One Vote Wonders

[kevin_standlee]

I am not speaking officially for anyone but myself here unless otherwise indicated. I'm mainly just letting off a little steam here.

There's been good things happening with the Hugo Awards over the past few years. After reaching something of a nadir of interest even among its own core constituency (the members of Worldcon), interest has been growing and the we're starting to see the fruits of a decade of work to raise the Award's profile. With that higher profile, however, comes people who don't quite understand how things work and who misinterpret well-meaning compliments.

Case in point is an author (I'm not going to link to the post because I'm not actually asking anyone else to get involved) who has had one of her fans tell her that the fan has listed that author's novel on that fan's Hugo Award ballot for this year. The author has squeed and crowed, "I've been nominated for a Hugo Award!" When I saw that — as I'm prone to see many public references to the Awards, as I have a regular search going for them for Mark Protection purposes — I posted to her site attempting to tactfully point out that only those works or people who make the short list are actually "Hugo Award Nominees." She responded sarcastically, pointing out that if someone nominated her for a Hugo Award, she's obviously a Hugo Award nominee, that why should I be concerned inasmuch as she was "promoting" the Hugo Awards and Worldcon, and thanks so much for telling her I should stop doing so.

I considered some further response, drafted several, and posted none of them. I can't think of anything I could say to her that would change her mind. After all, the "plain meaning of the words" means that if even one person nominates you for a Hugo Award, you are obviously a Hugo Award Nominee, and how could it be otherwise?

Well, I'm sorry, but sixty-plus years of practice and precedent, all logic-chopping and semantics aside, has established that only those works that appear on the Hugo Award final ballot are "Hugo Award Nominees." (I'm carefully not saying "top five" because sometimes more or less than five nominees appear on the final ballot.) Nothing and nobody else. Back in 1995, I received sufficient nominations to place twelfth overall, appearing on the "They Also Ran" list that has been published regularly showing works that didn't make the final ballot but placed fifteenth or higher. That doesn't mean I can legitimately describe myself as a "Hugo Award Nominee" even though a handful of people nominated me that year.

The Hugo Awards Marketing Committee has published in its FAQ list (it's the last question on the currently; yes, we know we should index that list) an answer to this question about what constitutes a "Hugo Award Nominee." (Yes, I was involved with writing it.) I was surprised it even had to be answered, but I guess there are now people who only vaguely know about the Hugo Awards other than they are important and who don't quite get the distinction between individuals nominating you for the award and WSFS (by way of the current Worldcon) actually issuing the Hugo Award Nomination.

Comments

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

That is an unfortunate terminological issue. We've tried to avoid similar problems with the Mythopoeic Awards, which are a juried award. Any member of the Mythopoeic Society may nominate works, and the complete list goes to the jury, which picks works for a final ballot, and then, in a separate stage, votes for the award itself on a points system.

What we do is release the final ballot (usually, like the Hugos, 5 nominees), but we do not release the earlier, complete list to anyone but the jury. Because it takes only one nominator to get a work on the complete list, that's not really endorsement by the Society in the way that being picked by the jury for the final ballot is, so it would be misleading to publicize it.

[desperance.livejournal.com]

I guess that's what comes of making one word serve two purposes: confusion and acrimony. In large, her position is inarguable: once legitimately nominated, she is certainly a nominee. The rules of WSFS may assign the word a specific other meaning in context, but they'd have been better served by finding another word. Or perhaps by remembering and enforcing Ambrose Bierce's definition: "nominee: a modest gentleman shrinking from the distinction of private life and diligently seeking the honorable obscurity of public office".

[howeird]

I have to disagree, both with your semantics and with your sucking the joy out of an author whose fan(s) thinks enough of his/her/its work to submit it for a Hugo.

And to quote from your very own http://www.thehugoawards.org/ which clearly states, over your name:
2014 Hugo Award Nominations Open

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

Yes, and to quote from that very same post:

Note: While this is a “nominating ballot,” and we say that you “nominate” people or works for a Hugo Award when you write them on the nominating ballot, only those people or works that appear on the final Hugo Award ballot later in the year are the actual “Hugo Award Nominees.” Merely writing a work in on your nominating ballot does not make that work a “Hugo Award Nominee” unless the work receives enough nominations from other Worldcon members to make the final ballot.

[howeird]

She did not say she was a Hugo Award Nominee™ she said she was "nominated for a Hugo".

[yourbob.livejournal.com]

I'm with H, in the way you presented it in your post.

I know I've said I've been nominated for a Hugo, because I have been. I am not / have not been a Hugo Nominee.

There is a difference in the meaning of the two phrases, and as you presented her words, she was correct.

[scott-sanford.livejournal.com]

Is there a term for 'person whose work has been put forth as worthy of a Hugo?' Somehow "Hugo Award Suggestee" sounds clunky. *grin*

Considering how long WorldCons have been doing Hugo Awards, some terminology must have evolved, if only behind the scenes. It wouldn't surprise me if various terms have been used over the years.

[hatgirl.livejournal.com]

Yes, I've often wondered what term I could apply to "the names I am putting on my nomination ballot" because Nominee isn't accurate. What terms do other people use?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

It's all in the context. I've never heard of a separate term. Yes, you "nominate" people or works, but they're not "Hugo Award Nominees" unless they make the final ballot.

Think about it: If it were legitimate to label yourself a Hugo Award Nominee if named on only one ballot, then you could be a Hugo Award Nominee (as could anyone else) simply by putting your own name down in some category. You think people think it's horrible now that anyone can vote simply by joining WSFS? Imagine how horrified they'd be when you can flat-out buy "Hugo Award Nominee" for a mere $40 WSFS supporting membership?

[hatgirl.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm not saying the appropriate term is "Hugo Award Nominee", precisely because that term is already used to mean something else. I'm just wondering if anyone has got a good term for that particular state-of-being, that of person-I-have-written-on-my-nomination-ballot. A Hugo Selectee? A Hugo Candidate? A Hugo Contender? A Hugo Entrant?

I like words, picking the right word makes me happy, but there doesn't seem to be a word for this category of people. But I was wondering if there were words other people chose to use.

[(Anonymous)]

I think that "entry" would be an appropriate/useful term to refer to a work or person that gets listed on a ballot in the first round. I've used that term in the past with regard to another award where I needed specifically to distinguish between the works/persons that get listed on voters' first-round ballots and the top five works/persons that become official nominees and get listed on the final ballot.

--J. Kreitzer

[hatgirl.livejournal.com]

Hm. I like how that sounds. "These are my 5 Hugo Nomination Ballot Entries". "Yay, someone just told me I'm one of their Hugo Nomination Ballot Entries!" Doesn't work for "Yay, I'm a Hugo....something something" though... Entrant, maybe?

[kevin-standlee.livejournal.com]

While I'm not convinced of the need for changing terminology that has suited the field since before I was born, the change that seems the most likely to not be misinterpreted (and this isn't my idea) would be to stop calling the names on the short list (final ballot) "nominees" at all. Instead, they would be "finalists." This would effectively devalue the term "nominee," and if people want to call themselves "nominees" because they got one nomination, they can do so.

This change would be difficult, but has the advantage that people coming to the field new would probably not misinterpret it the way these one-vote wonders are doing. The difficult part would be that everyone who was already here would (with some cause) resent being told that what you've been using all along is now wrong and we're going to use new words to refer to old things.

[richardthe23rd.livejournal.com]

You mean I missed making the Fan Writer ballot by five votes and I still can't call myself a "Hugo Award Nominee"? Dude! This sucks. Although there would be a fine line between writing my own name on a nominating ballot and going back to my hotel room after reading the also-ran list and telling my five roommates, "You bastards! All you needed to do was..."