View Single Post
Old 04-06-2015, 11:18 PM   #53
bgalbrecht
Wizard
bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bgalbrecht ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,806
Karma: 13399999
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: US
Device: Nook Simple Touch, Kobo Glo HD, Kobo Clara HD, Kindle 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer View Post
The suggestion I've seen bandied around that intrigues me is the one based solely on greatly increasing nominations. Nothing else really changes.

Under this new plan, a $40 supporting membership would buy you a LIFETIME of nomination rights. To get the voter pack and to vote, you still need to pay for a membership that year.

The full explanation and rationale: https://storify.com/jdiddyesquire/my-hugo-proposal
The solution I've heard that I like better is the single transferable vote. Everyone gets a single vote that is transferable if your first choice drops out. This makes it much harder for a block of voters to overload the nominations. Instead of being able to vote for 5 works, and getting a block of X people to vote for the same 5 works, and shutting out all other nominees (as happened for the novella award), you'd need 5 discreet groups for the shutout. It's still possible to game the system, but a lot harder to monopolize a category.
bgalbrecht is offline   Reply With Quote