Kind of saddened by the Hugos, not because of who won, but because every time I dip into that mess, the discourse has further deteriorated. This isn't to say "There's bad-faith actors on both sides! Neither side has any kind of reasonable position!" Rather, I think a few bad-faith actors on the side of the puppies (specifically, Vox Dei, whom I have encountered before, and have no qualms labelling a bad-faith actor) has driven down the level of discourse, since he is one of those people with whom there is no reasonable discussion to be had. In the presence of these elements, the tendency is to retreat to one's own side, and share frustrations, but the effect of this is that all the discourse quickly becomes personal attacks on one's opponent.
I tend to want to solve problems by intellectualizing them, of course, whereas real people are motivated by their emotions. (I mean. This is my model of how real people work. If you are not emotionally motivated, that's cool.)
And of course, Vox Dei is a revolting sack of mangoworms (do not google) so it's definitely understandable. And a lot of admiration for people like Foz Meadows who continues to try to produce rational arguments in the face of some pretty hyperbolic stuff.
Ugh. Politics. WHy is it so full of humans?
This post also on dreamwidth ( comments)