Month: May 2015

  • Hugo voting strategy: High-bar no award

    With the Hugo voting continuing I thought it was important to consider more carefully what my voting strategy should be, Specifically in what circumstances should I vote for No Award above a nominated work? El Sandifer has recommended voting No Award on everything and there is much merit in her argument. However, it would only […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 9

    Part 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 A conclusion Dave Freer’s argument does not show what he thinks it shows. The flaws in the argument are: His description of a left wing category of authors is probably faulty as it relies on key issues that enjoy more popular support in the US […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 8

    In part 7 I found some evidence of bias – specifically a plausible bias against Hugo eligible authors who might fit into the Pew typology (covered in previous posts) of “steadfast conservatives“. Dave Freer’s argument had looked at this from the other direction – considering whether there was a bias in favor of “red” authors. […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 7

    In part 6 I wandered off topic to nit-pick on issues that do not add much to the overall argument. So far I think I have shown that we can’t, based on Dave Freer’s red/white/black classification of Hugo nominees conclude political bias towards the left in the Hugos. the central feature of that argument has […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 6

    Part 5 was the number crunching post. I promised pedantry and I delivered 🙂 This post is about some nit-picks, caveats and other stuff that are worth pointing out partly because it is important to get the maths right as best we can and partly because they don’t matter that much in terms of the […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 5

    In part 4 I started trying to get a better handle on Dave’s 15% estimate. I explained why category he thinks of “left wing” maybe much larger than he imagines when considering authors as a population. In this post I’ll try and look at how Dave Freer then models the actual results from various Hugos […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 4

    In a bit of a marathon, Part 3 looked at some of the political markers raised by Dave Freer post and looked at those markers compared with survey data in the US. I also discussed why caution had to be applied when thinking about authors as reflecting the US population as a whole. The short […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 3

    Read Part 1 and Part 2 I’ve outlined some of the issues and looked at one core issues with Dave’s argument. To move on I’ll need to quote some more of Dave’s post: What is the chance that a novel/short/novella etc will come from someone who is politically outspoken, who loudly champions causes dear to […]

  • On petunias and whales: part 2

    Read Part 1 first.  A discussion of “A very surprised looking sperm whale and a bowl of petunias” by Dave Freer. Previously I’d listed the various ways Dave’s argument could go wrong and I claimed (without support) that it had gone wrong in each of them. Firstly I’ll pick on the easy one. If we […]

  • On petunias and whales: Part 1

    Several posts in and I’ve finally got to the blog comment that was getting way, way to long to be a blog comment. The story so far: The Hugo Awards have been dominated by Sad/Rabid Puppies who have claimed left-wing cliques of ruining the awards. A rag tag team and/or an unruly mob and/or revolutionary […]