Kerfuffle Timeline Part 2: The First Act

The previous part (Prelude and Prologue) is here Thanks for the feedback and I’m fixing things up.

Same caveats apply.

This is literally a narrative as it is a story shown over time with a plot and complications but it is also a subjective mapping of headspace. It looks more serious than my map but the same caveats apply – it is how I perceive the kerfuffle and while it is made out of truthful bricks (I believe) the structure itself is a fabricated thing. Same warnings about false balance apply and also the timeline has the issue of stirring up old arguments.

Suggestions and corrections are welcome within the limit of not wanting to re-kerfuff old kerfuffles and certainly not wanting to re-open old wounds.

Major sources: Mike Glyer’s puppy round ups (, Jim C Hines’s article , The Hugo Awards blog, and the blogs of Larry Correia, Vox Day, Brad Torgersen and John C Wright.

This runs from the nominations being announced to the end of May. Obviously April is very crowded. The Tor Boycott is foreshadowed.


Amazing Stories publishes an editorial ahead of the Hugo nominee announcement, indicating that Puppies had likely got many nominations and says: “I’m going to place ANY nominee that is associated with advancing a political agenda BELOW No Award.  If that means that No Award is my top pick in one or more categories, then so be it.  (I’ll read the works in the voters pack so I can rate the works as #1 behind No Award, #2 behind No Award, etc.)”


Hugo 2015 Award finalists announced


Deirdre Saoirse Moen posts ‘The Puppy-free Hugo Award Voting Guide’


Matthew David Surridge posts an article at fanzine Black Gate that he had declined a Hugo nomination for Best fan Writer before the announcement. “Had anybody contacted me to explain the thinking behind the Puppy campaign and ask if I wanted me to be on the slate, I would have politely refused. In retrospect, I certainly should have sent everybody involved e-mails asking to be withdrawn from the Puppy lists in February.”


In ‘The Day Fandom Ended’ Philip Sandifer says ‘The Hugo Award Nominations have just been successfully hijacked by neofascists.’  and advocates that ‘if you can spare $40, I highly encourage you to join and, when the Hugo Ballot is released, vote No Award in all categories’


Brad Templeton lists various approaches to solving the problem of slate voting in the Hugo Awards.


Entertainment Weekly, publishes a error filled account of the Puppy success in the nominations


On the blog Making Light, Bruce Schneier starts a discussion thread on ways of ammending the nomination voting process to reduce the impact of slate voting.


George RR Martin writes one of a series of posts on what he calles ‘Puppygate’


In another of George RR Martin posts on what he calls ‘Puppygate’, Brad Torgersen replies in the comments.


Brad Torgersen answers questions on whether people nominated by Sad Puppies had been contacted.


Mary Robinette Kowal posts an article on the Hugo Awards which concludes with an offer. “I encourage you to buy a membership to WorldCon and become part of fandom. If you cannot afford it…  I will buy a supporting membership to WorldCon for ten people, chosen at random, who cannot afford it.”


George RR Martin argues against the ‘nuclear option’ of No Award for everything.


Sasquan rules two nominees as ineligible and removes the from the ballot: John C Wright’s ‘Yes, Virginia there is a Santa Claus’ from best Novelette and John Eno from Best professional Artist. Wright’s novelette is replaced by “The Day The World Turned Upside Down” by Thomas Olde Heuvelt. John Eno is replaced by Kirk DouPonce.


George RR Martin writes a reply to Larry Correia


Daily Kos publishes an article called “Freeping the Hugo Awards”


In response to a claim by Vox Day that Amazon ratings demonstrate that the Puppy nominees are ‘objectively’ superior,  Glen Hauman  notes that Amazon ratings can be gamed and encourages people to add their own reviews to Puppy works on Amazon.


David Gerrold writes an essay on the Puppies on his Facebook page: ‘This year — this stuff, this little turd in the punch bowl — the community will survive it. Whatever happens, the Hugo will survive. With an asterisk, perhaps. (Maybe we’ll hand out official asterisks with the trophies this year.) But the one thing that is growing more and more likely … the architects of this squabble will have indelibly damaged themselves in the eyes of the SF community. There are invitations and acknowledgments that will never be offered — not because it’s a blacklist, but because nobody wants to hang out with assholes. ‘


Connie Willis withdraws as a Guest of Honor for WorldCon 2015 because of the Puppy slate.


Annie Bellet withdraws her Hugo nominated story ‘Goodnight Stars’. “ll joy that might have come from this nomination has been co-opted, ruined, or sapped away. This is not about celebrating good writing anymore, and I don’t want to be a part of what it has become.”


Marko Kloos withdraws his Puppy nominated novel ‘Lines of Departue’ from the Hugos. “I also wish to disassociate myself from the originator of the “Rabid Puppies” campaign. To put it bluntly: if this nomination gives even the appearance that Vox Day or anyone else had a hand in giving it to me because of my perceived political leanings, I don’t want it. I want to be nominated for awards because of the work, not because of the “right” or “wrong” politics.”


The Three Body Problem by Cixin Liu replaces Lines of Depature in Best Novel and A Single Samurai by Steven Diamond replaces Goodnight Stars in Best Short Story


Puppy nominee Lou Antonelli suggests that Bellet and Kloos withdrew because of fear. “They are both young and probably afraid theircareers will be hurt. Quite frankly, I think it’s a futile gesture. Their flirtation with deviancy will never be forgiven by the SF establishment.”


Eric Flint posts his first essay on what he calls the ‘Hugo controversy’.


Larry Correia publishes a post entitled: I’m not Vox Day


Brad Torgersen publishes a post entitled: Sad Puppies: we are not rabid.


Fanzine Black Gate withdraws its Hugo nomination.


Brad Torgersen posts an article called “Why Do It?” explaining his motives behind Sad Puppies 3.


Philip Sandifer posts an analysis of the Rabid Puppies. Brad Trogersen replies in the comments.


Kary English posts an essay on her blog discussing how the controversy over the Puppy nominations is affecting the authors who were nominated. “There’s a trope made famous by Anita Sarkeesian that in the game of patriarchy, women aren’t the opposing team, they’re the ball. There’s a contingent that’s going to be upset that I’ve name checked Sarkeesian, but her comment is applicable to the Hugos, too. In the Hugo debate, the nominees aren’t the opposing team. We’re the ball.”


George RR Martin speculates on who the many new supporting members that have joined WorldCon are.


Edmund Schubert withdraws his Hugo nomination for Best Editor (Short Form) “I believe that while the Sad Puppies’ stated goal of bringing attention to under-recognized work may have been well-intentioned, their tactics were seriously flawed.”


On Jim Hine’s blog Annie Bellet clarifies the extent to which she felt under pressure to withdraw. “Because I wanted to make sure my withdrawal was for me and that it could be something I felt comfortable with instead of just a reaction to other people’s pain.”


Voting opens for the Hugo Awards


Alexandra Erin reviews “The Little Prince” in character as John Z. Upjohn, USMC (Aspired) – a satirical Puppy commentator


John Scalzi posts an essay on why he regards the Hugos as not broken. “he flaw is fixable by addressing the nomination process so that a) slating is made more difficult, while b) the fundamental popular character of the Hugos (i.e., anyone can vote and nominate) is retained. There are a number of ways to do this (the simplest would be to allow folks to nominate three works/people in each category and have six finalist slots on the ballot; there are more complicated ways as well), but the point is that there are options.”


Tor Creative Director Irene Gallo posts a message on her personal Facebook page that describes the Sad and Rabid Puppies as “extreme right wing to neo-nazi, respectively”. The comment goes unremarked beyond her Facebook page at the time.


At Making Light, Keith ‘Kilo’ Watts posts the wording of a proposal for the Hugo Awards to adopt a single divisible vote with least popular eliminated system (SDV-LPE)


Hugo Packet (a collection of nominated works made free to members) is released online for members.


At Making Light the name ‘E Pluribus Hugo’ is first suggested by Joshua Kronengold, as a name for the SDV-LPE proposal,


A $3.4 million deal between Tor and John Scalzi is announced.


At Making Light a thread starts on finalising the wording of the E Pluribus Hugo proposal

2 thoughts on “Kerfuffle Timeline Part 2: The First Act

Comments are closed.