- There is no "Hugo Committee" that decides who should and should not get a Hugo Award.
- There is no Anonymous "Them" who determines what the categories should be.
- The failure of your favorites to make the shortlist for/to win a Hugo does not constitute a failure of process.
- Popularly voted doesn't mean "voting should be free to anyone."
- Complaining that "It's not fair!" makes you look like a whiner.
- Democracy is hard work.
To this I would add the following:
- Don't Shoot the Messenger. The Hugo Awards Administrator merely counts the votes and makes technical eligibility rulings. Don't yell at them just because you didn't like the voters' choices.
- The number of nominations for each finalist won't be announced until after the Awards. Every year, I see people saying variations of "They always tell us how many nominations each work/person got, so why didn't they do that now?" The number of nominations per finalist (plus the "they also ran" list of the top 15 placements) comes out after the Hugo Awards ceremony. The reason for this is so obvious that it shouldn't need explaining: it would bias the final results if we knew how many nominations each finalist received. Just getting the most (or least) nominations does not and should not affect the final result. There have been times that finalists who just barely scraped onto the ballot have won, and there have been cases of finalists with lots of nominations finishing last. In a sporting analogy, the results of the qualification round do not carry over to the final round.
Update: Per comments below, feel free to point anyone you want at this post. If I didn't want it to be public, I would have friends-locked it.