Weblog awards wobble but they don't fall down

By Phil Plait | January 6, 2009 9:30 am

Well, it’s that time of year again: the weblog awards have been announced, and the science category has this very blog listed. The usual suspects are there, including Pharyngula, as well as Neurologica, run by my pal Steve Novella from Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe.

I couldn’t help but notice that Climate Audit and Watt’s Up With That are there as well, just like last year. And those of you with long memories will remember much of the ugliness that happened last year, a situation I am loathe to repeat. Also, the sentiments I expounded upon in that linked post are still true today; these awards are not set up in a way that necessarily rewards truly good blogs. Instead, the sites that garner votes are the ones with the loudest voice, the biggest audience, or that generate the most controversy.

Two years ago it was fun to have the mock battle with PZ, an affair we still chuckle over when we get together. But last year… yeah. It wasn’t fun at all. So that’s why I will mention the awards here now, and that’s it. Vote if you’d like, vote for whom you’d like, vote against whom you’d like — you can vote once per day. And check out the other blogs, too; there are quite a few worth reading.

And my thanks to Miss Cellania. She knows why. I’ll note that she’s up for Best Large Blog. Hint hint.

And how the Law category doesn’t include Bob Loblaw’s Law Blog I’ll never know.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: About this blog, Science

Comments (13)

  1. Thank you for the sentiment. And don’t give up hope! We have added a few extra safeguards on the server end, which I hope will help to avoid those unpleasant incidents, and make it fun again for everybody (including you!)

  2. Noted and voted! (4 U)

  3. Jim Shaver

    “… a situation I am loathe to repeat.”

    Phil, I think you mean “loath”, the adjective, as “loathe” is a verb. Okay, for being a nuisance, I will go give you some love on WeblogAwards. I’ll have to do that tomorrow, though, since I already voted for Neurologica today.


    I did not need you to tell me, Phil; I’ve already voted 4 U last night!

    Now… er… when do I get my free (signed) copy of Death From The Skies!? ūüėČ

  5. Come on people… we need more votes for poor Phil… ūüėź

  6. glued

    Eh, better luck next year Phil old chap.
    Watt’s whooping everyone’s posterior (PZ has a chance, though) as of this writing.

  7. ¬ęb√łnez_brigade¬Ľ

    I’m splitting my votes between PZ & BA — until I must choose sides on the last day, when there will no doubt be another poll swarm. The site appears to be set up just like last year; and it seems like they would’ve learned their lesson after getting crashed last time.

  8. Josh in California

    I think the crashing aspect is deliberate. How much are they getting for the ads on each of those voting pages?

  9. What’s up with “Watt‚Äôs Up With That”? I’m struggling to get it? For example a recent post called “Looking more like La Nina every day” he says “About a month ago I posted: La Nina is back‚Ķand was criticized by a few folks”. I wonder who criticised because I heard many weather people in Oz announcing late last year that the expectation for 2009 was another La Nina event.

  10. the intransitive grammarian

    One of the more subtle distinctions in the grammar wars is the difference between “loath” and “loathe.” It’s hard to get it right.

  11. Nemo

    The current leader so far this year is another anti-GW blog. This is sickening.

  12. Ja Muller

    “And how the Law category doesn‚Äôt include Bob Loblaw‚Äôs Law Blog I‚Äôll never know.”

    I hope most people get this reference. Greatest. Show. Ever. (Except maybe the peak of The Simpsons)

  13. Chris

    I just went to the site to vote and it is completely non-functional.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!


See More

Collapse bottom bar