Hugo noms a big deal? (split from EP246)

[KenK]

Spar is a Hugo nom?  I  hope you EP bigshots remember to include the NSFW designation for this one. It is a great relief to me that this is the final Hugo nom. I read and listened to them all at EP and other sites and  I have come to the conclusion that like wine vintages some years noms are better than others. If people truly desire EP to do all the Hugo noms every year like this, then hey, have at it. I gratefully read/listen to them all. But I return to my original thought that it seems like some years the result isn't worth the time and effort, but that's just me. 

Some people esp. those who are collectors acquire items they know to be shit just to have the complete collection. I guess this is the final conclusion I draw from all this. Like vintages some years are better than others but (some think) you must buy a bottle or two of the bad years also just so your collection will be complete. Okay, I get it. And who knows, some may even like taste of the "bad" years. Having made this concession I wish us one and all better luck next year.

[Mur Lafferty]

I'm editing posting here without reading all the comments. I just want to respond as to whether they're a big deal.

Until recently, if you voted for the Hugos and you were a completely fair and conscientious voter (meaning you made sure you read every entry before you voted) you had to hunt down the issues of magazines, the anthologies, etc, to find the stories to vote for them. Right now, I am seriously annoyed that the non-fic entries are almost always small press, and almost always out of print by the time the Hugos come along, so they're impossible to find. I can't go hunting an Analog issue from 14 months ago if I didn't subscribe to it.

One of the reasons we run the Hugo stories is that we have the ability to present to Hugo voters all the short stories available to vote on, no matter how obscure their original printing was. If you are eligible to vote, you don't have to go hunting old issues, or hoping the author or magazine will put them online (Asimov's does this). You can come here and get, if we're able to get all the rights, every short story, listen to them all, and make your decision. If you think three are "meh" and two are good, then your decision is that much easier.

Sure, most of you aren't Hugo voters. Maybe the Worldcon isn't near you, or you don't want to/can't travel, or you don't want to/can't pay the supporting membership in order to vote. But I think there are enough voters, and enough people who care enough for the Hugos to be interested as to what's nominated, to make this five-week-separation from our usual programming worth it.

(edit- added) Also, for one, I'm super grateful to Dave for doing the Hugos this year. It kept us from silence, and it kept the tradition going- they didn't know if the new editor would want to run the Hugos, then the thing to do was do what the previous editor wanted. And if I had come on with the job to take over EP, deal with the difficulties of transition, AND track down all the rights to the Hugo stories, I would have gone mad. Dave did the podcast a great service, and even though some may not like the five weeks of these particular free stories, I'm thrilled that we have them.

[stePH]

I think running all the nominees (or at least as many as can be acquired) is a cool tradition, even when it's a mostly sorry-ass lot like this year's ("Bridesicle" for the win, no question.)

And kudos to Dave, for all you do.  You're a rock. 

[Dem]

30,000+ downloads for EP. Wondering how many pay or even donate. For free or near-as, we get a spectacular variety of stories that are read to us by people who know how to read audio material. We also get Hugo nominees which we'd have to trawl for otherwise, or miss altogether if we didn't know they existed. Whatever we might think of individual offerings, this is good value. Exceptional value, in fact. I haven't liked all the stories I've heard, and that includes many of the Hugo nominees. Some of them I've thought were poor ideas, some poorly written, and some completely incomprehensible but there's always been a substantial counter view that shows not that I'm wrong but that people are different. What a shocker! For me, EP is a professional outfit that relies on dedicated volunteer support without which we would have nothing at all so more power to its collective elbow! 

[davedoty]

Some people esp. those who are collectors acquire items they know to be shit just to have the complete collection. I guess this is the final conclusion I draw from all this.

You seem to be basing your conclusion on a false premise: that, even if we all agree that this year's stories are all terrible, that *we knew that before hearing them* and wanted them produced anyway.

Clearly, you somehow knew that all of the stories were bad before you heard them, and were able to pre-emptively decide they weren't worth the trouble (although you appear to have listened to them anyway), but most of us had to actually experience the stories before forming an opinion of them.  I wouldn't want the decision to include or not include them to be based on one person's personal taste, but I'm not sure how else the editor could *pre-emptively* judge the quality of the stories before everyone else has heard and judged them.

[Heradel]

Some people esp. those who are collectors acquire items they know to be shit just to have the complete collection. I guess this is the final conclusion I draw from all this.

You seem to be basing your conclusion on a false premise: that, even if we all agree that this year's stories are all terrible, that *we knew that before hearing them* and wanted them produced anyway.

Clearly, you somehow knew that all of the stories were bad before you heard them, and were able to pre-emptively decide they weren't worth the trouble (although you appear to have listened to them anyway), but most of us had to actually experience the stories before forming an opinion of them.  I wouldn't want the decision to include or not include them to be based on one person's personal taste, but I'm not sure how else the editor could *pre-emptively* judge the quality of the stories before everyone else has heard and judged them.

I just kinda want to amplify this, and add that it's not like the editors for the various 'casts have some sort of policy of running stories they know to be bad every so often for kicks. People have different tastes, and stories that some really like and others will not. It's not like the vast majority of people decide to run or produce or direct a story/play that they actively dislike (Though they exist: I went to a student production of Ivanov where the director declared in the program that he didn't like the play when he first read it, still didn't like the story, but thought he could do something with it so that's why he directed it. And did a horrible, horrible job that made me hope he finds fulfillment in the fast food industry rather than theatres).

Personally I don't think the Hugos had a bad year, but I understand that others do.