Oooh, shiny

The 2006 Weblog Awards

I get a badge!

There’s a bit of chagrin involved in being nominated for one of these Weblog Awards, since if you look at the finalists in “Best Blog”, you’ll see Malkin, LGF, Power Line, InstaPundit, and The Corner listed…you have to figure, whoa, standards are awfully low here.

However, I am not nominated for Best Blog! I am in the Best Science Blog category. This makes me feel much better, because my fellow nominees are all a fine bunch of deserving people.

John Hawks Anthropology Weblog
Good Math, Bad Math
Mixing Memory
The Panda’s Thumb
In the Pipeline
Bad Astronomy Blog

The next hurdle is the voting, which starts tomorrow. They’ve got a strange voting scheme over there, in which you get to vote every day or something, so it may still end up weird, and who knows, Michelle Malkin might win my category anyway.


  1. Ian H Spedding FCD says

    P Z Myers wrote:

    …and who knows, Michelle Malkin might win my category anyway.

    …which is about as likely as you winning Best Conservative Blog.

    On the other hand, how does she feel about squid and zebrafish?

  2. Goby says

    The Bad Astronomy blog points to the John Hawks blog. Thanks for the pointers to some blogs that were unknown to me.

  3. says

    There is a nasty word that begins with C. There are very few people who are deserving of having this word thrust upon them as an official title.

    One of these poeople is Michele Malkin.

    And no, the word is neither Christian or Conservative.

  4. Ginger Yellow says

    Careful there. Marcotte’ll get feminist on your ass.

    I know its silly to get worked up about these things, but I really don’t understand how Tom Tomorrow isn’t in Best Comic but Chris Muir is, or how Crooked Timber and Unfogged didn’t get nominated for anything.

  5. says

    The Weblog Awards are genuinely weirdly handled, in a Republican sort of way. They accept nominations, then the actual nominees are picked in a smoke-filled back room manner by the people who run the show. Then the voting is just bizarre — you get to vote once a day? It means the most single-mindedly obsessive and partisan voters will see their choice win.

  6. Paguroidea says

    I guess it will test the endurance of pharynguloids. Let’s go! Let’s go! Oh, it doesn’t start until tomorrow.

  7. says

    Hey, waitaminute, I thought that the Panda’s Thumb was a hotbed of theistic evilutionists! Now PZ is calling them “a fine bunch of deserving people”?


  8. says

    Some are more deserving than others. I will crush you.

    … which is easy, because cephalopods have no bones. Crushing is simple. Of course, they just pop back into shape.

  9. CL says

    Then the voting is just bizarre — you get to vote once a day?

    That’s actually become somewhat commonplace, or, at the very least, there are some “real world” votes conducted that way. The Baseball Hall of Fame lets you vote once a day on the nominees for the Ford Frick Award, given to a broadcaster for lifetime achievement. The nomination process for the Hobey Baker Award (given annually to the best player in Division I college hockey) is similar. There, you get to vote for up to three players once a day for a month or so. The Hobey Baker people combine the vote point totals with some smoke-filled room decisionmaking to get the list of finalists, with the winner then picked by some media and coaching types.