[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Nope, well, some of them.

Ignoring the obvious dinosaur in the room,

No, please, let's do talk about the dinosaur in the room. http://www.apex-magazine.com/if-you-...osaur-my-love/

Now explain to me why this is so bad that the people who nominated it were only checking boxes and didn't actually _like_ it. Come on, right here we have the second biggest puppy bugaboo. The evil evil thing that no one could actually like, a symbol of all that's wrong.

Dazzle me with your proof that I'm lying when I say I like it.

take Wakulla Springs as a recent example, it was actually far and away the best novella in the list, and I have no problem with it winning an award, but the Hugo? short of a throwaway one liner at the end, in what way is it SFF.

If you don't think a nominated work is worthy of a hugo, there's a remedy for that, No Award. You'll note that like Dinosaur, it didn't win. Now show me why the people who did like it were box checking instead of actually enjoying the story. You seem to think it's good so why couldn't they?

Should I claim that the 1995 nominators were pushing a box checking agenda when they put Apollo 13 on the ballot? It was history not SFF, right?

Or maybe I should agree that space stuff or dinosaur stuff, or a little touch of magic, monsters or aliens is close enough to most people and not throw a fit.

I have previously said that both groups just like different things and there is no huge conspiracy, and although there seems to be a fair number of puppy supporters who will accept that as the reason for the nominated works being as they are (they are of course allowed to vote for their own ideas of what is good), the anti-puppy lobby (with extremely few exceptions) simply seem to attack the participants instead of attempting to see reason or even argue their own case.

Which is why you went to the box ticking well.

But maybe you're right, the puppies don't attack the participants. Just look how kind they are to everyone

http://accordingtohoyt.com/2015/08/28/fauxtrage/
http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/08/27/...ost-hugo-post/
https://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com...g-diary-day-6/
Uh, John C Wright, everything he says.
And don't forget the fountain of care and kindness that is uncle Lou. http://dreamingaboutotherworlds.blog...nelli-lou.html
aww hell, it's all collected http://file770.com/?tag=sad-puppies

I, personally, don't think Catherynne M Valente is good enough to have been nominated for an award every year for the last 5 years for the Hugo, Nebula and locus awards. That's probably just me, although a puppy could argue that it is solely because she won the James Tiptree Jr. Award for expanding gender and sexuality in SFF and the Lambda Award for LGBT fiction. As I said though, tastes vary.

Yes a puppy might say that and it's so kind of you to tell us purely for information and not just because you want to pretend you're not the one making the argument.

This is supposed to be a conspiracy or affirmative action? It couldn't be consistent quality or just that the number of people who seek out her work being large and the more readers the greater the number of chances to end up on someone's award list? And there are ever so few people give awards these day after all.

You claiming that the puppies reason for being is just for friends of Brad is just blatantly dismissing their point without addressing it.

Actions speak louder than words http://file770.com/?p=22962&cpage=1#comment-276488

though his words are telling

http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/04/13/...#comment-55499

Do tell me what injustice was being righted by Brad slating whatever his buddy happened to have published?

There is reason for hope though as both sides do agree that Rabid puppies is just Beale being an arse.

Not _just_ Beale.