One of the things that bothered me with the delay in the stats was that Dave McCarty's Facebook page was the only place to get answers about what was going on. I don't know Dave and aside from the question of Hugo2023 statistics, I've not had social media interactions with him. However, I am aware he has a reputation of being abrasive. Even so, it is not good for a single person to be the only point of social media pressure. I did not want reasonable questions about the delay in the stats to shift from "reasonable" to "harassment".
Of course "stats are late" now pales in comparison to "WTFing F is going on with these stats?". There is a set of angry people now looking for answers. The hugoteam email address appears not to be working for many people, Chengdu Worldcon social media hasn't updated for a long time and wasn't responsive to queries when it was active, so THE ONLY POINT OF CONTACT is now Dave McCarty's personal Facebook page. That worries me and also it is the only place where more info is coming from.
So future Worldcon people - don't use your personal Facebook page to communicate about the convention beyond sharing links to an official page. It is a terrible idea both in terms of effective coms and in terms of personal mental health if things go awry.
Having said that, where else to turn than Dave McCarty's flippin Facebook page.
Neil Gaiman is asking pointed questions:
"Is there anyone who could actually explain WHY Sandman episode 6 was ineligible? I don't recall any politics in the episode. It was "SF or Fantasy" and had not been previously released."
https://www.facebook.com/grand.universal.dave/posts/pfbid0hGrsGBfQdKJ1AeJ9rvQBZHnm6sMN477qekuseGViBUBvkgmkgNLtfWXCFJqyboNHl?comment_id=913074043327928
Dave answers
"It was a judgment call on my part whether to list both the same way or note that per the WSFS constitution, only one could be considered. I thought it more appropriate to do it the way it appears. The only statement from the administration team that I can share is the one that I already have, after we reviewed the constitution and the rules we must follow, we determined the work was not eligible."
I can't make niether head nor tail of that.
Likewise Paulhas asked
"Why was I declared Ineligible for Best Fan Writer, Dave?. HOW could I possibly been rendered Ineligible? I'm owned an explanation !"
https://www.facebook.com/grand.universal.dave/posts/pfbid0hGrsGBfQdKJ1AeJ9rvQBZHnm6sMN477qekuseGViBUBvkgmkgNLtfWXCFJqyboNHl?comment_id=711159750797099
In a later comment, Paul points out that if the issue was some official objection to him personally then he has a right to know in the event that he visits China in the future. Paul's case is a particular minefield as the Chengdu Worldcon ruled him personally ineligible and in a category with very, very loose eligibility criteria. I'm not saying it is legally defamatory (particularly in China) but if I was in the situation Chengdu Worldcon is in I'd want legal advice.
Dave answers Paul ina weird way
"Given the phrasing of the request, I could just not email you to answer the question...but I am unaware of any reason the government of China would be using my team's rulings for a literary award to control their actions."
https://www.facebook.com/grand.universal.dave/posts/pfbid0hGrsGBfQdKJ1AeJ9rvQBZHnm6sMN477qekuseGViBUBvkgmkgNLtfWXCFJqyboNHl?comment_id=1386727165546462&reply_comment_id=321990483522714
A comment was made by Gray Anderson after the evasive answers about the eligibility rulings:
"You know, I have a better approach to this:
My interpretation of your broken loop comments is that you are telegraphing that you received marching orders from someone in the Chinese government or political apparatus, or from some set of rules to which none of us are privy and which you are unwilling to make us privy to, at some level, compelling a slew of irregular disqualifications which cannot be justified under the WSFS Constitution itself, or any other generally available WSFS documents.
I dare you to deny it."
https://www.facebook.com/grand.universal.dave/posts/pfbid0hGrsGBfQdKJ1AeJ9rvQBZHnm6sMN477qekuseGViBUBvkgmkgNLtfWXCFJqyboNHl?comment_id=7091661744250595&reply_comment_id=927372405814284
Dave gives a lengthy response:
"That I will categorically deny.
Nobody has ordered me to do anything. Nobody is changing decisions I have made. Folks can ask Helen how well I take orders and if she thinks I would have stayed on if such were happening.
There was no communication between the Hugo administration team and the Chinese government in any official manner. I got to meet the mayor and the vice mayor and there were a couple dinners with the vice mayor, the Worldcon team, and local dignitaries where the conversation was purely on our love of the literature and everyone's excitement to hold the event. The government wasn't involved in things beyond the local government liking the prestige of holding the event and doing things to support us like helping us connect with key sponsors and supporting those sponsors and us (demonstrated ably by the speed with which the site was put up and the gigantic fleet of buses for getting around that was even bigger than the "ridiculously large request" that Ben made for same).
I've done this job four times now and assisted a few more times. The rules I followed this time are the same as the rules I followed the others....and the same as every Hugo administrator ever has followed.
Yes, I am particular about the answer, but the answer is true and accurate and I am certain there are people that didn't work on Chengdu that understand the answer and can attest to the fact that it is true and accurate. That's where my responsibility ends on this matter."
https://www.facebook.com/grand.universal.dave/posts/pfbid0hGrsGBfQdKJ1AeJ9rvQBZHnm6sMN477qekuseGViBUBvkgmkgNLtfWXCFJqyboNHl?comment_id=7091661744250595&reply_comment_id=927372405814284
While I do not believe the central government in China had any interest in the Hugo Awards and I was sceptical local government would concern itself with the Hugo nominations specifically, I am surprised (based on my own experience in China) that officials did not involve itself in ensuring that the Worldcon event in general did not breach social-political norms. There is an obvious danger in presenting modern China as dystopian 1984-like state enforcing social conformity but you can overcompensate in the other direction. It wasn't absurd or Sinophobic to speculate whether local government took an interest in the Worldcon politically prior to the recent strangeness and now...well, we are running a bit thin on explanations.
This is so weird.
No comments:
Post a Comment