<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:,2008:/1/tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-</id>
  <updated>2008-09-24T12:06:28Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for Voting Irregularities in Weblog Awards 2007? Engadget and Gizmodo Duke it Out</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.1</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=3225" title="Voting Irregularities in Weblog Awards 2007? Engadget and Gizmodo Duke it Out" />
    <published>2007-11-09T22:03:57Z</published>
    <updated>2007-12-16T23:08:23Z</updated>
    <title>Voting Irregularities in Weblog Awards 2007? Engadget and Gizmodo Duke it Out</title>
    <summary>Voting is now closed for the Best Technology Blog, but there is a potential vote rigging controversy afoot. The site currently states: &quot;RESULTS ARE NOT FINAL FOR THIS POLL! This poll is still being checked for excessive voting from individual machines. If excess voting is found it will be noted and the votes will be...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Richard MacManus</name>
      <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/engadget_gizmodo.jpg" vspace="5" hspace="5" align="right" />Voting is now closed for the <a href="http://2007.weblogawards.org/polls/best-technology-blog-1.php">Best Technology Blog</a>, but there is a potential vote rigging controversy afoot. The site currently states:</p>
<p>"RESULTS ARE NOT FINAL FOR THIS POLL! This poll is still being checked for excessive voting from individual machines. If excess voting is found it will be noted and the votes will be removed. The winner should be announced Monday."</p>

<p>Top gadget blogs Engadget and Gizmodo dominated the voting - and both are neck and neck, with 44.7% and 44.2% of the votes respectively. [let's not mention where R/WW ended up!]. Both of the big gadget blogs heavily promoted the contest to their readers. During the week I noticed Engadget take an early lead - and up till a couple of days ago when I last checked, Engadget held a reasonable lead over Gizmodo. But both sites have gotten a lot of fast votes over the past few days. Perhaps taking their <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/01/technology/blog_wars.fortune/">fierce rivalry</a> a bit too far?</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/2007webawards.jpg" /></p>
<p>Note that users were allowed to cast 1 vote every 24 hours, which was determined by IP address. But most web techies know how easy it is to manipulate ip address voting. So we'll see how the "excessive voting" investigation goes!</p>
<p>p.s. I wonder if this will be covered by <a href="http://valleywag.com/">Valleywag</a>? ;-)</p>
<p><i>Top image courtesy of CNNMoney.com (linked above)</i></p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-comment:26211</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php#c26211" />
    <title>Comment from Andrew on 2007-11-09</title>
    <author>
        <name>Andrew</name>
        <uri>http://changingway.org</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://changingway.org">
        <![CDATA[<p>Richard,<br />
On the bright side, at least we can be sure that no-one cheated on behalf of RWW!</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2007-11-09T22:42:03Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-comment:26212</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php#c26212" />
    <title>Comment from Richard MacManus on 2007-11-09</title>
    <author>
        <name>Richard MacManus</name>
        <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Haha, yes :-) tbh I only voted a few times myself over the course of the week!</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2007-11-09T22:44:41Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-comment:26213</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php#c26213" />
    <title>Comment from Heelcandy on 2007-11-09</title>
    <author>
        <name>Heelcandy</name>
        <uri>http://heelcandy.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://heelcandy.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Personally, I read both Engadget and Gizmodo and their content is oftentimes duplicated so I think they should win a joint award for best technology award.  =).</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2007-11-09T22:48:01Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-comment:26214</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php#c26214" />
    <title>Comment from Zoli Erdos on 2007-11-10</title>
    <author>
        <name>Zoli Erdos</name>
        <uri>http://www.zoliblog.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.zoliblog.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Reminds me of this vote at the first Office 2.0:<br />
<a href="http://www.zoliblog.com/2006/10/13/office-20-awards-a-quiz/" rel="nofollow"><a href="http://www.zoliblog.com/2006/10/13/office-20-awards-a-quiz/" rel="nofollow">http://www.zoliblog.com/2006/10/13/office-20-awards-a-quiz/</a></a></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2007-11-11T01:31:03Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225-comment:26215</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:72.47.210.69,2007://1.3225" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/voting_irregularities_in_weblog_awards.php#c26215" />
    <title>Comment from Ryan Block on 2007-11-11</title>
    <author>
        <name>Ryan Block</name>
        <uri>http://www.engadget.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.engadget.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>"Perhaps taking their fierce rivalry a bit too far?"</p>

<p>Is that to imply that we are encouraging our readers to cheat on our behalf in order to win what essentialy amounts to a popularity contest? I somehow doubt you'd want to make that kind of accusation, Richard, and hope you'll revise your post. No need to get sensationalist, you know?</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2007-11-11T21:12:25Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>