It sounds as if you have plenty of rather polarized opinions here, though. “Each is as bad as the other” is generally utilized to legitimize Ill-behavior through false-evenhandedness when one has a particular sympathy for the misbehaving group.
People angry about active trollies mass submitting erotica to destroy the reputation of a long established award are not “as bad as” the trollies. Nobody’s asking you to “admire” anything, so the statement comes off as highly insincere.
Clearly you haven’t read the same stuff I have! Lots of posing for the crowd was going on.
And honestly I thought that was what literary awards are about, anyway - choosing the most admirable works? There seems to be much disagreement over what should be admired.
In your earlier reply to me, you literally told me what I think. That’s pretty typical of everyone involved in the Hugo mess back when I was looking in to it. And frankly I did not understand your point, leaving me no way of telling if it reflects anything I believe, so I elaborated. Just accept my words as they stand, instead of reinterpreting them based on your perception of my sincerity.
But, as I said, I didn’t spend much time perusing that mess. Perhaps what little I saw was not representative. What I saw was a whole lot of self-aggrandizing crusaders, some of whom had legitimate points, and none of whom I had any interest in listening to. It’s just a freakin’ literary award, you know? There’s plenty to go around. If somebody wants to start a “culturally sensitive SF” or “heroic Nazi fantasy” award, they can be my guest.
I’ll be in the garden, reading Sabatini or Flavia de Luce.
Meh. I’m 3D printing an open source edible banana that is also a wifi antenna/arduino powered cellular hot spot for 3d world countries - just look at it!
Perhaps people shouldn’t get riled up over trolls, and to that extent I understand, I also understand not caring about something you’re not actively involved in, but I just don’t get the desire to go out of your way to have opinions while claiming you have no opinions, then avoid learning anything that’s disabuse you of anything either way. Hasn’t the effort already been expended to read about it and comment on it?
Exactly! I’ve enjoyed his novels, and maybe I’d admire him if I actually met him in meatspace. (I also like his “lowest difficulty setting” blog post.) I admit I haven’t read anything he’s written on the Hugos and certainly won’t, if I can avoid it.
Yes, so I will simply recycle and save effort.
I’m out, folks, gotta get a nap before the big IT job.
And honestly I thought that was what literary awards are about, anyway - choosing the most admirable works? There seems to be much disagreement over what should be admired.
And that is as it should be. The problem comes when one person chooses the entire shortlist from which others must pick, which is essentially what happened here. He deliberately put some “serious” works onto the list (that perhaps would have received enough support regardless), but equally he deliberately put stuff like Chuck Tingle onto the list too.