The fine folks at Adventures in Sci Fi Publishing had me on to discuss the Hugos and the Sad Puppies.
For those who don’t want to hear my dulcet voice talk on these matters, or don’t have the time, inclination or ability, the Cliffs Notes version of my AISFP Podcast interview about the Sad Puppies:
The unifying of the Sad Puppies and Vox Day’s toxic Rabid Puppies fatally weaken the arguments of the Sad Puppies
and tarnish their points.
I agree with the Sad Puppies that a lot of deserving SF authors have never been Hugo nominated.
The Hugos are a small self selecting slice of SF fandom. That slice is by and large of a political stripe far
to the left of the Sad Puppies.
Sad Puppies are far from the first to logroll Hugo nominations–the story of L Ron Hubbard and Mission Genesis
The Sad Puppies “suggested slate” is a Block Vote in practice. Their protestations about being about “quality” are
countervailed by other comments in their blogs to cast their voting scheme to be a political act to stick it to the lefties.
Ultimately the Hugo is not a big award in the grand scheme of things–but its been cast as the voice of Science
Fiction even so.
Should the Hugos be Juried? Maybe, but Juried awards have their own problems.
The Pool of Nominators for the Hugos IMO is too small–the fandom that votes on the Hugos is a tiny fraction of
SF readership and fandom. I would vastly expand the Hugo nominating and voting membership, were I in charge. It would
have its own problems but would reduce logrolling from Sad Puppies or anyone else.