MLP and the Hugos · 3:30am May 20th, 2016
If you aren't aware of the situation with MLP and the Hugo Awards, I recommend you catch up with Horizon's excellent primer on the subject. The super short version is that someone is trying to troll the awards, and one of the things he did was get "The Cutie Map" nominated for "Best Dramatic Presentation (Short Form)."
So, with MLP dumped into the fray, Horizon asked me to write a blog post for Hugo voters, explaining to them why "The Cutie Map" isn't just a troll candidate, and why it's worth actually considering. I did that, and I'm going to post it below for all of you guys, even though you might know most of this. Keep in mind I'm writing for people who have never seen the show and might not be inclined to see it.
To that end, I also posted it on my non-pony blog, which you should link to if you know any Hugo voters or are linking this outside of fandom. At least it'll protect them from the feature box and all my cartoon horse lesbian shipping.
[And no, you guys aren't missing anything. The non-pony blog is mostly for the future, as my novel gets closer to coming out in August, so I have someplace to direct people that's not MLP related. It's mostly going to be stuff about my novel (which I will also post or link to here) and re-posts of general writing stuff that I've already posted for you guys. As of now, there's practically nothing there.]
Anyway, here's the essay below the cut:
You know, it’s kind of appropriate that My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic was nominated for a Hugo in order to troll people. Our entire fandom was built on some trolling.
Way back in 2011, some guys on 4Chan started posting MLP pictures and memes. Other people complained, and being 4Chan, they responded by flooding the site with pictures of ponies.
But somewhere in there a strange thing happened. People checked out the show, whether because they thought the characters were cute or because they thought it would be dumb and wanted to mock it, and they liked it. Not ironically, and not because it was subversive or slipped adult humor in under the radar. They just really liked the simple stories about Twilight Sparkle and her pony friends. And Bronies were born.
I personally come from a unique place in pony fandom. I’m a 33-year-old woman, and I watched the old My Little Pony cartoons back in the 80s, but I was never a big fan. I joined the Friendship is Magic fandom about four years ago, and two years after that I had a daughter, so I’ve gone from looking at the show as a fan, to looking at it as both a fan and a mom. It shines in both ways; it’s a rare show that a two-year-old can enjoy, with messages I’m happy to have her grow up on, and that I still wake up for on Saturdays, even when her father is letting me sleep in (parents of small children know how big a deal that is).
So, from my perspective, I hope this Hugo nomination can do what the show has done from the beginning: turn something sour and ironic into a chance for new people to enjoy it, and offer people some friendship and harmony in a situation where it’s sorely needed.
But Hugo voters are not 4Chan kids; they’re people who are neck deep in the best the Science Fiction and Fantasy genre has to offer, with sophisticated taste and some good reasons to want to avoid feeding these particular trolls. So, the question is, why should Hugo voters spend 44 minutes giving an episode of a children’s cartoon a chance?
There’s plenty to recommend about the show: clean, creative, and often adorable animation; catchy songs that are often up there with Disney; character-driven comedy and development. Those are all things that make Friendship is Magic great, but I’m not sure I’d argue that they’re why you should check it out. There are other shows, even kids shows, that can boast those things.
What I think makes My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic unique is that it’s a show about diversity, and through its unique characters, setting, and design it does a better job portraying that than any other media I’ve come across. It’s not about diversity in the sense of races, or genders, or political views, or any other box you could tick on a form. It’s about diversity of perspectives, passions, values, and talents, and how very different kinds of people can be good and bad, and still care for each other, help each other, and teach each other.
The main cast of characters are six ponies (the “Mane Six”-- the show and the fandom love their horse puns) who are easily and broadly defined in every aspect, from their names, to their voices, to their character design: Twilight Sparkle is a somewhat naive bookworm, Applejack is a hard-working farmer with a close-knit family, Rarity is an appearance-focused fashion designer, Rainbow Dash is a competitive athlete, Fluttershy is a shy animal lover, and Pinkie Pie is a hyperactive extrovert who throws parties.
This might seems one dimensional, but in the hands of the writers of the show it becomes archetypical instead. Different episodes explore different aspects of these types: Rarity is an appearance-focused fashion designer; through the show that means she’s a dedicated artist, a drama queen, a tough business woman, a stickler for details, a bit shallow, a proper lady, and a skilled social manipulator. Her point of view or methods might be right or wrong, or something that’s both needed and needs to be moderated. The same is true of all of the characters. By exploring very different aspects of seemingly simple “types,” the show is able to be supportive of all of them while still disapproving of their flaws.
And the show doesn’t stop with the main characters. The same broad strokes of personality and design have allowed the writers and animators to populate the setting with an enormous cast of colorful and memorable characters, almost all of whom require little in the way of introduction in order to play their parts in the story. They can be used to complement, contrast, or challenge worldviews of the main characters, or simply to provide other ponies with stakes in the outcome of the episode. By having so many unique characters the show rarely feels like the main characters are the only ones who matter, even while they remain at the center of the show.
The setting and world building of the show continue the theme of diversity of perspective; Equestria, the kingdom where the ponies live, ranges from the small town of Ponyville, to the almost fairy tale city of Canterlot, to bustling urban Manehattan, to the wild west of Appleloosa. The ponies who live in all of these places are a mix of the three primary tribes: earth ponies (regular ponies without wings or a horn), unicorns, and pegasi. As tribes, they each have their own magic and importance to the running of the kingdom, though it doesn’t define the places of individual ponies. That comes down to Cutie Marks, the symbol each pony has on their back hips. Cutie Marks are magic, and appear when each pony discovers their “special talent;” both their place in the world and the thing that makes them unique.
These themes -- that everyone is an individual, with a different way of seeing things, and that every individual has their good points and bad points and might be right and wrong in different situations -- seem like simple kids show stuff, but they’re something that most adults I know rarely remember.
The episode up for a Hugo, “The Cutie Map,” speaks to these themes directly, by sending the Mane Six to a town where the ponies all have the same equal sign cutie mark, the same hair styles, and are all suspiciously happy about it. It will probably be obvious to adults watching what’s going on, but there are some surprises and interesting details in how and why they succeed in resolving the issues.
From here on out I’m going to be talking about some spoilers. If you’re already interested, I hope you’ll check out the episode. If not, you might want to keep on reading for more specifics on why it’s a creative take on the idea.
So, “The Cutie Map” is a pony take on the classic Harrison Bergeron idea of enforced equality. All of the ponies in a town have gotten the idea that if none of them have the unique talents that come with their cutie marks, they’ll never have conflicts. But there are a few things I find really interesting about how the show in particular handles things.
First of all, they’re right, in a way. While they do secretly miss their Cutie Marks, the ponies in the town don’t argue and are always friendly to each other. As the musical number that establishes their philosophy puts it: “You can’t have a nightmare if you never dream.” And the ponies make it clear that’s why they made the trade-off, and it seems to work, even if they’re not always totally happy with the results.
The show contrasts this with the bickering of the Mane Six over why they’re there and what to do. The towns ponies are shocked that they can bicker and still be friends, and while this particular argument is to set up that point, it’s easy to see that with their different viewpoints the characters have been through far worse disagreements.
In this episode, the most widely different points of view are portrayed by Pinkie Pie, who’s outright suspicious of the smiles in the town and how happy the ponies there actually are, and Fluttershy, who’s sympathetic to their ideals and appreciates the peace and friendliness they’ve fostered.
Now, Pinkie is proven right when the leader of the town corners the Mane Six and forcibly removes their Cutie Marks, then locks them up to try to indoctrinate them. But, and this is the part I find really interesting, it’s Fluttershy with the biggest part in saving her friends, because Fluttershy agreed with the town's ponies.
Fluttershy is the most conflict averse and socially awkward of the main characters. It’s shown at the beginning of the episode when she doesn’t want to travel and offers to stay behind with Twilight’s assistant Spike, then balks when she finds out he was planning a “guys weekend” with Applejack’s brother Mac -- a situations well outside of Fluttershy’s comfort zone, which is enough to send her off on the adventure with her friends. So she can easily see the allure of a town where there’s no conflict, no differences, and everypony is happy.
But Fluttershy loves her friends in spite of their differences, and once they’re captured she understands that this isn’t the way to achieve that peace. So, having already shown the ponies that she’s in favor of the idea, she’s the one able to convince them she’s been indoctrinated and discover the secrets of the town.
The plan only works because the Mane Six have points of view so diverse that one of them can agree with the villain, while still condemning her methods when they’re harmful. That’s a pretty impressive celebration of diversity to me.
Another interesting thing about the episode comes at the climax. It’s revealed that the founder of the town, Starlight Glimmer, has secretly kept her Cutie Mark, proving that the ponies in the town were never truly equal in the first place. The town's ponies rush to get their own Cutie Marks back, while Starlight Glimmer escapes with the Cutie Marks of the Mane Six. Left without their special talents, the Mane Six are unable to catch her.
So it’s the town’s ponies, working together with their own special talents, who chase Starlight Glimmer and save the Mane Six. The climax is resolved not because the main characters themselves are powerful, but because the idea they shared is powerful in itself. It’s not their diversity that’s important, it’s everyone’s diversity, even four characters that the audience has never seen as individuals until that moment.
(It’s also worth noting that Party Favor, Double Diamond, Sugar Belle, and Night Glider are excellent examples of the show’s ability to characterize unique ponies with next to nothing in the way of screen time.)
I feel like "The Cutie Map" demonstrates some of the best that Friendship is Magic has to offer: it takes an idea without much nuance, and by drawing on its strengths it gives it a surprising complexity. It focuses on some unique world building in the setting, introduces new supporting characters, and throws in a catchy song while it’s at it.
I hope that’s enough to convince you to check it out. God knows the Hugos need the magic of friendship these days.
Are you talking about the Sad Puppies or the Rabid Puppies? They're two different groups. For instance, I'm a Sad Puppy, not a Rabid one.
Good lord... You've put some incredible thought to this.
Also, nonpony blog bookmark'd.
~Skeeter The Lurker
3957811
This year the Sads did a rec list, and while MLP was on it (I think?), it was the Rabids who still did a slate and got most of their stuff on, which also included MLP.
My super short summery was talking about the Rabids, with "the troll" being Vox Day.
3957816
Yeah, Vox is in my opinion almost as bad, or as bad, as the Tor Clique currently controlling the Hugos. He really is the things they accuse the Sad Puppies of being.
Of course, this all started when the SFWA kicked him out, essentially because they didn't like his opinions. I bet they're really sorry now that they did that.
On your essay -- personally, I think that simply getting a Hugo nom will increase respect for MLP among the fans. Of course, getting the nom and not turning it down out of outrage at the Puppies will make the Tor Clique hate the show forever. And you, for supporting the nom. Just don't be surprised -- or too upset -- by this. Traditional publishing is close to dead anyway, and so are the Hugoes if the Tor Clique continues to cling to them like grim death as they sink under the icy waters.
3957842
I'm hoping that the POV of "Yeah, we were a troll nom, but at least give us a chance..." will keep people calm. Maybe a few people will be so on the attack that they can't see a poor fandom that got caught in the middle but is still proud of their fandom, but, who knows?
I would also hope it would help that we're in the Dramatic Presentation category. Like, for the Short Story noms and stuff like that, the slate is taking up spots that could have gone to authors who need exposure. But this is the category for TV shows, it's not exactly struggling voices shouting to be heard. We probably bumped off everyone's second favorite episode of Doctor Who.
Yeah, no. Disney WISHES they could manage to consistently get songs half as good as the worst songs of MLP.
In my experience Disney's songs are all super cringe-inducing at BEST while MLP's are slightly cringe worthy at worst.
3957861
Actually, bookplayer, The Cutie Map was nominated because Starlight's village represents everything Vox and his Ilk think is wrong with the world in general and the Hugos in particular. I was lurking around when it was brought up, and everyone over there thought it was awesome. It's honestly not a troll nomination in and of itself. On the "metagaming the Hugos" level, it's a bit of a ploy, but they really did enjoy the episode.
3957821
Yeah, the Supreme Dark Lord of the Evil Legion of Evil has been quite clear on his goals: destroy the Hugos. And he isn't even going to do it himself. No, he's going to make the Other Side do it for him. That's the other reason why he nominated MLP and Space Raptor Butt Invasion: either the Other Side can live up to their own propaganda, and support the Diversity that Vox so kindly put on the ballot for them, or they can No Award women, LGBT people, etc. Then, when they're done, they can change the rules in such a way as to make next year's Hugos even more broken. Vox is an asshole, but damn if he isn't an entertaining asshole.
3957821
The counter is that even if you are right that the 'Tor Clique' both exists and controls the Hugos - it is the very clique voting to remove its own ability to do so in the future. That clique -cares- about the Hugos, all said and done, even if perhaps one may disagree with their choice in literature.
That's a far cry from hatemonger Vox Day who simply wants to burn it all down.
3957861
Read George R. R. Martin's blog on this. He's a relatively moderate member of the Tor Clique, but he takes for granted that he is a "true" fan and everyone who votes for anyone he doesn't like is an Evil Slate Voter, unworthy of respect as human. Most of the others who post on it are even more extreme The Tor Clique are a basic Ancien Regime who have "learned nothing and forgotten nothing," and they are crashing the Hugos in their effort to keep control.
I don't think that MLP was necessarily nominated as a troll action. Remember, even Vox Day has to keep his followers. I didn't follow his campaign as closely as I did the Sad Puppies (which was organized this year by Austrialian SF writer Kate Paulk), but I'm pretty sure there was a vote involved. In other words, enough of Vox and Castalia's fans liked the Show that they nominated it. If they just wanted to troll, they could have nominated any show, maybe the equivalent of Space Raptor Butt Invasion (not making up that title!).
I agree with you that MLP:FIM is a really good and thoughtful science fantasy show, and probably worthy of a Hugo. Maybe even worthy of a Hugo back when the Hugos meant something.
But then, of course I am a major MLP fan!
Good description. Probably helpful to folks trying to decide whether or not it is worth their time.
3957861
I completely disagree with the notion that the Hugos should go to "authors who need exposure," and that this category is somehow coterminous with authors who are nonwhite, nonmale, nonstraight and/or noncisgendered. I think the Hugos should go to the best science fiction and fantasy, regardless of who wrote it -- normally, this will mean that it will go to authors already well-known. (Who may, of course be nonwhite, nonmale, nonstraight, etc., because there's no reason such authors can't write good sf and fantasy!)
Turning the Hugos into a Participation Prize would be bad enough. What's worse is that this isn't even what's been done -- what's been done is to turn it into a Sucking Up To the Haydens Prize. Nonwhite nonmale, nonstraight etc. authors -- some of whom, of course, are Sad Puppies -- get excluded unless they are the friends of Patrick and Teresa Hayden. That's why my term for it is "the Tor Clique."
You're not part of the Clique, and you're not apologizing for the nom. They're going to hate you. It's that simple.
Just remember you're in good company. They also hate John C. Wright, a tremendously innovative space opera writer who's a Rabid; and Sarah Hoyt, a truly Heinleinesque new writer who's a Sad Puppy.
Embrace your ostracism. It's from a faction that's sinking anyway.
3957875
Well, they've decided to hate Sarah Hoyt for being a Sad Puppy leader, and she's a Portuguese-born woman who wrote a seriously-good future-rebellion novel with a gay male hero. It's pretty obvious that "opposing the Tor Clique" is the crime they find unforgivable.
3957884
How so? They're assuming that their own word-of-mouth gaming of the Hugo voting system won't trigger their Slate Test. (And, foolishly, assuming that the RP's and SP's can't figure out how to do exactly the same thing).
They're running up against the reality that they're an increasingly tiny part of science fiction and fantasy, and their gaming of the Hugos only worked because nobody noticed it until the formation of the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies. Now they have two choices:
(1) Close the Hugo voting pool, in which case it explicitly becomes the Suck Up To The Haydens Award, or
(2) Yield control to the majority.
I don't see their other options.
3957875
I don't discount the idea that they might have genuinely liked it-- we did come out of 4Chan, and I suspect there's some overlap between the demographics there. My guess is that's true and some people who didn't like it liked it as a joke candidate, and it was a combination of those groups that got us on there.
But in either case, the Rabids were still clearly trolling the Hugos this year with their slates. The people posting on 4Chan with the whole "Mods are Asleep: Post Ponies" meme probably were Bronies, some of them may still be around, but they were still using the show to troll.
3957921
Here's some info on the Sad and Rabid Puppies you might find interesting:
I'm a semi-insider in the Sads, because I'm friendly with some of the Sad leaders, and marginally-friendly with one of the Rabid leaders.
The Sad Puppies basically want to open up the Hugo voting pool so that it's no longer the Suck Up To The Haydens Award, and can once again become a mark of excellence in science fiction. They are not racist, sexist or anything of the sort -- their leaders include numbers of non-white and female writers, who have written numerous stories sympathetic to all races, sexes and orientations. Politically, they tend to be libertarian-conservative and pro-American.
Here's Sarah's blog: According To Hoyt. She no longer leads the Sad Puppies (that was just for one year) but they hang out there a lot.
The Rabid Puppies are closer in reality to what GRRM imagines the Sad Puppies as being. Vox Day actually is racist, sexist, religiously bigoted and hostile to variant sexual orientations. However, Vox doesn't control the Rabids as tightly as GRRM imagines, nor are all the Rabids in total agreement with all Vox's opinions on those matters. Politically, they tend to be religious-right to borderline-fascist.
Here's Beale's blog: Vox Popoli. He's the head of a publishing firm, Castalia House.
At least until the season 5 finale when they show that the world is doomed without the main characters.
Still, this sentence does point to one of the parts of the season 5 premiere that I liked best--the villagers themselves saving the day instead of the mane six.
Excellent work. I balk a little at dropping an 'everypony' in there, but that's a quibble at most.
3957920
Because of how the E Pluribus Hugo math works out. The short version is that if you have 5000 people slate voting for the same 5 entries during the nominations, and 1001 people voting for theirs, the 1001 are going to get their nod in while team 5k gets 4.
The net result here is that any voting 'slate' as it were can likely organize enough to get one thing nominated, and that's it. So your 'Tor Clique' can't control the nominations - again, if they exist - though the winner is gonna be determined by like, whomever gets the most popular acclaim.
3957961
They're all going to get around it the same ways -- by variable-slate voting. That means that the slate picks more nominees than slots and randomizes which one each of them votes for. There is no way to do what you're saying and retain anything like a free voting system.
3957961
If you don't believe me, go to Mad Genius or Vox Populi or According To Hoyt. They're discussing it openly. The Hugo Committee's plans only work if the Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies are all idiots.
3957908
I analyzed the 2013/2014 Hugos for this exact reason a couple weeks ago as seen here
In short? White dudes are doing fine, capturing nearly either 1/3 or 1/2 in 2014 depending on how you reckon multiple winners in one category like GoT, and it's about evenly split women:men. In 2013 White Dudes did even better. I didn't go further back than that but would be shocked if the trend suddenly reversed.
Part of the reason things like Space Opera tend not to win is that they often don't tell us things about The Human Condition. I love the Avengers films - I consider the first one the best 'Fun' comic movie ever made - but they aren't particularly cerebral. The 'best' mainstream comic film for that is probably The Dark Knight, although Civil War's pretty good as well. Granted, it's fair to argue that hey, people should consider the form as a whole and not be so biased towards Drama, but...that's part of why 'thought provoking' whatnot tends to do better in any literary/creative field.
The reason I tend to trust George RR Martin over Larry Correia and such has a ton to do with the style of argument. You ask Martin 'Hey, do you think the Hugos have had issues?' and he's open to discussing what they may be and how to fix them. Others...aren't. Trying to say Vox Day is equivalent to that is a total apples and oranges false equivalency.
3957968
Because the new system is set up so that each person only has 1 'vote' as it were, for the Rabids to control the entire thing again they have to be 5 times as large as the #6 vote getter. It doesn't matter how the Rabids vote in that regard - whether they all vote the same 5 works, or only vote 1 work per ballot; the end result is that eventually everything culls down to 5 entries remaining and of those 5 you only have 1 vote's worth of points to spread about. There is no 100% perfect voting system, ever - it's mathematically impossible - but this is damn close to as good as it gets, and no single minority group can hold the whole thing for ransom ever again.
The Sads want representation on the ballot. They are going to get it starting next year if they remain a relatively distinct voting bloc. As will the Rabids, if they do the same. As will whatever other groups there are. And then in the finals it's much simpler since it's just 'Tally up the rankings and award accordingly'.
It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I know the math here. Slate voting as a thing can no longer completely control a category without a massive supermajority.
3957969
I'm not sure why you even care how many Hugo winner are white versus nonwhite or male versus female. About half of science fiction writers are male, and whites are the majority of the US population. That you consider white males winning Hugos as a problem speaks volumes for your obsessions. Dsicriminating against whites is as racist, and discriminating against males as sexist, as is discriminating against blacks or females.
Period, and the Hugo winners who were crowing about excluding whites and males as an objective by doing so identified themselves as hardcore racists and sexists, in public forums. This will not be forgotten by whites, males, or anyone who has white or male friends or lovers. Which is pretty much the majority of fandom. N. K. Jemsin in particular should take note, especially since she's publicly claimed it's legal to shoot her ...
I have no idea about what you are talking here. If you mean The Human Condition right here and now, sure. If you mean the grander scope of the Human Condition, you're dead wrong.
3957976
The randomization is done by individual on the slate, not by each slate as a whole. I've seen several fairly simple methods proposed.
Not sure why you imagine the Rabids or Sads to be less "legitimate" voters than the Tor Clique. Sucking up to the Haydens does not confer "legitimacy" unless the voting pool is closed off to "outsiders."
3957988
I care because people are claiming there is a conspiracy here to favor nonmale/nonwhite authors. The way you determine if such a thing exists is to them analyze 'Who is actually winning' - and the data there points to 'Hey, white dudes are doing perfectly fine for themselves'. My only point in the greater post there is that 'Demographically, white guys are still over-represented relative to the at-large population'. I'm not advocating a policy or position based on that, just stating something factually true. Now, I don't know the exact demographics of the Hugo Population so I can't comment there - I suspect it is heavily more white / more male than the general populace, but lack any way of confirming that and therefore cannot make a factual statement regarding it.
As for Space Opera-ey stuff? I love my Asimov, but something like Foundation isn't asking many Big Questions at all - it's an engaging and very well done series of mystery novels with a Sci-Fi backdrop. Star Wars is at its heart a Hero's Journey with a Scifi backdrop. Part of why the new Star Treks are weaker is they are lots of flashy style but not nearly the same substance as their predecessors (Though plenty of other Trek movies have the same faults). That's what I mean; lots of Space Opera isn't asking questions/making observations in the way something like Neuromancer or Three Body Problem or Game of Thrones does.
3957960
I found another typo, so I fixed that on the blogpost version. It's just so hard to talk about every pony without saying everypony!
3958005
Conspiracy? It was stated openly by the SJW writers.
It just wasn't very successful, because the writers in question aren't listened to much by the fans. These are writers who are mostly successful at sucking up to the Haydens, rather than entertaining anyone.
Wow ...
... you actually read them, and you somehow missed the whole issue of whether it was moral to plan the future of a society without the democratic consent of those who were being planned for? Seriously? That has to be the most unintentionally-embarrassing public confession of obtuseness I've ever read, regarding one of the most famous science fiction series ever written.
The really funny thing about that was that Asimov ultimately came down firmly on the side of social planning, which is to say the SJW side of the issue. Because he was, fundamentally, a socialist, as was obvious from his massive collection of scientific and social essays.
Which just goes to show that the Revolution, when not allowed to devour its own, simply forgets them.
Your taking the other representatives of "Space Opera" to be Star Wars and Star Trek should also embarrass you. Here are some names: Edmond Hamilton. E. E. "Doc" Smith. Alistair Reynolds. Poul Anderson.
Look them up, then die of humiliation.
3957996
It doesn't matter if they randomize. Here is how the new system works in simplified form with 10 people and 10 stories being nominated, with 5 finalist slots. (Each story has an S before it to indicate Story instead of Voter, and voters a V)
Persons V1-V4 are a slate : They all vote for the same 5 entries - #S1-#S5
Person V5 & V6 vote for #S6 and #S7.
Person V7-V8 only vote for #S8.
Person V9-V10 vote for stories S7, S9, and S10.
Each person's vote is worth 1 'point'. As a result, at the end of the first round of balloting :
Persons V1-V4 distribute .2 points to each of their 5 stories - resulting in entries S1 - S5 having .8 points each.
Persons V5 & V6 give half a point to stories S6 and S7, so those two stories have 1 point each.
V7 and V8 vote for S8 - S8 now has 2 points.
V9 & 10 vote for S7, S9, and S10 - S7 gets .33 points from each, for 1.66 points total, and S9 and S10 only have .66 points total.
As a result, S9 is dropped because it's the lowest vote getter with only 2/3 of a point, tied with S10 - but only one goes away here, and I'm flipping a coin; in the real world with thousands of voters the need for a tiebreaker is extremely unlikely and I don't remember what the rules are off the top of my head. It's not relevant here anyhow.
In round 2, V9 and V10 now add a half point each to S7 and S10 - S7 now has 2 points, and S10 has 1 point. As a result, one of S1-S5 is the weakest link - S5 goes away. Now S1-S4 are all at one point.
At this point, stories 1-4, 6, and 10 all only have 1 point each, and story 7 & 8 have 2 points. Stories 5 & 9 are eliminated. Story 4 goes away, 1-3 now have 1.33 points each. Story 6 goes away, Story 7 now has 3 points. Story 10 goes away, Story 7 now has 4 points.
The reason there being after each round, there is one story with only one point - the least favored, and so it is cut.
We are now down to :
Story 1-3 : 1.33 points each
Story 7 : 4 points
Story 8 : 2 points.
And there are our 5 finalists people vote on. The block still gets 3 stories in, but it doesn't completely dominate things. A sufficiently strong block can still get multiple entries up there, but it needs a massive supermajority to win outright.
If instead Voters 1-4 only vote for 2 entries each from #1-#5, you get the same end result - they get 3 of their 'preferred' entries in, and that's it. The most they can possibly get in is 3 with the other voters voting as they do.
It's complicated and I am clumsy at explaining it, but it stops slate voting from owning everything.
3958027
The work-around is simple. A slate simply has each of its voters vote on a single one of the five stories that the slate wants nominated. Since all other slates are on the same terms, nothing freaking changes.
You're also assuming in your example that only slate voters would pick any of the stories the slate wanted. Unless the slate deliberately picks stories which NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO WIN (why?) then each story chosen by the slate will also attract non-slate votes.
Admittedly, the plan you propose would work if all slates were strict (everyone who votes to support the slate votes "straight ticket" and STUPID (not taking into account the rules change). Part of the blindness of the Tor Clique is that they don't get that neither of their two rival slates is either.
3958015
It's a perfectly cromulent word but yeah -- outside our little fandom it's non-standard.
3958019
I'm going to be quite comfortable within my own sphere of life because I feel no need to be needlessly antagonistic. You can argue about the morality of Societal Planning vs. Individualism but given the whole premise is 'A Dark Age is inevitable, this is our one path to stopping it', I don't really see many moral questions being raised there. It's mathematical exercise and future Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire. Characters rarely agonize over their choices - that's more for Prelude and Foundation & Earth than for the original novels; it's not until Second Foundation we begin seeing any real 'Is this good/bad?' in it all.
I shall take your advice to 'die of humiliation' with the gravitas it deserves, which is to say precisely none! But I thank you nonetheless for the venom. Tis always better spent against those who will giggle at the bile rather than be genuinely wounded by it.
3958034
If your 4 slate voters only vote #1-4 once each, and #5 is left off entirely, 7&8 still make the ballot and then there's a 6 way tiebreaker between the others.
Of course in the real Hugos there are way more nominations that that, which was the point - a small cadre of 200 people or so could dominate everything because all the other votes were fanned out. Now, that same 200 people can award 1 story 200 votes, 2 stories 100 votes, or 5 stories 40 votes - meaning the other 800 who are all over the place in their voting are far far more likely to capture multiple nominations they prefer, which, you know, they should, what with having 800 people against 200.
3958043
I was perhaps too poisonous with my venom there, but I was irritated by the claim that Space Opera was shallow when you missed the whole point of the Foundation series (which is, by the way, a heck of a lot longer than five books, counting the three non-Asimov ones) and didn't know any other prominent space operas other than Star Trek and Star Wars. This reminded me too much of the idiots who praised Margaret Atwood for inventing the concept of religious dictatorships and strange sexual systems, when both were popular themes in the science fiction of the 1940's and 1950's.
3958045
I think the Hugo Committee is far more likely to go with gaining the power to throw out votes they don't like, because if they don't have that power, the Tor Clique gets swamped by the rest of fandom.
3957913 Sarah also does the odd post on Instapundit, which I find critical in getting through the day.
Excellent blog post, far, far better than I ever could have done. I hope we win, and it would be nice if we win, but I'm afraid the Legions of Perpetual Outrage will simply bleat like sheep and attempt to club to death anything that even remotely looks like a puppy. (Yes, I mix metaphors for a hobby.)
You forgot to mention that StarLightVillage is based on JonesTown. It is a good thing that they did not have grape-flavored FlavorAid, in StarLightVillage.
3958062
I was throwing out the first ones that popped to mind that are big in popular culture. And to me the Foundation series consists of the two prequels and 5 main books. I'm not going to count another author there - it's not a Wheel of Time scenario where there was always a plan.
3958064
E Pluribus Hugo already got a massive vote for it last year, and the only reason it's not already the rules is any rules changes have to be approved 2 years in a row. This year is the last year slate-domination is possible. From 2017 onwards, if any group can secure all 5 nods it is a supermajority anyhow.
3957961 3957968
Here's a GRRM post on the official statistical analysis of EPH. EPH doesn't work as intended. If the Puppies continue to slate-vote, and the general Hugo-voting public doesn't, the Puppies continue to dominate the field.
From the official analysis:
As indicated further down in the analysis, they'll need to custom-build a voting system to keep the Puppies down, and that system can then be gamed from a different direction. Alternately, they can implement "anti-votes" to kick nominations off the ballot, but the Puppies are big enough that they can then use that as a veto themselves. That pretty much leaves policing the nominators (and who watches the watchers?) or going to a closed system.
3957913
I think they hate Sarah Hoyt because her blog suggests she's a rather wild-eyed reactionary, who tilts at SJW windmills with nearly as much gusto as the various Rabids do.
Anyway! Good essay, Bookplayer, and one that I hope will resonate with the Hugo voters.
Using ponies to troll a bunch of geeks? That is literally so five years ago.
Anyway, thanks for posting this. Now when I wonder "why the hell am I even here?" I can remind myself that it's because the show is, in fact, pretty good.
Reading these comments makes me realize just how little I know of the matter.
~Skeeter The Lurker
I don't know much about the Hugo Awards; this and Horizon's blogpost were the first time I've heard about all this drama. I did quite enjoy reading your article. It does a good job of summing up what makes MLP so special, which is something I know a lot of people still have trouble describing to outsiders.
Let's just hope this is enough to convince the Hugo voters to take the nomination seriously.
3958160 Reading these comments makes me realize that I've spent absolutely no time in the last four years cultivating friendships among either the 'Hayden Clique' OR the 'Sad Puppies' OR the 'Rabid Puppies, so nothing I could possibly write would be in this conversation
Instead, I wrote eight decent books about very naughty ponies
Not sorry at all. Popularity contests come and go, but words in sequence can stick in the mind rather better
I am just mad they didn't really troll the Hugos by putting up 'Precious' for a Hugo. For God's sake, I've got zebras talking in everything from iambic pentameter to elegaic meter, a character who talks only in prime numbers of syllables (like extended haiku) when she's being courtly, and two embedded secret messages, startling twist endings, and the learning of important lessons about one's boundaries and when you're doing evil things by stomping about full of your own assumptions.
Sounds like some of these people ought to read my ponies for their own good
3958181
*checks* Well, blog-published works are eligible, and so are online magazines, so FiMfic would probably count. Since MLP (and possibly fanfic?) were confirmed to be eligible this year, I know who to talk to about getting you on the Rabid Puppies III list. Given their attempts to bring certain matters to public attention, the Dread Ilk would probably find it hilarious to get a Trixieverse novel on the list. Not sure about the details for eligibility time-wise, though. You might have to write another one this year to make it.
3958145
She's a Libertarian. That means she's in favor of letting people basically do what they want as long as they don't harm other people.
3958160
You're absolutely not alone, mate.
3958199 …ew?
Only if they promise to read it
I don't think those guys are really about reading, more's the pity
Reading this, I realize that I'd thought it was The Cutie Remark that got nominated. Cutie Map makes a little more sense, I guess?
I dunno, I'd still have rather seen Agents of SHIELD on there. They did some hardcore, very classic sci-fi storytelling this season. (I'm not even sure why Jessica Jones got it.)
3958181
I can see the headlines now:
My Little Pony pornographic fiction wins award, world shock amused outraged and somewhat aroused.
~Skeeter The Lurker