Tag: Dave Freer

  • The Puppy Kerfuffle: Winners and Losers

    No, not a Hugo Awards reviewer but a reviewer of the extended art installation/interactive game/aesthetic stoush/book rebellion/fandom vandalisation known as the Puppy Kerfuffle. My summation of the winners and losers in the whole thing – ignoring, of course, the actual winners and losers of the Hugo Awards. Winners Alexandra Erin: http://www.alexandraerin.com/ her playful and insightful […]

  • Revenge of the petunias: the gender edition

    This section of my reply to Dave Freer got to long and also touched on issues beyond the proportionality discussion of the Petunias and Whales. I am posting it seperately.

  • Revenge of the Petunias

    Dave Freer has kindly replied to On Petunias and Whales: Part 9 in comments on the Mad Genius Club blog. This post is a reply. The format of my post is a bit ‘fisk’ like and I’m not keen on that because: The fisk approach I think always ends up being a bit aggressive When […]

  • More Petunias: some extra data [updated]

    [updated] I’m even less sure of that data below now. The 100% figure for book publisher seems unlikely. Going to the FEC website and searching on ‘book publisher’ I find lots of hits and some are obviously to Republicans. That isn’t to say the Verdant Labs data is wrong, just without a clear statement of […]

  • Revenge of the petunias (and whales)

    A new sighting of Dave Freer’s argument has been spotted on Sarah A Hoyt’s blog. But it goes beyond that. Yeah, this started by noticing that anyone who wasn’t parroting the mintruth’s line of the year had as much chance of winning awards (except for the Prometheus) as a snow ball of setting up residence […]

  • 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 […]

Blog at WordPress.com.