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...
incredible that Sean thinks that masking IP addressess or cleaning out cookies or rebooting modems to get a new IP address (as reccommended by Wonkette) is NOT cheating. These awards have no credibility when such a vile thuggish site such as Wonkette is in the LIBERAL category and condones cheating which weblogawards clearly do not care about.
I think you misread Sean's statement. What he said was that the methods proposed don't work.
And by the way the comments at Wonkette you are all so keen on discussing no longer exist. The bloggers at Wonkette were good enough to remove them when we contacted them. We did this, not because they worked, but to make take one less thing off of everyone's plate to complain about.
Since the comments no longer exist I'm not exactly sure why you persiste in posting pictures of them. As we've already told so many of you we've already checked the logs.
Of BTW, from our visual scanning of the logs it appears that way over 90 percent of all votes come from easily identifiable major ISP's like Comcast, AOL, Verizon, etc.
You can ask the guys at Engadget and Gizmodo, who are regularly locked in fierce battle every year about how meticulously we examine the votes, and how professional our operation is. Last year their race was not decieded until after the polls closed as I worked with both of them to show them which votes (cast via a last mintue complex hack) were being tossed out.
We revised our software to elimate the two small attack vectors found last year and we've had no similar problems this year. If something is found (and we always find it) we'll remove those votes and take corrective action.
As a "new blog" candidate, I hope I will be forgiven for asking some newbie-level questions. 1) If several members of a family wish to vote but have just one computer, I presume they will only be able to cast one vote; there presumably won't be a way for people to "log on" with identities for voting - there will essentially be one vote per computer per category?
2) Conversely if my wife and I vote with different computers from the same home address, I assume your tracking software will recognize that as two votes and not think someone is cheating by voting twice?
3) I'll find the answer to this in a day or two, but I'm curious... will the voting page show running totals of votes cast, or will the vote totals be suppressed until the voting period ends?
4) I've not been able to find a "link code" for my visitors to use to get to the voting pages. I have placed one of the badges on my sidebar. I think I can modify the code of the badge so that it takes people to the category I'm in. Is that the way we need to do it? And from that category voting page will visitors be able to click out to a main page to enter votes in other categories, or should I provide a link for that purpose?
Thanks in advance for any answers
1) Honestly I don't remember. I think if they each have their own user account they can each cast a vote. See the Daily Notes - Jan. 5 for information on multiple votes from the same machine or network. Basically if you try and stuff votes one after another it's going to counter that. Spead your families voting out and you'll be fine.
2) Yes. The only restriction is that you can't cast the same votes on both machines within a short period of time of each other. In that case it looks like it's a spamming attack and would kick in with fraud supression.
3) The vote totally are real-time.
4) You've got the right idea. Just link to your poll page. Every poll page has a link to the master navigation page.
Post by Kevin Aylward on Jan 5, 2009 22:51:21 GMT -5
Because there are 48 seperate polls to build and activate. We had to make a tweak to the code this morning and I had to manually update 48 seperate pages to add the poll code to them. All that takes time. I updated status when I could and polls did open on the 5th.
Post by Kevin Aylward on Jan 4, 2009 1:08:07 GMT -5
Sign up for the Weblog Awards News mailing list (link on the main site), because we'll be sending details to that list. We'll also post instructions on the poll page. We're looking at rolling this out Tuesday or Wednesday, so we can gauge the overall system load.
Congratulations to all the finalists but you guys have to do better with nominations next year. Trying to find me was too confusing, so people didn't bother. What you need to do is have a database or other list generating software where people can nominate the names and have it come out alphabetically and then people won't renominate the same people over and over and people can find those they want to nominate more easily. That makes it alot more fair to everyone involved. But I am genuinely happy for those who were able to garner nominations at all since it was so confusing! See you around the blogosphere!
That is on our "to-do" list. The comment system used for nominations is easy and open, but it doesn't drive as much traffic to the nominees as we'd like.
The way we present the finalist in the polls really does drive traffic and RSS subscriptions, which is really the goal of the whole operation. We'd like the nomination process to drive traffic to the nominated blogs as well. Hopefully we can come up with a system like you describe for next year.