Not Dead Yet

In no small part because I keep adding comments, the discussion of the Lifetime Achievement Hugo Award continues on John Scalzi's blog. As I said over there, I'm amused that at one end there's an assumption that of course only writers would ever be considered for such an award, so why bother because the written-fiction awards already exist, while at the other there's an assumption that WSFS members are so fickle that they'd only nominate the flavor-of-the-month actor.

Off The Hook

No jurors were called for today, so I'm done for this jury call -- but of course that means I could get summoned again relatively soon. I'd just as soon get a short trial so I'd be off the rolls for three years.

On Loving Elites

Juried awards have their place, but the Hugo Awards is not that place. While I'm not certain how I'd personally vote on adding a Lifetime Achievement Hugo Award, I do know that I'd oppose any version that delegated the selection of the winner to a small, select committee.

Some people seem to have an odd idea about what the Hugo Awards Administrator does. I do know what the Administrator does because I've been in the job myself three times (1993/1994/2002). What Administrators do not do is select the "best" works ourselves. As I said in a reply on John Scalzi's blog, letting the Hugo Awards Administrator pick the winners is equivalent of letting the Registrar of Voters decide who gets elected to political office.

SMOFCon: Cheryl Weighs In

My SMOFCon review was more in the form of scattered reportage when I had time and a wi-fi signal. Cheryl has spent some time thinking about it and posted a long report.