Some internet legends are true and not as apocryphal as they seem. If you don't already know it, here is one of them:
"Van Halen, the American hair rock band of the ™80s was infamous for this inclusion in their contract, Article 126, œThere will be no brown M&M's in the backstage area, upon pain of forfeiture of the show, with full compensation.
For years this clause was seen as a frivolous and ego-maniacal expression of the rock and roll lifestyle.
In his book, Crazy From the Heat, original frontman David Lee Roth explains that the request was actually a quick safety assessment. With tonnes of stage equipment, high-powered electronics, pyrotechnics and large crowds, the humble brown M&M was a warning signal to see if the stagehands had been paying attention to each detail of the written contract to ensure the safety of the band, crew and audience."
https://www.safetydimensions.com.au/van-halen/
A brown M&M was a simple flag to see if the people in charge were paying sufficient attention to the details. I would have thought red M&Ms would have been a better choice but then I'm not a major 80s rock band (or am I...).
There were plenty of red flags about the Chengdu Worldcon and as ErsatzCulture has pointed out, many of them were coming from fan communities in China. However, they all got mired in multiple other issues including actual racism among some Western fans, a degree of controversy over the site selection vote and actual controversy about the Pro-Putin anti-Ukraine guest of honour. There was effectively too many red flags (some of which weren't substantive) to pay attention to.
The following may be a suggestion to solve a problem that may never happen again but here is a thought I had. There should be several standard sets of simulated test data for the Hugo nominations and Hugo final voting. A given Worldcon should produce a dummy version of the Hugo stats by N-days into the process using the standard test data. If they can't or won't then that's an early issue. If they can, well if there are problems later on then we'll have at least eliminated one issue.
Is this a burden for the Hugo team? A bit but no, not really. If they are using the same software and processes as a previous con it will all work and a dress rehearsal is a very good idea anyway. If they are using new or modified processes then end-to-end testing is highly advisable and something they should do regardless. Plenty of nerds in the broader Worldcon community will check their work for free if they publish it.
The main additional effort is coming up with sets of viable test data that is sufficiently realistic. I am sure that collectively we could find ways of doing that. In terms of process, test data for a given con could be passed on from the previous con and released publicly once the dummy report was also released.
No comments:
Post a Comment