It will definitely give you rage.

Can anyone link to a good summary of the Sad Puppy thing? I've only read people commenting about it, but not giving a lot of details.

Here's one - [link] If you really want rage, read the comments.

I read as far as GRR Martin's remarks, for which I wanted to hug him, and decided to stop there.

Lots of back-channel stuff goes on in the romance world, but I can't imagine RWA allowing that kind of thing to go on. I actually can't imagine many members I know even considering doing something like that.

Thanks, Ginger. I'm not going to read the comments. The article was enough.

I can't imagine RWA allowing that kind of thing to go on.

The problem is that this was according to the rules. They did nothing technically illegal, just nasty, especially the way they pushed honestly great work off the ballot (like, fr'instance, The Martian, which I figured was going to win the Hugo).

But I bet there are people even in the RWA who are angry and full of bitterness at not getting their brilliance recognized, and willing to blame it on the successful people being in a nasty political clique, just like high school. It's all about who you know, right?

But perhaps the RITAs aren't as easily gamed as the Hugos.

Ironically, The Martian is the kind of SF they claim has been marginalized. He's practically channeling Heinlein and Hal Clement.

Indeed. The Martian is the kind of book I give non-SF readers because it's so much fun. And has no dragons or blasters or aliens.

But perhaps the RITAs aren't as easily gamed as the Hugos.

The scoring system makes collusion difficult if not impossible, IMHO, and it also helps that you-the-author choose whether to enter, instead of any kind of fan or critics' nomination process. Which means that as a first-round judge (members/entrants judge, though you're barred from judging a category you've entered), you're probably going to be stuck reading at least one mediocre to downright terrible entry per year, but it's worth it to see new or obscure authors mixed in with the well-known stars on the list of finalists.

They did nothing technically illegal, just nasty, especially the way they pushed honestly great work off the ballot (like, fr'instance, The Martian, which I figured was going to win the Hugo).

It's worse: two of their nominees were ineligible, two more were reviewed and found to be "substantially different," and there's one more likely to be taken off because John C. Wright keeps publishing stories on his blog and then deleting them, and Vox Day apparently doesn't realize that counts as publication.

Ironically, The Martian is the kind of SF they claim has been marginalized. He's practically channeling Heinlein and Hal Clement.

There's also a Heinlein biography that would be on Best Related Work if they didn't take the whole ballot.