Sad

[kevin_standlee]

Cheryl's withdrawal from many of her current projects saddens me, although it doesn't surprise me.

If there is anyone out there who wants to continue to insinuate that the Hugo Awards are somehow "corrupt," and who has any better evidence than "I didn't win" or "The things I wanted to win didn't," I want them to actually come forward and produce it.

I've said this before and I'll keep saying it: The failure of works/people to win the Hugo Award that you want to win is not a failure of process. Why is it so difficult for people to get it through their heads that not everyone thinks exactly the same way they do? Is it so important to you to consider yourself The Standard Person?

Comments

Re: Speaking For Fandom

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Defining a series of episodes that tell a single story as long form if they exceed two episodes.

We really don't want to try and go by "episodes" any more that we should define our measurement lengths as "blocks." "Episodes" have too much variability, as shown in the differences between typical US and UK "one-hour" shows. What about two "half hour" episodes?

The main reason we went with running length, serialized-work rules, and a 20% gray zone is that it's the only general form we could come up with that roughly matches up with how the real world works.

Basically more comunication from the Hugo committe to potential voters.

Do you really think some notice like this would have helped:

"Some of the nominations in BDP Short Form are longer than 90 minutes but shorter that 108 minutes because most (or all) of the nominations for those works placed the works in Short Form and because the WSFS Constitution allows works to appear in either Short or Long Form if they are within 20% of the 90 minute boundary between categories. The Hugo Award Administrator kept the works in question in the category where the voters believed the works belonged."

I don't think it would have made a difference and might have actually confused voters.