On 2/3/2024 1:35 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:

On 2/3/2024 1:31 PM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:

1) "Esquire" still exists?

2) It covered the Hugo controversy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20240203052928/https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a46612912/science-fiction-hugo-awards-2024/

(I believe the archive.org prefix is to get past a paywall).

The interviewed people make various reasonable-sounding guesses, but,
alas, they are just guesses.

Perhaps at some point WIP or another body will do more digging and
release a more comprehensive account of what actually happened at
Chengdu (as the last WIP statement sort of hints at.) After all, the
people who presided over the Hugo process are alive and available.

Weird. I'm still getting used to Thunderbird.

I thought I posted on this earlier today, but it seems to have gone only
to Ahasuerus. I must have hit 'Reply to sender only'.

Anyway, I wrote:

The story is hitting the non-genre press. Yesterday, Esquire magazine published an account of the affair:

https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/books/a46612912/science-fiction-hugo-awards-2024/

It leans more towards the 'state interference' hypothesis than it does
the 'incompetant f*ckup' theory (personally, I think both are involved),
but otherwise seems a pretty good account. It praises the transparency
of the Hugo process, but notes its drawbacks as well.

pt