Quote:
Originally Posted by pdurrant
That's not quite a fair summary.
The sad puppies gamed the nominations, most successfully in 2015, and the Hugo voters reacted by voting for No Award in the categories they gamed.
To prevent small (ca 20%) numbers of nominators controlling the selections, the rules were changed for the 2017 Hugos
|
I think it's a pretty fair summary. They game the system to get invalid results, we modify the rules to make sure only deserving books win. The only real difference is if you like the results or not. The sad puppies basically brought the clique issue to a head. It's not a shock that the only two years that Baen got a book in the finalist was when the sad puppies were active.
Looking at the best novel category -
2020 - Tor placed 4 out of 6, including the winner, Orbit 1
2019 - tor 1 out of 6 including the winner
2018 - tor 1 orbit 4
2017 - tor 3 orbit 1 (out of 6)
2016 - orbit 2 out of 5
2015 - tor 3 orbit 2 (out of 5)
2014 - tor 1 orbit 3 (out of 5) Still trying to figure out how the Wheel of Time could be a finalist for best novel in 2014. I'm sure the fact that it was published by Tor had nothing to do with it
2013 - tor 1 orbit 2 (out of 5)
2012 - tor 1 orbit 2 (out of 5)
Not sure what happened to Orbit in 2019, maybe they had a brief falling out.
I could keep on, but I think I've made my point. Fairly obviously Tor and Orbit have dominated the voting over the past decade at least.