I think so. There haven't been many four-nominations-in-the-same-year people at all (Mike Resnick is one, as I recall), and this year we have two of them!
OK, I'm assuming xkcd wouldn't count as a graphic novel, as he hasn't--to my knowledge--published a collection yet. But...his work is really more about the writing than the art.
Is there another category more appropriate to webcomics?
Actually, there is one xkcd collection (published in 2010 I believe; certainly before 2011).
More to the point, xkcd is how he makes his living, and no one to my knowledge has pointed out any non-xkcd art as a reason for nominating him in Fan rather than Pro Artist.
The first year or three of xkcd, he would've been clearly eligible for Fan Artist. As soon as he started making most of his livlihood from it, in my opinion he isn't. Alas, a reading of the rules where you pay no attention to the usual meanings of "Fan" and "Pro" leads one to the conclusion that one can never *not* be eligible for Fan Artist. Something that really should get fixed (and I can't volunteer to try this year; I'm too booked at Chicon).
I recognize the problem, but I can't think of any way to fix it without putting Administrators in the position of having to make judgment calls and overrule the expressed will of the voters in areas that are not clearly technical like year-of-publication and the like. Bear that in mind as you try and craft a solution.
I keep reading people who want a Strong Administrator to get rid of the things they think shouldn't be there, but what happens when the Strong Administrator disqualifies something you like because s/he didn't like it in some way? There's no recourse or appeal from a Hugo Administrator's decision, after all.
Oh, I think there's a relatively easy way to mostly fix it. Namely, make explicit what type of art one needs to have done and then leave it up to the good will of the nominated.
In other words, put something in the definition for Fan Artist and Writer like "To be eligible for this category, a nominee must reasonably believe they produced a body of work in the preceding year which did not result in, either directly or indirectly, a substantial part of their income and that nominators could've reasonably seen that non-professional body of work. When contacted to accept or decline their nomination, nominees will be reminded of the preceding sentence, and asked to provide a reasonably viewable location for that body of non-professional work for inclusion on the ballot."
Basically make it clear the Fan categories are for non-professional work (with a caveat that getting "paid" a sandwich per blog entry or similar insignificant "pay" doesn't count), that the nominee should be able to point out said non-pro work, and since that's (in theory anyway) the only thing being voted on, its location should be on the ballot just like the date/magazine info for many short fiction nominees. WIth a key point of effectively strongly suggesting to any nominees that it they think it's pro/provides much of their income, they should really decline the nomination.
Not bad. I reckon the primary criticism is that it doesn't provide a bright-line technical definition that can be applied mechanically and without any form of human judgment. I'm not saying that this is bad; just that it's where the controversies lie.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-04-07 09:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-08 04:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-08 04:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-08 05:13 am (UTC)Chris
no subject
Date: 2012-04-08 04:35 am (UTC)>Best Fan Artist: Randall Munroe
*long blink*
OK, I'm assuming xkcd wouldn't count as a graphic novel, as he hasn't--to my knowledge--published a collection yet. But...his work is really more about the writing than the art.
Is there another category more appropriate to webcomics?
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 01:25 am (UTC)More to the point, xkcd is how he makes his living, and no one to my knowledge has pointed out any non-xkcd art as a reason for nominating him in Fan rather than Pro Artist.
The first year or three of xkcd, he would've been clearly eligible for Fan Artist. As soon as he started making most of his livlihood from it, in my opinion he isn't. Alas, a reading of the rules where you pay no attention to the usual meanings of "Fan" and "Pro" leads one to the conclusion that one can never *not* be eligible for Fan Artist. Something that really should get fixed (and I can't volunteer to try this year; I'm too booked at Chicon).
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 02:02 am (UTC)I keep reading people who want a Strong Administrator to get rid of the things they think shouldn't be there, but what happens when the Strong Administrator disqualifies something you like because s/he didn't like it in some way? There's no recourse or appeal from a Hugo Administrator's decision, after all.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 02:29 am (UTC)In other words, put something in the definition for Fan Artist and Writer like "To be eligible for this category, a nominee must reasonably believe they produced a body of work in the preceding year which did not result in, either directly or indirectly, a substantial part of their income and that nominators could've reasonably seen that non-professional body of work. When contacted to accept or decline their nomination, nominees will be reminded of the preceding sentence, and asked to provide a reasonably viewable location for that body of non-professional work for inclusion on the ballot."
Basically make it clear the Fan categories are for non-professional work (with a caveat that getting "paid" a sandwich per blog entry or similar insignificant "pay" doesn't count), that the nominee should be able to point out said non-pro work, and since that's (in theory anyway) the only thing being voted on, its location should be on the ballot just like the date/magazine info for many short fiction nominees. WIth a key point of effectively strongly suggesting to any nominees that it they think it's pro/provides much of their income, they should really decline the nomination.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-09 02:32 am (UTC)