Super editors debate the Nebula Award process and selections

For my money, the Asimov's Science Fiction readers forum is one of the best places for intelligent discussions of SF/F issues. Case in point: A current thread discussing the Nebula Award preliminary and final ballots. The thread was started by Dave Truesdale in reference to his essay "Nebula Apathy Slights Original Anthologies, Or Why I like the Hugos." Since then Gardner Dozois, Rich Horton, Gordon Van Gelder, and John Joseph Adams--along with writers like Tom Purdom and other Asimov's Forum regulars--have analyzed the hits and misses of this year's Nebula ballot, the problems with the Nebula process, and thoughts on how to fix things. In general, the rough consensus appears to be that:

  • While there are some great selections on this year's preliminary and final ballots, the really good stories and novels are not consistently getting nominated and making the ballot;
  • The Nebula script category is a joke since no one actually reads the movie and TV scripts. The category should be abolished or renamed Best Dramatic Presentation;
  • A jury should be used more in the Nebula process because few SFWA members have the time or inclination to read enough works to make an informed selection.