I have made a table
showing what effect E Pluribus Hugo and 5 and 6 would have had on the Hugo nominations this year and last, using the reports provided to the WSFS Business Meeting.
Looking at the table, I see I inadvertently misled the Business Meeting: I said the sixth finalist would be a non-slate work 75-80% of the time, based on the 2015/16 data, and it actually seems to only be about 66%. I must have misclassified something or miscounted while I was trying to read the report on my cell phone. I think the argument I presented to the Business Meeting is still sound, but less strongly supported by data than I claimed, for which I apologize.