Vote for Rumproast in the Weblog Awards—The Sequel [NOW WITH MORE OPEN THREADINESS!]
THIS POST IS CLOSED—MORE CHEATER-ENDORSED BLOGS HERE!
This is so fucking on! Don’t let the PUMAs win this thing. They must not win anything. Ever. It is their destiny. Vote for Rumproast in the Weblog Awards for Best Small Blog. You can vote once every 24-hour period per computer. If any of our blog buddies could help us out with promoting this, we’d appreciate it. As an added bonus, every time you vote for Rumproast, a PUMA loses its roar.
You can read the previous action-packed thread here, but not until you vote.
MORE: Please also consider voting for friends of Rumproast Wonkette (vote here), Balloon Juice (vote here), Jon Swift (vote here), and Jesus’ General (vote here).
MORE: In case you didn’t click above, we’ve been Wonketted:
In “Best Small Blog,” we wholeheartedly endorse the excellent Rumproast blog, and you should vote for them daily. They have bravely been messing with the PUMAs since this summer, consistently, and with hilarious results. The PUMAs noticed that they’d been nominated in this category and are mobilizing their entire Internet loser base to prevent Rumproast from winning. Make Rumproast win.
Just a quick point of clarification, we’ve been messing with them since at least March, long before they came up with that utterly ridiculous acronym…
We also wholeheartedly endorse Jim Newell’s other pick ~ synthesis ~ for “Best New Blog.” It’s really good and it’s up against a wide-eyed lunatic who writes for Flowbee, waves guns and puppies around, and hates Communists, especially when they win presidential elections and stuff.
MORE: The PUMAs are running around the blogotubes accusing Wonkette and Rumproast of “cheating” (as I noted in the earlier post, here are our sinister haxxing instructions) and they’ve been “prowling” the folks at the Weblogs Awards so much with their delusional accusations (“IT’S LIKE THE CAUCUSES ALL OVER AGAIN! BLORT!!!!!”) that host Kevin Aylward had to update the Awards FAQ:
Q: Site XX is cheating, why won’t you remove them from the contest?
A: First of all, upon what evidence are you basing your assertion that a particular site is cheating? Do you have the logs, are you monitoring the polls? Of course you’re not, that’s our job and you can ask any of the participants in previous editions where there were close call contests we check and double check everything.
Before you accuse other sites of cheating, I suggest you do some research.
Sometimes finalists vote totals spike up when they get a link or endorsement from a high traffic blog. You can look things like this up by checking who is linking to the poll page with Technorati. Often that’s a useful way to investigate who is sending traffic to a particular poll.
Our Site Meter is open, and you can use it to see the last 100 referring sites. Somewhere in that list may be an explanation of where voters are coming from for a poll you care about. Also, don’t discount the effects of campaigning via e-mail lists or forums some sites have done in the past to drum up support. In short there are lots of ways for sites to get voters to the polls. Don’t assume that just because you don’t understand how they are getting votes that they are somehow cheating.
It’s a seven day contest - surges and spike are to be expected.
Their inevitable conclusion will be that Kevin A. is an misogynistic obot and he must be destroyed.
Posted by Kevin K. on 01/07/09 at 09:36 AM • Permalink
Categories: Messylaneous • Politics • PUMAs • Nutters • Poliblogs • Rumproast Related •


