Quote:
Originally Posted by Rev. Bob
Here's the "fun" part: the SP4 plans have already commenced. By all available evidence, this isn't a stunt to prove something and then stop - it's an ongoing campaign. It wasn't enough last year to show that a determined group could put something on the ballot. It's not enough this year to utterly control the ballot. What will be enough? Most likely, nothing.
I think it's time for the Hugos to change their nominating process in such a way that no slate - Sad Puppies, Rabid Puppies, the supposed Sekrit Libruls, or anyone else - will be able to exert this kind of influence. Off the cuff, two suggestions come to mind, either independently or in tandem:
- Nobody gets to nominate more than two works in any category. (The shortlist is typically five.)
- Two nomination rounds. The first is wide open, anyone eligible to nominate can toss in any number of eligible works. Those nominations are then reduced to a manageable field that's still much larger than the planned shortlist - say, 25 or 50 that will get pared down to five. Maybe the reduction is just "top X votes to nominate," or maybe there's some anti-slate rule added in, but the second round of nominations pulls exclusively from that pool. If combined with #1 above, this is where "vote for two" comes in - and heck, call 'em "primary choice and alternate" if you wish.
It's not a perfect solution, and I'm not sure what sort of fair anti-slate criteria could be devised, but it's something. |
They could also just abolish the thing.
For a decade or so.
When children fight over a toy you take it away until they learn to behave.
It's not as if the world would end.