?

Log in

Banned

Brad Torgersen deleted my comments.  I feel unreasonably delighted by this.

(happy dance)

Post Worldcon Quick Comment

I'll try and assemble my thoughts later.  A lot happened.

However, I would just like to say, Brad Torgersen has completely lost his shit :)

One week in two days

As I'm off to sunny Spokane tomorrow, I'm trying to get the entire week's worth of work done today.  So far so good.  I haven't got the task I set out to do done, but I've ticked off a bunch of other stuff.

Now it's last minute shopping and packing and general fiddling around with stuff ahead of Worldcon.  That said, I've still got a few conference calls next week and probably a meeting with somebody who coincidentally will also be in Spokane, which is handy as I really need to close with them next week.

In other news, I just got upgraded for the flight to Spokane, all 45 minutes off it.

Greece eh?

I've been keeping an eye on this, as you do.  It does have that grim feeling that people may have had in 1913/14 while the wise heads agreed war was impossible, the events just kept unfurling.

As I remarked on Facebook, the problem with negiating agressively with somebody who has nothing to lose, is that they might, in fact, decide that they have nothing to lose.  It feels like we're at that point.

We could discuss that the Euro project was potentially doomed from the outset for various factors:

  • currency union without political union is unstable - how do you impose rules on people who are doing stupid stuff with your largess

  • Germany joined at the wrong part of it's business cycle when the value of the Mark was much lower than it had been, giving Germany a HUGE price advantage in the early stages

  • expecting members of your currency to depress their economies and GDPs to avoid other members experiencing any relative inflation isn't the right way to do things

Anyway, here we are.  The Greeks have called the German bluff and stated, correctly in my opinion, that this is now a matter for their voters.  They were elected, as a government, with a mandate to do something about austerity, they have tried, they have failed - it is now up to the people of Greece as a whole if they are prepared to deal with the consequences - either live with more austerity or get out of the Euro and possibly the EU.

At the crux of this is the idea that as long as you live 'within your means' and pay down your debt, confidence and growth will return to your economy.  The problem here is when your economy is running with 25-30% of the workforce unemployed, where does all the demand come from for there to be confidence?  I got nothing - there isn't a way to do it.

It has been suggested to me that all this posturing is purely because the Germans, ECB and the Commission are ok with losing Greece, as long as it shows the Spanish, Italians and Irish that they better not think about breaking ranks.  That feels potentially true especially after the tirade from the Commission Chair today where he basically demanded to know who the fuck these voters thought they were and what gave them any say in running their country?

What indeed?

My Hugo Numbers - a bit tidier

Firstly, my original methodology was a bit wonky, I was working off the published nominations that got more than about 3% of the votes cast.  Unfortunately, not very many years have published details on the number of Unique Works nominated compared to the Ballots.  I have 3 relatively easy to look at ones though.  2009, 2013 and 2014.

Tables don't seem to be easy here, so I'll do what I can:

Total Ballots cast Best Novel | Novelette | Novella | Short Story
2009 - 629 | 373 | 337 | 448
2013 - 1113 |616 | 587 | 662
2014 - 1595 | 728 | 847 | 865

Unique Works Nominated Best Novel | Novelette | Novella | Short Story
2009 - 335 | 233 | 122 | 470
2013 - 475 | 252 | 135 | 569
2014 - 648 | 290 | 206 | 578

I've already covered the works garnering about 3% of the total votes and what happened to them.

Most interesting for me: the ratio of unique works nominated to the number of ballots cast for Best Novel has stayed REALLY very consistent over this whole time.

The actual ratio of people who vote for Best Novel and then vote for a short category is also relatively consistent.  What is not consistent is effect on the works being nominated - relatively speaking fewer and fewer short stories are being nominated over time.

What is unclear to me is how many unique works are actually published in each category and how much of this is simply diminishing returns in a field that already was fairly widely read.

Either way, given these results and how often in recent years some of the short categories have struggled to get enough stories which hit 5% it's indicative of just how effective a strong 'slate' is and how little evidence there really is of much of one historically.

Adding Diversity to the Hugo Awards

One of the claims the various puppies have made is they're getting more works into consideration for the Hugo Awards...  I thought this was an interesting claim, especially given the effectiveness of a strong slate, so I thought I'd look at the data.  I can only find details back to 2011, anybody who has links to the earlier nomination data, I'd quite like it.

So 2011 is a clearer pre-puppy year, back in the bad old days when either middle-aged priviliged white men, or a sekrit cabal of Social Justice Warriors ruled the Hugos - it was also a smaller con, being in Australia.

As our pre-puppy, cSWM/SJW dominated reference we had 833 Ballots Cast for Best Novel, with 23 works up for consideration.

Each year, since then, the number of ballots cast has increased - interestingly, the number of books nominated has not, in fact, in each of the following years just 16 works have been nominated... meaning that the ratio of ballots to works has gone from 36:1 in 2011, to 100:1 last year...  strike 1 for the puppies.

I next looked at the ratio of Best Novel nominations to nominations for the Short Story categories - interestingly, by and large they're relatively static - more or less half the people who nominate a book for Best Novel nominate a short.

But here's another thing, in the last Post Puppy year we had the following numbers:

Novelette: 24
Novella: 22
Short Story: 17

Let's look at the state of play post puppy?

Novelette: 17-16-15
Novella: 15-15-16
Short Story: 18-17-15

Apart from Short Story which hasn't changed, the number of individual works has actually fallen too.

One of the original puppy claims was that works were not getting onto the Hugo Ballot, this is certainly true, but the implication of the claim was they were not being nominated - the data doesn't support that.  They were being nominated, they just didn't have enough people doing so.

The drive to get more people to nominate Puppy books has actually reduced the diversity and range of options being nominated, NOT, increased it.  Which rather dismisses the idea that the puppies do not and have no voted the slate as a bloc and read their own things and made their own decisions - if they have been doing that, then actually they've been therefore reading pretty much the same stuff as the cSWM/SJW 'cabal'.

I'd be interested to look at the data going back, but on the face of it, the drive to get more people to nominate and increase numbers has actually had the reverse effect and that strong slates actually make things even worse.

EDIT 1: A puppy supporter has pointed out to me that 2012 was also pre-puppies too - I'd need somebody to check if that was around the time a lot of Book Bloggers were getting upset about cSWM domination of the event.  Either way, it's interesting that despite an increase in the numbers of nominations, the numbers of works being nominated hasn't changed a lot with or without the Puppies.  I would like pre-2011 data so we can see what the normalized ratios were pre Aussiecon.

EDIT 2: The data I'm seeing seems to cut off at about 3% of votes cast - so I don't actually have full nominations here, but the numbers making that cut off seem very very consistent year in and year out.  Having more works spread out doesn't indicate much of a conspiracy.  Just people tend to like the same things.

EDIT 3: It's really hard to pull out the numbers of unique works because they're not always given or not given in a format I can be arsed to pull out.  However, interestingly a couple of things emerge:

  1. The ratio of ballots to unique works in Best Novel is constant at about 2 - you can increase the voters, they all seem to behave the same way - the number of works that make the 3% of the votes cast list that is conventionally shown dropped in 2011 and has stayed the same

  2. The Short Story categories have changed - if the ratios of votes to unqiue works had stayed constant then they'd have been 300+ unique works in one of the categories last year, instead there were only 200

In short, the more people we have taking part, the easier the numbers suggest it becomes to actually log roll a category with a strong slate.  I wasn't expecting that.

There is also precious little evidence that there has really been any real concerted activity in the past to game the awards - but we knew that.

Why do you make me hurt you?

Quote of yesterday, for me, was this on File770:

“I’m not a sociopath. As it happens, I’m actually unusually empathetic. I understand your pain. That’s why I gave you the opportunity to back down.”

That's Theodore Beale that is.  I am minded of an old school TV serial killer, or TV style domestic abuse or something.  "Why are you making me hurt you?  Why don't you just do as I say?"

I have been reading all the Hugo entries, even the Puppies, both Sad and Rabid, and actually, until that and some choice stuff he's repeated today about Poll Taxes and how he gave 'us' a chance to back down, I've had to conclude I have to vote no to any fiction category that has his fingerprints on it, and I have to say sorry to Kary English if I meet her about that.  OTOH she is up the for Campbell.

My father wasn't a very nice man and this is the sort of power game crap he'd pull at home after a bad day and after he was forced to retire on health grounds, when he didn't have a department at his beck and call at the Yard.  He mellowed as he aged and our relationship was much better by the time he died, but that took many many years of him learnng to live with himself and without the power that he used to have.  Mr Beale seems to crave that power and enjoys wielding it.  Sad really.

Anyway, novel category is easy - Three Body #1, Goblin Emperor #2, Anciliary Sword #3, No Award #4.  I am sad to say, I do not have any choice but to vote No Award #1 in the 3 other fiction categories.  Only 2 of the stories felt like they should be there, and as one of them was the kind of 'message' fiction the Puppies claim to hate, I'm a bit lost over what they stand for.

Fan Writer is equally easy, anybody prepared to put their head over the parapet to take on that other blight on the face of SF&F, Requres Hate, is good with me.

Best Fanzine?  No contest really :)

I'll be voting the Movie and 'TV' categories as if there wasn't a slate as I strongly suspect the slate effect is minimal in those because they do largely represent what people liked.  I'm annoyed Predestination wasn't in the Movies - Heinlein people, your BFF?  No?  Too much icky cross-gender stuff?  Sad.

Other observations from a few days of trying to avoid writing support docs (yes, the stuff they don't tell you in CEO school)...

  1. The Puppy supporters/sock puppets/sealions and so forth work from the same kind of talking points memos as does the American right.  Today's word to use is 'Poll Tax'

  2. If I were Beale, and I get a lot of No Awards this year, I'll make damn sure my slate looks like a normal reading list full of the stuff he claims to hate, just to see if people will spit stuff they would otherwise like, because that way it can be about him!

  3. 'Slate' is not a complicated word in this context nor is 'breaking the spirit of the law' - watching the 'wahhh, we didn't break the rules why are you being mean to us?' stuff is stomach churning

  4. Having read, or tried to read, most of the short fiction - we have a SERIOUS mismatch in taste and expectation going on.  Flow? Read like a bad Dragonlance rip off of somebodies clever D&D scenario.  A couple started out well and then went down hill really fast - what happened to Hook and Back fill anyway?  Turncoat?  Less said the better.  Neal Asher and Iain Banks could teach him a thing or two about writing AI battleships.

And, finally, not all Puppies are the same, there are a few commentators on File770 who genuinely didn't realize they were being played and feel bad about it now.  To them I say this, never mind, vote for what you like, join in, and be careful of what you see promoted.
Larry Correia's thread on the Hugo withdrawals:

There's a complete gem in there from "Doug Wardell": http://monsterhunternation.com/2015/04/15/well-this-sucks-2/

Are you suggesting that you thought everyone who voted the Sad Puppies slate read every work they nominated? If so, I think you’re naive.

There's more in there too - including somebody who nominated Kloos so they could get the second book free....

So I did that then....

EDIT: Lines of Departure has been withdraw from the ballot which renders what I wrote somewhat out of date.  I'll be clear.  I REALLY wanted to like it, I really did, but it had too many flaws for that.  Still, as I said at the end, it sounds to me like Marko Kloos is a good guy and I wish him luck.

Because one of the charges I have seen hurled around is 'at least we [puppies] read the books we nominated unlike you', I thought I'd see what all the fuss is about.  I'm not a huge Butcher fan, I've read a couple of Dresden books but it's not really my thing.  I have read an Andersen, and been on a panel with his wife, and I can't imagine he's not a decent writer - he's been a jobbing author for a while now but I'm not sure I want to dive into the first book of a new series following on from a previous series...  so I bought a copy of Marko Kloos Lines of Departure.

I wanted to keep an open mind, I wanted to be fair, simply put I didn't want to dislike this as much as I did.  Actually, strike that, dislike is too strong there.  It's just not terribly good - not completely bad, but still.

One of the claims of the Puppies is that they want 'good' stories that hark back to some mythical Golden Age - well, this certainly felt like it could have been writen in the 1960s, that's for sure.  The protagonist, a weapons specialist, has worked as a Neural Systems operator - except that the neural systems in this future don't appear to do anything that computers do now, in fact, I'd argue they seem dumber, as do the people, more on that in a moment.

It felt like Aliens fanfic - the tech level is roughly late 20th century, except for the giant spaceships and the Albucurie 'shute' which functions as some kind of 'tram line' FTL system, but there's no background to that, nor any description how they get the 'chutes' in place.  The aliens are inscrutable, although 80 foot tall aliens weighing 1000 'metric tons' that move around in 1 gee environments did give me a pause for thought - how does their nervous system work? How do they manage to move around without spending all day eating and so on...

The Earth is a ruin, the population of the US is 3 billion, the world is over 30 billion - nothing is said on how that happened, just that it has.  All the money has been spent on extra-solar colonization for getting people off planet and getting resources in... yes, I typed that correctly.  They're importing ores and other materials from outside of the solar system.

Some years before the story, the 'lankies' turn up and start terraforming planets we've colonized and they can't be stopped - until one of the people on a planet they capture/liberate (bit vague and I was skimming by now) from the Sino-Russians (yeah, there's still time for a turf war between us and the damn commies) remembers some school physics or a Larry Niven short and suggests they use spacecraft as kinetic weapons.  Seriously, they've been losing a war for this long but the scientists chides the solider for thinking like military people and not like a scientist.  Honestly, the dialog is in there...

The story isn't good.  It isn't original. It's part of a series.  The characters are barely two dimensional - but hey, there's a woman as a staff sergeant, so, ummm, equality!  The science is bad (...the debris cloud accelerated at a quarter gee...) - frankly, this book has no right being on a Hugo list.

In Amazon it was compared to Old Man's War.  I didn't much like Old Man's War but I read it.  This is nothing like Old Mans War - in comparison, OMW is literature :(

I challenge ANYBODY who read this to come here and explain what they saw there that made them think that this was worthy of being on the Hugo list other than Marko is a good guy?

Latest Month

August 2015
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel