The Mighty Buzzard writes:
So, last night the SJW types over at the Hugo awards decided they'd rather burn the whole thing to the ground than give out an award based on what the readers like instead of social justice reasons:
The members of the World Science Fiction Society rejected the slate of finalists in five categories, giving No Award in Best Novella, Short Story, Related Work, Editor Short Form, and Editor Long Form. This equals the total number of times that WSFS members have presented No Award in the entire history of the Hugo Awards, most recently in 1977.
Here are a few of the people on the #SadPuppies slate that should be quite surprised to learn that they were denied a chance at an award for being white males when they wake up this morning: Rajnar Vajra, Larry Correia, Annie Bellet, Kary English, Toni Weisskopf, Ann Sowards, Megan Gray, Sheila Gilbert, Jennifer Brozek, Cedar Sanderson, and Amanda Green.
takyon: Here are in-depth explanations of the Hugo Awards controversy.
Previously: "Rightwing lobby has 'broken' Hugo awards" Says George R.R. Martin (240 comments)
Your post was almost making a decent claim about your level headed and open minded position. However you dropped it at the end, some topics you don't want to be involved with.
Your point would have succeeded if you'd said something like: "if they want gay marriage they can have gay marriage, but there better be some interesting science stuff too!" (Even though there are no particular rules...). But no, you said keep that stuff away from me. I think the whole reaction of the puppies is probably more to do with personal discomfort regarding a new cultural trend.
Its not a conspiracy when the whole process is voted on by invested people (members), just a trend in what people think makes a good story worth awarding. Also, the puppies created the whole scenario by gaming the system (no one likes a cheater), so don't blame the lack if awards on anyone else.
Uhhhh - wait a second. The SJW's WEREN'T trying to game the system? That is what the whole story is about. Two conflicting points of view, each trying to influence the outcome of the awards - and ultimately, the voters voted "none of the above".
We really need a similar vote in American politics.