers together, and chant, "It's an honor just to be nominated" in unison. Were you at the con? Did I give you a ribbon? If not, I'll be sure you get one, should we ever met. Wear it proudly. The rest of us do. If that list I linked to is right, I've lost fifteen. When you lose, the fannish tradition is to congratulate the winner and shake their hand, then go to our Hugo Loser Party to get drunk and bitter. When I lose, my friends all tell me I've been robbed. Makes me feel better. Even when I know it isn't true.

Looking further down the Chicon ballot, we come to the John W. Campbell Award for Best New Writer. Not a Hugo. E. Lily Yu was the winner. She finished ahead of Karen Lord, Stina Leicht, Mur Lafferty, and... ah... Brad R. Torgersen again. Sorry, Brad. Two losses in one night, that's hard to take. But it's an honor too. Very few writers have ever been nominated for a Campbell and a Hugo in the same year. Actually, you may be the first. Being a Campbell Award loser does not officially qualify one for the Hugo Losers Club, but we usually let them in anyway. FWIW, I lost the very first Campbell Award, in 1973 at Torcon II. I was a nominee, but never really a contender, to tell the truth. Jerry Pournelle won that first Campbell, defeating George Alec Effinger so narrowly that the con gave him a special runner-up plaque, the first and last time that was ever done. I was way back behind both, so no plaques for me. But I did lose two Hugos in a single night once, in 1976 in Kansas City, Big Mac. Lost one to Larry Niven, and one to Roger Zelazny. The next night, Gardner Dozois and I founded the Hugo Losers Club, and held the first Hugo Losers Party in my room.

Onward and backward, though. Let's go back to Renovation. Reno, Nevada, 2011. Best work of 2010. Connie Willis wins the Big One for BLACKOUT/ ALL CLEAR. The other nominees were Mira Grant (for FEED, the first of her zombie cycle, I believe), Lois McMaster Bujold, N.K. Jemison with THE HUNDRED THOUSAND KINGDOMS, and THE DERVISH HOUSE by the amazing Ian McDonald.

I know what Vox Day thinks of Jemison, since I read his poisonous screed. (He is a Rabid Puppy, I know, not a Sad one, and I would hope most SPs would disavow his bile, regardless of their literary preferences or political affiliations). Vox attacked the GOH speech she gave at an Australian convention... but since the Sad Puppies here have stated often that they only care about the work, not the race or the views of the writer, surely there could not have been any objections to THE HUNDRED THOUSAND KINGDOMS... or the Bujold, or the McDonald.

The novella award went to Ted Chiang... a writer of literary SF, we may agree, but one of the most powerful to enter our field in many years. There's a reason Chiang wins every time he is nominated for a award. He's bloody good. Novelette, though... that went to Alan Steele for "The Emperor of Mars," a classic retro-SF story that he actually wrote for OLD MARS, the anthology Gardner and I were putting together. When we were unable to place the project, however, Alan sold the story to ASIMOV'S, and it brought him home a rocket. Classic old style SF in the tradition of Edgar Rice Burroughs.

I will skip over the rest of Reno... except for the John W. Campbell Award. The fans chose Lev Grossman as the Best New Writer, over Lauren Beukes, Saladin Ahmed, Dan Wells... and Larry Correia. This, it seems to me, was BEFORE he started his first Puppies campaign. Dan Wells was also a Sad Puppy at one time... though this year he asked not to be part of the slate.

I have read Correia's blog, and I know he says that he was treated very badly at the Reno worldcon, attacked for his views, denounced as a racist and homophobe. I was at Reno myself, but I don't recall meeting him, so I don't know the details of any of that. It shocks me to hear it, because the fandom I know has always been warm and welcoming to people of all political views. We are there to party and flirt and celebrate SF, after all. I regret any personal attacks or abuse that Correia may have suffered.

I will say, though, that there is no dishonor in losing to a writer as gifted as Lev Grossman, and many many terrific writers have lost the Campbell Award over the decades, starting with me. And it is an INCREDIBLE honor just to be nominated. Think about it. We have hundreds of new writers entering our field every year, all of them dreaming of careers, all of them fighting for recognition, trying to build their brand... and a few, maybe, lusting for rockets. Out of all those people, the fans nominated FIVE (sometimes six) for the Campbell.

There were no Sad Puppies when Larry Correia was nominated for the Campbell, when Brad Torgersen was nominated for the Campbell, when Torgersen was nominated for his first Hugo. (Subsequent noms, yes, may have resulted from Puppy campaigns). That was the traditional Hugo electorate putting you on the ballot... you, and a lot of other conservative writers, religious writers, white male writers, and purveyors of space opera, military SF, and Good Old Stuff.

There was never any need for Sad Puppies to "take back" the Hugos. The feminists, minorities, literary cliques, and Social Justice Warriors never took them in the first place. That's a myth, as the actual facts I have cited here prove conclusively.

Correia's blog, which GRRM refers to, is at http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/0...d-puppies/ or https://archive.is/gQavz should the site be down (its database was down this afternoon). I will quote the most relevant part:

Quote:Quote:

Within a few days of the nominations being announced I not only knew that I was going to lose, I knew that I was going to be last place. Only it had absolutely nothing to do with my writing, but rather, who I was, and what I was.

I know you remember when you were starting out, Mr. Martin, because you talk about it in this very post, that scrimping, saving, and sleeping on couches phase of your career, where you are desperate to get your work out there in front of people, to get any exposure at all, and I’m betting that you were always really excited to hear what readers had to say about your creations. Right?

I know I was. So I went out on the internet and started searching my name, trying to find out what the buzz was for the Campbell nominees. I started calling friends who belonged to various writer forums and organizations that I didn’t belong to, asking about what people thought of my books in there.

You know what I found? WorldCon voters angry that a right-wing Republican (actually I’m a libertarian) who owned a gun store (gasp) was nominated for the prestigious Campbell. This is terrible. Did you know he did lobbying for gun rights! It’s right there on his hateful blog of hatey hate hate! He’s awful. He’s a bad person. He’s a Mormon! What! Another damned Mormon! Oh no, there are two Mormons up for the Campbell? I bet Larry Correia hates women and gays. He’s probably a racist too. Did you know he’s part of the evil military industrial complex? What a jerk.

Meanwhile, I’m like, but did they like my books?

No. Hardly any of them had actually read my books yet. Many were proud to brag about how they wouldn’t read my books, because badthink, and you shouldn’t have to read books that you know are going to make you angry. A handful of people claimed to have my read my books, but they assured the others that they were safe to put me last, because as expected for a shit person, my words were shit, and so they were good people to treat me like shit.

At first I was shocked, then I got angry. What the hell? This is supposed to be the most prestigious awards in scifi and fantasy?

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not lumping all of the WorldCon voters in with that perpetually outraged, politically motivated clique. I know plenty of voters read my books and just didn’t think they were as good as the people I was up against. Awesome. I salute you for you being an honest person with an honest opinion, and let’s face it, people have different tastes.

But don’t tell me now that the Hugos don’t have whisper campaigns…

Though I knew I still had fans voting, and I figured there were a lot of honest people who would give my works a fair shake regardless of my politics, I also spent most of my adult life as an auditor who did statistical analysis for a living. I understood how Australian Rules voting worked, and the rankings are not most popular to least popular, but rather least disliked to most disliked, and 72 hours after the nominations came out it was pretty obvious I was going to be most disliked.

Then I went to my very first WorldCon.

Mr. Martin, you talked about your positive, joyous experiences at WorldCon. How you were welcomed as a peer, about how you had all these great, wonderful, memorable experiences.

But I’m betting before your first WorldCon a whole bunch of malignant lying bastards didn’t spread the word to thousands of complete strangers that you were a racist, sexist, homophobic warmonger who deserved to be shunned.

Side note, I’m not racist, sexist, or homophobic, but if that crowd (I’ll talk about the derogatory label my side uses that you don’t like in a minute) decides you are the enemy, they will smear you with those labels, regardless of the evidence. If you don’t believe me, read the many, many news articles about Sad Puppies that came out a few days ago working off that same script.

I met many wonderful people at that WorldCon. I also had many people treat me like garbage. I was berated by other panelists. I had people get up and leave the room when I entered. I had belligerent drunks challenging me at room parties because “Oh, it’s that fucker”.

A lot of people will tell you now that I bring this upon myself, because I am rude and abrasive on the internet now. Yes. Now. But back then I was still trying to play it cool, and didn’t think I could have a successful career if I made the wrong people angry. It wasn’t until after that WorldCon that I said screw it, they’re going to hate me anyway, might as well state my honest opinions.
Reply
#11

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

The Puppies biggest win - they kept Arnita Sarkeesian from invading another traditional male space by keeping her off the Hugo ballot. You see, she's not just a gamer now, she's a full fledged sci fi nerd.
Reply
#12

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Pretty much everything in this thread is misinformation and doesn't explain what actually went on. I also wouldn't trust George RR Cuck as he's one of the most ignorant idiots there is. He's defending the same people who scream how triggered they are, how unfriendly his books are to women exclusively, and how his show should be canceled. This fag even went out after the show and handed out awards to the SJW crew he thought should/would have won. The main takeaway though is that the Sad/Rapid puppies WON. They proved what they set out to do which is if your political views don't align with them they would go no award over letting you win. Even RR Cuck wrote in a blog months ago that if this happened it would be horrible and prove them right. Just rolling over and letting SJWs have what they want isn't going to happen and the Puppies are going to come back even stronger next year and led by 3 women. If you want a good analysis of the events go to Reddit Torinaction.

Milo's article is a quick, easy to read summary of the events.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...-they-are/
Reply
#13

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote:Quote:

I will say, though, that there is no dishonor in losing to a writer as gifted as Lev Grossman, and many many terrific writers have lost the Campbell Award over the decades, starting with me. And it is an INCREDIBLE honor just to be nominated. Think about it. We have hundreds of new writers entering our field every year, all of them dreaming of careers, all of them fighting for recognition, trying to build their brand... and a few, maybe, lusting for rockets. Out of all those people, the fans nominated FIVE (sometimes six) for the Campbell.

Leaving aside the other careful sophistry in Martin's rant, this phrase is significant.

Who is "the fans", George?

Not everyone gets to nominate a book for a Campbell or a Hugo. Only members of the relevant society do. This year, according to Wired, was the biggest ever turnout for the Hugos: 5,950 votes cast. 65% more than the previous record, which means that in the past, roughly 2,700 people -- less than the population of a small shitberg village -- determined who got a Hugo. And eligibility to vote does not require any sort of authorship or qualifications in literature. Flat $50 or so and you have a vote, as demonstrated by the sudden, massive turnout for these Hugo awards.

If that's a representative or large sample of the total population of the SF-reading community, I'll eat my fucking baseball cap. But then I don't have to: there's at least one analysis floating around out there which demonstrates pretty clearly that goodreads ratings have skewed away from Hugo award winners for a few years now.

At this point the Academy Awards have more credibility than the Hugos for artistic merit, not least because its voting body is a big slice of the acting and directing population of Hollywood -- and that regularly gets it wrong and is manipulated by advertising campaigns. Is dear old George actually arguing that the Hugos are sacrosanct or are immune to that sort of pressure?

Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
Reply
#14

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

I'm sorry, George RR Martin writes on LiveJournal? In 2015? With bestsellers and an HBO series to his name?

How hard is it to get a website set up for you with that kind of money rolling in?

"Nothing comes easier than madness in the world today
Mass paranoia is a mode not a malady"
Bad Religion - The Defense
Reply
#15

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-25-2015 01:51 AM)NilNisiOptimum Wrote:  

I'm sorry, George RR Martin writes on LiveJournal? In 2015? With bestsellers and an HBO series to his name?

How hard is it to get a website set up for you with that kind of money rolling in?

Probably just as hard as it would be to buy a current PC as opposed to the WordStar DOS piece of shit he still uses to write his books on.

And no, it's not so he can focus better and not surf the Internet. He regularly whinges about how hard writing is and how some days he just says "Fuck it" and fires up the XBox. He's a fucking hipster, only fatter, same breed as those odd writers who are still writing their fucking books out longhand or using a typewriter and consequently wasting both their precious time and that of the unfortunate fucker who has to retype it.

Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
Reply
#16

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-24-2015 10:31 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

The Rabid Puppies made the SJWs pull down the very awards the SJWs owned. The Rabid Puppies did not even have to win in order to make the point. Indeed if they had won it would have been counterproductive. As it is, not one SJW on the face of the planet can now say the Hugo awards are merit-based; this exercise has proved entirely the opposite. At least for the moment, it destroys the Hugos' credibility.

This is the best summary of this I have read so far, thanks for summarizing.
Reply
#17

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

I read a lot, occasionally sci-fi and when I do I've previously picked among Hugo Winners to find good tips.

I applaud the sad puppies initiative but associating with Vox Day was a mistake. The man is just plain nutty, anti-vaxxer should be an early warning sign.
Reply
#18

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

What the fuck is puppygate and why does gate have to go at the end of every so-called scandal since Nixon. So many try-hards these days with their terminologies.
Reply
#19

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-25-2015 05:40 AM)Vicious Wrote:  

I read a lot, occasionally sci-fi and when I do I've previously picked among Hugo Winners to find good tips.

I applaud the sad puppies initiative but associating with Vox Day was a mistake. The man is just plain nutty, anti-vaxxer should be an early warning sign.

That you think that Sad Puppies is associated with Vox Day shows the strength of the narrative. They are being criticised across blogs and the mainstream media simply because they wouldn't publically shun him.

Vox Day is a character taken to extremes - while he may proclaim objectionable views, he is excellent at classical argumentation. He's also an acceptably good author and a decent editor.

The whole point of these campaigns was to either break the SJW stranglehold on the awards or have them show just how biased they are. I think they achieved that. And next year will be even more fun.

"I'd hate myself if I had that kind of attitude, if I were that weak." - Arnold
Reply
#20

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote:Quote:

The man is just plain nutty, anti-vaxxer should be an early warning sign.

I would guess you formulated that opinion without spending much time on his blogs. I find him to be one of the more sane/clear voices in the manosphere who has a firm understanding of the culture war we're in.
Reply
#21

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

I used to be a massive GRRM fan, but I lost all respect for him when I started reading his sad puppies responses right when they came out a few months ago. In the end he is just a fat white knight who lost his love/girlfriend to his best friend near the start of his career [this is true] but still had to stay friends with them and hang out together. Cuckolding at it's finest.

He is thus a bitter man, but chooses to white knight. His bitterness brings forth the facade of "red pill" writing.

When he sided with Sarkeesian, went against GamerGate, and gave credibility to her "rape threats", it was over for me.

GRRM is, however, the overwhelmingly biggest voice in this debate because of how famous he is. Most people are going to read his "Not a Blog" for the sane take on this. This means that the overwhelming majority of people will be misinformed and side with the SJWs.

It is a monstrously uphill battle, proven by the fact that since the narrative is so strong even I was initially fooled by it into thinking that the Sad Puppies were up to no good.

You don't get there till you get there
Reply
#22

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-25-2015 12:04 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  

I used to be a massive GRRM fan, but I lost all respect for him when I started reading his sad puppies responses right when they came out a few months ago. In the end he is just a fat white knight who lost his love/girlfriend to his best friend near the start of his career [this is true] but still had to stay friends with them and hang out together. Cuckolding at it's finest.

He is thus a bitter man, but chooses to white knight. His bitterness brings forth the facade of "red pill" writing.

When he sided with Sarkeesian, went against GamerGate, and gave credibility to her "rape threats", it was over for me.

GRRM is, however, the overwhelmingly biggest voice in this debate because of how famous he is. Most people are going to read his "Not a Blog" for the sane take on this. This means that the overwhelming majority of people will be misinformed and side with the SJWs.

It is a monstrously uphill battle, proven by the fact that since the narrative is so strong even I was initially fooled by it into thinking that the Sad Puppies were up to no good.

Slim, question for you. I hate SJWism, find Scalzi's brand of white male liberal abasement disgusting, and I've been in enough SJW-infested environments to know just how nasty their tactics can be. However, I found GRRM's rebuttal of the the idea that white men and non-liberal writers are being excluded somewhat persuasive. What did he get wrong?

It nags at me to not be able to rebut GRRM. I think he is wrong but I like his writing and respect him. Also, his brand of thoughtful, "Yes there may be a few issues around the edges but let's remember, straight white men have all the power so SJW's are basically right" white-knighting reminds me a great deal of some friends of mine.
Reply
#23

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-25-2015 10:17 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:Quote:

The man is just plain nutty, anti-vaxxer should be an early warning sign.

I would guess you formulated that opinion without spending much time on his blogs. I find him to be one of the more sane/clear voices in the manosphere who has a firm understanding of the culture war we're in.

I formulated that opinion FROM reading his writing. He was picking fights with Richard Dawkins way before I joined this forum, a man that is way better at providing a scientific basis for his arguments than Beale.

Beale is the type of ally that is just as much a liability. Other than his anti-vaxxing stance he also holds some ill-conceived views on laws to be based on Christian grounds and while his ideas on restricting female voting are not uninteresting they are completely unrealistic and just weighs down the rest of his message. Nominating himself for the Hugos wasn't a smart thing to do if he wanted to make a point either.
Reply
#24

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-25-2015 07:49 AM)Benoit Wrote:  

That you think that Sad Puppies is associated with Vox Day shows the strength of the narrative. They are being criticised across blogs and the mainstream media simply because they wouldn't publically shun him.

I'm aware that Correia isn't altogether happy with the Vox Day assosciation.

The Sad puppies had a good thing going until Beale just walked into the living room and pissed on the carpet. At this point SP could have at the very least taken some stance to differentiate themselves (obviously they dont' think so and we see the result now), because Beale was getting far more out of the deal than the other way around, especially since he nominated himself several times.

What will happen now is that unless the Hugos change their ballot and voting process the future awards will be owned every year by SJWs.
Reply
#25

SJWs shut down Hugo awards

Quote: (08-24-2015 08:47 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Quote: (08-24-2015 07:54 PM)Killer Joe Wrote:  

Did understand wrong, or did they actually set fire to the awards ceremony? How many dead/injured?

Right wingers aka the puppies used the process of the Hugos to keep out women, minorities, and other undesirables. Tired that too many guys like Scalzi or the chick that won last year were getting all the attention. They cloak it bullshit like "hard science", but it's obvious that they feel like they're losing "science fiction".

Left wingers responded to the jury rigging of the system with the No Awards.

Meanwhile, a translation by a Chinese American of a Chinese (mainland) Science Fiction novel took the top spot.

Same bunch of neckbeards have no problem believing in Faster than Light Travel, green humanoid aliens having sex with Captain Kirk and Elves, Orc and Dragons, but will flip their shit if Captain America, James Bond, or the Human Torch is black.

And most of these dudes are "smart" and have technical backgrounds. So they'll assiduously back up all of their claims with "science", and calls to authority, history, and tradition. Same "engineering logic" is all over the web. Shows up in technolibertarianism, people talking about gold as a reserve currency, and bunch of other shit that "would be great if only people listened man, and were logical dude"

Fighting for the Soul of the Genre, when back in the 80's nobody gave a fuck.

It's because of Silicon Valley, and the rise of nerd money, thus nerd power, that you see these things. Hashtag activism for the people who wrote the code for Twitter.

Same bunch of dudes who all throughout college complained that there were no chicks coming to the anime night @ Chemistry building, are mad as fuck that cosplay bitches run Comic Cons now. And have no problem being skeevy with the few bitches at work .

WIA

This nonsensical post is amounts to little more than an attack on the character of the people who supported the Puppies.

Quote:Quote:

And have no problem being skeevy with the few bitches at work .

Great Parthian shot.

Quote:Old Chinese Man Wrote:  
why you wonder how many man another man bang? why you care who bang who mr high school drama man
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)