The Semiprozine Motion
August 17th, 2008 by Editors
Short Title: One Fewer Award
Moved, to amend the WSFS Constitution for the purpose of eliminating the Best Semiprozine category while preventing works that currently qualify as semiprozines from competing in the Best Fanzine category by striking out and adding words as follows:
1. Strike out subsection 3.3.11, Best Semiprozine:
3.3.11: Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues, at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which in the previous calendar year met at least two (2) of the following criteria:
(1) had an average press run of at least one thousand (1000) copies per issue,
(2) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(3) provided at least half the income of any one person,
(4) had at least fifteen percent (15%) of its total space occupied by advertising,
(5) announced itself to be a semiprozine.2. Amend subsection 3.3.12 to include a definition of works formerly considered semiprozines, making them ineligible for Best Fanzine:
3.3.12: Best Fanzine. Any generally available non-professional publication devoted to science fiction, fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues, at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, and which
does not qualify as a semiprozinemeets no more than one (1) of the following criteria:
(1) had an average press run of at least one thousand (1000) copies per issue,
(2) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(3) provided at least half the income of any one person,
(4) had at least fifteen percent (15%) of its total space occupied by advertising.
Any publication may declare itself ineligible for this category for a particular year.3. Strike out references to semiprozine in sections 3.3.13 and 3.3.14:
3.3.13: Best Fan Writer. Any person whose writing has appeared in
semiprozines orfanzines or in generally available electronic media during the previous calendar year.3.3.14: Best Fan Artist. An artist or cartoonist whose work has appeared through
publication insemiprozines orfanzines or through other public display during the
previous calendar year.
I am reading this as barring the former semiprozines from competing in the fanzine category only. Does that mean that Locus is potentially eligible for Best Related Work instead?
Liz:
The intention of the proposers of the motion is that former semiprozines should not be eligible as magazines, but that their editors should be eligible for Best Editor: Short Form.
The language for Best Related Work does stipulate that works should not be eligible in any other category. There may be some quibbling that a magazine is not the editor and that therefore any magazine is eligible as a related work, but I think this is likely to get stamped on if anyone tries it.
What about former semiprozines that now meet the definition of fanzine? I’m thinking of NYRSF here — so far as I’m aware, the only one of those four criteria it meets now is that it pays its contributors — but I’m sure there are others. The wording for Best Editor: Short Form specifies that nominees must have produced anthologies, collections or magazine issues. This would seem to suggest either that NYRSF (et al) is only eligible in fanzine, or that the editors of any fanzines which produce four or more issues in that year can’t be nominated for Best Fanzine.
Actually, there is an overriding subjective criteria — “Any generally available non-professional publication….” It appears that “professional” is mostly a subjective decision to be made by the individual voters making nominations. Woe be unto any administrator who disqualifies a nominee on the grounds of “professional” unless s/he can find a technical reason as well.
It seems to me that Locus failed the “non-professional” criteria long ago but because it’s a subjective one determined by the voters, it kept showing up on the ballot anyway.
Specifically to your question, if in fact NYRSF only meets one of the four listed criteria, doesn’t remove itself from consideration, and the voters decide that it’s a “non-professional” work, then it probably belongs in Best Fanzine.
The whole question of what happens to semiprozines that were only in the category because they had been declared to be semiprozines by their editors had clearly not been thought through by the makers of the motion. It is not a trivial question. We need to know what happens to Ansible. Some people might have argued that having once been declared a semiprozine it could never be undeclared, while others would have said the opposite. To avoid confusion, the wording was changed at the Business Meeting to make it clear that a fanzine editor can declare her zine eligible for the category or not on a year-by-year basis. If no such declaration is made then the former semiprozine is eligible as a fanzine (provided it is not ruled out by any of the other criteria). As far as I know, Dave has yet to make a pronouncement of any sort.
There is, as far as I can see, nothing to prevent voters from nominating the editor of a fanzine in Best Editor: Short Form, and nominating the fanzine in Best Fanzine. I don’t think anyone is worried about this as yet, because the chances of any fan editor, even Dave, knocking the likes of Ellen or Gordon off the ballot are pretty remote.
Am I the only one who, whenever seeing the short title of this motion, hears their inner editor screaming, “That’s one LESS award! Less, not fewer! Aaargh!”
I am? Okay, back to my corner then…
Actually, the Less/Fewer thing was one of the things debated about it before it reached the floor. Its first incarnation was “Less” and there were a bunch of complaints about how “Fewer” is the proper form, so the proposal’s sponsor changed it. Me, I probably would have changed the short title entirely to something like “No More Semiprozines.”
Hmm, the rule as I learned it is “less” before singular, and “fewer” before plural. Thus, “two fewer awards”, but “one less award”.
Oh well, what’s done is done (or at least frozen for ratification).
The rule I found (note that I didn’t get involved in the discussions about title myself) was “Use fewer to describe countable things. Use less to describe uncountable quantities, collective amounts, and degree.” You can count Hugo Awards, so “fewer” applies. But it’s clear that there’s significant disagreement on the subject.
FWIW, titles are not part of the substantive portion of the constitution or any amendments thereof. They are for sake of reference only.
My own view on this sort of thing is that if “incorrect” usage results in confusion as to what is meant, or a reduction in the information content of the sentence, then it is bad. However, if it is perfectly clear what is meant and nothing is being lost then the rule about what is “correct” is redundant and I don’t see any point in getting exercised over it.
(I would have liked to end that with a sentence that begins with a conjunction, contains a split infinitive and ends with a preposition, but I’m in a hurry so I’ll leave that to someone else to concoct.)
Looking at the data for the category, and the nominees from 2000 forward, Locus doesn’t qualify since it publishes at least 1,000 issues and likely provides Charles N. Brown, or at least one of his staff, with half of his income. Interzone is likely the same, assuming they are still paying an editor.
Lady Churchill’s Rosebud Wristlet, NYRSF, Speculations (if it still exists), and The Third Alternative (ditto) do not fit any of the criteria except, probably, “paying market.”
I doubt Emerald City or Ansible are/were rolling in dough and/or advertising either.
(15% of 24 pages would be 3.6 pages; I don’t even believe NYRSF did that during the Boom Years.)
So it looks as if the fanzine category just got a lot more competitive, and the end result is only that Charles N. Brown will be competing with Gordon van Gelder et al. in “BE-Short.”