Just a general comment. I haven't up until a week or so ago been faithfully reading blogs. Thanks to this site, I've been lead to a few now I'm getting addicted to. I have to say, I wouldn't want Kevin's job, though. lol;)
I have a question. A lot of offices and dorms, etc. are networked so that more than one computer may share the same IP address but are in fact separate computers and have different people voting. Does your software pick that up or are people in large offices/dorms with many daily active voters going to be penalized unfairly when you look at voting tonight and announce the winners?
Post by slackerchic on Jan 6, 2009 14:13:31 GMT -5
My site (Slacker Chic) is nominated in the Best Fashion Blog category, and I have had several people tell me that they tried voting for me, but their vote did not count. (As in, the number of previous votes for my site stayed the same.) They tried to vote again, but were given the message that they already voted. What's up with that?
Just wondering if voting is limited to one per person. I've heard that unlimited voting is OK, after noting a huge surge over the past few days in votes for a particular mid-east blog. Sorry to say, but this looks like stuffing the voting box and does not lend credibility to the outcomes.
Last Edit: Jan 8, 2009 20:17:05 GMT -5 by injector
Post by Sean Gleeson on Jan 8, 2009 22:05:23 GMT -5
Voting is limited to one per person, per day. A surge of votes is not synonymous with "stuffing the voting box." The particular surge for Michael Totten (I assume this is your referent) coincided with a bunch of posts on very influential blogs, all strongly urging their readers to vote for him. Nothing mysterious about it.
Voting is limited to one per person, per day. So, 1,000 rabid people can generate 3,000 votes over 3 days. Doesn't give me much confidence in the voting process, when combined with a contentious subject like the middle eastern situation.
Post by Sean Gleeson on Jan 9, 2009 22:09:37 GMT -5
I shouldn't worry; there are only about 1,000 rabid people in the whole world. (There are about 55,000 cases of rabies annually, but death follows about a week after the onset of symptoms, so only about a thousand victims are alive at any time, on average.) The probability that any significant fraction of them are voting in The Weblog Awards is almost nil.
More seriously, the allowance for multiple voting does multiply the votes of everyone equally, not just the votes of those you oppose. If we took all the results and divided everyone's tally by nine, the relative standings would remain unchanged.
So, if a rabid voter votes each of 7 days - or however long voting is open - and a normal voter votes once, everything equals out?
No one casts 7 votes the other just one.
I think it comes down to motivation. Motivating readers to vote will improve your total. The reason I came up with the system was to give a small traffic blog a chance against a large traffic blog. A large traffic blog might link to their poll once, get a bunch of votes on one day then there votes per day will quickly trail off. A small traffic blog that can send its voters to the polls every day may well beat out a blog with higher traffic but a less motivated readership. All bets are off it the large traffic blog campaigns every day though...