And the Angels rejoice.

Posted April 26, 2008 5:32 PM by Madeleine Robins

Best of luck to the new officers.

They're gonna need it.

Posted April 26, 2008 5:38 PM by abi

I see that Spiro Agnew lost to Elizabeth Moon for the Veep position.

Posted April 26, 2008 5:47 PM by Serge

And I'm sure Orlando Bloom is crushed to miss out on being Treasurer.

Posted April 26, 2008 5:58 PM by abi

Congratulations to all involved with the organization; here's hoping that smoother waters are ahead. (Also, I'm guessing that the Agnew vote didn't come from a Davis voter, but no matter.)

Posted April 26, 2008 6:08 PM by Zeke

That's terrific news for anyone who wishes SFWA well (as I do, though I'm no writer and never will be). Let's hope it's a harbinger of similar good news for America as a whole.

Posted April 26, 2008 6:13 PM by Lee

Wow. I wonder who the other 52 boneheads are? Hey, 52, that's one for every card in a standard deck...no, that doesn't make sense, because Burt is definitely NOT playing with a full deck!

Posted April 26, 2008 6:19 PM by Xopher

Xopher, there's an extra joker in his deck.

(May I add to the cheering?)

Posted April 26, 2008 6:21 PM by P J Evans

Good news! I hope they manage things better.

Posted April 26, 2008 6:36 PM by Marilee

abi @ 4... Orlando didn't have it as bad as Angelina Jolie, who lost to Bud Sparhawk.

Posted April 26, 2008 6:51 PM by Serge

Those are good numbers. May they be for an omen.

Congratulations to SFWA, my most hearfelt best wishes and condolences for the winners (back in my college days the typesetter for the paper (Elaine, a wonderful woman) would give congratulations to the people who ran for EIC, and lost, and condolences to the poor sod who won.

We understood, but it didn't keep us from trying for the slot. I was the blessed recipient of such congratulations, and I offer my condolence in that spirit.

Posted April 26, 2008 7:05 PM by Terry Karney

Burt has fifty-two relatives with voting rights in the SWFA? Amazing.

Posted April 26, 2008 7:32 PM by Fragano Ledgister

But imagine if Charles Stross had won all the categories for which he was voted....

Posted April 26, 2008 8:34 PM by Rachel

Let this be a lesson for future nominees: Pandering to the Gentlebeings does not win you elections.

Posted April 26, 2008 9:00 PM by Adam Lipkin

WOOHOO!

Rachel @13: I suspect Charlie would have just downloaded his consciousness into several separate human-equivalent AIs and staffed the board that way. ;-)

Posted April 26, 2008 9:04 PM by Kevin Riggle

Kevin @15: But would the same person in more than one AI "body" be fair? Are we going to need to have rules that a given personality can only serve in *one* position in an organization? How about clones? Do they count as one person or more than one?

We're going to have to figure these things out, sooner or later.

Posted April 26, 2008 9:41 PM by Magenta Griffith

Yep. I already wished them congratulations and condolences on the LJ SFWA community.

Posted April 26, 2008 10:12 PM by SisterCoyote

It may not be surprising that Burt got 53 votes, but I find it appalling that Milton Friedman got at least one for Treasurer.

Posted April 26, 2008 10:30 PM by Linkmeister

Oh, thank God...

This bodes well for SFWA. I wish all the officers the best of luck.

In particular, Mary Robinette Kowal had some ambitious, but sensible, plans for streamlining SFWA. I hope she pulls them off.

Posted April 26, 2008 10:59 PM by John Chu

*sigh of relief*

Posted April 26, 2008 11:08 PM by heresiarch

The absolute numbers surprise me. Only 400 votes total? Somewhere my intuitions are badly wrong. Is SFWA a much tinier organization than I would have guessed, or does the vast majority of its membership just not care who runs the thing?

Posted April 27, 2008 12:26 AM by Matt Austern

Oh Yay! YAY! I can continue to aspire to joining someday.

Posted April 27, 2008 12:46 AM by Mary Dell

SFWA has about 1,500 members, last I heard. Many of them don't bother to vote.

400 is a fairly low turn-out, though; I'm pretty sure I remember certain previous elections drawing well over 500.

Posted April 27, 2008 1:57 AM by Lawrence Watt-Evans

Fragano Ledgister at #12 writes:

> Burt has fifty-two relatives with voting rights in the SWFA? Amazing.

Perhaps there's some residual good will from Critters? I've always thought it a good thing, and it's the only context I knew him from before all this copyright committee craziness started.

I am very happy with the results of the election though.

Posted April 27, 2008 7:29 AM by Steve Taylor

#24:Perhaps there's some residual good will from Critters

One of the reasons why I quit Critters was because that he used his weekly Critters newsletter once to character assassinate Cory Doctorow. I don't know if he's done anything similarly egregious with it since. (Normally, the newsletter lists markets, sales, and the current week's stories.) I'd been pondering quitting for a while, for unrelated reasons, but this put me over the edge. Yes, there was a certain "cut off my nose to spite my face" aspect to this. I mean, he shouldn't care one way or another whether I'm a Critter. However, I didn't want any involvement with him at all.

Another reason, by the way, for those 52 other votes is that there may be writers who actually approve of Andrew Burt's policies and tactics. Condemnation of Andrew Burt's actions is not universal. During the scribd fiasco, I definitely remember blog posts in Andrew Burt's defense, even though he acted in ways not only inexcusable, but also counterproductive to his own cause. I'm not surprised he received some votes. To reference the Eric Clapton thread, artists whose works you admire may not also have views you admire.

However, I'm glad that Russell Davis received the vast majority of the votes. SFWA is in good hands, at least for the next year.

Posted April 27, 2008 8:34 AM by John Chu

Magenta @#16, obviously clones are more than one person, unless downloaded minds are also involved. I mean, most clones will grow up at a different time and in a different environment than their progenitor, so they'll be quite distinct.

I mean, identical twins are much closer (same upbringing, usually; same uterine environment, even) and *they* are eligible to have one being President and the other Prime Minister of Poland at the same time...

.. hm. actually, perhaps that's a good argument against such things being allowed. ;)

-- N., theoretical identical twin

Posted April 27, 2008 8:41 AM by Nix

Rejoice that ballots counted in the night

Sum up to show there's sanity this year.

As joining these illustrious ranks comes near

In prospect, better futures come in sight,

And my ilk will no longer need take fright

Of arms that hold the written word too dear.

Now, hold the hope that truth remains so clear--

While lawyers ploy, a writer always writes.

The news of fair elections now should bring

A bright foreshadowing into the plot:

November comes, and questions yet remain,

And we can only hope freedom will ring.

But that is out my hands, and not my lot.

I persist, writing, hopeful, pixel-stained.

Posted April 27, 2008 9:05 AM by A. J. Luxton

Nix @#26

I mean, most clones will grow up at a different time and in a different environment than their progenitor, so they'll be quite distinct.

Not if you use a cloning hammock.

Posted April 27, 2008 11:02 AM by Mary Dell

Mary Dell... Speaking of clones, ever read Joshua, Son of None?

Posted April 27, 2008 11:34 AM by Serge

We're going to have to figure these things out, sooner or later.

As soon as the personality is copied into another "body" the two copies will have different experiences and will start diverging. Clones start diverging with their first cell divisions, as anyone who knows naturally-occurring clones ("identical" twins) already knows. (There are, of course, several sf works on the subject; _Cyteen_ and _Brothers in Arms_ come to mind.)

Posted April 27, 2008 12:13 PM by Chris

Serge@29: or the downmarket version, The Multiple Man?

Chris@30 et al: I remember \somebody/ (probably Charlie) writing about deliberately creating mind-copies to deal with multiple events, then dealing with integrating the experiences.

Posted April 27, 2008 12:40 PM by CHip

David Brin's Kiln People, maybe?

Posted April 27, 2008 1:10 PM by David Wahler

CHip @ 31... You mean, Jamie Maddrox, right? I never could quite figure out how he also managed to have his instant clones wear the same clothes as the original. I have the same problem with that episode of Wonder Woman where some bad guys clone Hitler, and the process works, down to the clone wearing a Nazi outfit and leather boots, but luckily WW puts a stop to the whole business by decloning Hitler. (Boys from Brazil was better.)

Posted April 27, 2008 1:18 PM by Serge

The Boys From Brazil didn't have Lynda Carter.

Posted April 27, 2008 1:31 PM by Scott H

Now the question is how many ex-SFWAns will rejoin. (One, at least.)

Posted April 27, 2008 3:38 PM by Ken Houghton

The 53 doesn't surprise me, Mr. Burt does have supporters for all the actions he's taken. Just because many people have been vocal in public about their view of his actions being detrimental doesn't mean that there aren't people who agree with him that his actions were very necessary, very much on point and wildly overblown by the opposition. I don't think they were, but then I don't understand the appeal of a certain news channel either.

For the new SFWA board, though, now is when the hard work begins. I wish them a whole bunch of luck and energy.

Posted April 27, 2008 6:13 PM by Steve Buchheit

As a stop-gap to prevent multiple iterations of the same personality occupying multiple governing positions, I can see having an age of majority as a viable option. That is, it has to be at least eighteen years from the copying event before they can run for office, to allow the iterations to diverge a significant amount.

BTW, I guess we're in agreement that having multiple iterations on the same governing body might be more efficient for getting things done, but less efficient in finding the correct thing to do?

Posted April 27, 2008 6:39 PM by NelC

CHip @ 31: "I remember \somebody/ (probably Charlie) writing about deliberately creating mind-copies to deal with multiple events, then dealing with integrating the experiences."

In Accelerando a multiplicity of different mind-copying strategies are used--at one point, a couple spins off copies of themselves and runs them through a couple million iterations together to see if they would be compatible.

As I recall, in Accelerando copies are treated as part of the same person, splitting and recombining at will. Sounds like fun, really.

Posted April 27, 2008 11:16 PM by heresiarch

Serge@33: He might mean the novel by Ben Bova.

(That's "Madrox" with one d, btw.)

Posted April 28, 2008 4:58 AM by David Goldfarb

Nix 26: Identical twins raised together are similar--but usually not as similar as identical twins raised apart. This is because they differentiate themselves on purpose, but also because when they're raised together, one tends to dominate, and the pattern affects their later lives.

Posted April 28, 2008 11:57 AM by Xopher

I have only just seen these results.

And the write-ins.

(Screams, faints, and flees, in no set order.)

Posted April 28, 2008 6:32 PM by Charlie Stross

Xopher writes in #40:

Nix 26: Identical twins raised together are similar--but usually not as similar as identical twins raised apart. This is because they differentiate themselves on purpose, but also because when they're raised together, one tends to dominate, and the pattern affects their later lives.

Tangentially, a letter I recently had published in Physics World.

Posted April 28, 2008 7:27 PM by Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey

heresiarch #38: There are also very good copies available for people (with your choice of whether to fire-and-forget or reintegrate) in the Culture, I think. This plays a small part in Use of Weapons.

At any rate, I, for one, welcome our new uploaded clone Strossian overlords. Or will, once they stop screaming, recover from the fainting, and realize there's no point in fleeing.

Posted April 28, 2008 9:17 PM by albatross

Am I the only one here who's had close business relations with Russell Davis, prior to his arrival on the entire SFF.Net and then SFWA scene (which, god help me, I recommended to him in the first place before he knew much at all about fandom)? Just curious.

Posted April 30, 2008 1:06 AM by NC Hanger

Speaking of clones, and assorted artificial people...

Freefall: is this more important than First Law?

Posted April 30, 2008 2:51 AM by Dave Bell