When science fiction was young and a print medium only, in the Golden Age and earlier, there was a lot of fucked up SF out there. It was quite obscure at the time, too.Connor MacLeod wrote:If you really care about sci fi, you should hope to hell that it stays as obscure as posisble, to minimize posisiblities of fucking up.
Obscurity does not guarantee quality; 90% of everything will still be crap. It'll just be 90% of a smaller sample size.
As for hardness/softness, I grade SF on many things other than that. I'd rather see soft-SF that nods in the direction of physics but generally ignores it when it's inconvenient, if that means better plotting or characterization. There are examples of this happening, and I often wind up liking them.
Hard-SF can of course be good. I am not denying this. But I don't grade SF on "hardness;" I grade it on plotting, characterization, and ability to fire the imagination.