randy_byers: (cap)
randy_byers ([personal profile] randy_byers) wrote2015-04-08 09:28 am

Hush, Puppies!

I like to think of the idea of voting No Award above any of the Hugo nominees from the Sad Puppies or Rabid Puppies slates as the "Hush, Puppies" Strategy.

[identity profile] brithistorian.livejournal.com 2015-04-08 09:04 pm (UTC)(link)
I like that!

[identity profile] smofbabe.livejournal.com 2015-04-08 09:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Love this! Can I quote it with attribution on FB?

[identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com 2015-04-08 09:55 pm (UTC)(link)
Certainly!
wrdnrd: (Default)

[personal profile] wrdnrd 2015-04-09 01:18 am (UTC)(link)
Buttons. We need campaign buttons.

[identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com 2015-04-09 01:38 am (UTC)(link)
I'm trying to decide whether it should be "instead" rather than "above," since I think I'll leave the Puppies off my ballot altogether.

[identity profile] voidampersand.livejournal.com 2015-04-09 03:25 pm (UTC)(link)
There is a last step in the counting where ballots specifically ranking a nominee relative to "No Award" are counted. If you leave the nominee off the ballot, your ballot is not counted in this step. In effect it is treated as "don't care".

[identity profile] randy-byers.livejournal.com 2015-04-09 03:36 pm (UTC)(link)
From what I understand, the only reason to rank anything after No Award is if you dislike one of those things more than another. In other words, you can still affect which of the things you dislike will win. So yeah, not including those things on the ballot means "no preference."
Edited 2015-04-09 15:41 (UTC)

[identity profile] voidampersand.livejournal.com 2015-04-11 02:32 am (UTC)(link)
Never mind. As long as you list "No Award" on your ballot, it will count against all the nominees that you don't list.