Comments on: And the winners are…?

By: Fabs

Fabs — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:45:06 +0000

Cherry,
I have been actively involved in this debate and from all that I’ve read, you seem to be the only one in the top ranks (and thank god you are at the very top) to intimate that you have learnt from this ordeal and in future will be running the awards in a different fashion.
As a member of the general public and a writer on my own very-unknown, un-important blog, i would like to relay to you some of my thoughts and suggestions for next year’s competition from the above-mentioned point of view:
I feel incredibly insulted when I hear that certain bloggers’ votes have been given an added weight purely because they are – as it seems – deemed by you or others in the top ranks to be worthy of this position. The idea of a panel just does not seem fair at all when votes are counting.
It is for this reason that I suggest that in the future you cancel the idea of a panel of judges with weighted voting for ALL CATEGORIES EXCEPT that of BEST NEW BLOG. This panel will firstly be made up of the previous year’s nominees for BEST OVERALL BLOG (so that the public can play a role in selecting them). The voting for this will obviously also be public, but I a s member of the public would welcome weighted voting in this category, as I simply do not feel I have the time or energy to sort through ALL the new blogs.
From what i can make out, you all have huge issues concerning those blog-masters with huge readership numbers who send their muppets along to vote for them, swamping out the voters of other blogs in the process. This, as I can see, sets up a (I daresay) Zuma-situation where supporters do not care to surround themselves with all the information regarding all the nominees in the categories before casting their votes. Besides saying “live with it” (as that is unfortunately the case with a free and fair democratic election), I would suggest this:
Create a situation where each voter has to be aware of the other sites before voting. This is simple in an award like “Best Blog Post”, where the voter would simply have to click through an html copy of each post before voting, but I’m sure that if you got creative, you could find a way to make this scenario real with the other categories as well.
Yes, it will most certainly involve a lot more admin for the voter, but wouldn’t you prefer to have 100 knowledgable votes by people who have made a concerted effort as opposed to 1000 votes by people who were simply directed their by their blog-master?
I hope you find these suggestions of value. Congratulations on all the admirable (and unenviable) work you have done so far and voorspoed for the future!

By: B8

B8 — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 04:39:30 +0000

Wayne, WHY do you even share “part of the mechanics” of the judging process????
Why not just stay impartial? Why not stay completely independent of it?
These awards are and always will be a popularity contest. Let the public decide. No other judges are necessary and if they are, then make damn sure that they are 100% impartial and independent.
“What exactly is wrong there that makes all of us a joke? Why are all the hours of effort and work we put in not worth consideration then?” Wayne, stop crying, don’t make me call you an ambulance. BLOGS are not life or death, the world would still continue to exist if this blog or any other stopped today. Get some perspective my friend.

By: michelle

michelle — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 06:31:21 +0000

Simon, are you actually Seth, you naughty boy??

By: Wayne

Wayne — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 20:52:43 +0000

Simon, could you explain then in a rational way why the awards are so bad or why you regard our views and association with it as a joke.
I have explained on the blog I share part of the mechanics of the judging process in an 18th of March entry. Are you familiar with that while you make your criticisms?
What exactly is wrong there that makes all of us a joke? Why are all the hours of effort and work we put in not worth consideration then?

By: Simon

Simon — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 16:58:16 +0000

You have turned these awards into an absolute joke! Something NOT to be taken seriously! Jobs for pals or should I say Blogs for pals.
What an absolute joke all this is!
Idiot!

By: tripeak

tripeak — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:58:37 +0000

Ditto to Martin’s comment. Still trying to watch the interview – without it being chop-ph-phy So… no auditors from Price Waterhouse Coopers? LOL

By: Martin

Martin — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:32:16 +0000

“As seen on TV” – haha, loved it.
But seriously, all this moaning and crap just proves one thing: how big a thing it’s become. Respect.

By: The Popular Front

The Popular Front — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:23:31 +0000

My, what alot of silly bitchyness the awards kicked off. Reminds me of working in the local fashion industry… I think you did a great job of drawing attention to the local blog community and maybe some people should be more grateful for it, or alternatively get off their ass and do something more constructive than moan. To me it makes sense that the people most qualified to judge are other bloggers…

By: Cherryflava

Cherryflava — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:21:50 +0000

Thanks Nic.

By: Nic

Nic — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 13:13:53 +0000

I think you have a done a great job in organising this years event (inspite of criticism). The event is a cool one and necessary in many regards. The criticism can only help in bettering the event in the future and you are doing a thankless and commendable job at the end of the day.