Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday August 16 2017, @09:16AM   Printer-friendly

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

The 75th World Science Fiction Convention (commonly known as WorldCon) is being held this weekend in Helsinki, Finland. The convention is where the annual Hugo Awards are presented, and today, the convention announced the latest recipients.

This year, women almost completely swept the Hugo Awards, taking home the top prizes for literature in the science fiction community. That's particularly notable, given how the awards have been increasingly recognizing works from female and minority creators. The trend prompted a counter-movement from two group of fans, the self-described "Sad Puppies," and their alt-right equivalents, the "Rabid Puppies." These groups gamed the awards and forced a slate of nominees onto the Hugo ballot in 2015, prompting widespread backlash within the wider genre community. Another award, the Dragon, faced similar issues earlier this week when several authors asked to pull their nominations over concerns about Puppy interference and the award's integrity.

This year's sweep by female creators seems to be a strong repudiation of anti-diversity groups. 2017 also marked the year the ceremony earned its own award: a representative from the Guinness Book of World Records certified that the Hugos are the longest-running science fiction awards ever.

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday August 16 2017, @03:14PM (12 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday August 16 2017, @03:14PM (#554743) Homepage Journal

    Expect nothing else. SJWs fight because they lack the ability to create and want to take down those who have it. Their stated reasons are bullshit.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Troll=1, Insightful=2, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @03:51PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @03:51PM (#554754)

    You are so delusional and the backlash in this entire thread is depressing. Bunch of prejudiced dudes butthurt over society taking away their participation prizes. There was no accusation of the awards being manipulated, but this whole thread whines on and on as if men were somehow chested. Grow up you whiny man children.

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday August 16 2017, @07:07PM (2 children)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Wednesday August 16 2017, @07:07PM (#554872) Homepage Journal

      Why would they accuse themselves of anything? Or did you mean nobody accused them of manipulating the awards at all? Seems to me you only have to look around right here to put bullshit to that statement. Or any number of millions of other accusations around the rest of the Internet.

      Whiny? Nah. Calling bullshit against SJWs isn't whining, it's just proclaiming the emperor has no clothes. Everyone with half a brain already knows it but most of them are too scared to say anything.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @08:48PM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @08:48PM (#554926)

        Ooooh, you so ALPHA TMB, I wish I could have your confidence and bravado!!!

        Heh, you are such an epitome of the libertarian neckbeard. Thankfully other countries have their own shitheads so at least I don't have to worry that it is some virus with ground zero in the USA.

        This entire situation can be summarized by the following: society moved on, some small % of conservative men can't handle it, try and actively cheat a system and then proclaim others are actually to blame.

        Projection, it is what you conservatives do best.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:26PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:26PM (#555252) Homepage Journal

          Ooooh, you so ALPHA TMB, I wish I could have your confidence and bravado!!!

          I get that a lot. You can be too if you want though. All you have to do is take responsibility for your own actions, reject responsibility for those of others, and refuse to reject reality just because it doesn't conform to what you think it should be. Oh, and have a huge dong.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Sulla on Wednesday August 16 2017, @10:30PM

      by Sulla (5173) on Wednesday August 16 2017, @10:30PM (#555003) Journal

      Hugo winners

      The Obelisk Gate (Science Fantasy) - Magic girl and her mom investigate climate change on not-earth (wiki)

      Every Heart a Doorway - Girl goes through magical portal (PBS article)

      The Tomato Thief - Grandma tries to catch whoever is stealing fresh tomatoes from her garden, finds herself drawn into a complex magical plot involving shapechangers, space warps, and gods. (wiki)

      Seasons of Glass and Iron - Can't get past all the shoes to figure out the plot from a long summary of the article

      Monstress, Volume 1: Awakening (Epic Fantasy) - Wars involving magic, slavery, and racism

      Arrival (First one to call itself SF) - Aliens attack earth including montana

      The Expanse: “Leviathan Wakes” (Show) - Not as good as the books, too much random character drama that didn't exist. Miller isn't played by the guy who plays Bullock in Gotham so it sucks.

      The Vorkosigan Saga - Not going to look up a summary on a Saga, third paragraph of the wiki "The point of view characters include women (Cordelia in Shards of Honor and Barrayar; Ekaterin in Komarr and A Civil Campaign), a gay man (Ethan of Athos), and a pair of brothers, one of whom is disabled and the other a clone (Miles and Mark Vorkosigan), their cousin (Ivan Vorpatril) together with some less well educated characters (e.g., the bodyguard Roic and the runaway lad Jin)."

      From the 'about' on the Hugo Awards website, "The Hugo Awards, presented annually since 1955, are science fiction’s most prestigious award. The Hugo Awards are voted on by members of the World Science Fiction Convention (“Worldcon”), which is also responsible for administering them". So I presume they should be judging SF.

      The number one question I have is why are people submitting Fantasy to a SF award group and then bitching when SF people don't want to give awards to Fantasy?

      --
      Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @06:41PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @06:41PM (#554848)

    Seems like you have a bad case of "bucket crabs"! There really is no cure but to realize that it is only a right-wing talking point, and not grounded in reality at all.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @07:09PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 16 2017, @07:09PM (#554873)

      They've infiltrated everywhere! Those commie leftists are everywhere trying to undermine our authority and turn our children gay!!! EVERYWHERE I SAY!
      /s just in case

      fucking loons can't handle modern society

  • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Thursday August 17 2017, @10:25AM (4 children)

    by FakeBeldin (3360) on Thursday August 17 2017, @10:25AM (#555214) Journal

    Seriously? You complain about moderation and then post crap like the above?
    Read the moderation guidelines [soylentnews.org]!

    Bad Comments are flamebait, incorrect, or have nothing to do with the article. Other examples: Ad Hominem, ridicule for others with different opinion (without backing it up with anything more tangible than strong words), ...

    And those who modded you "insightful":

    Do not promote personal agendas. Do not let your opinions factor in. Try to be impartial about this. Simply disagreeing with a comment is not a valid reason to 'down mod' it. Likewise, agreeing with a comment is not a valid reason to 'up mod' it.

    Or does that paragraph only apply to opinions that disagree with TMB?

    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:35PM (3 children)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 17 2017, @12:35PM (#555256) Homepage Journal

      I'll give a short answer here because this is an entirely different comment. Your other bitchfest has already been addressed.

      A) That comment was entirely factual. Look at any area of culture that SJWs have infiltrated and taken over. Every last one has gone to shit in terms of quality.

      B) Factual comments are not eligible for down-modding, even if they do hurt your feelings.

      C) Even if you dispute the statement, a comment is not eligible for legit down-modding unless you can prove it factually incorrect or it otherwise hits some eligibility criteria. Like if I'd added ", you stupid cunt." to the end.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:58PM (2 children)

        by FakeBeldin (3360) on Thursday August 17 2017, @01:58PM (#555303) Journal

        I believe that using the term "SJW [wikipedia.org]" as a pejorative [dictionary.com] and not explaining yourself falls afoul of the moderation rules (specifically, "ad hominem" and "ridicule without backing it up"). As such, comments that do so are legitimate candidates for down-modding, irrespective of how the moderator feels about the comment.
        Apparently, you believe that the moderation rules do not support that. I'm not sure why - maybe you think SJW is not a pejorative, or maybe you believe that you're allowed to apply a pejorative label to any group/activity as you see fit and that that in itself justifies the group/activity being factually SJW.

        The good: we seem to agree that using pejorative terms can be warranted.
        The bad: we definitely disagree on the barrier for "warranted".
        The ugly: not there. Since both of us seem to be fed up with this discussion, likely both of us are going to stop going off-topic.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:23PM (1 child)

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday August 17 2017, @03:23PM (#555361) Homepage Journal

          Scuse the tone up above. Coffee wasn't working very well this morning for some reason.

          SJW is a pejorative, yes. It also has a pretty well-defined meaning when I use it though; if it didn't it wouldn't be a very good insult. In this case it was precisely the correct term to describe the groups I was speaking of.

          I have no beef with run of the mill progressives being part of any culture they're able to contribute to. SJWs by definition though contribute primarily bigotry, thought policing, hatred, and exclusionism. None of which are desirable traits in a community of any kind. Well, maybe they're desirable in Daily-Stormer-type communities but not in the vast majority of western culture.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Sunday August 20 2017, @02:22PM

            by FakeBeldin (3360) on Sunday August 20 2017, @02:22PM (#556685) Journal

            SJWs by definition though contribute primarily bigotry, thought policing, hatred, and exclusionism.

            Aha! I am (relatively) unfamiliar with the term "SJW" - beyond seeing it used as a pejorative.

            This definition is rather clear. I don't think I would like anyone that fits the description - we seem to be in full agreement there.
            I seem to have misunderstood what you meant, sorry for that.