Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mike Van Pelt <usenet@mikevanpelt.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: The whole "Puppies" furor
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2024 23:17:18 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <vig6du$1vtgk$1@dont-email.me>
References: <robertaw-D56189.21595429112024@news.individual.net>
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2024 00:17:18 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ab5ff89593048841820772c08b0f5481";
	logging-data="2094612"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18hKsLpe/0NhpV18bUuPgPwFVsO0+UYh/Q="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:H3H6rwIo+2wBUiGkeN8fq5Boh/Q=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: mike@Mike-Laptop.localdomain (Mike-Laptop)
Bytes: 2992

In article <robertaw-D56189.21595429112024@news.individual.net>,
Robert Woodward  <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:
>I once spent a good deal of time studying the 2015 Hugo nominations. 
>While the Rabid Puppies were definitely block voting, the Sad Puppies 
>appeared to be different. Either there were secret puppies with their 
>own nominations lists (which overlapped the Sad Puppy list) or many of 
>the Sad Puppies were only nominating works that they had read. If the 
>latter was the case, while they could be accused of ungood literary 
>taste, was this block voting?

My understanding of the "puppies" thing was that the "Sad
Puppies" (name inspired by that "Give to the Humane Society"
ad with all the forlorn looking doggies in it) thought that
the kinds of stories they liked (and thought a bunch of
other people liked) were getting short shrift at the Hugos,
so made a list of what they considered worthy works, and said
"Here's some stuff we like that you might like as well; if so,
consider nominating it for a Hugo."

I don't see anything wrong with that, though it sure got a
lot of people upset.

A separate issue, of course, from Vox Diaboli, who glommed
onto the campaign with his "Rabid Puppies" block, which,
as you said, was definitely block voting.

The upset seemed to me to be a lot more about politics than
about quality of the works.  And conflating the original
(arguably legitimate) campaign with the (reprehensible)
block vote.

I wasn't involved in either group, being a non-attender of
Worldcon that year.

I'd kind of lost interest in the Hugos years before, anyway;
little of the kind of thing I like ever seems to get nominated,
at least, since "The Mote in God's Eye."  I note in particular
that no stories from Analog *ever* get nominated.  (Or, hardly
ever.  I can't think the last time I saw one on the list.)

-- 
Mike Van Pelt       |  "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com   |   -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH              |      Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston