Justin Hartman - Latest Comments in SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

phillygirl — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 03:49:44 -0000

Quite the interesting read and this certainly generated a lot of comments ... as I think have all SA Blog Award posts in recent weeks.

I too attended the Cool Running event last year and as events go, it was fairly dull. I enjoy the process of being a finalist tho, if only to get my blog exposed to a wider audience.

I think the SA Blog Awards are pretty much a work-in-progress and each year some things improve and some stay the same. And it's only thru people discussing the flaws that things will improve.

I have to agree that I don't agree with Thought Leader being considered a "blog" ... I nominated a specific Thought Leader Blog in a certain (discarded) category and I think that's a far better approach. If Thought Leader itself should be a finalist (or winner) in any category it should be a category like: "Best SA Web Application for Weblogs" or similar.

I think there should definitely be more of a consensus regarding the award categories :) (I mean really, what kind of award system has a category for people writing about the awards?)

And for what it's worth I think it's okay that some categories were discarded. If only one SA blog got nominated for a category, firstly: perhaps the category wasn't very well thought out and secondly: where's the competition, it kinda defeats the purpose. But then again, I agree that there should've been a bit of a better explanation around this decision!

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Blog Awards Fan — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 03:43:03 -0000

Richard Catto is just a jealous little prick with more than one pseudonym

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Spencer Drew Patrick Eggworth — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 02:41:01 -0000

Oh come on! What a waste of good processing power debating this. These awards are a complete and utter crock o' SH*T. The majority of local blogs are utter rubbish (mine included) and these awards just perpetuate the myth of Web 2.00 stardom in the minds of a few deluded individuals. Wake up and smell the Java.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Expensive Mistakes and Cheap T — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 04:52:24 -0000

when I asked if anyone knew what the prizes are, I was referring to the ten supposedly sponsored prizes mentioned on the SA Blog Awards site.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Rudolph — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 03:13:42 -0000

Although I think there can be vast improvement to many media awards in the tech space, the Blog awards and any other similar accolades does serve the purpose of promoting the industry. I think many people – including me on many occasions – make the mistake to assume that the purpose of awards is always to discover and reward the best in its field. This is only partly true…

To truly reward the best in the industry – in whatever field – is such a complex task that one should not expect this to easily happen. Even with mainstream awards – like the Telkom journalist of the Year awards – many problems occur and controversial choices are made.

I personally think that any awards process should involve readers, writers and industry experts – assuming that there is a large enough user base. With limited resources this is not possible, which is why many of the top blogs and podcasts are absent. This however does not mean that the awards are useless – just less accurate than what it can be. The question really is how inaccurate…here I can not judge…

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Glen — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 11:40:10 -0000

Great post Justin and I thought I'd like to add my views as expressed by myself and other independent podcasters in South Africa.

The "Best SA Podcast" category for the SA Blog Awards. The description clearly reads "Best independently produced video or audio podcast in SA". It so happend that a huge number of the nomincations are clearly not independent podcasts and added to that, that one of the nominees, 2oceansvibe.com is not even a podcast, but a blog with embedded YouTube videos! I was unable to locate the RSS feed for the Just Plain Darren podcast on the webiste and without that, it isn't considered a podcast.

I am extremely greatful for my podcast getting a nomincation this year, but I think there should of been some form of obvious filtering done in this category, even if the public vote is the exclusive vote. Jon has been made aware of this, but with the rules this year, is unable to do something about it.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

gmk — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 10:06:00 -0000

What should be a joyous time for the community to respect their peers and show [ thick enough cheese? ] we really care about everybody and our carbon footprint when the reality is our little blogowhatitsname is no bigger than coda's barge poll or David Bullards IQ.

Every year you all get your knickers in a fat knot and make derogatory comments about other peoples mothers. When you have all finished with your annual self masturbatory flagellation of how important you all are let it dawn like a new rainbow nation that no-one other than the ones who run it or whine about it give a flaying faaaaark.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

tuberider — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:21:42 -0000

Hey why don't we set up a bad blog awards?

as long as I win something that is. I want to be great.

Have a nice day.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

coda — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 09:18:20 -0000

My barge pole is bigger than your barge pole.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Justin Hartman — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:09:28 -0000

‘lack of quality nominations’ - that infuriates me.. I personally nominated for David Bullard and Bolton in the Most Controversial Blog as I felt they were both defining moments in the Bologosphere in 2007.

Are you telling me David Bullard is not a quality blog and that Bolton didn't highlight many key issues in our blogosphere?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Groogle — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:08:53 -0000

...and a 69 x 100 pixel winners badge

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Justin Hartman — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:07:14 -0000

The prize is: R20.08...

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Expensive Mistakes and Cheap T — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 08:03:26 -0000

I agree with what you have expressed in this post.

There is no transparency whatsoever in this awards process. I would also like to know who the judges are. That should have been annouced at the beginning of the nominations process.

As for the removal of a whole load of categories, I actually enquired into that and was informed that those categories were removed due to 'lack of quality nominations' - this is a vague, avoiding-the-real-issue answer, if ever I've heard one.

If people nominated, those votes should have been carried through. Just to ensure that the awards are a proper reflection of the reading populace.

And I agree that the awards serve to perpetuate the 'elitist' environment - as such, I'd like to know how many nominations were actually cast, and how many it took to qualify as a finalist.

As a finalist myself, both in the best personal blog category (a category that myself and another blogger suggested) and best group blog, I dont mind if my personal blog doesn't win. In fact, it probably wont. The usual suspects will win.

But the group blog I run would be much more deserving as it is much better to share a win with others, than it is to win alone. And as for the prizes, does anyone even know what they are?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Stii — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:27:29 -0000

I'm with Colin on this one this year. Cheers. Out. Colin, fancy a round of golf while this plays out?!

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Justin Hartman — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:13:28 -0000

Nic, I think you've misinterpreted what I was trying to say. I honestly feel that a lot of those sites (sarocks included) deserve an award and some recognition because they are good initiatives but at the same time there are some I just completely disagree with. But hey, I'm not the public and this is what they voted on.

My issue was more about the fact that we need credibility to these awards and this is lacking. They have tried desperately to be transparent but as I said communication has been flawed.

In terms of egos and being an elitist I think we need to explore this a little. Bloggers, in the old sense, are egotistical. I personally don't write my blog so people can say how great I am, I actually do it because I just want to share stuff with people that matter to me. If others read my stuff - great - if not so be it.

Awards from a blog perspective are meaningless to me - but that's just me. I agree with being recognised for achievements but I want to be recognised in a proper way.

If I knew 4 million people nominated on the Blog Awards then I'd feel proud of my achievements but to just have 300 people nominate perpetuates the elitist, little-boys club that we ALL belong to. I'm no different to you in this regard however I want this to change.

My question to you is this. Why do you need a badge on your site from people who already think you're doing a great job? Does this somehow validate your efforts or is it just your ego that would like one?

What happens if you don't win, how will you feel?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Andre — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:06:27 -0000

@Nic

The reason I ask is that a number of people indicated that they'd nominated my green blog, and my wordpress click reporting indicated that a considerable number of people had clicked to nominate my blog. Perhaps not as many as Urban Sprout, for example, but the last time I check voting protocol one nomination + one seconding meant that one could stand?

Either way, it would just be interesting to know what the governing principles were. Anybody? Rafiq?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

robin@noboxmedia.com — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:04:09 -0000

I agree on all points. This is my first year as a nominee and I must say the experience so far has been bleak. After a bit of investigating I can still not assign responsibility of the SABlogAwards to any individual, company or organization.

All the points made above are valid, only problem is the organizer/s of the SABlogAwards seem to have no real interest in communicating to the public or improving their service. As such, perhaps the creation of a more credible awards campaign would be the best solution. I would be more than happy to offer my services as a developer/designer if any one is interested in starting a new BlogAwards portal. I am sure I could get support, exposure and perhaps even sponsorship by a well known ICT publisher. I could also arrange free hosting and domain registration.

Just thought I would put the idea out there. Afterall, if the shoe does not fit, get a new one.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Nic — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:00:02 -0000

@Andre brilliant question, that's the sort of transparency I was talking bout.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Jared — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:51:15 -0000

Why isn't capetownnews.co.za listed in the list of top blogs?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Guy McLaren — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:43:39 -0000

I declined to enter and in fact asked people not to nominate my blog. All I see are the same suspects.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Jerm — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:43:35 -0000

Once upon a time, I wrote a blog post about this nonsense. I think I compared the awards to horse turd. Or was it dog turd. I can't remember now. But that's not the point.

After winning a few categories last year (and coming 4th overall, I think), I realised that something was very wrong with the process.

Hence I decided not to be part of it. Unless, of course, my blog was guaranteed a win in the bisexual-gay-lesbian category. Or in Best Self Help Blog (which doesn't exist).

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

VhailorZ — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:43:20 -0000

hey i think its cool watching people think they are actually any good when they win the SA BLOG AWARDS! dum dum duuuuum!!!

Ok seriously, if theres no demand, then theres no supply. and like justin said. we are talking about a mere 300 people MAX here.

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Andre — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:37:30 -0000

Also, how many times does a blog need to be nominated before it proceeds to the voting stage? Is one nomination enough, or did you need 50?

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Nic — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:32:57 -0000

@Colin hahahahahaha - fair decision methinks!!

Re: SA Blog Awards, WTF?

Nic — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 06:31:41 -0000

Justin - what makes my comment so bad? The fact that I want to win? That's ridiculous. Why participate if you don't want to win. It's not SA Rocks's fault that the organisers didn't open the awards up to amagama, iblog and 24.com. that would've been brilliant as we have discussed before. I back that move 100%. I am not saying that it's right that the event is perceived as an elitist event, it's not right at all, but before we get in to that debate I'd like to know how many blogs received nominations in the first round. I think we'd be surprised.

And let's be honest we are all very heavily embedded in this elitist regime it appears. I must tell you SA Rocks readership is not the blogosphere as much as it is the average user commenting on a story they googled.

And it is nice to be recognised for your efforts. My comment on this is perfectly justifiable dude. If I'm nominated it's nice to win, ego in or ego out, people like to win stuff and be recognised by anyone anywhere at anytime. Ofcourse if the awards were more reputable with more entires and the like then it'd be better to win and to participate. But that's y we are having this debate i guess, to improve things.