Guess I'll Go Eat Worms

[kevin_standlee]

It would appear that I am part of what's wrong with the Hugo Awards and it would be much better if I just died already.

Not much else I can say about things like this. I contemplated whether I should give him more publicity, but I figure if I promote people who mostly agree with me like Scalzi yesterday, it's only fair to give some time to someone who deeply disagrees with me and is willing to make an argument for it. Heck, I don't even disagree with everything he said.

Comments

[howeird]

Quite a lengthy discussion of discussions of discussions. I think he was saying all of us Baby Boomers should just die already, he was only naming you as an obstructionist who uses nefarious skills he does not have, in the promotion of Pure Evil.

He does make some good points, but the one he misses is that if he wants Hugo noms to more closely echo his tastes, he needs to do some work to draft more people like himself into the process. At least he has done the Worldcon supporting member thing, a step in the right direction for this. We do need more young fans, IMHO.

Remind me next year to nominate his post for Best Fan Writer and Best Related Work.

[delosharriman]

Kevin doesn't have Nefarious Powers? But… but…

(Three things I don't understand. Firstly, under "Fourthly", the implication that the WSFS Business Meeting should act according to the ideas of people who don't attend. He seems to have missed that it's a self-selected, not a representative, body. Secondly, under "Fifthly", the implication that "on-line fandom" has no social content. And thirdly, also under "Fifthly", the implication that Kevin, of all people, discourages anyone from participating in the process.)

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Oh, actually, I get that last part. It's because I don't sugar-coat the process. I don't hide just how difficult retail politics can be. I don't cover up the fact that making reasoned arguments that can sway opinionated, obstinate people is not easy. I don't obfuscate procedures and make it sound like suggesting an idea is just as easy as implementing it. I want people to participate, but I don't want them to think that it's as simple as posting on the internet. And therefore I am "discouraging" people from participating, the same way people who explain how mundane politics are "discouraging" people from voting or otherwise being involved because they're telling people "There's nothing you can do, your vote counts for nothing, go away."

Of course, I don't feel that way. Even knowing how difficult the process can be, I want people who care passionately about things to get involved. I'll show them where the levers are and will explain the rules as well as I know how to do it. But I have no patience with people whose attitude amounts to, "There shouldn't be any rules. Just do what I say!"

[daveon.livejournal.com]

This is what I'm struggling with from the post. The position that the 'traditional fans' aren't getting the needs of new fans, and that something HAS TO BE DONE!!! But without anything particularly clear on what should be done.

Sure, the meetings look and sound like 18th century parliaments, but ALL meetings of bodies that have to get shit done in the real world tend to look like that because otherwise shit doesn't get done, and what does get done doesn't actually function.

It's why the workings of governments are a nightmare, because trying to operate a consensus out of the chaos of human activity is a problem.

[scott-sanford.livejournal.com]

Kevin keeps showing up to explain how the process works and encourage people to actually participate. This has confused and frustrated many.

Reasonable discussions are not actually forbidden on the internet.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Except for people for whom disagreement with them and showing them where the flaws are in their arguments is "being mean" and "driving people away," I think.

Actually, I think it's because I was the person being told I was full of it and didn't know what I was talking about when I showed up in fandom in the mid-1980s that, instead of driving me away, made me say, "I'll show them!" and led me to work my way into the system by becoming an expert in it. But not everyone is as monomaniacal as I am and interprets my passion and frustration as cruelty and rudeness, I guess.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I used to be called passive aggressive when I'd piss people off so I switched to being aggressive most of the time because it was obvious they weren't getting the clue.

Seriously, when did explaining error to people become a fucking crime?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Seriously, it could be a schools problem. There seems to be some schools of thought (ahem) that downgrading a student for being wrong is itself wrong and we mustn't hurt the child's feelings. Well, I admit I didn't like being wrong; indeed, I worked so hard at trying to be right that I became a right pest about it. However, not correcting someone's mistakes is in some ways more cruel than hurting their feelings by correcting them.

Heck, even today I don't like to be wrong — who does? — but if I'm convinced that I've been caught out, I'm likely to say "fair cop, guv," and that often leaves them mystified. For instance, at one of the gripe sessions at ConFrancisco in 1993, where we as a committee had made a very significant series of planning mistakes that led to some monumental queues, one of the first things thrown at us was a statement, "You had horrible lines at Registration!"

Those of us on the head table said something like, "Yep, you're right. We blew it. We're sorry. We hope others see what we did wrong and won't repeat the mistakes."

The persons with the complaint were left without an argument. I think they were ready to tear into us had we been all defensive, but when we admitted how badly we screwed up, there wasn't a whole lot more to say.

The only thing good that came out of that was that we've almost never had a significant queue failure at a Worldcon thereafter, because multiple generations of conrunners were so appalled at the results of the mistakes that they've applied enough resources to the issue to reduce (not eliminate) queuing, sometimes to the extent that people who assume all conventions must have Monster Queues say, "There can't be anyone here; it only took me five minutes to register." By now, twenty years on from ConFrancisco, many of the conrunners who have had it pounded into their heads that Thou Shall Not Have Monster Queues don't even know why that lesson keeps getting shouted at them by the Old Pharts. Unfortunately, that probably means that we're about due for another critical failure when someone gets it into their head that s/he knows better and tries something new, spiffy, and wrong, followed by the convention failing its saving throw for Registration Meltdown.

But I digress, of course.

[beamjockey.livejournal.com]

Please don't die.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Thanks! It's been a bad year for that sort of thing already.

As part of putting off that evil day, I'm off for a walk on account of my blood sugar is in the low 200s after breakfast, which is officially Not a Good Thing.

[teroyks.livejournal.com]

You know what they say—if both sides of the debate attack you for being too far on the other side, you must be doing something right.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Yep. I do so much wish that the people on the conservative wing after me for being a dangerous lunatic radical would go talk at the liberals who think I'm a hidebound reactionary opposed to all change. The problem is that they're so far apart that they're not even in each others' worlds, I think.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

+1

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

It's Seventh Fandom all over again. Breathe deeply, and this too shall pass.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

True, but this comment hurt more than most. I've spent more than half my life working with WSFS and trying to promote it, and working to tell other people how they can become a part of it and make the changes happen that they want if they can convince enough others that they're right, and comments like that tell me that my "own actions have done more to damage the Hugos than anything that some wannabe fan blogger could ever do."

[teroyks.livejournal.com]

I have a hard time seeing how people can interpret your actions like that (and said so in the comments of the post). I think you are generally much more patient in your comments than I would ever be.

On the other hand, I do agree it probably isn't helpful that so many people dismiss discussion of any possible problems with the Hugos as "my favorites don't win, boo-hoo". There is a lot of that, but other people who are trying to discuss things more deeply probably get -- or feel they are getting -- the same treatment as well.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Yes, that was pretty cruel. And that's why, I think, despite all the replies from teroyks and auntie_m and others trying to suggest that attending Worldcon is more fun than pouting, I doubt this person will be happy there unless s/he finds some way to remove that giant chip from the shoulder. And indeed, that is why s/he replied that we aren't as welcoming as we think we are, because it's hard to welcome someone who's so full of burning resentment at fandom for already existing on its own terms.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

There's some thought provoking stuff in there, especially on the nature of online fandom versus traditional fandom. But the thing is, he pretty much comes out and says that online fandom doesn't need conventions and the sense of community that gave fandom a way to come together and exist in the first place. Which leaves me wondering what in the hell he does actually want. I had a strong sense, at the end, that he was basically saying - I want my cake and I want to eat it but I don't have any cake and I'm not sure which one I want anyway.

Finally, and the bit that is royally starting to piss me off with all of these discussions is this line: it also positively reeks of racial and economic privilege as those demanding silence invariably seem to be male, white, middle-class and North American. which leads to this: I want a Hugo Award that is socially, politically and culturally inclusive but I feel that the debate, as it is currently conducted, is not exactly helping anyone to bring this future about.

Firstly, to coin a phrase, I can do bugger all about being White and Middle Class. I'm 44 years old and science fiction when I was growing up was a very White Middle Class kind of thing. I can't help who or what I am, but I will be buggered if I have to apologise for it because somebody else seems to be guilty about it.

Secondly, the actual problem with the second clause is that while you have a goal of a Hugo that is more inclusive, socially, politically and culturally... if you can't articulate what that means - and based on this lengthy polemic, I'd suggest that is the case, then you can't have a constructive debate because you don't know what the hell you're debating. Which is really at the crux of this discussion.

To whit: people running around saying the Hugo's are broken, but being singularly unable to actually explain why in anything other than vague terms that they are not comfortable with them. That, in and of itself, speaks volumes.

[lindadee.livejournal.com]

To be honest, when I read a book all I care about is whether it's a good read. I could give a rat's ass as to whether the writer is male, female, transgendered, white, black or purple with pink polka dots. I buy more books in a year than I know I can reasonably read because they sound interesting to me and I'll get around to them "someday." When i first got into fandom I used to try to nominate for the Hugo, but I gave that up because I no longer care if they book I'm reading is "current," and I'm lucky if I see five movies a year. It's harder, too, to vote TV episodes because, for whatever reason, shows no longer air the titles of the episodes and haven't for years, as far as I can tell.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

You can always look up the names of a TV episode if you want to.... but I think the point is valid. Doctor Who is MUCH easier to pick out for single good episodes than pretty much any other show on at the moment, which is why it's getting the nominations.

[lisa-marli.livejournal.com]

It all really boils down to - "You Didn't Nominate What I Wanted" Thus "The Process is Broken".
Happens every year. And because Kevin keeps pointing this out "HE MUST BE AT FAULT."
No, you are Not at Fault! Sorry for shouting but it needs to be.
And the system isn't broken. As a White Middle Class Female, I can state, I nominated for what I wanted - Not all of them made the Final List - But there it is. I will then go vote. I probably will buy a Supporting Membership in London because I like nominated and voting for Hugos. And there is that nifty Hugo package, and supporting a good con.
The Hugos are What We, the Supporters and Attendees of Worldcon, want them to be. We voted the rules and we made the nominations. If you don't like the way it is done, Go Make Your Own Lawn! There can always be more awards.

[lisa-marli.livejournal.com]

Posted over there -
FIRSTLY – The Hugos are What We, the Supporters and Attendees of Worldcon, want them to be. We voted the rules and we made the nominations. If you don’t like the way it is done, Go Make Your Own Lawn! There can always be more awards.
Sorry, I don’t think the Awards are Broken. They are what they are. They aren’t perfect, but we have a WSFS meeting where everyone can come and express their own opinion, propose New Rules, and try to reach consensus. But These Awards have been around for DECADES, Same Basic Rules, That is Their Strength. You know who voted on them and why.
And I’m being Real Serious, If you don’t like the award, then Go Make Your Own. We’re not stopping you. It can be a ONLINE Event, where everyone goes to a Website and Nominates. Top Item gets the Award. And everyone will know what they are, the kind of person who votes for them, and whether they like the answers or not.
And then you too can be blasted for not awarding what THEY thought was the True Winner for that year. Because, that’s what everyone does. On every Award awarded. Really, trust me, they do -see Oscars, Emmys, Golden Globes, even the People’s Choice Awards (which are now using an online system). Every Award System is Busted according to someone.

[jeff-morris.livejournal.com]

Honestly...if all this does every year is raise your blood sugar levels and blood pressure in general, let it go. I admire your dedication and your ability to express all this so well, but it's not worth the frustration I see you go through this time every year.

And when you've reached the end of your rope... http://youtu.be/GEdb46IrFDk

[wild-patience.livejournal.com]

Sigh. It was certainly very wrong of him to attack you personally and publicly. I can't recall hearing of you ever mocking anyone or acting as he claims.

The Hugo awards are what they are: a popular award voted by those who buy memberships in the Worldcon. They're not juried or have significant qualifiers other than those stated in the guidelines. They're what people want to read. I happen to have actually read the works that he singles out as mentioning of no interest to him (the newest Bujold, the McGuire/Grant, Saladin's, and Scalzi's) and I found them all great reads. They were entertaining. I'd be happy to see any of them win the award.

Maybe he should go hang out with the Pulitzer crowd and complain that he doesn't like how they operate.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Oh, go read what he (and I) have pointed to; I haven't (IMO) mocked people directly, but I have been quite sarcastic (some would say condescending or passive-aggressive) about ideas I consider foolish, and sometimes I do get a bit overwrought. After all, when you've spent more than half your life working on things, you sometimes get a little defensive when people with not a whole lot of experience or desire to actually work on things want you to change everything you've been doing to suit them Because They Know Better.

I reckon that I know why people made fun of me when I was a brash young fan. (I think I'm a Brash Old Phart now.) And many of the reasons were right, but I had to bash my own head against those walls before I realized it.) While trying to avoid the "Kids these days have it too easy" fallacy, there is an element of that here, in that we now have a generation that doesn't remember when there wasn't an internet and you didn't have instant access to information and that these kinds of arguments moved at the speed of paper mail in sacks carried uphill both ways in the snow in my bare feet.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

I must admit, and this might be a factor of me becoming an old fart myself, but I start to think I sound like I'm my dad.

A lot of this debate feels terribly like every generational argument ever. But this isn't a racial or gender or sexual orientation one, this is a hell of a lot more like the ones which I had recently with my niece.

We were at a family dinner when I was back in the UK. Myself, my brother, sister, her husband and my teenage niece.

She eventually asked her dad if she could go to a party. My brother, immediately said, 'will there be parents there?'... She, at that point, hesitated.

My sister and I burst out laughing. She looked confused. I grinned and said to her, "Sophie,you never, ever, hesitate when you're about to lie to your parents about a party."

She was shocked.

I had to go on while my sister nodded. "Seriously, we were your age once, and believe me, your grandfather was a total bastard compared to your dad. Just remember that next time you try to sneak out on your dad."

My brother tried to be annoyed with us, but seriously, do kids NEVER learn?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

*laughter* Now I appreciate that. There are many adults who I think have forgotten what it was ever like to be young. But as you show, there are many teens (and other younger people) who have a hard time visualizing their elders as ever having been young.

(I think I have a slight advantage in that my grandparents who raised me were relatively young when I was born — my grandmother was 39 when I was born in 1965 — and my mother (to my right in the icon photo) was a bit of a wild one, particularly after she divorced my father and my sister and I went to live with my grandparents in 1970. Also, I grew up among my grandfather's younger siblings when they would go off into the mountains on deer hunting expeditions and suchlike. Also, I had pictures of my grandmother and grandfather when they were in their late teens, like my grandmother's high school graduation photo and my grandfather in his Army uniform before being shipped off to fight in the Pacific. They both cut fine figures, too.)

Although in some sense, I spent so much time hanging around people older than me that I was, you might way, grown up early. Not that I was mature, mind you. I'm not sure I ever got that.

[daveon.livejournal.com]

Interesting... So my mother was 38 when I was born in 68 and my dad 42... My brother and sister are much older and it means on both sides we 'hurtle' back a generation faster than anybody I knew growing up. My dad was the youngest in his family meaning half my grandparents were born in the 19th century and my paternal grandfather died at 74 almost 15 years before I was born!

Because I was the youngest I also hung out a lot with older people.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

You're a lot like Lisa, then. Her parents are/were almost the age of my grandparents (and she and I are only a couple of years apart). My mother was only 18 when I was born, and I think there might be almost that many years between Lisa and her eldest brother, who I've never met. (There are times, the older my mother and I get and thus the smaller the relative difference in our ages, that I almost can envision her as an extremely elder sister rather than my mother, partially because I was actually raised by her parents.)

My great-grandfather (mother's mother's father) was a WW I veteran; I've seen his post-war discharge papers, and I'm told he was very fond of little toddler me. I have no memory of him; however, I knew my mother's father's mother pretty well, as she lived to be almost 100, and I have some memories of my mother's father's father. It was those last two (Myrtle and Brooks Reynolds) who packed up their rather large family (including my grandmother who had married into it) onto a Model T pickup and headed for California because if they'd stayed in Arkansas, they'd've starved. Real-live Grapes of Wrath stuff. Makes me feel extremely fortunate that I didn't have to live that hard either growing up or today. My problems are really small potatoes compared to what they had to go through.

[a-cubed.livejournal.com]

There were 92 years between my father's birth and my daughter's.
Unfortunately, he didn't live to see her born.

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Conversely, my mother's father's mother got to hold her great-great grandson (my nephew Shane, at far right in the icon).

Mind you, I'm a piker by my family's standards. I should have grandchildren by now. Not going to happen. In effect, Fandom is my family, as I've spent the resources most people invest in their children on Worldcon and other fannish endeavors.

[a-cubed.livejournal.com]

My father also held his great-great grandson before he passed away: he was the eldest of five children, his parents had 21 grandchildren of which four were his, two from ech of two marraiges. My eldesst half-sister was number three of the grand-children and I was number 21. I was an uncle already when I was born and a grand-uncle before I went to University.

[yourbob.livejournal.com]

Sorry.

It's all a fancy way of saying that nothing he liked got nominated and so it must be "evil (tall)Kevin"s fault because 1100 people disagree with him and even though he "tried" by doing some story pics in public but his audience is too small and he's not influential enough and doesn't want to bother showing up to help "fix" things so everyone nominates his way, so he'll bitch and attack Kevin and take his toys and go home.

He's not interested in the Hugo Awards, he's upset that he can't have everyone think the same as him.

I WON'T be nominating him for a writing award. All I saw was okay grammar and spelling. Nothing new, originally phrased, or helpful.