thoughtful1) That some people who want to vote, fairly and by reading/watching as many of the nominated works as possible, are prevented by the cost of a Supporting Membership.
2) That there is thus an untapped source of revenue for Worldcon, in the form of the Voting Memberships, and that this would be a large enough group to make up for the decrease in Supporting Membership sales.
3) That this would not interfere with the Hugo Voter's Packet.
Some of the concerns are as follows:
1) That the potential for voter fraud would increase with the reduction in initial price (IE, someone who was trying to vote-fix could buy three $40 memberships for the cost of two $60 memberships, thus allowing for a higher number of false/purchased votes).
2) That the decrease in Supporting Membership sales would not be countered by the increase in Voting Membership sales (Mary and John always buy Supporting Memberships, for $60, so they can vote; now that they can buy Voting Memberships for $40, they do that instead; Worldcon has essentially lost $40 in revenue).
3) That reducing the price too much would cause publishers to rethink participation in the Voter's Packet.
All of these concerns are valid.
The Hugos, like everything else about Worldcon, are a volunteer organization. They are not run by a fully trained team of crack voter fraud investigators; they're run by fans like you and me. Anything that increases the chances of voter fraud is something we need to seriously think about, for which reason I would not recommend reducing the cost of voting rights below $40—although I would also at that point suggest the creation of a "school age" voting membership, which costs $20 and is only available to fans ages 14-20 (high school and start of college). Trust me, when I was a senior in high school, $20 was a fortune, and I was not committing voter fraud. But I was growing into someone who would absolutely support and believe in these awards. Could someone buy themselves a Hugo? Yes. But someone could buy themselves a Hugo now. If Oprah wants a Hugo, she can buy it. People will gossip, and the community will find out, but Oprah will have her Hugo.
Now the finances are an important consideration. A lot of each Worldcon's seed money, according to my understanding, comes from Supporting Memberships and pre-Supports. If you take that away, we could wind up in a situation where there are no Hugos, because there is no Worldcon. And if the idea that the convention costs a lot of money, consider this: they have to make rockets, and Hugo rockets ain't cheap. They're incredibly high-quality pieces of statuary, produced in far too small a number to start getting "mass production discounts." (When I print a CD, for example, the first disk costs about $2,000. But the next 999 are free.) So in order to open the doors wider, we're threatening the income that keeps the infrastructure of the awards stable. That's part of why I don't recommend rushing into anything: I just think the conversation is a good thing to have.
Finally, there is the voter's packet, and that's where things get hinky. There's no guarantee, year to year, that the packet will exist; publishers are under no obligation to allow their works (often their most popular, and hence most potentially profitable) to be given away for free, and that's what this essentially is, since neither they nor the authors are seeing any royalties from this distribution channel. I am okay with that—for me to have gotten on the ballot in the first place, a lot of folks have to have read my stuff—but I don't make the final call. So what happens if we say "Voting Memberships are $40" and the publishers say "Great, you can't have our books"?
I don't know.
I know the first thing would be the authors getting punished. Orbit chose not to make the books by their nominees available in all formats this year, and while I do not criticize them for that choice, it did result in my receiving email that flat out said "I was going to vote for you and now I'm not because I hate this file format." People can be petty when thwarted, and I guarantee that if four authors have their books in the packet and one does not, that fifth author is losing, as well as taking a lot of shit. I don't like taking shit. I have plenty.
So what we need is a) a price point that does not cause the Worldcon to lose money to the point where it becomes unstable, and b) does not upset publishers, while also c) allowing fans who really want to be a part of this process to participate. And that's why I don't want to see the amendment that would keep this from ever becoming possible to go through. Not because I think the Hugos should be free, or want to see it turn into an even bigger popularity contest than it already is: because I think it's important to encouraging participation in the awards from an ever-growing number of fans. Whether it's saying "individuals can cede their voting rights to the convention to be re-sold for a lower than Supporting rate to low-income fans" or "teens vote cheap" or "we need time to think," I believe that thinking is what needs to happen. Not closing off the conversation when it's just getting underway.
August 10 2013, 00:25:02 UTC 3 years ago
* I gather there is also WorldCon site selection. But what else am I missing?
August 10 2013, 00:26:24 UTC 3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:29:06 UTC 3 years ago
The only one I came up with, and I don't see it happening because of logistics, was a reduced price supporting membership that didn't include the e-packet as such but did include the ability to read it online. But then you need to maintain a secured web host, etc...
August 10 2013, 00:31:35 UTC 3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:32:33 UTC 3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:35:44 UTC 3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:41:49 UTC 3 years ago
For $60, you get over $200 worth of what your peers think are the best books of the previous year, plus other materials that sometimes a person can't even purchase in their region. And you get to vote on Hugos, Campbell, and Worldcon Site Selection. There is simply no valid argument for "this should be cheaper". This is better than any deal you can get on Woot!
August 10 2013, 00:47:30 UTC 3 years ago
I mean, honestly, I lose money if you read all my shit in the Voter's Packet instead of buying it. Normally I hate losing money, 'cause my cats gotta eat. But I do think this is a discussion worth having.
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:49:17 UTC 3 years ago
One issue I think needs to be added: if there was better publicity around the Voting Packet and what you get for Supporting Memberships, publicity for people who are into the genre but won't attend WorldCon for a myriad of reasons, I think they'd sell more supporting memberships. It's AWESOME value for money, especially here in Australia where a paperbacks tend to cost $20 or more each; if ONE paperback is only $15.99 it's CHEAP. Don't get me started on how expensive eBooks are and how Australian eBooks from Amazon cost more than USA hardcovers...
The supporting membership is AWESOME value for money. While some people may be interested in a voting membership, I suspect more would be interested in the supporting membership if they knew what they were getting.
August 10 2013, 02:59:42 UTC 3 years ago
Even though I try to exist on a pension, and already own quite a few of the books in the package it is still brilliant value for me because I get introduced to other writers and their work.
And apart from that value to me, I'm supporting the con, even though I can't be there.
FTW.
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 00:56:37 UTC 3 years ago
(And I say this as a someone too poor to afford even a Supporting Membership. That cheap voter packet might be handy for me, but that doesn’t mean that I deserve to have it.)
August 10 2013, 05:16:53 UTC 3 years ago Edited: August 10 2013, 05:19:44 UTC
(and I don't mean any of that to dis the con -- I really don't. It's just a matter of perception I'm poking at here. :)
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 05:03:11 UTC 3 years ago
October 10 2013, 20:11:52 UTC 3 years ago
August 10 2013, 05:39:49 UTC 3 years ago
It is a concern of folks "ballot buying", but really?! The folks who are devious and likely to want to do that can't be that many, right? Maybe I'm naive, but since there's not exactly regulation on it now, I can't help but feel those touting concerns such as that as being at least somewhat alarmist. Has there been evidence of that sort of thing happening in the past?
Folks are not voting for folks because the content isn't in their preferred format? That's....absurd to me. There are converters for that sort of thing. Everyone's got a preference in format, but if the content is there? Use it! Silly people.
October 10 2013, 20:12:08 UTC 3 years ago
3 years ago
August 10 2013, 06:01:11 UTC 3 years ago
Reducing the price might make damage by fraud LESS likely. Damaging fraud for a Hugo would come from some source rich enough to buy enough sock-puppets to actually affect the outcome. For example, a publisher trying to promote a mediocre book into a best seller, or a movie producer trying to get credibility for a mediocre or criticized movie. Sources with that kind of budget, won't be deterred by a $20 difference in price.
However the $20 reduction would mean a lot more people could vote -- to vote against that mediocre book.
The limiting factor on the publisher's fraud wouldn't be the cost, it would be how to escape notice. The more votes he'd have to buy, or hack, the more risk of getting caught.
October 10 2013, 20:12:27 UTC 3 years ago
August 10 2013, 16:36:33 UTC 3 years ago
October 10 2013, 20:12:49 UTC 3 years ago
August 10 2013, 17:07:13 UTC 3 years ago
October 10 2013, 20:13:04 UTC 3 years ago
August 11 2013, 01:14:36 UTC 3 years ago
FWIW, I am far more pleased at the short fiction being included than the novels, because once the ephemera (magazines and suchlike) are out of their publication month, they are extremely difficult to find. In years prior to the packet being offered, the chance I would have even seen one of the short fiction pieces was minimal, let alone reading enough to make me feel as though I were competent to vote in the whole category. And I feel that the voter's packet is an introduction to new authors. The 2011 packet introduced me to Mira Grant (and Seanan McGuire by the backdoor), as well as N.K. Jemisin. I can anecdotally state that the "free" works in the packet gave me the opportunity to support the authors therein, and when I have more free cash, I'll buy the novels that were in the packet, instead of just the sequels. (It's a lot harder now that we don't have a bookstore in town anymore. Over 100,000 people and we don't have a bookstore. That is truly an issue.)
October 10 2013, 20:13:31 UTC 3 years ago
August 11 2013, 03:35:31 UTC 3 years ago
October 10 2013, 20:14:00 UTC 3 years ago
If money enters the equation, it will not be enough to balance costs, and the publishers become a lot more likely to pull out.
3 years ago
August 11 2013, 06:52:36 UTC 3 years ago
It's been interesting, being involved, although mostly with the Ceremony itself, although as an usher until last year, when my contribution was very much in sight. Remember the Display?
October 10 2013, 20:14:16 UTC 3 years ago
August 11 2013, 21:03:56 UTC 3 years ago
We can actually reduce the cost of Supporting a bit more - to the cheapest in real terms it's been since the 1980s if not before - by removing the paper publications (making it possible to opt-out). People have discussed this for a few years but my feeling is that it is likely to go through now. In principle this might reduce the Supporting Membership down to $30 or even $25 - although some other Constitutional changes would need to happen to allow this in practice. So we'll probably see $40 for 2014, 2015 and maybe 2016 and maybe then a drop to an even lower number.
For people who've been focused on the $60 charge to join up this year, and may not have known what to expect in future, this should be very good news. $30 is a LONG way from $60.
My own experience (Chairing a Worldcon, working Chair's staff on several others, and helping with the Hugos - so hopefully quite relevant!) is that this would address the first two points Seanan raises. I would also hope that at $30 for a full Supporting membership, the need for some other special cheaper category of membership just for the Hugos would be unnecessary.
The only question then is at what point the publishers will become uncomfortable - and to that, we don't yet know the answer. I am hopeful that since they support the Packet at $40, they would continue to do so at $30. But it also depends on how many people download the material and what their perception is of the value they are getting in return from the publicity.
August 13 2013, 00:12:56 UTC 3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
August 11 2013, 21:56:27 UTC 3 years ago
So if you are a Supporting Member of Loncon 3 (2014 Worldcon), you could nominate for LoneStarCon 3 this year; nominate and vote in the final ballot for Loncon 3 next year; and then nominate again for the 2015 Worldcon (wherever that ends up being).
Of course you have to buy your membership early enough - so in this example, you'd have had to have your London membership already bought by January 31, 2013, to have been able to nominate in this year's Hugos.
October 10 2013, 20:14:55 UTC 3 years ago
Sense of Community
August 12 2013, 16:27:45 UTC 3 years ago