The Inherent Complexity of Worldcons
A reminder from dinogrl
last night that the Hugo voting deadline was at 2359 PDT yesterday led to a long series of follow ups
where I attempt to explain the complexity of Worldcons, site selection, the Hugo Awards, and why it can be confusing and what can be done to explain it better.
I agree completely that there are things we can and should do to explain it better. But there are certain things we cannot
do to simplify things without actually making fundamental changes to Worldcon and to the Hugo Awards.
To apply a bit of reductio ad absurdum
, the Hugo Awards would be much simpler if we didn't let the members vote for them and allowed a Secret Committee of SMOFS to decide. Oh, that's right, some
fans think that's what we already do, because the awards don't reflect their personal opinions.
By the way, some of the complexity in the explanations at BASFA this past week were because we've just come out of a transition period between selecting Worldcon sites three years in advance and two years in advance. That means that there was a year where no Worldcon site selection election happened, thus:( Worldcon site selection elections 2004-2007Collapse )
The system we have is based on rules created and voted on, in large part, by people who attend every Worldcon, or most of them. For anyone who cares about how WSFS and Worldcon works, you're better off voting every single year, regardless of whether you actually attend or not. Think of it as paying $50 dues to the World Science Fiction Society to keep your annual membership active. If you vote every year, you're only paying once a year -- you're just doing so for the Worldcon two years hence. You paid for next year's convention last year, and you paid for this year's convention two years ago. Current Mood: thoughtful