« The Steady March of Progress | Main | You Know »

December 03, 2004

Elected, Selected, Whatever

Preface, After the Fact: I've no plans to delete this post, although Kevin has amended his original post on how the nominees were narrowed down, because, hell, it's on the record and has been all day. That said, it was not just Kevin that narrowed down the choices, but two volunteers.

Regardless, my issue has never been specifically with the "how" of the process, but with the communication of the "how," or the lack of it, as it were. I was asked in the comments how I would have narrowed down, and that's a fair question, but not really on target with what I was saying. I might have run it just like Kevin - or perhaps not - but, regardless, I would have published the rules and the process beforehand so everyone knew what they were getting.

So, have fun with the awards - hope you find some good new blogs to read - and I hope you'll come back here to be entertained or annoyed or both. I like to think I'm six of one, half dozen of the other.

Now, on with the show....

As you probably know, it's time for the 2004 Weblog Awards. I'd go and vote, but - well - no, I won't, and here is why:

This year, it's a bit of a piece of poo.

Q: I nominated XXX, but don't see them as a finalist. Why is XXX not included?

A: Several thousand blogs were nominated. Of the hundreds nominated in each category there's at most 15 up for voting. The finalists picked were a set of the best of those nominated, in my subjective opinion. You are, of course, free to disagree - but since I'm paying for this site I'd appreciate if you do it elsewhere.

Happy to oblige, happy to oblige.

This site was nominated last year. This site had a pretty good showing, from what I remember.

This site was nominated this year. This site is not listed in the poll because Kevin didn't think it was among the best of those nominated.

Granted, it's Kevin's site - and Kevin's money and Jeebus bless the free market, Hallelujah, and can I get an Amen - but if you're going to ask for nominations for something called "The 2004 Weblog Awards," whittling down the list based on your own opinions is, in my opinion, wrong-headed and something that should have been stated up-front before people started plugging their faves.

An idea: call it something like "The 2004 Come Vote on the Blogs You Told Me About That I Thought Were Special Awards" or "The 2004 Not Really What It Looks Like Awards." But don't call it just "Weblog Awards."

Last year, it seemed to be all about having fun (Kevin even attests to this in the very first post at the site), at least from the points of view of the nominees with whom I corresponded; this year, well, it was handled in a way that is bound to annoy and ruin the fun for many, many people who were nominated but who didn't meet Kevin's standards.

People don't like being handed a raw deal. They're silly like that.

I know, I know: Too bad, so sad, cry me a river (and, hey, is that the world's tiniest violin playing for us?)

Don't get me wrong, I fully recognize that the entire thing is essentially an electronic return to high school popularity contests, that the vote tally is largely a result of continually telling your readers to vote for you every day, and that the traffic gained isn't quite an Instalanche but is just as disinterested and fleeting.

I fully recognize that I am inherently biased toward some hot and heavy lovin' for this blog.

I also fully recognize that this is a really silly thing to be annoyed about.

So, now that it's off my chest, I'll move on to things that really matter, like women, sex, beer, and money money money.

P.S. Yes, I also think it is dumb to call the World Series the World Series. However, I've never been invited to play in them and then been told I couldn't, so that doesn't annoy me. Except when they pre-empt by favorite television shows. Bastards.

P.P.S. Welcome to any of you trekking over here from A Small Victory. Why not break with the tradition of the blogosphere, and rather than surfing away after reading this post, take a look around the site? Go on, be a rebel.

I'm bound to have at least one opinion, if not more, that offends the crap out of you.

Update: Apparently the post above counts as being my worst, according to another blog. Said blogger has apparently not read much of the site, because - trust me - I can do a lot worse than what you just read.

She closes with:

Lighten up... have some fun.

Uh, yeah, we tried that, but someone ruined it. See above.

Update The Second: Look, folks, I'm really not that terribly bothered by any of this. It's not going to keep me awake tonight, fuming and cursing the name of Wizbang with clenched fists and a lone tear slowly tumbling down my cheek.

I (and, I believe, Michele) were merely annoyed that the (a) purpose and (b) approach of the whole shebang were not properly communicated right away.

I think it's great that people are getting traffic; there are a lot of fantastic blogs out there, and writers who deserve to be read. I hardly think I'm the best of the lot (but I do like me, and sometimes I pat myself on the back and say "Good boy, good!"). However, there are other vehicles out there to generate traffic for new blogs, ones that say "we're all about generating traffic for new blogs."

The same should have been done in this case, from the start. It would have avoided a whole lot of "what the fucks" from a whole lot of people.

The End.