Before I start, a little disclaimer. I have nothing to do with the 2004 Weblog Awards. My sole involvement thus far have been 1) an e-mail from Kevin requesting that Paul and I “up the tempo” a little to keep up the pace here at Wizbang! while the Awards are keeping him busy, and 2) voting for a couple of sites already. I didn’t even get a sneak preview of the ubercool logo Suzy designed. (Sniff — I thought we meant more to each other than that, Suzy…)
Anyway, everyone else is chiming in on the ballot-stuffing being done by Kos’ supporters, so I figured I’d toss in my 1.5 cents (inflation takes its toll). There are a few points I find enlightening over in the thread at Kos where this seems to have erupted.
The first is one Kos-head cites as justification for the stuffing is the fact that some Little Green Footballs readers are doing the same thing — even pointing out that “(t)hey even borrowed the script from Kos to make their job easier.” (UPDATE: I don’t know whether LGFers did this or not — I have no inside knowledge about the Awards, and don’t want any. But the Kos-head’s citing of it — real or not — is the key here.) Apparently it escaped his mind that there would have been no script to borrow had not he (or one of his colleagues) first written, used, and published it.
I understand the impulse to counter-cheat, but I don’t agree with it. You don’t answer bad conduct with bad conduct. My mother once told me, “don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to your level, then beat you with experience.” Not only do I think that we would prove less skilled cheaters than they, but I think that by simply letting them choose the battleground, we already lose.
I also noticed, in my perusal of the comments, that Kos himself has not spoken up. He hasn’t denounced the cheating, hasn’t deleted the script, hasn’t renounced the fraudulent votes. Kos has a history of deleting pieces from his site when they prove inconvenient; I find it telling he hasn’t done so here.
I’ve often heard the argument against legalizing marijuana phrased as pot being a “gateway” drug that leads to more serious abuse in the future. I wonder — could cheating in online voting be a “gateway” action that leads to cheating in votes that actually mean something? If so, it’s nice of them to give us such a public track record to cite…
What really aggravates me is that Kevin set up these awards with the clear, stated purpose of giving excellent but relatively unknown blogs a chance at some publicity. Kevin seems to take Wizbang’s high profile as a responsibility to the blogosphere and is trying to “share the wealth” a little. (As one of the biggest recipients of Kevin’s largesse, I am especially sensitive to this topic.) But to the Kos-heads (or whatever the hell they call themselves; I don’t care enough to find out), nothing is more important than WINNING.
I’m not going to suggest what sort of sanctions should be imposed. Apparently the fraudulent votes are being deleted and the abusers have been banned. That’s also affecting a lot of innocent people, as well (obligatory cheap shot: but I really wonder if it’s such a bad thing to ban AOL users), but apparently there’s no other way to keep out the cheaters.
But this last part is strictly for any Kos-heads who find their way over here. I’m gonna speak to them in their own language for a moment:
J.
UPDATE: I’m closing comments on this thread. It’s gotten wildly off-topic, and it’s degenerated into re-fighting battles that were settled over a month ago. Anyone that obsessed with doing that is welcome to go join a Civil War Re-enactment club.
– Thats alright Mike, in truth I’d actually love to see the radical asshats push this numbnutz refusal to accept that thev’ve been dupped and used by the lying jerks like McAuliffe and others in their own party, and see LurchKerry file suit and get dragged out into the center of the public spotlight and really exposed instead of what he’s actually trying to do, namely keep a low profile and let it all blow over before he truly gets “outed” once and for all and sent packing back into his weasle hole. Its never going to happen…..
– O’neill and his partner have offered to pay for the FedEx charges if Kerrydork will just please, please sue them. Nada. Nothing. Total silence except for this BS rumor they float every few weeks that he’s “thinking” about it… Yeh right. If all of these things are terrible lies and slander against him then whats his problem ….whats he waiting for…. His lack of action, as it has been from the very beginning, is totally damning….
– Anyone that would be enough of an idiot to try to shovel lies against the tide of truth that hangs over that scumbag at this point deserves whatever ridicule they bring down on themselves….
– Thanks for tracking the pertinant post. As I posted earlier, It would be real cute of the moonbats to do the deed and then cover their tracks after the fact with a few well placed CYA posts. The fact that they garner such immediate rath based on past actions is no ones fault but their own….
– In the case of the sKerry mess, anyone who would try to argue that its more likely that 11 people are more viable than 265 people probably gets that mindset because their whole party is a fine example of mass lying…..
– And a sorry to Jay for getting so far OT … appricaite your patience….
Does Kos circulate these rumors of a lawsuit? As a law school grad (I don’t know if he ever passed the bar) he should know better. That he does nothing to squelch the rumor among his minions, is not very ethical.
Oh, Kerry has the benefit of lots of lawyers supporting him. They hve, no doubt, informed him of the myriad problems he’d face pursuing any legal actions. Kerry wants to sue and he’d be required to actually release all of the records he claimed he released (well, until right before the election, when he mentioned that his records weren’t public) as part of the discovery process.
Kerry would be foolish to attempt to fight this (as idiotic as FNC was in suing Franken for the cover of his mindless drivel in written form) and I cannot fathom any instance in where he’d actually pursue this. Kerry is best served with the present set-up: Best to be thought a liar than to have it concretely proven.
-=Mike
– Well its more likely that its sKerry’s staff “leaking” to the liberal press lap dogs. O’Neill went public a few weeks ago when the Kerryites tryed a few well placed hints he’d like to try yet another disasterous run and said that the Swifties will be waiting for him. Right after the BS rumor that he was thinking of sueing surfaced and thats the last anyones heard of it, in spite of the pleas from O’Neill begging Lurch to sue them…..
Apparently the flipflopper has more money and ego than common sense. Yesterday he gave a speech in NH, telling his “flock” to hang together and continue their support, and next he’s headed out to Oregon. I don’t think he’s going anywhere but even further in the political toilet….. Now I’ll shut up on sKerry….
Hunter said “when you have no other way of arguing against the facts …”
Nice description of why you’re continuing to try to change the subject. I realize you find it hard to explain why it’s OK to criticize Kos cheaters while blithely ignoring LGF cheaters.
“I gave you -5- clear actions that your plastic blow up ex-candidate …”
I realize you’re still trying to change the subject. I told you where I’m willing to have that conversation with you. Put your money where your mouth is.
“I notice you cherry picked the only thing in the list that could be a matter of conjecture”
You’re descending into total incoherence. Do you mean the idea that O’Neill offered a reward is just your conjecture? I don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about. I have a funny feeling that makes at least two of us.
“That would be intellectually honest”
Quite audacious of you to refer to such a thing, since you’re still determined to avoid a direct and simple question. Maybe you missed it the first time: do you condemn the fact that our host here speaks up against cheating by Kos folks, but is utterly silent with regard to (earlier, albeit clumsier) cheating by LGF folks? Yes or no?
Julie said “I think winning the election means George Bush is president. That you and the other nuts can’t accept it is pathological behavior.”
Nice job trying to change the subject. I realize your reasons are the same as Hunter’s.
“I remember how you crapped all over Beldar’s site.”
How interesting that the cat got your tongue at that time. You said nothing.
“You did not prove O’Neill a liar.”
How interesting that you found some reason to avoid making that statement at the more appropriate time and place.
Anyway, if you think I didn’t prove O’Neill is a liar, you should offer an alternate explanation for why Beldar has studiously avoided providing his long-promised summary.
To put this back on topic, I agree that it’s beyond sad that lefty blogs think that cheating is so needed, but seeing the glee with which they flooded internet polls (I loved one time where FNC refused to even refer to their results, seeing as how absurd (something to the extent of 80+% feeling Kerry “won” one of the final 2 debates) they were), we should have seen this coming.
Are conservatives perfect? No. And, no doubt, conservatives do cheat.
I’m, however, not willing to say that we ARE doing it when the evidence does not really bear it out.
I will say that conservatives don’t cheat gleefully (if we do cheat, we have the common sense to not only not mention it, but to publicly gripe when others do it).
All I heard was how conservatives wanted to suppress the vote and steal elections, but which side was slashing GOTV van tires? Which side is trying to overturn the results in WA and OH? Hint: It’s not the right.
I know constant disappointment in the behavior of others is inevitable and, for whatever reason, it ALWAYS bugs people — even when we should know better.
But we SHOULD have known better. They did it during the debates. They did it during any on-line poll they could. This is just par for the course.
One thing I will always find humorous, though, is that, in 2008, Bush will STILL be blamed for the divisions in the country, and not the assorted slugs who populate places like Kos and DU — people who have no desire to unite.
-=Mike
MIke said “Thus, Charles was out in front BEFORE any of this.”
Yes, Charles spoke up to discourage cheating. That’s nice. And then his visitors proceeded to cheat anyway, and Charles did nothing, as far as I can tell. So what’s your point? I never said Charles encouraged cheating. But please explain why we haven’t heard a peep from Charles regarding the various cheat messages he hosted, subsequent to his warning.
By the way, what’s the logic of a poll that specifically announces that people are allowed to vote over and over again (as long as it’s “only” once per day)? And what do you think of Charles explicitly encouraging this: “I highly recommend voting once per day for LGF” (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=13809)?
“Kos, who has cherry-picked his entire audience by banning anybody who dared to hold a differing viewpoint …”
I see lots of differing viewpoints on Kos. Unlike almost all the leading right-wing blogs (who have a fraction of his traffic), he has the guts to host comments. Registering and posting is simple. Back up your accusation, please.
By the way, with the exception of LGF, no right-wing blog that hosts comments has more than about 8% of the traffic that Kos gets. And Kos gets well over three times more traffic than LGF does. And obviously even LGF shouldn’t now count as an “open” blog, since registration is currently closed.
” … is responsible for this.”
Really? This is pretty mind-boggling. Let me see if I can follow your “logic.” Because Kos has allegedly (according to you) banned some or many people, he’s therefore responsible for every statement made by every subsequent visitor to his site, because those are people he chose not to ban? He gets more than 250,000 visits per day. Many visitors leave posts. You claim it’s fair to hold Markos personally responsible for every post, by every visitor. How amusing. Are you suggesting that such an absurd standard should be applied across the blogosphere?
Given the size of his audience, it’s nonsense for you to claim that Kos “cherry-picked his entire audience,” or that the person(s) who posted the cheat-script are “people HE chose.”
I also wonder if you’d really like me to create a digest of “interesting” LGF posts (aside from the cheater posts I’ve already documented) that apparently, by your rules, we should hold Charles personally responsible for.
“something HE refuses to distance himself from”
The fact that Kos himself is silent on this subject means nothing. He has lots of other fish to fry. As the biggest blog, by a large margin, I can’t imagine why this “poll,” or the blather about it, would capture his attention. Lots of his visitors spoke up against cheating. That’s more than enough.
Again, I wonder if you’d really like me to create a digest of “interesting” LGF posts (aside from the cheater posts I’ve already documented) that Charles is currently failing to “distance himself from.”
“given all of the deleted posts in the threads there”
Pray tell what “deleted posts” you’re talking about. I see no sign of “deleted posts.” Proof, please.
“Kos did the EXACT same thing during the debates”
He didn’t encourage people to cheat. He encouraged people to vote. Explain what’s wrong with that. Or substantiate your claim that he encouraged cheating, if that in fact is your claim. I see you’re willing to make lots of allegations without a shred of proof. Typical.
“If individual LGF’ers did it, then yes, they should be condemned.”
Isn’t it interesting then that people like Powerline and Captain’s Quarters have condemned Kos cheaters but not breathed a word about LGF cheaters. Not to mention Charles himself failing to breath a word about LGF cheaters (aside from his initial warning, which was buried in an easy-to-miss message, and promptly ignored).
I also notice your nuanced use of the word “if,” as if there’s any question that LGF folks cheated. There is no such question. They cheated, both before and after they borrowed a smarter method from a Kos poster. Imitation is the sincerest form etc.
“The HEAD of LGF specifically told them not to.”
That’s true, and he deserves some credit for that (although he also “highly recommended” that his people vote repeatedly, as long as it was “only” once per day). But please explain why he apparently has nothing to say about various cheaters who have posted on his site, after he made his announcement. Anyway, I never said I had a gripe with Charles. (Unlike you, I think it’s absurd to suggest that the host of a large blog should be held personally accountable for every post by every visitor). The problem is all the hypocrites who are blind to the cheaters he hosted.
“Your attempts to refute any of O’Neill’s charges against Kerry were laughable.”
Isn’t it interesting how many people (like you and Julie) are now ready to speak up, after Beldar has shut down the discussion. If you have something substantive to say on the subject, I suggest you encourage Beldar to reopen the thread (under a new summary), as he has repeatedly promised.
see above under “Too big for his britches” re: KOS
~Cindy
Mike said “I loved one time where FNC refused to even refer to their results, seeing as how absurd (something to the extent of 80+% feeling Kerry ‘won’ one of the final 2 debates) they were)”
Do you think FNC would have done the same if the shoe was on the other foot? Just genuinely curious about your opinion.
“I’m, however, not willing to say that we ARE doing it when the evidence does not really bear it out.”
You’re obviously scroll-impaired, so let me help out. From my earlier post:
—-
From http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=13820#c0038:
“Go here [http://www.squarefree.com/bookmarklets/zap.html]. Add the ‘zap cookies’ bookmarklet to your favorites. Vote. Then run the ‘zap cookies’ bookmarklet, refresh page, run bookmarklet, refresh page… each refresh will count as a vote.” (12/3/2004 11:23AM PST)
From that same thread: “Sometimes having 126 IP’s has it’s ups. Not many, but this is one.” (12/3/2004 11:20AM PST)
From that same thread: “Having four different broadband connections available at three locations is a beautiful thing” (12/3/2004 12:44PM PST)
From http://2004weblogawards.com/archives/000079.php:
“Good to see LGF coming back. What’s great is that they’re using the Kos’ perl script against them.” (12/4, 11:56 pm)
“LGF has just gained a huge number of votes in the past few minutes. Looks like someone else has learned to use scripts.” (12/4, 11:59 pm)
“25,141 votes in 27 minutes … So we’ve escalated from 107 votes per minute to 931 votes per minute in the past half hour after all of the script hacking notes have been posted.” (12/5, 12:14 am)
“Well, that was fun. Got LGF up to 40% with Kos’ own script.” (12/5, 12:36 am)
Of course, the best proof that LGF cheated is that Kevin reset their counter (see http://2004weblogawards.com/archives/000079.php). Those who say LGF didn’t cheat should provide some alternate explanation for why Kevin did this.
In other words, LGF folks cheated both before and after the script was posted on Kos. It’s just that the LGF folks weren’t very good at cheating until they bumped into a better coder who happened to also be a poster at Kos.
—-
“I will say that conservatives don’t cheat gleefully”
You must be pulling my leg. I guess “well, that was fun” (see LGF message quoted above) is conservative-speak for “I am cheating with a heavy heart?”
“if we do cheat, we have the common sense to not only not mention it, but to publicly gripe when others do it”
Thanks for being so up-front about what passes for morality in your neighborhood. I’d be hard-pressed to come up with a truer and more succint portrayal of right-wing “values.”
You’re saying it’s “common sense” that if one cheats, the proper thing to do is not get caught, and be a hypocrite and point fingers at the other guy who is open about it. Thanks for saying it so directly. I see you’ve been trained in the Rush Limbaugh/Bill Bennett School for Pill Poppers and Compulsive Gamblers. I nominate you for cabinet minister in charge of moral values.
Anyway, the folks at LGF obviously didn’t have enough “common sense” to “not mention it.”
“They did it during the debates. They did it during any on-line poll they could.”
Voting was encouraged. Please provide a shred of proof that cheating was encouraged, condoned, or practiced. Otherwise I will have to invoke the principle you stated so aptly: “the evidence does not really bear it out.”
“people who have no desire to unite”
I think that expression is a euphemism for “people who aren’t willing to ignore facts just because they’re inconvenient.” As long as you define “unite” that way, thanks but no thanks. Exhibit A: you’re still in denial about the cheating promoted at LGF, before the subject even arose at Kos.
Isn’t it interesting how many people (like you and Julie) are now ready to speak up, after Beldar has shut down the discussion. If you have something substantive to say on the subject, I suggest you encourage Beldar to reopen the thread (under a new summary), as he has repeatedly promised.
We both did: You did not refute any of O’Neill’s charges and you made a fool of yourself.
And where do you get off acting like Beldar owes you anything? I think the man deserves a medal for just tolerating you. Here is what he wrote:
I’m planning to write a new post, summarizing the results of this “challenge,” sometime this weekend.
Today I printed out this post to have a hard-copy handy for cross-referencing as I worked on the long-promised summary, and it ran to 154 printed pages.
Who cares! If you want a summary, do it yourself! Instead, you act like it’s a damn legal contract. He and everyone else was sick of you and he was trying to close down the thread. Otherwise, you would have never stopped posting your 10k word a pop posts that no one really reads and refuted nothing. NOTHING! The reason why it ran to over 154 pages was because of your ad nauseam posting that you are now starting to do here, that I have seen you do at other websites until you are banned, and when you come back under a different name.
– junkbox – you’re saying nothing – just rhetoric…pure and simple spamming….a bunch of circular long winded jibberish with no point what so ever… try a few simple coherent lines or forget it… you’re wasting bandwidth….
OMG! In the time it took me to make one post, the Bloviator stuck again. I guess one should never underestimate the power of your hot air.
Julie said “we both did.”
Did what? No one named MIkeSC or Julie posted on the Beldar thread I cited. As usual, you’re making things up and not citing a shred of proof.
“And where do you get off acting like Beldar owes you anything?”
He owes me what he owes any reader, and that is to make good on his commitments. No one twisted his arm to post the “challenge” to begin with, and no one twisted his arm to make the commitment he repeatedly made. I realize that someone like you who lacks the capacity to respond to a simple factual challenge also lacks the capacity to understand a simple word like “commitment.”
“that I have seen you do at other websites until you are banned, and when you come back under a different name.”
More accusations without substance. Proof, please.
Hunter said “try a few simple coherent lines or forget it”
It doesn’t get any simpler than this: do you condemn the fact that our host here speaks up against cheating by Kos folks, but is utterly silent with regard to (earlier, albeit clumsier) cheating by LGF folks? Yes or no?
You probably recognize that. It’s the simple question you’ve already ignored twice.
By the way, earlier I didn’t mean to slight O’Reilly by leaving him out. His loofah-wielding escapades qualify him to be on that list along with Limbaugh and Bennett. Nice to know he’s preaching to kids now. Just what we need, a new generation of finger-pointing hypocrites whose main priority is not getting caught (Mike’s morality, as he described above). Thank goodness the country is finally putting the proper emphasis on values.
– You’re on perm ignore junkboxdork – and don’t bother with anymore goading post attacks – its as transparent and lame as you are … It works for awhile until people catch on and then you’re toast…. might as well move along now your mommy’s calling you…. b-bye
what Hunter wrote (^^).
And what julie wrote (^^), and angel and mike.
Everyone here can read what they wrote and what everyone else wrote. Otherwise, they are just sitting before a monitor, twirling the little wheel on the mouse.
jukebox needs to start paying rent, what with the paperwork underway.
Wow. You look at these comments and suddenly it’s like October all over again.
Kerry who?
On other matters, I ask this question of everybody in the group: Seriously, what needs to be said about this other than, “Cheaters are dickheads?” I don’t care what your politics are. If you cheat, you’re a dickhead. And if you cheat in an online poll the sole purpose of which is to have some fun and make new friends, you’re a pathetic dickhead.
Why all the fuss? What more is there to be said about it than that?
– Works for me Jeff –
Nice to see that certain folks are resuming the position they find most comforting.
Jeff said “Cheaters are dickheads; I don’t care what your politics are.”
The problem is that the host here, and lots of other folks, are inclined to adopt the first part of what you said but not the latter part. The idea seems to be “cheaters are dickheads except when they’re ours.”
This philosophy is summed up pretty cogently by Mike: “if we [conservatives] do cheat, we have the common sense to not only not mention it, but to publicly gripe when others do it.”