A Sphincter Says What?|
I would like clarify the point around "basically there were a couple 'slates' of candidates for Hugo Award nomination" to point out that the two slates in question, Sad Puppies and Rabid Puppies, were allied in their perspective and thus behaved much like a single slate. If they had been opposing slates, we would have seen very different results - much like American elections where there are slates backed by the two major parties.
|Date:||April 15th, 2015 02:02 pm (UTC)|| |
I disagree that they behaved like a single slate. In fact, as has been observed, where the slates disagreed, the Rabid Puppies slate dominated - its nominees made the ballot, to the exclusion of the nominees on the Sad Puppies slate.
Okay, that's a fair distinction. What I was focused on is that there weren't any slates in strict opposition.
|Date:||April 15th, 2015 05:46 pm (UTC)|| |
Well, there aren't going to be any slates in strict opposition, are there? Because the group they claim to be opposing, the "SJW"s, doesn't exist.
(I know exactly one (straight white) guy who is willing to own the SJW designation. Aside from that, I agree with what someone else said about how it's not a term anyone calls themselves. It's an internet pejorative that creates a frightening scarecrow some people like to argue against. Some of the behavior that is attributed to the SJWs has occurred from time to time, but by different groups that do not have a single shared agenda, nor any leaders who will pick up that tainted flag.)
|Date:||April 15th, 2015 07:02 pm (UTC)|| |
I'm much more of a Social Justice Magic User. I don't have the STR for Warrior. :-D