First up, there is Daniella Bova over on her blog talking about how the Puppies tie in with mainstream publishing.
George RR Martin himself boasted about how he kicked the Puppies, and then himself bitched that if Sad Puppies had not been involved, Toni Weisskopf (elite veteran editor at Baen) would have gotten an award.
Aimee Morgan, over on Facebook, had a great reply to his post ("Hugo Aftermath" on his livejournal).
Nope. No war. No SJWs. No politics. Just a whole bunch of works and people who were ignored and/or slighted because the wrong people supported them.Exactly, as the International Lord of Hate himself mentioned, Toni was eligible for a Hugo last year, but this year, Toni got even more votes, and was shouted down by No Awards. Nice, George. Just nice.
Don't pretend it didn't happen. You admit that works were downvoted because Puppies supported them. You admit that you would have liked to see how the competition would have gone had certain works not been supported by the wrong people (heck - you might even have gotten another award!) But it was all the Puppies' fault. Had they not had the temerity to get involved in the Hugos, none of this would have happened. Had they not had the impertinence to suggest works for nomination, this kerfuffle would have been avoided. Had they not had the unmitigated GALL to suggest that Toni Weisskopf might be worthy of a Hugo, she might have actually won.
Yeah, right. Pull the other one - it has bells on it.
The Sad Puppies said "here's a bunch of good stuff that's Hugo eligible this year. Read it, and if you agree you can nominate it for a measly $40". And peoples' heads started to explode. Oh My GOD!!!!!!!!! It's a bunch of conservative hateful white Mormon men trying to eliminate diversity in SciFi!!!!! Except, it wasn't, and the Sad Puppy list of suggest works had men and women, gay and straight, of various skin tones, and assorted politics ranging from libertarian to unknown (but probably more progressive than I).
Don't worry though. The TruFen wanted to send a message, and they did. Even without the Asterisk awards, we got the message.
And the message was "Needs more Puppies."
Oh, and Aimee is female (obviously) and Catholic. So, nicely done, you Puppy Kicking bastards.
Vox Day even backs this up, as he crunches the numbers on the pre-Puppy nominations of Toni for the Hugo. Oops.
The Novel Ninja has a few choice things to say on the subject, including highlighting just how utterly insane the entire reaction was by the CHORFs / Puppy Kickers / SJWs.
As pointed out in the post on Tuesday, Sarah isn't happy, and Cedar might be in WitSec.
Honey Badgers? Also are not happy.
Brad Torgersen has declared that the Puppy Kickers are just vicious, rabid schmucks ... okay, he didn't say anything like that, but he has discovered something I've noticed awhile ago -- when you get into something that involves politics in any way, shape or form, expect torches and pitchforks.
A suggestion for next year and Sad Puppy 4? This should be the motto, and the general attitude of everyone who volunteers to be on the Sad Puppy list of suggested nominees.
Granted, I'm not sure how Jim Butcher avoided the labels, or Kevin J. Anderson, but that's probably because Jim is a nerd's nerd, and Anderson is a veteran. But still, yikes, if you had open support, you were beaten, kicked, and grabbed torches and pitchforks.
Oh, and for the record, no, I still have no problems being a potential Sad Puppy nominee next year. Why not? I'm a conservative New York Catholic. "Come and get me" is my default position.
Also, this seems to be the Hugo victory image the CHORFs want to use.
Celebrate diversity? You people have never ridden a single New York City subway train, have you? I've lived in New York for so long, a monochromatic room makes me uncomfortable -- this group would make me get onto another subway car.
I don't think the future has ever looked so white.