Jump to content

Ran

Administrators
  • Content Count

    37,698
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ran

  1. I met him in that workshop and had a nice chat with him. Seemed a good fellow.
  2. A trailer has shown up on Netflix for the second volume (series) of Love, Death, + Robots: No release date as of yet, but later in the year seems likely. Based on some details here, it may be that it was not intended to be released (apparently users in Australia are the only ones who can see it). Also, I am pretty sure I saw a CG version of Michael B. Jordan in there... ETA: Annnnd, it's gone, removed at Netflix's behest. Definitely not something they intended to release, to say the least!
  3. The Hollywood Reporter seems to have confirmed reports out of New Zealand that Amazon intends to spend $465 Million (USD) on the LotR series' first season. It is an utterly unimaginable sum.
  4. CDPR has revealed in a financial report that the profit from the release of CP2077 more or less tripled the profit they made in the year The Witcher 3 was released, and that includes refunds being factored in, The calls for them to abandon the property and move on seems even more premature, IMO.
  5. @Ormond The Hugo Awards are the wild, wild west of literary awards. Here is the WSFS Constitution's description as to what qualifies: This is very, very broad. The history of the awards shows that for many years winners were things like the Science Fiction Encyclopedia, Sagan's Cosmos, King's discussion of horror in various forms of media Danse Macabre, biographies of authors, accounts of fandom history, essay and review collections, and even art books for awhile. But now it seems like it has changed. The first organization ever nominated went on to win in 2019, and two years later two organizations have been nominated. It's an odd direction for it to go and I'm not sure what solution there is besides splitting it up as you suggest and trying to leave space for actual books.
  6. Lindsay Ellis's video is very good, actually, and I definitely approve of the message that a lot of people who show up for Twitter dogpiles of individuals are doing it for reasons of entertainment and/or making them feel like they're "doing" something about racism/sexism/inequality etc. because it's a lot easier to harangue some Twitter person than it is to actually go out and do something like volunteer to register voters or build houses or whatever. Though she doesn't use the term ,"horseshoe theory" fits some of what is going on in her particular case. A bunch of 4chan rightwing Internet trolls who were the first to target her surfaced things from years go, some of which she had already made apologies for, and now the very online left are taking that grab-bag of old takes and videos and whatever and basically just doing the same thing. There is a pretty dark part after the halfway mark (which she provides warning about before she gets into it) that made me feel a mixture of anger and sadness that anyone would feel like they'd have to lay their soul bare like that to try and give context to people who genuinely don't deserve it.
  7. Some real "the beatings will continue until morale improves" stuff goes on on Twitter.
  8. Camestros Felapton has a good and clear-eyed view on the matter. Hopefully the convention committee will agree with him.
  9. I think it's certainly a big part of it, because it's such an in-your-face thing that literally has the convention itself publishing and having staff and presenters and such repeat the words in various official contexts. I have quibbles with the fact that the actual text repeats the sentiment, and in general I have a problem with how much navel-gazing is going on in the Best Related Works category over the last few years, but the title being repeated over and over at an event where GRRM is a member is just cruel. He made his mistakes and made his apologies. Much criticism he and ConZealand received was and remains perfectly sound. But mak
  10. First, anyone who assumes that other people are arguing in bad faith with no evidence other than "I disagree with them" needs to think as to whether his response would change if he believed that other people were in fact arguing in good faith. If he believes he'd make the same argument, then why baselessly claim it is bad faith? If he realizes that he would not make the same argument, then maybe he needs to rethink his position. Secondly, he is wrong about the Code of Conduct being only about attendance at the convention: Emphasis mine. How can CoC violations be reported before the convention if the CoC only covers the event? Sanford is factually wrong. Would he like to be only about the convention itself? And yet I know of a number of cases where people were quite properly reported for CoC violation and barred from the convention in advance (Jon Del Arroz, for one, a decision that IIRC Sanford covered or commented and seemed to approve of then). Discon III has already published a livestream and a press release that feature this work telling GRRM to fuck off. The CoC has already been violated, near as I can tell: So a Discon III staff member or volunteer presenter has directly repeated in an official media broadcast a title whose intent is to offend or cause discomfort specifically by telling GRRM he is not welcome. That is absolutely something that seems like a violation of the Code, and it's a violation being perpetuated by the con itself. They need to figure out whether they're okay with that, or whether they need to take steps to mitigate it by, for example, not using that title. ETA: His remarks about the CoC are worse than I realized, as Discon III's CoC group already revoked the membership and banned someone for harrassing Sanford back in February. He absolutely knows it's not only about how you act at the convention, so why did he say it? Or is it that it should only be about how you act at the convention, unless it bothers him, then it applies before? I really liked his reporting on the Baen's Bar mess, and the harrassment he received is deplorable, but his partisanship in this matter is making him out to be a hypocrite.
  11. Interesting point. I am very dubious of his attending in any capacity, though. Maybe setting up somewhere to meet friends and colleagues outside of the convention spaces? I could see that.
  12. It depends on category. The range of number of nominations in Best Novel was 309 for the work with the most nominations and 132 for the work with the least. In the Fan Artist category, the least had just 10 nominations. In Best Related Work, the least had just 31.
  13. Mike Glyer forwarded the question regarding the BRW featuring a work that seemed to violate the Code of Conduct (and make the WSFS complicit in it) to the concom. His write up, including a quote from me regarding the ridiculousness of the situation, is here. Their response at present is that Code of Conduct violations are not discussed in public and are dealt with internally. I do not fault them on that, as such things need proper time and consideration. But if weeks wear on with no apparent word or action from them, it will seem like they are willing to be forced to violate the Code of Conduct.
  14. Hard to say with them. NYT is generally pretty negative on SF/F (they panned GoT in its first season, quite infamously). I think the ones that give me some hope are this one from the Playlist that specifically addresses how it goes in the later of the four episodes, where they seemed to find the development of characters promising, and this one in Variety.
  15. Most of the reviews definitely felt like critics were being extra-critical, so to speak, because of Whedon and their apparent need to reassess everything he had done in light of recent stuff.
  16. Maybe last year, I don't know, but 2019 data suggested normal variation in overall publishing (women were dominant in YA, men dominant in SF, men a bit ahead in Fantasy), and Locus's UK list of forthcoming books for 2021 -- published in December of 2020 and based on data from publishers -- showed similar results. There's no real evidence of a huge swing in numbers between men and women getting published this year. Possibly there is a huge swing of publishers throwing more marketing dollars at women and non-binary writers rather than men? Or that the dollars aimed at very online reviewers and outlets are focused more on women and non-binary writers, and this is causing a feedback loop?
  17. Many times, but he never won (he did win a number of WFAs and Nebulas).
  18. There's no overlap in the winners of the Dragon Awards and the Hugos in the main SF/F categories. Literally zero. Indeed, not a one of the Dragon Award winners for Fantasy or SF were even Hugo nominees. Of 30 works to win the Dragon Award over 5 years (2016-2020) in various SF/F/Horror/YA categories, only one -- Tomi Adeyemi's Children of Blood and Bone -- was on a Worldcon ballot. Yes, it's likely true that the early Dragon Award went from Puppy overrun to more balance on the ballots... but it's literally "more balance". Here's the 2020 nominees, which by my count has 22 men to 15 women and non-binary, a number much closer to the kind of result you'd expect from chance (and stacked somewhat in favor of men because I included the MilSF/F category which tends to be male dominated; if we go just the SF/F categories, it's 5 men and 9 women and non-binary, again a number that feels comfortably close to what might be a normal variation; the 2019 ballot is 8 men and 5 women or non-binary.) We have discussed Goodreads before, and self-identified men make up 30%-33% of the audience there (latest statistics from 2018). By way of comparison, Ad Astra published this demographic analysis as part of a series examining the demographics of Worldcons over the years. It includes this graph which reveals that in the last 5 years identifiable men are between 53% to 47% of the WSFS membership. While this does not tell us the demographics of Hugo voters, it seems very unlikely to me that the idea that there's any large gendered difference in voting participation, and I think the onus would be on those who believe that to provide evidence for it. The Puppies had a particular impact on the Worldcon that is being felt to this day. That's what makes the Worldcon different from the Dragon Awards or Goodreads Awards. The other difference that I can see between the three is that the Hugos have cachet and a lot of the literary fandom wars ultimately connect or reflect on them, whereas Goodreads is too big to have that kind of factionalism tell in results and the Dragon Awards are too unimportant (and their venue too consciously unliterary) for it to cause similar furor.
  19. Huh. Cool news which I also did not expect. Certainly did not feel like they had a proper ending for it, so glad for the creators that they get at least one more go.
  20. Hotfix 1.21 out. Patch notes here. Lots of gig fixes where things could block progress, memory management fixes to reduce memory leaks and resultant crashes,
  21. I wondered the same. My one thought was that maybe turning your glass meant that you were giving the person speaking continued time to hold the floor.
  22. This is a fair point and I double-checked names and realized I misgendered Sarah Gailey and Nino Cipri when totalling things up. I also decided to add the Lodestar and Astounding to the count, forgot them way down at the bottom. (I see what people mean with the comments on the confusion going on in the Lodestar category. Shame, but unsurprising.) This actually nudges the number of men I counted down overall, to 5 self-identified men, 31 women or nonbinary in 2021. No change to 2020 as far as that goes once I adjusted for pronouns.
  23. I missed this detail, but from the Discon announcement, Mike Glyer notes that this is the lowest amount of nominating ballots sent in since 2012. In 2/3rds of the categories, fewer than 40 nominations were needed to get on the ballot. The 5th place on Related Work had 31 nominations, among the lowest which hovered in that area, except for fan artist (ten was enough for that). That fits the idea that the unique combination of the New Zealand con's restricted membership combined with the continuing pandemic and uncertainty about Discon III's situation led to a pretty small voting body. Glyer assumes this mean that the post-Puppy rush of voters has now disappeared, but I'm not so sure. In any case, I do think it adds support to the idea that the fandom that is particularly online and most accepting of virtual con going may have had a particularly outsized effect compared to some previous years.
  24. No one is asking any individual to apologize for anything. But it's hundreds and thousands of people (over the years) who nominate, and people are discussing what it says about the WSFS body and not what it says about any individuals. I am sure there were people who nominated only men or only women in 2013, a year where the long list ended up split with 32 men and 32 women.
×
×
  • Create New...