From our more narrow UK perspective, these awards were of particular interest.
For a start, these were the ones which kick-started
Blogpower into being and that particular group has gone onto bigger and better things.
Then there was
Iain Dale's own comment, which was probably accurate:
The American Weblog Awards are, apparently, a big deal. This year they have a Best UK Blog category, in which this blog features.
One year ago, I complained that they weren't transparent in the nominations phase, although the voting itself utilized an excellent engine. That they have included UK and other country sections this year is commendable for a start.
By contrast, the Annual Blogpower Awards for 2007 were quite transparent in the nominations but the poor voting engine caused them to become, as
Mr. Eugenides put it, in his usual inimitable fashion, “a p-s-ing contest” - to see who could p-s- the furthest.
I fear that that's also what happened with the Weblogs although having now been part of the process, I can see more clearly where
Kevin Aylward is coming from and perhaps it's not the fault of the administrators themselves but a basic flaw in the whole nature of awards.
Nominations PhaseThere was clearly no small resentment that some of the bigger UK blogging names like
Mr Eugenides and
Ellee Seymour, for example, weren't there and yet the
Pub Philosopher,
Baggage Reclaim and yours truly were. These two bloggers themselves, I hasten to add, said not one word.
Though eternally grateful for the nomination but refusing to concede I was unworthy, yet it does seem a bit puzzling to be ranked alongside
Guido,
Iain,
EU Referendum and yes – the inevitable Neil Clark.
Possibly this was because the awards are American and I do cater for American topics of interest more so than many of those on the list. Possibly it was the Americans' opinion of who is a top UK blog. At least that's one explanation.
Voting PhaseThis is where the problem lay and continues to lie, suggesting that for next July's BP Awards, we have to find a solution to the flaws in this phase.
Keving Aylward touched on it himself when he wrote:
This is a viral event, and sites that do a better job of turning out readers to vote tend to do better. We've seen all sorts of campaigning tactics over the years and based on what I've heard many of the same tactics are being employed again this year by various sites.
The process was particularly noticeable in the
Funniest Blog Award [in which certain of us were going for
Jon Swift], where the leader, Sadly No, quoted
this explanation, by Freep, as to what was going on:
The DUmmie FUnnies are under a bigtime attack by an organized campaign by the Leftwing Blogosphere to keep us from winning as FUnniest Blog in the 2007 Weblog Awards. Late yesterday afternoon the DUmmie FUnnies, thanx for the most part to Freeper Power, was leading in that poll by almost 700 votes. Then the Left got desperate. They just can’t tolerate a blog, dedicated to mocking and satirizing their many foibles to win that award. Therefore, led by Sadly No! and the Democrat Underground, a host of leftwing websites is now targetting us by urging their readers to vote for Sadly No! in the FUnniest Blog category.
By the way, 134 comments alone on this post shows the strike power of the Americans, something only Fawkes and Dale can really match over in the UK, [maybe EU Referendum but don't quote me].
Now I'm going to come clean here. I could have used multiple IPs and had the use of another computer altogether, which I didn't have at the time of the BP Awards.
What I did have then and now was a pool of people to draw on. If I'd put the url to all my girls plus my clients, each of whom would have brought their offices into play, my friend and I estimated, conservatively, that it would have come to a shade under 300 people, if we'd put our hearts into it.
Assuming 6 votes in that time, I could have called on about 1700 votes under these rules, plus the 130 odd genuine votes, plus about 12 from me.
That might have “won” me the award. Why not to do it? The truth now? Three reasons:
1.We were on a four day holiday during the awards period and it would have been pushing it uphill to utilize all those people and I just didn't want to;
2.Iain Dale stood above it, I noticed and didn't actually canvass for votes, even though he admitted the prestige these awards enjoyed. It seemed a higher thing to do, particularly in light of N3 below;
3.People like Neil Clark and their devotees who came over here and told me this about my vote:
I look forward to reading your excuses for this pathetic perfomance. Neil is now on almost 750 votes. Just wait until Latin America kicks in tonight - you only have about three hours to wait.
then go on to say, in answer to
some folk who sprang to my rescue:
That's why he's [referring to me, of course] got less than 120 is it? I have decided to toss a few votes Bright Meadow's way. That Pub Philosopher bloke needs to come in last for having too much gob.
“Toss a few votes”? Don't think this requires much further comment, except to wonder if they really think this is what blogging is all about.
Some readers were puzzled by my singling out of the egregious Clark so to learn more about him, see
Stephen Pollard's old site and maybe
Mr. Eugenides for dessert, then for an update, go to the
Devil's Kitchen and you'll get the general idea.
Next stop is
Prodicus, who also draws in the mysterious footballer loving chick
Kickette and with this girl, I just don't know what to think.
She really does add piquancy to this next section.
What is a good blog?If we 10 are the best the UK has to offer, then the question of what constitutes a “good” blog is particularly relevant.
Must it be political? Perhaps DK and Prodicus are judging in terms of political comment, perhaps not. Perhaps there's a case for saying that a blog by a girl who loves footballers and is read by
a Kickette Army of girls who love reading about footballers is every bit as “good” as the more visible DK.
To be “good”, need that mean high traffic alone or must there be some sort of product of a more “elevated' nature? I confess I don't know the answers to these questions.
Pointers for the FutureLooking at the next BP Awards, perhaps we should only have a nominations phase, with no voting phase whatsoever. It would be administratively easier, wouldn't drag these things out so long and provided they were adequately advertised beforehand, seem to be the best solution to the problem.
FinallyThank you to the mystery people who nominated me in the first place and to those who clicked away in my defence throughout. I hope I didn't disgrace you, despite Exile's scathing remark and it was a certainly a useful experience for the next Blogpower Awards, although I'll not take an active part in their administration.
It used to be "apple for the teacher". Of course this story below was a one-off, of course it couldn't become the norm:
To 
