tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post6256716259533719995..comments2023-06-09T15:16:38.867+01:00Comments on It Doesn't Have To Be Right...: Doing the Hugos, Part 3dIan Saleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15375389971610069381noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-33982286739909095752009-06-03T05:21:01.129+01:002009-06-03T05:21:01.129+01:00The Tear is freely available, just not officially ...The Tear is freely available, just not officially available, was my point.<br /><br />e.g. same as getting tv shows on bittorrent.<br /><br />The Political Prisoner is now in the same situation, as you mention. Lots of people will have already downloaded it of course.<br />FSF is of course available via EBSCOHost etc., too, for those aware of those sort of databases via the library.<br /><br />So it is possible more people could get it like that, than have bought Galactic Empires. <br /><br />Not as convenient as an obvious, publicised version, of course, so that won't help.<br /><br />There are no officially for sale ebooks of River of Gods or Brasyl either, which is absolutely crazy.<br /><br />All of which certainly will hurt McDonald in awards situations.Blue Tysonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01090584083476832111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-11851143581180266602009-06-02T11:05:02.450+01:002009-06-02T11:05:02.450+01:00@dd-b: If the requirement were to be publication i...@dd-b: <I>If the requirement were to be publication in all markets worldwide in the same year, nothing would be eligible. That's probably not the result you want either.</I> And it's certainly not what I suggested.<br /><br /><I>I believe the short fiction is all available free online to Hugo voters anyway. That's as close to universal availability as you're going to get I think.</I> John Scalzi now puts together a packet of all the nominated fiction for Worldcon members. This is something he himself does, not the Worldcon. I think it's an excellent idea. But my comment was directed at the nomination process.<br /><br /><I>Or is it only not going to the books you personally favor?</I> It hasn't done that for a long time. As several have said, the shortlists demonstrate that what I like and value in sf is generally not what those who vote for the Hugo like and value. The Resnick stories, for example.<br /><br />@Blue Tyson: All of the short stories and novelettes are freely available online. Four of the five novellas also were ('The Political Prisoner' has been taken down, for some reason). But not 'The Tear'. Admittedly, everything is included in the abovementioned packet.Ian Saleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15375389971610069381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-2088601278239971252009-06-02T08:45:00.658+01:002009-06-02T08:45:00.658+01:00Speaking of computers and the internet - if you go...Speaking of computers and the internet - if you google 'ian mcdonald tear ebook' - you will see that access to this isn't just limited to those that can buy SFBC books. (of course you can get a few of these secondhand, too).<br /><br />dd-b points this out too, of course.Blue Tysonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01090584083476832111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-1053152755957601162009-06-01T23:49:24.736+01:002009-06-01T23:49:24.736+01:00Eligibility primarily requires nominations; it mus...Eligibility primarily requires nominations; it must be "published", but that's much easier than getting enough people to nominate you. <br /><br />If the requirement were to be publication in all markets worldwide in the same year, nothing would be eligible. That's probably not the result you want either. <br /><br />I suspect non-US SF fans often get US TV shows somehow or another (friends in the US, bit torrent, or whatever) before those shows are officially shown overseas, not with Hugo voting primarily in mind but just out of interest. I know US fans do similar things when Dr. Who is coming out in the UK ahead of here.<br /><br />It's historically very true, and currently still true, that the Hugo Award is somewhat US-centric. SF itself is somewhat US-centric, and SF fandom is very US-centric (as witness the disproportionate number of US fans attending Worldcons held overseas; sometimes a majority). <br /><br />I believe the short fiction is all available free online to Hugo voters anyway. That's as close to universal availability as you're going to get I think. <br /><br />Is the Hugo award becoming less relevant? Or is it only not going to the books you personally favor? (I have similar questions on this one.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-36749258052564944652009-06-01T23:04:08.086+01:002009-06-01T23:04:08.086+01:00No apology necessary. Debate is good.No apology necessary. Debate is good.Ian Saleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15375389971610069381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-71509116121213219082009-06-01T22:46:54.380+01:002009-06-01T22:46:54.380+01:00At the moment, the rules reflect the will of the B...At the moment, the rules reflect the will of the Business Meeting, which consists of those members of the WSFS (Worldcon members) with sufficient motivation to participate in the rulemaking process. If that membership changes, it's likely to change the rules as well.<br /><br />No, changing rules isn't easy. Constitutions are not <EM>supposed</EM> to be easy to change. If they are, you get messes like that in California. (I'm a California citizen and I do vote and have voted in every election since I was first eligible.)<br /><br /><EM>And yet, as I pointed out in my post....</EM>Point taken. I over-reacted. I guess it's because I see the "change the rules because my favorites didn't win" approach so much that I tend to jump to it even when it's not justified. Sorry.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-63209129768204282562009-06-01T22:41:19.134+01:002009-06-01T22:41:19.134+01:00... such a rule would technically require that eve...<I>... such a rule would technically require that every single work of SF/F in the world must be accessible to every single person in the world, which is an absurd requirement.</I>Hence my use of the word "notionally".<br /><br /><I>...if non-US fans (who you seem to be suggesting vote purely on nationalistic grounds) chose to participate...</I>No, I was suggesting they voted honestly - i.e., only voting for something they had seen.<br /><br /><I>It is a common complaint to attack awards' legitimacy when what you really mean is "My favorites didn't get nominated/win."</I>And yet, as I pointed out in my post, I think McDonald's 'The Tear' is the best of the novellas I've read from the shortlist so far.Ian Saleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15375389971610069381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-77468160685137020942009-06-01T22:26:02.934+01:002009-06-01T22:26:02.934+01:00At the very least, nominated works should be notio...<EM>At the very least, nominated works should be notionally available to all those who might become Worldcon members.</EM>Surely you can see that the logical extension of this is that <EM>nothing</EM> can ever actually be eligible, because such a rule would technically require that every single work of SF/F in the world must be accessible to every single person in the world, which is an absurd requirement.<br /><br /><EM>The fact that a SFBC-published novella is on this year's shortlist suggests that the Hugos are dominated by a small group of US sf fans... which makes the awards increasingly less relevant.</EM>Could this have something to do with non-US fans not bothering to vote? There were something around five thousand people eligible to nominate, and only about 10% of them bothered to exercise their franchise. (This is not unusual in recent years, of course.)<br /><br />Given how few WSFS members actually bother to nominate and vote, if non-US fans (who you seem to be suggesting vote purely on nationalistic grounds) chose to participate rather than ignoring their ballots like 90% of their fellow members, they would dominate the Awards.<br /><br />It is a common complaint to attack awards' legitimacy when what you really mean is "My favorites didn't get nominated/win." This is not just true in SF awards, but in mundane elections as well.<br /><br />Remember that WSFS does make special allowance to give non-US works additional eligibility in most cases. This simply acknowledges the real, practical fact that most WSFS members who vote are Americans <EM>no matter where the Worldcon is held</EM>. Even when it's in the UK, Americans dominate the voting <EM>because they vote</EM>, not because of some Nefarious Scheme To Rule the SF World. It's not a plot; it's a fact that Americans are the largest single group of English-speaking people in the world, and while the Hugo Awards are notionally open to anything in any language, in practice they track the demographics of English-speaking SF fandom.<br /><br />You want to see more non-US works nominated? Try (a) promoting non-US works (which generally get an extra year of eligibility if they get US publication most of the time) to US voters and, assuming you think that everyone votes nationalistically, (b) encouraging non-US members of Worldcon to use their voting rights.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-11336658240872889312009-06-01T20:52:41.381+01:002009-06-01T20:52:41.381+01:00And when the worldcon takes place in the UK or Aus...And when the worldcon takes place in the UK or Australia, and a dramatic presentation that has only been broadcast in the US appears on the shortlist... then yes, it makes a mockery of the award.<br /><br />At the very least, nominated works should be notionally available to all those who might become Worldcon members. The fact that a SFBC-published novella is on this year's shortlist suggests that the Hugos are dominated by a small group of US sf fans... which makes the awards increasingly less relevant.Ian Saleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15375389971610069381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3369127277021590195.post-53988161883418569732009-06-01T18:42:42.349+01:002009-06-01T18:42:42.349+01:00I actually have a problem with stories from SFBC-p...<EM>I actually have a problem with stories from SFBC-published books being eligible for the Hugo Award.</EM>By that reasoning, I would suggest that dramatic presentations telecast in the US shouldn't be eligible because members in the UK, Australia, etc. can't see them.<br /><br />Alternatively, works published only on a web site shouldn't be eligible because some people don't have computers and won't use the internet.<br /><br />I'm going to quote another person (it was on a closed list so I don't know if he wants attribution) whose opinion I respect (even if I don't always agree with him, although I do in this case): "The rules don't require that a work be available to 100% of the electorate and never have. They simply require that availability be big enough that a work counts as having been published." If a work's distribution is such that it gets enough nominations to appear on the Hugo Awards ballot, I would think that is <EM>prima facie</EM> evidence that the work's distribution isn't "limited" and that it has been "published" for eligibility purposes.Kevin Standleehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02748134147055160408noreply@blogger.com