tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post3801306738773507892..comments2024-01-17T01:33:01.361-08:00Comments on Staffer's Book Review: Guest Post | Love a Blog? Nominate It by Stefan RaetsJustinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18030992882575439420noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-4210055707162687582012-03-10T14:53:07.791-08:002012-03-10T14:53:07.791-08:00I come late to the party, but as a long time reade...I come late to the party, but as a long time reader of sf/f, blogs are now the most influential source of info on the genre I have, short of from the authors themselves. Fanzines, and even professional journals like Locus are mostly irrelevant to the convenience and well-written focus blogs like this one bring to my favorite book genre.<br /><br />Andy LAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-45022850910831816232012-03-08T09:48:38.332-08:002012-03-08T09:48:38.332-08:00Stefan is having trouble commenting for some reaso...Stefan is having trouble commenting for some reason soo... here are his comments in response to Cheryl:<br /><br />Thanks, Cheryl. First of all, I was just being facetious with the gavel business, trying to make the point that there's a rational and rule-based process in place to make these decisions. I didn't meant to imply that Mr. Donald Eastlake III is a judge. (I also don't want to imply there's anything wrong with being a judge. Just trying to cover all bases here.) <br /><br />Your point about people not being rewarded for the same work twice is one I hadn't considered before. However, isn't this possible right now? A "Fan Writer" is defined as "Any person whose writing has appeared in semiprozines or fanzines or in generally available electronic media during the previous calendar year." Doesn't this mean someone could be nominated for his or her fanzine as well as an individual writer?<br /><br />Ultimately, I feel that this all comes down to semantics. Blogs are an example of fan writing, just like fanzines. I firmly believe that more SFF readers are familiar with blogs at the moment, so I'm trying to make the point that the medium shouldn't be excluded. Yes, people shouldn't be eligible twice for the same work, but excluding the place where the vast majority of fan writing takes place nowadays is not the way to make this happen, especially if it's not applied across the board. <br /><br />This is a complex issue, and I obviously don't have a ready solution, but I felt that it was important to get some more discussion going about this. <br /><br />I know very little about FanCasts and podcasts, so I don't feel qualified to address that portion of your comment and would rather leave it to someone who knows more about it. However, the whole "method of delivery" issue seems to relate directly to the blog/fanzine one too. New media will continue to pop up, so maybe this discussion should be approached from that perspective rather than from a "blogs vs. fanzines" one?Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18030992882575439420noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-60124002767943887602012-03-08T01:02:47.069-08:002012-03-08T01:02:47.069-08:00My apologies for not getting to this yesterday. I ...My apologies for not getting to this yesterday. I was away from my computer most of the day. Here are a few thoughts.<br /><br />Firstly, yes, there is someone with a gavel. This year that person is Donald Eastlake III. He's the Business Meeting Chair. His job is to ensure fair play and adherence to the rules of debate. He's not, as you seem to imply, a judge. If he does his job properly (which I'm sure he will, he's done is several times before) then it would be entirely unfair to hold him responsible for any outcomes of the meeting.<br /><br />As to the actual rules changes, I haven't been involved in any of the discussions regarding the rule changes, but here is what I think some of the thought processes might be.<br /><br />One of the regular problems that Hugo rules writers have to deal with is avoiding the same work being rewarded twice. Suppose, for example, that Jane Smith is a very popular fan writer, but that almost all of her writing appears in her LiveJournal, "This Is Me". Should she win both Best Fanzine and Best Fan Writer, for what is essentially the same work?<br /><br />So what I think the intent may be here is that someone who just writes a personal blog gets nominated in Fan Writer, whereas something that is more of a magazine, with multiple contributors, interviews, and so on, gets nominated in Fanzine. I'm not sure that the wording is right. I'm certain that if I were still producing <em>Emerald City</em> then it would still be eligible as a fanzine, but I'm concerned about sites such as <em>SF Signal</em> which I believe should still be eligible as fanzines. Hopefully that will get clarified in Chicago.<br /><br />Where I think you should be much more worried is with the Fancast proposal. Back when I started <em>Emerald City</em> I was constantly getting told that it should not be eligible for Best Fanzine because it was not printed on paper. That might seem laughable now, but back then it was a huge issue. Since then WSFS has gone through a long and sometimes painful process of debate regarding how electronic publication should be handled, and the end result was a general principle that it is the content that is important, not the method of delivery. The Best Fancast proposal goes directly against this principle. Podcasts are currently eligible for Best Fanzine. Star Ship Sofa has won it. If Best Fancast gets approved then it will be established that the method of delivery is a key aspect of category definitions, and next time a new delivery method is invented the people who make use of it will be excluded until such time as they can argue for a category of their own.<br /><br />I've seen people argue that the technical skills required to create a podcast are very different from those required to create a fanzine, but equally the skills required to create a mimeo fanzine are very different to those required to create one as an epub. I know, I've done both.<br /><br />Also it is entirely possible to create a fanzine that contains elements of text, audio and video. (I did that very deliberately with <em>Salon Futura</em> to make that point, though it is a semiprozine, not a fanzine.) In what categories would that be eligible?<br /><br />Anyway, please do keep nominating bloggers in the Fan Writer category, and please do keep nominating the likes of <em>SF Signal</em> as fanzines. Hugo administrators rarely go against the will of the voters unless the case is absolutely clear cut. And here's hoping for some interesting and fruitful discussion in Chicago.Cherylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09328347167113836522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-46165161939148947632012-03-07T08:19:18.563-08:002012-03-07T08:19:18.563-08:00As a long time SF&F reader I find these debate...As a long time SF&F reader I find these debates (the blog and comment one) fascinating. In all this time I had never even considered being able to vote for the Hugo -- those that know me wouldn't be surprised (I once burst into a room of people distraught that a certain celebrity had died... 4 or 5 year previous). I am looking forward to getting involved and to the changes that digital media and social networking are going foster. Thanks to @neilhimself for the heads-up!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-20833520494987154962012-03-07T06:04:03.915-08:002012-03-07T06:04:03.915-08:00Yes.
I should have been more clear to say that th...Yes.<br /><br />I should have been more clear to say that the last line of your excellent post muddies the clarity of the first paragraph in that regard.<br /><br />While the intent of the line is a general admonition to buy and nominate in the future (something people like Cheryl Morgan would be grateful to you for helping to promote), it doesn't make it ironclad clear that's what you meant. I took it to mean you were contradicting yourself from paragraph one. I made a mistake.Paul Weimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02444942522624902562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-87993346013124158202012-03-07T05:43:30.183-08:002012-03-07T05:43:30.183-08:00I believe that's stated in the first paragraph...I believe that's stated in the first paragraph...<br /><br />"Now, to be absolutely clear, if you weren’t a ChiCon member before you started reading this article, you won’t be able to make nominations this year. That deadline has passed. But you’ll still be able to vote in this year’s Hugos, and you’ll be eligible to make nominations next year. So it’s still a good thing to do. Go ahead. I'll wait while you sign up."Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18030992882575439420noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5978497880525976810.post-51296530574752478212012-03-07T05:39:07.725-08:002012-03-07T05:39:07.725-08:00Correction: You cannot buy a membership now and st...Correction: You cannot buy a membership now and still nominate. You had to have been a member as of January 31st in order to nominate.Paul Weimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02444942522624902562noreply@blogger.com