Kevin Standlee (kevin_standlee) wrote,
Kevin Standlee

A Blast from the Hugo Past

Tom Whitmore, going through the files of Alva Rogers, found a copy of the 1964 Hugo Awards Final Ballot voting results, and I've posted them to the Hugo Awards web site. Back in those days, voting was "first past the post," meaning that the winner was whoever had more votes than any other nominee, not necessarily (or even likely) a majority.

Discounting the entries for "No Vote," (blanks, abstentions, etc.), which shouldn't count toward the number of ballots cast, I checked the percentages of votes with preference, and look at what percentage of the votes it took to win the Hugo Award in 1964:

Novel: Here Gather the Stars (Way Station) by Clifford D. Simak: 24%
Short Fiction: “No Truce with Kings” by Poul Anderson [F&SF Jun 1963]: 37%
Professional Magazine: Analog Science Fiction and Fact ed. by John W. Campbell, Jr.: 34%
Fanzine: Amra ed. by George H. Scithers: 32%
Professional Artist: Ed Emshwiller: 30%
Publisher: Ace: 36%

Or, to put it another way, between roughly two-thirds and three-quarters of all the voters who expressed a preference preferred some other nominee over the one that won in each category.

This to me is why our current Hugo voting system (instant-runoff voting), complex as it is to so many people, is more fair and more likely to return a result that represents a candidate who, if not necessarily best-liked by a majority, is certainly not actively disliked by a majority of the voters. (This says nothing about those people who don't vote, of course.)
Tags: hugo awards

  • Burrito Weather

    By now, most of you will probably have seen this picture that demonstrates the weather in North America about now. Temperatures are in °F.…

  • Quiet Valentine's Day

    With rain and wind on Sunday, we stayed inside and did not do a whole lot. We spent some time going through our photos, in particular what we call…

  • Frustrating Day

    I tried watching the defense phase of the Second Trump Impeachment trial, but it was just too aggravating. Trump's attorneys' arguments are absurd.…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.