Another roundup of links related to the fallout of the Hugos. Again, sharing link doesn’t imply either endorsement or chastisement of the contents.
Let’s start with the absolute craziest as John C. Wright produces an absolutely unhinged screed claiming that us not awarding him, the greatest gift to writing since clay tablets, lets Patrick Nielsen Hayden (also the gays?) win.
Vox Day probably said something too but I don’t care what he thinks.
John Scalzi suggests that acting like a jerk doesn’t pay.
This tumblr thread discusses why the Alfies were not the secret SJW Hugos.
Black Gate suggests that the failure of the Puppy slate might have to do more with the quality of the work than any political consideration.
Nick Mamatas also invites Sad Puppy partisans to defend the quality of the nominated works.
The Guardian reports on GRRM’s reaction to the Hugo results.
Tobias Buckell mocked up an alternate world ballot for the Hugos in which the Puppy campaigns hadn’t overrun the nominations.
Flavorwire attempted a brief summary of the whole mess.
Asia Times (and the China Daily) mostly just concentrated on the Best Novel win for Liu Cixin, entirely ignoring the puppy kerfuffle in their coverage.
NPR warns that this may not be a loss for the puppies, depending on how their goals are defined.
The Nielsen Haydens hosted a discussion thread on their blog which is mostly interesting for some otherwise quiet big names who popped in to leave their five cents.
Aliette De Bodard saw the Hugos as a win for a global vision of SF/F between the Liu Cixin / Ken Liu and Thomas Olde Heuvelt wins.
This is from before the awards but it is still relevant so I’ll include it: Kelly Robson suggested mediation between Puppy and other interest groups would be more productive than fighting.
Mike Selinker proposed a suggested fix for the Hugos based on video game testing methodology.
Abigail Nussbaum argues against the Hugos being seen as elitist or progressive to begin with, suggesting they tend to be populist and middle of the road.
Adam Shaftoe seconds Kelly Robson’s proposal for mediation and discourse.
Frank Wu suggests puppies abandon block voting in exchange for some big-name authors providing exposure to some Puppy-favourite work.
File 770 published a thorough collection of quotes from all sides.
An exceptional analysis from Eric Flint.
Arthur Chu suggests that the Sad Puppies really only exist online, thanks to the ability of the internet to favour those willing to burn the most time on an issue, and are effectively absent from physical spaces.
I may add to this as I see new things of interest. I moderate comments with a light hand but I too have a copy of Scalzi’s mallet of loving correction which I will use as I see fit. Please feel free to share links to either side of this discussion, except for Vox Day. No link to his blog will get out of moderation.