Puppies wee on your shoulders and tell you it’s rain

This is rather rich coming from the man who wanted to destroy the Hugos:

It should go without saying, but apparently I need to plainly state the blatantly obvious, everyone should read the nominations and vote honestly.

First you shit the bed, then you scold everybody else for wanting to clean the sheets. That seems to be the Puppy talking point du jour. Case in point, this douche:

Voting “No Award” over a work that one thinks has been “nominated inappropriately” is really a vote against the process of nomination, and should take place in a different venue, at the WorldCon business meetings where the Hugo rules can be discussed for possible change.

No.

That’s not how it works. That’s reinventing Hugo history and rules to suit your own cheating. This is another tactic straight from the Republicans’ Culture Wars playbook, an attempt to bind your opponents actions with rules and expectations you yourself aren’t bound with and which in any case you’re making up yourself. This working the refs has had far more success than it should’ve in American politics largely because of the braindead political media swallowing it hook, line and sinker. Not so much in fandom though. Nobody with any familiarity of Worlcon fandom’s history and culture believes that it’s dishonest to vote No Award over any nomination that got there through blatant slate voting, or that fans have a duty to be “fair” to nominations which stole their place on the ballot. That didn’t work when the scientologists did it, nor will it fly when it’s a bunch of whiny crybabies running cover for a racist asshole wanting to promote his vanity press.