Weblog Awards

Last year there was a crazy Florida style hanging chads-keep-voting-after-the deadline event pitting Climate Audit and Bad Astronomy and their legions of readers against one another. The judges declared a tie, after being unable to sort out the post deadline voting mess.

This year I hope they will have better quality control.

So here you go, nominate your favorite science blog (or any other blog type you frequent) and we’ll see if the voting goes smoothly, or if adjustments are needed at the end.

Ric Werme points out: Note from the nomination rules:

# The number of nominations a blog receives is irrelevant. One nomination is enough…

# Rather than add a “me too” nomination for a site you’re encouraged to use the “+” icon to indicate your preference for nominees. The “+” ratings are one extra piece of information the finalist selection panel can use to help generate the finalist slates in each category.

Have fun.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
23 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
pkatt
November 14, 2008 1:07 am

Well as far as most read.. it would be yours,
http://solarcycle24com.proboards106.com/index.cgi
and
http://www.spaceweather.com/
sooooo I guess youre it 🙂

Araucan
November 14, 2008 2:44 am

I did it…
Good luck

November 14, 2008 2:57 am

Nominated WUWT, keep up the good work
Luca, from Italy

Philip_B
November 14, 2008 3:17 am

I’ve nominated WUWT.
Let’s hope this year’s vote is as eventful as last year. The most interesting thing on the blogosphere for a few days.

bikermailman
November 14, 2008 4:50 am

Nominated, thanks for all the great work!

November 14, 2008 5:13 am

My vote too

tarpon
November 14, 2008 6:12 am

I put your site in, and would like to say — best site around.

Editor
November 14, 2008 6:15 am

Note from the nomination rules:
# The number of nominations a blog receives is irrelevant. One nomination is enough…
# Rather than add a “me too” nomination for a site you’re encouraged to use the “+” icon to indicate your preference for nominees. The “+” ratings are one extra piece of information the finalist selection panel can use to help generate the finalist slates in each category.

cbone
November 14, 2008 7:09 am

Don’t forget to go back and vote for the other nominations. There is a little + mark at the end of each post. You can go back and show your support for nominations that way.

Dan Lee
November 14, 2008 7:21 am

Did you catch this?
http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/C/COAL_PLANTS?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
“Coal Plants Jeopardized over Climate”

cbullitt
November 14, 2008 7:39 am

Put you in there–although I’m conflicted about not nominating JunkScience too. Didn’t see any other sites with as many entries. Good luck Anthony.

kim
November 14, 2008 8:16 am

Last year during this contest I wandered over to Pharyngula and stumbled over the epic Stan Palmer thread. I ended up missing three days of my life and was finally asked to leave by the host. That’s a very tolerant host, folks, and an alert and perceptive commentariat, but it wasn’t I who was the problem in the conversation. That board has the completely unnecessary habit of confounding skepticism about the CO2=AGW paradigm with religious faith. He, and they, have it totally backwards.
=====================================

November 14, 2008 8:24 am

I am in!

Jim B Canada
November 14, 2008 10:27 am

# The number of nominations a blog receives is irrelevant. One nomination is enough…
# Rather than add a “me too” nomination for a site you’re encouraged to use the “+” icon to indicate your preference for nominees. The “+” ratings are one extra piece of information the finalist selection panel can use to help generate the finalist slates in each category.
We may not be the best at reading instructions but we make up for it with clicking enthusiasm!

November 14, 2008 10:57 am

“Great. The deniers are already spamming the nominations. That’s just lovely.”
Peter

Mikey
November 14, 2008 11:45 am

“Great. The deniers are already spamming the nominations. That’s just lovely.”
But why would that bother the warming lobby? One keeps hearing they have a consensus.
Unless of course they’d like us to believe they’re not doing the same thing. In order to do that I’d have to widen my parameters as to what I find believable. So they’d have to answer this question for me. “If Santa is so fat, how does he get down the chimney?”

Ellie in Belfast
November 14, 2008 12:43 pm

I’m in. You are +9 and counting.

Ellie in Belfast
November 14, 2008 12:47 pm

Oh! make that just on ‘Best Blog’. Lots of nomiations and lots of + on ‘Best Science Blog’

November 14, 2008 4:01 pm

Mrs Smokey just got home. I’ll remind her to vote, too. And I’m emailing some other folks I know who visit this site. Can’t hurt. Might help!

November 14, 2008 4:55 pm

nominated Bernstein and Woodward 😀

papertiger
November 15, 2008 4:11 am

We have quite a team fighting the false climate change political movement.
This year the weblog awards field looks to be shaping up as a contest pitting skeptic against skeptic. Talk of who noticed what act of perfidy first could build rifts which might cause some of us to lose track of the goal.
I pray that doesn’t happen.
Let’s remember, “It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit.”

November 16, 2008 9:18 pm

This one is the best. Sensible, easy-ish to understand and commonsense most of the time.
A good counter to the nutcase Gores of this world.

Bill P
November 17, 2008 9:55 am

What has the “Best” site done to steady confidence that they’ve fixed the problem of cyber-vote-fudging last year? It seemed especially ugly with regard to readerships at CA and pharyngulee (pharyngula?).
My nomination:
CA = best science
WUWT = best web
Regards, Anthony.

%d bloggers like this: