There are people saying it's because she uses AI tools. However I'm pretty sure there's at least one other cover, still on the ballot, that uses AI tools.
And no requirement that there NOT be AI tools used. We're fine if they want to make that distinction, but that should be listed in the rules for nominations before they begin for the year.
I was guessing the AI thing too because there are still a lot of the rabid “AI is evil and soulless!” ranting going on. Still, if they were going to disqualify based on that, they should have made it clear up front and double checked the entries before announcing them. And definitely show courtesy enough to respond to your email request.
This kind of stuff is what is really giving the awards a black eye and leads people to question the legitimacy of the win.
If the contest has unwritten rules, that's going to bite them hard, especially in light of other events manipulating their contests off the books. The ship has probably sailed for getting Cedar back on the ballot, but they at least owe her and Raconteur an explanation and apology for keeping everything in the dark.
I'm hoping this gets settled in a nice way, but my confidence in these conventions and awards things is rapidly waning. It's sad, because I had the impression that the Dragon Awards were a nice alternative to the Hugos, which jumped the shark years ago. Apparently there are plenty of sharks to jump.
Cogent, well written, and to the point. Hope they provide a similar response.
There are people saying it's because she uses AI tools. However I'm pretty sure there's at least one other cover, still on the ballot, that uses AI tools.
And no requirement that there NOT be AI tools used. We're fine if they want to make that distinction, but that should be listed in the rules for nominations before they begin for the year.
Message sent. AI is only as good as the person driving it. Cedar can make the AI dance to her tune!
She makes it dance like a Busby Berkeley musical with synchronized swimming scenes.
I was guessing the AI thing too because there are still a lot of the rabid “AI is evil and soulless!” ranting going on. Still, if they were going to disqualify based on that, they should have made it clear up front and double checked the entries before announcing them. And definitely show courtesy enough to respond to your email request.
This kind of stuff is what is really giving the awards a black eye and leads people to question the legitimacy of the win.
They should void the survey entries for best artist, and re-do them entirely.
If I hadn't been whiffling on a couple books, I'd have voted for my second choice artist. Lovely stuff, but I'd rather vote for Ms. Sanderson's work.
Also, if I were not subscribed to this newsletter, I would never have realized they'd excluded someone.
Hope the DA gets it figured out.
It's NOT just me.
Unless you create your book covers in ink and watercolors, every art program contains an AI assistant. Canva, Adobe, MSWord all contain AI assistants.
So, that's not a good reason.
If the contest has unwritten rules, that's going to bite them hard, especially in light of other events manipulating their contests off the books. The ship has probably sailed for getting Cedar back on the ballot, but they at least owe her and Raconteur an explanation and apology for keeping everything in the dark.
I'm hoping this gets settled in a nice way, but my confidence in these conventions and awards things is rapidly waning. It's sad, because I had the impression that the Dragon Awards were a nice alternative to the Hugos, which jumped the shark years ago. Apparently there are plenty of sharks to jump.