2007 Weblog awards allows post closing voting

What a mess, the weblogs award has a major screwup, and people can still vote hours after the polls have closed.

While my IE6 browser will not allow additional votes, my Firefox browser on the same machine will.

See screencap:


click for full sized image.

I have several screencaps from an hour after poll closing that showed votes still rising. I hope they can settle this issue without a fight breaking out or hanging chads.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 9, 2007 12:06 am

Beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I take comfort in the fact we (there I go using the plural possessive again) – ahem… I take comfort that new eyes will see Steve and Anthony at Climate Audit, and find out that there is real science going on there.
Not watered down, ego stroking, “we are better then you are so you must listen to us” pretention, such as we see on the AGW side.
It must bug them that they have to Doctor the vote just to break even, when the cards are stacked in their favor from the beginning.

November 9, 2007 12:35 am

How about a defiant consolation “Rocky” theme?
He was a million to one shot, and stood toe to toe with the best.
I’m ready for the rematch.

November 9, 2007 7:16 am

Anthony, they linked their news page to Deltoid where voters were being asked to vote for bad astronomy. Does that sound like an objective poll taker to you? Do you really think they will allow CA to win? 1420 votes came out of nowhere at 8:20 PM, three hours after they were being told on their forum that the voting had not been stopped and their administrator claimed “we’re working on it.”

Julie KS
November 9, 2007 8:16 am

Anthony, I sure hope CA wins, but however this turns out, congratulations are in order to you and Steve.
As others have said, one of the benefits of these awards is that you learn about blogs at are new to you. The Invasive Species blog was new to me, and I like it because I have an interest in that subject. Also, the blog owner seems cordial and politically neutral.
The Pharyngula blog was a real eye-opener, but in a different way. I don’t know much about this Dawkins movement, and I care less, because I think a person’s spiritual beliefs are his own business. I couldn’t help but notice, though, that PZ and some of his commenters are not good ambassadors for that movement. They are intolerant, immature, and hateful.
Thanks for the Freeman Dyson essay. That was a refreshing palate-cleanser after experiencing the depressing small-mindedness on PZ’s blog.

Laurence Sheldon
November 9, 2007 9:34 am

What’s up with that?

November 9, 2007 10:28 am

I wouldn’t worry about it since some folks for other sites have publicly said they’ve cheated, it’s all pretty worthless. CA and your sites are the winners as far as I’m concerned.

Johnas Doubts
November 9, 2007 11:27 am

Check this site out to understand where it all went wrong. This is a security analisys of the entire voting process: Weblog Awkwards – Anatomy of a Break-In.

James Lilling
November 9, 2007 11:52 am

The people over at PZ’s blog, including PZ himself, strike me as the “We’re more intelligent than you are, so we must be correct.” crowd. (Or is is that “We’re correct so you must be an idiot.”) Snotty, demeaning, illogical, and such. There are 443 posts in a thread where PZ says “Welcome, Stan Palmer, I’m going to unload on you as a proxy for all your fellow denialist idiots!” and

Sorry, but the sanctimonious assholes who have charged over here to make accusations, and the fact that he’s got the support of the junk science king, Milloy, gives me no cause to doubt my impressions of McIntyre, and I’m not at all interested in visiting his site.Sorry, but the sanctimonious assholes who have charged over here to make accusations, and the fact that he’s got the support of the junk science king, Milloy, gives me no cause to doubt my impressions of McIntyre, and I’m not at all interested in visiting his site.

November 9, 2007 2:05 pm

See my coments, here:
Post #26 (last on the current list)

November 9, 2007 2:07 pm

Congratulations to the St. and the Rev.
The TRUE victors!

November 9, 2007 2:30 pm

Now, HERE’S a development! I just went to the awards site, and what did I see? CA and BA tied at exactly 20,000 votes each.
That could mean a number of things. It could mean tht the totals just happened to be tied–at the exact same suspiciously round number. It could mean the totals are different, but the display has mmaxed out. Or it could mean that the moderator has put the kibosh on the whole affair. matched to totals, and is now trying to sort out the mess and determine who REALLY won.
incidentally, the St. (St. Mac) posted over on CA that when the polls “officially” closed, he was ahead by over 200 votes. Add at least 40 to the total, thanks to the blatant, public cheating by doLittleton (who was boastful about it).

Jim B
November 9, 2007 2:31 pm

Next Year we put all our forces behind SurfaceStations.org!

November 9, 2007 2:48 pm

I stopped perusing PZ’s blog not because of his militant atheism (I consider myself a militant atheist as well), but because of the total intolerance toward anyone questioning AGW.
Yes, people’s spiritual beliefs are their own, but too often they are pushed onto everyone else, thus you end up with militant atheism.

Joel McDade
November 9, 2007 2:57 pm

Try 1,200 ahead at the close.
Ya know, this was supposed to be fun and not really meaningful and all that, but this result just sucks. I feel jipped and suckered.
Surprised some of the big blogs haven’t picked up the story.

November 9, 2007 11:33 pm

And the word is in. From “I’mtellinya”.
“#18 lucia
“Posted on Friday, 09 November, 2007
“Weblogawards.com has called the race. It’s a tie!
“We are announcing a tie between Bad Astronomy Blog and Climate Audit, so there will be two winners in this category. Both blogs agree with this decision. We thank them both for helping resolve the issues that affected this poll as voting closed Thursday.”

November 9, 2007 11:37 pm

Again, congrats to the St. and the Rev.
You’ll always be living legends in my book!

November 10, 2007 6:48 am

There’s a not-so-old American legend. I really don’t know if it’s true, but that’s not the point. It’s about the first game when Rockne used the forward pass. This was a legal tactic (obviously), and greatly benefittedbit the game, but it had never occurred to anyone before.
Not unlike how it had never occurred to anyone before to, like–D-uh–(as in D-ue D-iligence) actually eyeball the surface stations, the base source of data for our current flap.
The story goes that he waited until the final moments of the game to pull it off. The pass was completed and the receiver ran down an open field. At this point the hostile hometown crowd spilled onto the field and jumped on the reciever. The ref. refused to call a foul and declared Rockne’s team the losers.
We have already seen the “crowd’s” reaction to St. Mac and the Rev., so far, and it is eerily analogous. We have seen it carried forward in the last few days. (At least the ref. wasn’t a total moral loss this time–and a hat tip to him, despite all.)
But Rockne, so the legend goes, was all smiles in the team bus afterwards. Because he knew he had accomplished. And he knew that he was now in possession of a mighty sword with which he would smite his (noble and not-so-noble) opponents in the future.
So let St. Mac and the Rev likewise smile. (And I’ll throw in an honorable mention to the Docs P.)

November 10, 2007 11:46 pm

Some generals win because they follow the rules.
Others win because they break the rules.
And others win because they write the rules!

%d bloggers like this: