Vote for the Winner of the 2010 Blogging Scholarship

Posted on 27/10/10 5:38 AM by Amelia

Screenshot of the official results.

And the official results are in…

  • Winner: Christie Wilcox
  • First Runner Up: Christine Mielke
  • Second Runner Up: Mark Lamprecht

Voting closes closed at noon pacific on November 5th. Please see this post for more background information about each blog & blogger.

Congrats again to all the finalists.

And thanks for being good sports about it in spite of all the nasty comments by people who trolled in the comments here & people who trolled other contestants. If only the people making such comments were half as classy as the finalists are, then the world would be a much better place. 😉

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

171 Comments on “Vote for the Winner of the 2010 Blogging Scholarship”

  1. Finalists for the 2010 Blogging Scholarship ~ Blog ~ CollegeScholarships.org Says:

    […] We had so many entries this year that it took us a couple extra days to sort through all of them & pick finalists from all the great blogs. Here are the 10 finalists. Voting will be open from today, October 27th to closing at noon pacific on November 5th. You can vote for your favorite blog here. […]

  2. Help me get money | Jewschool Says:

    […] So if you like my blogging here, you can vote for me and help get me some dough by clicking here to vote for me. […]

  3. Help me get money « New Voices Says:

    […] So if you like my blogging here, you can vote for me and help get me some dough by clicking here to vote for me. […]

  4. Please Vote for me in the 2010 Blogging Scholarship Finals! « the Sam Jackson College Experience Says:

    […] Hello everyone! I entered collegescholarships.org's Blogging Scholarship and was selected as one of ten finalists. I need you help to make it to number 1! If you can take _5 seconds_ to vote – no need to register, or anything – and just click 'Sam Jackson,' I would truly appreciate your help! […]

  5. Finalist for the 2010 Blogging Scholarship Says:

    […] will receive a $10,000 scholarship to help pay for school. I would love it if you would consider voting for me as I am one of ten finalists. It would be incredible to show the Power of Temptalia! :)Excerpt from […]

  6. Help me get money | The Reform Shuckle Says:

    […] So if you like my blogging here, you can vote for me and help get me some dough by clicking here to vote for me. […]

  7. Amy Says:

    Josh Eklow’s blog is hilarious, clever and lighthearted. This should definitely win.

  8. Requesting the Lounge's help Says:

    […] pass the link along to anyone and everyone you can bother with something like this. Thanks much. Linky to vote – David Wilensky Official Sponsor of Jaroslav Halak There are 26 teams in baseball with a longer World Series […]

  9. John Grennan Says:

    Dear Friends, In this season of shameless campaigning, I’ve come to you to ask for your vote. I’m one of ten finalists for a national college blogging scholarship for my work on The Oak Book (oakbook.com), a site on politics in Oakland, California. And, like the Constitution or American Idol, the best will rise through a democratic process. You can vote for my politics blog on the Oak Book by going here: http://www.collegescholarships.org/blog/2010/10/27/vote-for-the-winner-of-the-2010-blogging-scholarship/

    Vote early, vote often. Tell your friends.

    Many thanks,
    John

  10. John Grennan Says:

    I’m one of ten finalists for a national college blogging scholarship for my work on The Oak Book (theoakbook.com), a site on politics in Oakland, California. And, like the Constitution or American Idol, the best will rise through a democratic process. You can vote for my politics blog on the Oak Book by going here: http://www.collegescholarships.org/blog/2010/10/27/vote-for-the-winner-of-the-2010-blogging-scholarship/
    Vote early, vote often. Tell your friends.
    Many thanks,
    John
    By John Grennan on October 27th, 2010

  11. John Bugay Says:

    Mark Lamprecht, definitely!

  12. darrell russell Says:

    tracy

  13. Annoyed Says:

    so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes?

  14. Susan Buxbaum Says:

    David Wilensky is smart, knowledgeable, clever, and funny (what a combination!). My vote is for him!

  15. Laura Anderson Says:

    Josh wins my heart without fail~

  16. A Vote For Me Is A Vote For The Children « Off The Mark Says:

    […] This means that I am asking for your help to get me this scholarship. All you have to do is click on this link, and vote for me at the bottom of the page. You have until November 5th to vote. No personal […]

  17. L. B. Nielsen Says:

    We need more science to better the world and an importent part is educating everyone and spreading the knowledge gained and the understanding of science. Therefore Christie Wilcox gets my vote.
    Go Christie Wilcox!

  18. Olifantje Says:

    @annoyed

    That’s what Pharyngulic campaigning does for you…

    All us sciency people are voting for Christie.

  19. Magictree Says:

    Pharyngulated

  20. S. Bonneville Says:

    Science trumps all, it is the most important human endeavor since our origin as a species. Therefore my vote is for Christie Wilcox.

  21. sailor Says:

    “so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes?”
    Not so mysterious, just a big group of pro science votes from the Pharyngula crowd.
    To be honest anyone that decided anything serious on an internet poll has got to be nuts. There must be a better way.

  22. Marcus Hill Says:

    “Annoyed”: nothing mysterious about it. One of Christie Wilcox’s stablemates at Scienceblogs is PZ Myers, and he mentioned this poll on his immensely popular Pharyngula blog. This isn’t cheating (no bots are involved), it’s just advertising the existence of a poll in the same way as all the other candidates have done. Unfortunately for them, PZ has such a large following of like minded folks that any poll mentioned there gets very quickly skewed. There’s even a word for the phenomenon: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pharyngulate

  23. MarkNS Says:

    “so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes?
    By Annoyed on October 27th, 2010″
    ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    All it took was another science blogger to point out this poll which had a cosmetic blog in the lead to his readers. No mystery there. Ain’t democracy grand!

  24. Schenck Says:

    I just voted for Christie Wilcox! Go Science Blogs! Too bad there’s only one science blog on this list, and yet there are a couple of religious ones. And good luck on your PhD Program, future-doctor Wilcox! I know that graduate school can be expensive, especially when you have to perform experiments, attend classes, fly to conferences, it can really build up!

  25. Amused Says:

    so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes?

    She got support from PZ Meyers of Pharangula and probably a large chunk of the rest of Scienceblogs. Which sent a few thousand votes here (including mine).

  26. Greg Laden Says:

    Annoyed: Christie is a member of a very large and caring community of scientists and science bloggers. The word just got round that the is in this contest. She is our friend, colleague, ally and loved one. Please to not be annoyed.

  27. Amused at Internet Democracy Says:

    If this is an open voting poll, and one person has access to 100000 friends with internet access, and you only have 1 friend with internet access, then you will probably only get one vote and they will get 10,000 dollars. Who cares if your blog is any good?

  28. Annoyed with Annoyed Says:

    Christie Wilcox “mysteriously gained around 1000 votes” because she has a lot of support from the scienceblogs.com network.

    Go Christie!

  29. Misha Says:

    Wilcox got the votes because she’s already popular on Scienceblogs.com. Just us showing our support for a great person with a great cause.

  30. MAT Says:

    Glad to see *science* blogging in the lead. Christie does a great job making science accessible to more people- a great contribution in these days of public science bashing and proud ignorance of facts.

  31. Daniel Says:

    Science has never nor can it ever “better the world.” Science can only answer the question of “what is” (and it gets that wrong more than right) and cannot answer the question of “what should.” Science can create a nuclear weapon but Science is unable to tell us if that weapon should be used.

  32. Help a Starving Grad Student | Ya Like Dags? Says:

    […] left out in the cold, but I’ll be forced to lose what’s left of my faith in humanity.  Swarm that poll like a pack of hungry dogfish. This entry was posted in Donor's Choose, blogging, dorkiness. Bookmark the permalink. ← […]

  33. Amused Says:

    “so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes? By Annoyed on October 27th, 2010″

    It’s not mysterious. A few other blogs with large followings decided to plug her. And rightly so, IMHO, almost all of the other blogs look like crap. It’s a popularity contest on the internet…what exactly did you expect?

  34. Greg Says:

    “so, did anyone else notice that Christie Wilcox mysteriously gained around 1000 votes within ten minutes?”

    It’s an online poll and you can only vote once, nothing mysterious about it. Word got out that there was a decent science based blog out on the interwebs and to go take a look at it. So a lot of us did and agreed that Christie has a good blog. Then we read some of competition and although I C You Pee is quite entertaining, and makeup tips are invaluable to at least some of the population, they just didn’t have the appeal of a solid educational blog. Christie’s blog is good, and I feel that with this scholarship it will encourage her and others to continue providing blogs that are more than simple vanity pieces.

    ~Greg

  35. Annoyed at Annoyed Says:

    @Annoyed Isn’t it strange how people start complaining when things don’t go their way?

    You don’t think that someone who blogs on scienceblogs can’t muster up some supporters to go click on a poll? Give it a rest.

  36. Also Annoyed Says:

    Why, yes, I did notice that Christie Wilcox has gotten votes far in excess of her blog readership and in excess of any human’s social networking abilities. I hope this website has a robust method of identifying votes cast by actual people (why no Captcha?) because some of the candidates seem to have more technical skill than scruples.

  37. Omar Says:

    I think Christie Wilcox has the best blog. I also like Josh Eklow’s blog.

  38. Jason Says:

    Science has never nor can it ever “better the world.” Science can only answer the question of “what is” (and it gets that wrong more than right) and cannot answer the question of “what should.” Science can create a nuclear weapon but Science is unable to tell us if that weapon should be used.

    By Daniel on October 28th, 2010
    ////////////////////
    It also tells you that if you get the right type of mold, you can cure many bacterial infections. That never helped anybody, did it?

  39. Names are stupid Says:

    @Also Annoyed: No trickery, she just was advertised on Pharyngula,PZ Meyers’ blog… and yes, he does have access to those kind of numbers … but please, don’t let that stop you from flinging baseless accusations around. My vote’s for Christie. For science!

    @Daniel: Science can’t better the world? You make that comment using a machine whose existence is owed to science, surrounded by the comforts of science. I make that statement assuming, of course, that you live in some kind of city utilizing plumbing, roads, electrical appliances, etc. What a profoundly ignorant statement.

  40. Jaynie Says:

    Also annoyed: There probably isn’t any technical cheating going on here. If there was, you’d be looking at a *much* larger lead. It’s pretty rude to be accusing someone of cheating when all they’ve done is attract the attention of a particularly large crowd of science fans from the other blogs on their network.

  41. Daily Data Dump – October 28th, 2010 | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine Says:

    […] A very special note: I endorse Christie Wilcox for 2010 Blogging Scholarship. […]

  42. Mark Says:

    Actually, if you look at comments in PZ Myers’ post promoting Wilcox it appears she jump by over 4,300 votes in less than an hour. That is, providing the documentation is correct.

    – Posted by: John Morales Author | October 27, 2010 11:27 PM
    *Christie Wilcox: 1751 27% of all votes

    – Posted by: WeAreStarStuff | October 28, 2010 12:19 AM
    *Christie Wilcox: 6100 55% of all votes

    It’s just the power of popularity and numbers.

  43. Lyra Says:

    @By Also Annoyed

    While it might be reasonable to say that “Christie Wilcox has gotten votes far in excess of her blog readership” (she very well may have), to say that she got votes “in excess of any human’s social networking abilities” is untrue. Scienceblogs.com has a truly massive following, and other bloggers at scienceblogs.com have mentioned this contest on their blogs. People who follow scienceblogs.com are likely to have a keen interest in science (otherwise they wouldn’t read blogs at scienceblogs.com). What happened with Christie Wilcox is that people with a keen interest in science advertised this contest to a large number of people who also have a keen interest in science.

    Personally, was not aware of any of the blogs in this contest before I was made aware of the contest through scienceblogs.com (thus, anyone who I voted for would have received at least one vote in excess of their normal readership). I voted for Christie Wilcox for the same reason I visit scienceblogs.com; because I’m interested in science. There were a couple of other entries listed that I found interesting, but for me, biology carried the day.

    Like it or not, this is what happens when you judge this thing via a giant internet popularity contest.

  44. Pieter B Says:

    Christie’s total started to zing within minutes of my posting the poll to my Facebook page, thus demonstrating an important scientific principle: correlation does not equal causation.

  45. JG Says:

    Wow. Someone crying foul already?
    Might it just be because she’s got a good blog on science blogs?
    That’s a pretty big potential reader pool. So.. no. It’s not outside her ability to network.

  46. at Annoyed and Also Annoyed Says:

    Scienceblogs has millions of page views every month. Several thousand is a drop in the bucket for their readership, and this vote is posted on a number of the blogs as well as the frontpage. And that’s just Scienceblogs – the rest of the science blogging community is rallying behind her, too.

  47. wwmiller@clevelandcountyschools.org Says:

    Good Luck!!!!!

  48. MoeLarryAndJesus Says:

    Daniel wrote: “Science has never nor can it ever “better the world.” Science can only answer the question of “what is” (and it gets that wrong more than right) and cannot answer the question of “what should.” Science can create a nuclear weapon but Science is unable to tell us if that weapon should be used.”

    I’m guessing you posted that using a computer that’s powered by electricity, Daniel. You didn’t meditate and tap on your Holy Book in order to post it, did you?

    And you were probably born in a hospital, and you never suffered from polio or smallpox or bubonic plague.

    I’m guessing science has made you life better in more ways than you can even quantify. Along with the lives of many others. So goes the world.

  49. Southern Fried Scientist Says:

    Go Christie, an excellent blogger deserves recognition.

    I love how many people are “annoyed” that she’s got so many votes, when other contestants are posting things like this:

    “(And remember that although you can’t vote more than once on one computer, you can vote on your computer at work, your home computer, your cell phone, etc!)”

    on their blogs.

  50. BillC Says:

    Yes, I voted for Christie and yes, I am an “actual person”. I voted for her because she is a science blogger. I believe that such blogging is important and deserves support. There are too many people like Daniel and sailor who just don’t get it: science has improved our lives and continues in its most important task of explaining our world and our place in it in a rational way. This task needs people like Christie: a talented writer who is able to communicate the, sometimes, complex information that scientists provide, information that many try to misrepresent to further specific agendas. Be annoyed, be very annoyed or more annoyed, perhaps some day you will get so annoyed that you will make an effort to understand the world we live in and if you do there’ll be bloggers like Christie that you can turn to as a resource.

    All Hail Eris!

  51. PT Says:

    There is a very simple fallacy with this contest. It neglects to measure creativity, innovation, and ingenuity and instead quantifies which blog has a larger network. I hope in the future College Scholarships can create a more objective means to determine who truly deserves the $10,000. Just because a blog discusses a topic that interests more people does not make one more deserving.

  52. The happy camper Says:

    I voted for Christie. I have been following her blog on and off for about 9 months and since I am a follower of the science blogs she got my vote. That said, I did read all the other blogs and found some to be worthwhile endeavors, one I found the subject matter to be a little disturbing(but funny), a couple to be about as interesting as watching paint dry and one in particular to be one of the shallowest most pathetic blog I have ever read.
    Just my opinion.

  53. Lori Says:

    I am a daily reader of scienceblogs.com an occasional reader of Observations of a Nerd, and am delighted to see that it is doing well here. It’s a wonderful blog!

  54. Ben Says:

    Annoyed: Go /look up/ Pharangulate…

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pharyngulate

    Then go visit…

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

    …and in particular…

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/10/a_10000_poll.php

    Mystery solved.

  55. Liz Says:

    I’m another real person who voted for Christie–I had read her blog before, enjoyed it, but had no idea there was a contest until it was posted on Pharyngula earlier.

    And I can’t help but laugh at the poster who said that science has never done anything to “better the world”. You’re on the internet, on a computer/phone/iPad/whatever, writing about a blog. Nothing in that sentence would be possible without science. But I’m sure that’s the only thing you use that’s science related, and you’ve forgone all medical treatment your entire life, right? No penicillin when you had infections, no Tylenol for a headache, and certainly no help with polio, mumps, the measles, etc.

  56. Allie Says:

    @ Also Annoyed- PZ Myers alone gets an average of 90,000 visitors a day, and he’s only one of the many science bloggers rallying for Christie’s blog. Besides, as this is a contest for an EDUCATIONAL scholarship should be awarded to a SCHOLARLY blog.

  57. Bryz Says:

    Wow, someone probably should just put the Twitter fail whale under my name instead of the votes and percentage.

  58. Rewarp Says:

    @PT
    “There is a very simple fallacy with this contest. It neglects to measure creativity, innovation, and ingenuity and instead quantifies which blog has a larger network. I hope in the future College Scholarships can create a more objective means to determine who truly deserves the $10,000. Just because a blog discusses a topic that interests more people does not make one more deserving.”

    And how would you measure creativity, innovation, and ingenuity objectively using Internet polls? Make it a multiple choice question while totalling up the average?

    You probably see how that will turn out.

  59. Kenneth Says:

    I voted for Christine because I am obsessed with her blog site. She puts so much time, effort, and money into it that she definitely deserves something for all her hard work. I don’t think an online poll is really the right way to go about giving out such a large scholarship though.

  60. Taproot Says:

    The fact that Christie and Christine are in the lead gives me just a little more hope for humanity. It shows that both fundamental truths about life and the world we live in (the biology blog) and superficial vanity (the make-up blog) are more relevant to society than religion. Hell, the three religious blogs together barely have enough hits to hum above the background noise.

  61. Mark Says:

    Allie,

    Maybe some of us need to further our education to make our blogs more scholarly. :) Besides, it does not follow that education equals scholarly.

  62. Adrian Morgan Says:

    I want Christie to win, and voted for her days ago, but I acknowledge that a tighter race would be more fun for the spectators.

    On the first day (back when I voted), Christine of Temptalia was in the lead with the same kinds of percentages as Christie has now: about 60% or so. Now, from Christine’s “About” page we read: “Temptalia is a made-up word […] that is supposed to mean the perfect woman.” To which I can’t help smiling and thinking to myself: “Ah, but surely the perfect woman reads Observations of a Nerd by Christie Wilcox.” 😉

    I like it better this way. One is a blog about ideas, discoveries and knowledge. The other is a blog about products. No insult intended to Christine (I respect everyone’s right to their own passion), but in my world, one of those beats the other hands down.

  63. Lyra Says:

    @Bryz

    If I liked sports, I’m sure I would love your blog. I’m even from Minnesota! Go, Twins, over . . . er . . everyone else!

    . . . alas, I am sports illiterate. *blush*

  64. Greg Laden Says:

    Science betters the world, Nerdie Christie has a great blog that a lot of people love, and Christie’s blog betters the world.

    Sour grapes are … sour!!!

    That is all.

  65. BillC Says:

    PT and Rewarp have a point. But a finer point can be put on it. This contest is a popularity contest. Recognizing that, they seem to assume that there is no value in popularity, that it is always, somehow, superficial. That may be true in some communities – that’s too bad, but the communities, in which I participate, value creativity, innovation, and ingenuity. Popularity, here, is based upon that and more.

    I voted for Christie because we need more voices on the side of reason over ignorance, new voices that can bring new approaches. Is she a PhD candidate involved in biological research who can express herself in a lucid manner? I’ll vote for that. Is she “popular”, is she attractive? She can’t be faulted there; science is, among other things, a social endeavor and women have been under-represented for too long. Women like Christie can only be an inspiration to more young women to pursue a career in science.

    Did I vote for her because she speaks to an interest of mine? – yes, exactly. Interest, like popularity, is seen by many people to be superficial. My interest is to increase my knowledge of the world in which I live so that I can increase my appreciation and sense of it, to better my grasp of the sheer beauty and majesty of it, It’s constant learning process and I will be looking to Christie, for resources in that endeavor.

    May her blessings increase – Hail Eris!

  66. Omar Says:

    “The fact that Christie and Christine are in the lead gives me just a little more hope for humanity. It shows that both fundamental truths about life and the world we live in (the biology blog) and superficial vanity (the make-up blog) are more relevant to society than religion. Hell, the three religious blogs together barely have enough hits to hum above the background noise.

    By Taproot on October 29th, 2010″

    If there was a vote for the best comment I’ll vote for you :)

    test [b]retest[\b]

  67. TripleE Says:

    Josh Eklow’s blog is the most innovative blog I’ve ever seen. Let’s talk content: not only is he taking on topics that slip through the cracks of contemporary American existence, he’s doing so on a local, grassroots community level that speaks to the humane within us all. Give him recognition, if not your money.

  68. MedTrivia « Cryptocheilus Weblog Says:

    […] heeft uw hulp nodig. Klik op het plaatje voor meer info. U gaat hier naar toe en stemt even voor haar. Cristie FTW! Scienceblogs […]

  69. Lisa C. Says:

    I voted for Christie… I vote for science!

  70. Quick Links | A Blog Around The Clock Says:

    […] I hope you did already, but if you didn’t, please go and vote for Christie Wilcox right now and right here. […]

  71. Rob Says:

    Here’s a vote for Mark Lamprecht…

  72. Around the Interweb (10/31) « Blogging Theologically Says:

    […] Vote for Mark Lamprecht (who runs HereIBlog.com) to win a $10,000 blogging scholarship. Please take a couple of seconds and […]

  73. science blogger for fairness Says:

    Christie Wilcox is unfairly supported by a campaign at Science Blogs (go look at it if you don’t trust me – they just call on their huge base to support her without asking people to even look at the other contestants).
    As this competition is supposed to support quality and not just who has the most support already anyways, I strongly suggest to disqualify her immediately! This should be at least somewhat fair, and it is as it is now just not fair to anybody. If she wins, this whole contest is a sham!

  74. Sam Says:

    Not sure what I’m supposed to click. It’s Nov 1 and the links to the candidates don’t seem to go anywhere but a # anchor on this page.

  75. You’re Opportunity to Make A Difference « 5 Pt. Salt Says:

    […] rise of educational costs, Mark would be most appreciative if you could take a few moments to vote for him. It won’t costs you a […]

  76. Three Ways to Support Science! « Southern Fried Science Says:

    […] scholarship, but she needs your help! Head on over to the contest, check out all the finalists, and vote for the one you think is best. Southern Fried Science enthusiastically supports Christie […]

  77. Sam Says:

    C’mon! Temptalia girls need to rally more strength and win this for Christine!

  78. Southern Fried Scientist Says:

    @ science blogger for fairness, I’m confused as to how you think that’s unfair? Independent bloggers can choose to support whomever we damn well please and almost every blogger in this contest has colleagues at other sites saying “vote for X”. Christie should be disqualified because high traffic bloggers like her blog? Maybe the fact that she has a network of high profile blogs supporting her indicates that her content is exceptional.

    Maybe what’s really unfair is all the trolls crying foul just because their favorite blog isn’t winning.

  79. Bob Says:

    @ science blogger for fairness, are you joking? Are you new to the internet? An online poll by definition is about popularity. She has an excellent and popular blog, she deserves to be in the lead.

  80. LU Says:

    “C’mon! Temptalia girls need to rally more strength and win this for Christine!”

    I agree! Voted for Christine, good luck!

  81. Mel Says:

    An online poll is a terrible way to decide on giving out a scholarship especially of magnitude. It’s so easy to rig! Why wasn’t there another method to decide the winner?

  82. jose Says:

    With PZ lobbying for Wilcox, she cannot fail.

  83. Stevarious Says:

    As far as I’m concerned, every one of these bloggers deserve to win.

    But of course they can’t.

    So go Christine!

  84. Sam Says:

    “As this competition is supposed to support quality and not just who has the most support already anyways, I strongly suggest to disqualify her immediately!”

    So, essentially you want to disqualify her because she’s winning?

  85. NJK Says:

    Here’s another vote for Christie Wilcox and her fantastic efforts in science education!

  86. Pieter B Says:

    I voted for Christie, and only once, though I could, between work and home, vote four times if I wanted to, and dozens with not too much work. I am told that a blogger who is *not* in the lead pointed out that that was possible if one has access to a number of different computers.

    While I think Christie is most deserving, if this were a poll solely about layout and design, I’d give it to Christine. Excellent work, even though I can’t stand pink.

  87. Marcus Hill Says:

    @ science blogger for fairness: You’re right! We should also remove any politician who uses any sort of advert from the ballot papers. How dare they try to garner support when attempting to win a popular vote? Cheating, pure and simple.

  88. Karen Says:

    Temptalia sucks, plain and simple. Just another site trying to peddle makeup reviews, disguised under the larger premise of Beauty with a capital B. Vote for something that’s actually creative, like IC YOU PEE. There’s a lot of interesting commentary beneath its surface, unlike these other “blogs” aka marketing websites.

  89. Claire T. Says:

    I have been friends with Christie Wilcox for 7 years, yet when she posted her campaign for votes I still did my due diligence by examining the competition before awarding her with my vote. While several of the other blogs in the running have their merits, I believe that Christie’s blog educates on the kind of topics that one might study in college. After all, this is about school isn’t it? Personally I would expect to receive a higher grade in class by having a well researched paper like Christie’s popular article “Evolution: The Curious Case of Dogs” rather than wearing a low cut shirt paired with the MAC makeup stylings of Temptalia. If I were interested in Political Science I might vote for John Grennan and if I had decided to study Theology atfter my confirmation at 14 years old then maybe I would have voted for Mark Lamprecht, however those are not the topics that I am passionate about and while clearly a lot of effort has been put into these other blogs they have not gotten me interested in further researching their topics of blogging, while Christie’s blog has. After reading Christie’s blog I have the desire to learn more, to look at other blogs on the scienceblog network and for this I believe Christie deserves to win. She makes learning, not only palpable, but FUN. I think everyone should research the competition and chose whomsoever they please to vote for, but don’t go around trying to debase the competition. If your blog or your friend’s blog is as good as you think then they will get votes. So please cheer up and show some good sportsmanship.

  90. www.how2winscholarships.com Says:

    Great job students!!! :)

  91. Rubber Duck Says:

    Well said, Claire T! This site needs a “like” button :)

  92. stellar4217 Says:

    I think it’s a bit unfair to dismiss Christine of Temptalia just because she runs a beauty blog. From the criteria I read for the finalists the scholarship is for a student who runs a blog not specifically an educational blog. She puts a lot of effort into her blog while being a full time law student, as I’m sure all the finalists do in some form & it’s sad people resort to insults. Temptalia doesn’t tell you to “wear a low cut shirt paired with the MAC makeup stylings”. This scholarship is about the effort a person puts into their blog on a subject they’re passionate about while furthering their college education. So just because Temptalia runs a beauty blog doesn’t make her dense or less deserving because her blog isn’t on education. Christie has a wide lead and I wish her well even though I don’t read her blog. I’m sure all these people deserve an award.

  93. JohnP Says:

    ‘science blogger for fairness’, rather an ironic nym for someone who is advocating banning someone simply because they are getting more votes in what is essentially just an on line popularity contest but apparently is not happy that it is not the one they support. By your logic, I assume you know what the term means, if you were being really fair and not just bitter, then everyone who has garnered so much as a single vote through someone else advocating for them should be disqualified. If you don’t think so, then your nym is even more hypocritical.

    P.S. a few of the contestants have interesting blogs and a couple I will visit again, but as a geek, Christie’s stands out by a mile.

  94. Allie Says:

    @Mark- What I meant was this scholarship should help its recipient continue their education and their blog as well.

    There are many fine blogs in the running- The Oakbrook is a great example of community journalism, and Temptalia is a gorgeous site. But Christie’s blog, Observations of a Nerd, is directly related to her education, and I believe that if she wins the scholarship, it will help to further her blog. She is an excellent science communicator, a gift all too rare in the science community. Science literacy in America is abysmally low, and we need more people like Christie who can relay the complicated science being done in a way that the average person can understand and connect with.

    I myself am a science journalist, and I cannot express to you how much work goes into some of the longer, more complex articles-countless hours of researching a topic, scouring scientific journals, and reading numerous articles. Yet somehow Christie manages to do it, all while attending classes, working in a laboratory, and writing countless grant proposals. Her ability to continue her education will allow her to tackle even more complex areas of science, and to keep writing her amusing anecdotes of life as a scientist.

    I am sure every finalist here as attempted to garner votes through the support of friends and colleagues, so those trying to debase Christie’s success through libelous remarks need to stop right now. Christie just happens to come from a very tightly knit community- the science blogging community. No one is stuffing ballot boxes here- so perhaps everyone can maintain a little decorum.

  95. Bruce Wilcox Says:

    As Christie’s dad, the temptation to vote multiple times for her did arise, but I didn’t. I’m proud of all her hard work and that would just cheapen it.

  96. Soren Says:

    At this moment Christine Mielke has got close to 35000 votes. I expect that the people who wanted Christine Wilcox banned for obtaining fewer than 35000 votes should campaign for Christine Mielkes banning also?

    Its a popularity contest, and I am impressed with both womens ability to turn out the vote, though mine was cast for the science nerd in stead of the make up nerd.

  97. MAC Tartan Tale: Viva Glam, Sir Teddy, & Brush Sets Says:

    […] sets.For my written review and photos of the brush set, you can view it here. (Link to vote is here — I’m Christine Mielke.) […]

  98. jerry Says:

    Here’s a commenter from Pharyngula explaining how they tamper with polls.

    First, PZ says: “Crush it, please.”

    Then commenter djfav says:

    “I’m using two Firefox add-ons. Cookie Monster to block all cookies and iMacros to automate all the refreshing and clicking. I think it works. Any tips?”

    Later…

    “Still running the bot. Assuming it even works, I’m casting a vote every 1.5 seconds. Giggity.”

    And a few short hours later:

    “86% yes, o tentacly overlord.”

    Pretty easy way to rack up thousands of votes in a short time, and it does work.

  99. Sigh Says:

    Hey! Ms Wilcox is cheating!

    She has on average almost 1 vote per second that this pole has been open! Pitty you can’t win it without cheating!

  100. Sigh Says:

    And now Wilcox is getting 5 votes every second!

  101. Sigh Says:

    Looks like Mielke is also cheating… Hit refresh!

  102. Sigh Says:

    I can confirm what Jerry has said above!

  103. Matt Says:

    Jerry, you’re totally misrepresenting, as if someone has claimed they are doing that to this poll. The Phyrangula crew has been very explicit about not cheating, and no one is using those kinds o tactics to get Christie votes.

    For that matter, this site is unimpressed with the removal of cookies, so that approach wouldn’t work anyway. And if they were using those tactics, the numbers for Christie Wilcox would be several hundred thousand, not tens of thousands.

  104. CunningLingus Says:

    @jerry

    Way to cherry pick the above comments from a totally different poll to this one. What’s the problem? is your particular favourite not winning perchance? Nowhere in the comments section of THIS PARTICULAR POLL on Pharyngula, will you find the above comments, typical loser attitude though.

  105. jerry Says:

    Over at PZ Myers blog,(on the Christine Wilcox thread), Pharyngula commenter Draken asks:

    “But how do do you bot votes? It seems to register IP numbers…”

    Fellow Pharyngula commenter MonkeyBoy replies:

    “One simple way to bot vote with different IPs involves having control over a large number of different PCs (or at least having them serve as proxies).”

  106. dave Says:

    Jerry: That comment thread was for a completely different poll. In that one, the question was “Do you think immunizations are safe?” When PZ posted it, 53% said Yes and 46% said No. It was merely an opinion poll on a Fox web site and the science community needed to make a statement against the anti-vaxers. This is a different matter entirely.

  107. Someone Says:

    Don’t think anyone is using automated means to add to the votes on this one, that sort of thing is generally reserved for creationist polls and the like…

    Christie Wilcox is clearly the best choice out of those provided and a lot of people read Pharyngula, nothing more than that, heh.

  108. samuel Says:

    Anyone crying foul about PZ’s audience voting should not concern yourself with a contest based on popularity.

  109. jaynie Says:

    @jerry: way to use a quote from a completely different poll to make it look like Christie is cheating. If the hordes of pharyngula weere botting this one, she’d probably be at 99% by now, as is usually the case with such polls. If you read the comments on pharyngula in relation to this contest, you’ll find a good number of comments urging others not to vote more than once, and (thus far) no comments such as the one you posted.

  110. jerry Says:

    ‘Someone’ wrote:

    “Don’t think anyone is using automated means to add to the votes on this one, that sort of thing is generally reserved for creationist polls and the like…
    Christie Wilcox is clearly the best choice out of those provided and a lot of people read Pharyngula, nothing more than that, heh.”

    So you admit that Pharyngula readers have used automated voting before to skew poll results?! Whoa!

  111. Mark Says:

    A friend of mine pointed out to me that as fast as you can refresh this page the votes for Wilcox & Mielke increase each time by one or more. He thinks there is some cheating going on.

    So I just refreshed the page, waited exactly one minute and refreshed again.

    The results?

    Christie Wilcox 70367 58% of all votes
    one minute later: 70403 58% of all votes
    = 36 votes per minute.

    Christine Mielke 44394 37% of all votes
    one minute later: 44409 37% of all votes
    = 15 votes per minute.

    And now within just a few minutes of writing this post:

    Wilcox 71649 58% of all votes

    Mielke 44693 36% of all votes

    Is my friend correct?

  112. jerry Says:

    Jaynie wrote:

    “If the hordes of pharyngula were botting this one, she’d probably be at 99% by now, as is usually the case with such polls.”

    So that’s “usually the case”? Wow! How many polls have you cheated on?

  113. jerry Says:

    Matt wrote:

    “The Phyrangula crew has been very explicit about not cheating, and no one is using those kinds o tactics to get Christie votes.”

    How can you possibly know this? Have you spoken with every single PZ Myers fan?

    “For that matter, this site is unimpressed with the removal of cookies, so that approach wouldn’t work anyway.”

    How could you know this unless you had tried to cheat?

    “And if they were using those tactics, the numbers for Christie Wilcox would be several hundred thousand, not tens of thousands.”

    You sure seem to know alot about cheating on polls. But several of PZ Myers’ followers are already disagreeing with you on the Christine Wilcox thread:

    criselsegood: “I think at this point there’s votebotting on both sides apparently”

    rewarp: “Well. I guess her [Mielke’s] followers figured out how to vote multiple times as well.”

  114. CunningLingus Says:

    Jerry seems to think (I use the term very loosely), Christie needs automated vote macros to win, of course it couldn’t be because most people find she is the most deserving. Here’s the thing jerry, you’re an asshalf, it would take two of you to make an [profanity edited out].

  115. Anonymous Says:

    Clearly both Christie & Christine are using votebots (refresh your browser every few seconds and you’ll see what I mean), but I doubt either of them are actively using these tactics.

    The fact that this can be done simply points to the stupidity of doing a public poll to decide who wins $10,000 in the first place. There are multiple ways to counter vote-botting; from recording IPs, to forcing people to quickly register, to putting up a CAPTCHA image.

    Recording IPs suffers the problem of multiple people being on the same network, sharing an IP. Forcing people to quickly register is slightly better, but still fails for plus-addressing of emails, and can be automated. CAPTCHA stands the test of time for most types of poll; it can be broken, but not easily, and certainly not without a lot of effort.

    [staff note: we do record IP addresses]

  116. mascha Says:

    I voted for christine because science isn’t getting me laid.
    Looking beautifull is! :)

  117. Daniel Says:

    The fact that PZ’s readers have to “urge” others not to cheat speaks volumes to what kind of people that site attracts. Of course, we all know atheists have zero reason to be honest.

  118. Skeeter Says:

    @Jerry
    “So you admit that Pharyngula readers have used automated voting before to skew poll results?! Whoa!”

    Never once when there was money on the line. But to crash useless polls whose results will affect no ones life? Often.

    Another thing they don’t do: post out of context quotes in the comments section of online polls where there is money on the line, with the intention of making it appear that someone has cheated. Shame on you.

  119. travc Says:

    Sorry to all the others, but you can view the Pharyngula effect as a high-profile recommendation / endorsement. Those things do matter and are perfectly fair, though they don’t really *feel* fair when you’re on the other end of them. I wish we could give scholarships to everyone.

    PS: I doubt anyone is using a bot to skew the poll. That would be very unfair and violate all sorts of ethics. This is a very serious thing for those involved, no an online game. Many of us are still paying off our own student loans.

  120. Mike Says:

    It’s likely that an equivalent number of both Christie’s and Christine’s followers are cheating – if one was doing it and not the other, then the results would not be this close (for those who don’t know, just a few people using bots would give hundreds of thousands of votes/day.) It’s also likely that the proportion for both is 0% – the people involved seem to be taking this seriously enough.

    Comments like the following are pretty ridiculous:
    “Christie Wilcox is unfairly supported by a campaign at Science Blogs (go look at it if you don’t trust me – they just call on their huge base to support her without asking people to even look at the other contestants).”

    In fact, having your blog readers (even occasional ones) vote is fair – it’s what this contest is all about!

  121. Soren Says:

    Matt:
    “The Phyrangula crew has been very explicit about not cheating, and no one is using those kinds o tactics to get Christie votes.”

    Jerry:
    “How can you possibly know this? Have you spoken with every single PZ Myers fan?”

    Well seeing you are the one making claims about cheating wouldn’t it be better if you brought some evidence?

    As to the vote count, PZ Myers blog has about 100.000 unique visitors each day, and he is not the only one rooting for Christie, so its not crazy to imagine a result just as the one we are seeing now.

    Actually, earlier today i noticed that Christine got about 21 votes per minute. Christie got about 1 per 10 minutes.

    Later PZ posted another plea for votes, and Christie shot up to about 30 votes per minute, at that time Christie still was at about 21 pr minute.

    To me it looked like thousands of people started voting when they saw PZ’s plea, not like a couple of bots suddenly coming awake.

  122. Sam Says:

    David wrote:
    “The fact that PZ’s readers have to “urge” others not to cheat speaks volumes to what kind of people that site attracts. Of course, we all know atheists have zero reason to be honest.”

    Of course, we all know that the fear of repercussions from their god(s) is the only reason religious people are honest (when they are). Heaven forbid they lose their faith! Why, they’d instantly turn into nasty, thieving cheats like the rest of the none-believers.

  123. Get over it Says:

    In the immortal words of Jon Stewart, “I think you’re confusing losing with tyranny.”

    I’m sorry your favorite blogger is losing and that you can’t just be happy that a well qualified student blogger(as all of these finalist are) is winning and will receive recognition and reward. I saw no cries of cheating when Christine jumped to a very early 60% lead.

    And pretending like a joke poll of some idiot creationists website is in any way equal to this contest is absurd.

    As for atheists “having no motivation to be honest.” lol

  124. jerry Says:

    Here’s what it looks like when PZ Myers “pharyngulates” a poll which can’t be hacked because of a registration wall. (And yes, money was involved here too).

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/10/yum_genetically_engineered_pla.php

    You get vote counts in the hundreds, not nearly 100,000.

  125. Maya Says:

    I find the comments about Christine and her “followers” VERY offensive and off-base. It’s not fair to imply that girls who enjoy reading/writing beauty blogs and reviewing products are unintelligent or less deserving of a scholarship because of our interest in beauty. I’m a science major and I’m not voting for Christie because her blog doesn’t interest me. The effort Christine puts into Temptalia is mind blowing. She has a lot of work as a law student as it is, but she posts on Temptalia several times a day.
    To everyone who believes that Christine doesn’t deserve this because her blog has no “substance,” needs to take a step back and stop stereotyping the Temptalia girls. We’re not superficial and vain, we’re intelligent too.

  126. charles Says:

    I voted for Christie because science IS getting me laid!

    @mascha – maybe you’re hanging out at the wrong bars

  127. AR Says:

    Jerry –

    Given the post above that shows Christine’s beauty blog increase by similar numbers per page refresh, and other competitors have actually encouraged their readers to cheat, don’t you think singling out Christie’s blog is a bit off?

    I read Pharyngula regularly. I don’t know everyone on it. Maybe some people use vote-bots on some internet polls. Most probably don’t. Given the general readership, I’d say only a select few have the time, technical ability, and inclination to do so. You don’t know, and I don’t know, whether or not such methods are being used this time. Seems a bit like pointless speculation…

    In any case, from the note above from staff of this site, it seems like they have checks in place to reduce the risk of those sorts of hijynx on this particular poll. Stop flogging the horse. It’s been dead for hours.

  128. meeotch Says:

    Daniel (Spratlin) is just a sad commenter reduced to licking his wounds at this point. He lost his job, partially (though not entirely) through a situation involving the Pharyngula blog.

    http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/11/we_got_a_spratlin_fired.php

    And since you brought it up, I’ve often wondered: if you think an atheist has no reason to be honest (presumably because we have no belief in a reward or punishment in the afterlife) then what does that mean for people like you who believe that all they need to do is ask for forgiveness and the lie is effectively gone? What’s stopping you from lying, you hypocrite?

  129. Duy Says:

    @mascha
    “I voted for christine because science isn’t getting me laid.
    Looking beautifull is! :)

    I voted for Christie Wilcox because makeup isn’t informing me about STD.
    Science is :)

  130. Ishraq Says:

    @Daniel: Stop being so butthurt at the fact that someone with an undoubtedly better blog than yours is winning.

  131. meeotch Says:

    By the way, as far as Pharyngulating polls goes, I’ve never even bothered to participate in one of those before. I don’t have the time to help skew the results of every lame, BS right-wing anti-science poll PZ posts. But the moment that I saw that there was some money on the line for a person doing work that I support, you better believe that I jumped all over that. I wouldn’t doubt that there are many other people in the same boat as I am, and that’s why the results of this poll can’t be compared to other Pharyngulated polls.

  132. jerry Says:

    AR:
    “Given the general readership, I’d say only a select few have the time, technical ability, and inclination to do so. You don’t know, and I don’t know, whether or not such methods are being used this time. Seems a bit like pointless speculation…”

    Not if you use your brain.

    “In any case, from the note above from staff of this site, it seems like they have checks in place to reduce the risk of those sorts of hijynx on this particular poll.”

    All evidence to the contrary. I was just able to cast a vote for every single contestant in about 1 minute with practically no effort and only the most basic computer skills.

    My advice to the Scholarships.org people is to shut this fiasco down and redo this contest in a more secure and fair anvironment like the one I referenced above. Require registration and CAPTCHA recognition and give the $10,000 away honestly.

    This contest smells.

  133. Barbara Says:

    I’m a follower of Christine Mielke on twitter, and the reason why she got so many votes at that time was because it was the first time she posted that on her website/twitter account. Many of her followers, like myself, voted right away, and thats how she gained so many votes at the time. After that, since people couldn’t vote twice, her votes increased at a lower speed. No cheating there whatsoever.

  134. CubicKinase Says:

    Just logging in to say, it isn’t botting, it is that masses of science lovers that would like for science to win over cosmetics.

  135. mojotoad Says:

    Whatever the case might have been, this particular poll has recently attracted the attention of reddit, which is where I first noticed it. I just voted for Christie, but only after I’d read through several of her recent entries. Just for kicks, I read through some samples of the other blogs represented. Christie still takes it, by a long shot.

    It’s like that whole internet tsunami.

  136. Skeeter Says:

    Cry about it Jerry.

    Just tell us who it is that you would like to win so that the poll can be re-cast until the vote comes out in their favor.

  137. jerry Says:

    CubicKinase said: “Just logging in to say, it isn’t botting, it is that masses of science lovers that would like for science to win over cosmetics.”

    Oh, thank goodness. The lover of science has proclaimed by fiat that “it isn’t botting”.

    How quickly science lovers will discard science when $10,000 is at stake! Lol!

  138. amb Says:

    The voting system can be gamed. Just an FYI, this poll is garbage.

  139. peacegirl Says:

    Christine Mielke all the way! she is amazing and so so SO dedicated and deserves this scholarship for all the hard work she has put in! please, vote for her!!!!

  140. 2010 Blogging Scholarship – Voting Ends 11/5 at Noon PST! Says:

    […] pay for school (I am a JD/MBA candidate, graduating in May!). I would love it if you would consider voting for me as I am one of ten finalists (I am Christine Mielke!). It would be incredible to show the Power of […]

  141. Kenny Says:

    “My advice to the Scholarships.org people is to shut this fiasco down and redo this contest in a more secure and fair anvironment like the one I referenced above. Require registration and CAPTCHA recognition and give the $10,000 away honestly.

    This contest smells.”

    QFT

  142. reddit Says:

    REDDIT

  143. Jon R Says:

    GO CHRISTIE! SCIENCE FTW!

  144. JackieOh Says:

    Team Wilcox!!!

    Ladies of Science, woohoo! I hope she wins and to anyone who doesnt think its fair, I’ll borrow a phrase from pop culture:

    “Haters gonna hate”

    😛

  145. 5agan Says:

    I think PZ (Pharyngula) should have all of his visitors post here to shut the likes of Jerry up. Jerry, you are probably a nice enough guy but you are being dick! Maybe you should pray about it. I personally love science and always give my support to those fellow lovers of truth and reason. -Adrian

  146. mtn Says:

    How many PAID bloggers are on this list? How is that what blogging is about?

    If your blogging is a paid career move, seems like it’s missing the point of blogging as an idea? I think that’s called being a paid topical writer on the internet.

  147. MonkeyBoy Says:

    I noticed this poll and I thought there was a lot of “irregular” things going on.

    First off – I started hand saving poll results but I eventually wrote a GreaseMonkey script to save the data for me, for now every 5 minutes to see how robots behave overnight when most people are asleep.

    I, as someone who can write a Greasemonkey script to record the vote history, might also be capable of writing a cookie zapping script for those insecure sites that use cookies to prevent multiple voting, and then use cookie deletion for just ME to robo vote up some poll and make my multiple voting predominant.

    However, this poll claims to use IP addresses, not cookies, to prevent multiple voting, yet there is obviously a lot of ROBOT VOTING (as my captured data shows).

    With IP checking I think the only robo voting that can exist is from from someone or a group that controls “bot farms”. Namely griefer organizations like 4Chan or Anonymous that like to screw up polls, or criminal (or near) organizations that use “bot farms” for spamming.

    Discounting the robo voters, I can understand why Wilcox is getting a lot of votes because numerous large biology/science blogs have been promoting her. I can’t understand why Mielke has so many votes for her ‘makeup blog’ – google searches don’t reveal any major promotions which leads me to to think that most all of her votes come from ROBO VOTING.

    I would guess that some 4Chan like group decided to promote a makeup blog as a joke while some other decided that science should be promoted over beauty, and this poll results mainly reflect which is the best at ROBO VOTING with a “bot farm”.

    [If anybody wants I will make my collected vote history available in a few days]

  148. ramona Says:

    I’m a med student and I voted makeup over science. Why? Just because of the sheer effort Temptalia puts into her blog. A full time law student AND she updates her website multiple times a day with original pictures and thoughtful reviews.
    Just because we like makeup doesnt mean we’re shallow. “Nerds”, get of your high horse.

  149. mtn Says:

    Oh okay, one paid blogger….I’m pretty sure she’s getting paid to entertain an audience…that is also voting in this while everyone else on the list, is an actual blogger. Whoever is running this needs to get updated with what blogging actually is. give 10k to someone who is an actual blogger.

  150. Mel Says:

    I want to take BACK my vote for Christie after reading the subtle snarky jabs at her 2nd place competitor. What a piss poor sport. For someone who flaunts their level of education so much, her attitude makes her come across as 16 years old. I hope College Scholarships is staying on top of the Blogs they’ve chosen as finalists and sees this disgusting display of poor sportsmanship at the top of Christie Wilcox’s latest post.

  151. Matt Says:

    Mel: The top of Christie’s post isn’t snarky or mean – she didn’t in any way diss Christine. She actually says she was inspired by Christine and her fans to look into the evolution of makeup use! If you read that as snarky, then you have clearly got blinders on.

  152. updawg Says:

    Christie’s a good blogger, so I think she should win.

    -A Lying, Cheating Robot

    (just kidding, I’m a person)

  153. Help Christie Wilcox, a science blogger, win a $10,000 scholarship by voting here. Someone who blogs about cosmetics is catching up rapidly. Help science win! | Sole Genius Says:

    […] by velopilot to science [link] [185 comments] reddit: the voice of the internet — news before it happens @ […]

  154. Mya Says:

    @Karen

    Wow. That was really rude of you, I go onto temptalia.com to look for makeup looks for certain colors and for her reviews and swatches for things I am planning to buy. That is your opinion but you don’t need to be so rude. Your opinion isn’t a fact.

  155. dave Says:

    Why are we still getting votes on Christie and Christine’s blogs after the contest is over?

  156. Juan Quiceno Says:

    no need to cheat just have good friends who tell other friends who in return tell other friends I hope christie wins 😀

  157. Matt Says:

    Saw this on Reddit this morning and voted for Christie.
    I also posted the link before I left to work to a few gaming forums.

    Reddit = millions of unique people reading the site at the same time.

    SCIENCE RULES!

  158. annoyed Says:

    vote for christine not christie

  159. Leslie Says:

    Ditto Dave. I wish the site would stop the voting; it is misleading and kind of annoying and very unprofessional and unfair to give false hope to contestants or their fans

  160. Bob Says:

    Congratulations Christie!

  161. Sigh Says:

    The voting is over and Christie is still getting votes!

    [I thought I turned the voting off when I took a screenshot of the results…time to fix that real quick. I have the official screenshot of the results at the ending time & will post it right now.]

  162. Sigh Says:

    If this isn’t evidence of cheating I don’t know what is… This really is silly…

  163. Sigh Says:

    Turn it off… I’ll bet it just continues for weeks!

  164. ScienceGeek Says:

    @ By Daniel on October 28th, 2010
    Science has never nor can it ever “better the world.” …

    So, I suppose that the alleviation of suffering does not make the world better then? So, you don’t care for medicine or technology? You don’t think the world is a better place now that we have a germ theory of disease? You don’t think the world is a better place now that we have pasteurization? You don’t think the world is a better place now that we have the pictures from the Hubble telescope?

    Well Daniel, I think the world is a better place with science in it, because without science I would have died before making out of my mothers womb.I know that I make the world a better place in my own way.

  165. JG Says:

    Stay classy guys. Just because your pick didn’t win, doesn’t mean someone cheated.
    Christie and Christine are being friendly about it, despite people attempting to troll some kind of confrontation

  166. jerry Says:

    MonkeyBoy wrote: “However, this poll claims to use IP addresses, not cookies, to prevent multiple voting, yet there is obviously a lot of ROBOT VOTING (as my captured data shows).

    With IP checking I think the only robo voting that can exist is from from someone or a group that controls “bot farms”. Namely griefer organizations like 4Chan or Anonymous that like to screw up polls, or criminal (or near) organizations that use “bot farms” for spamming.”

    No, nothing that sophisticated necessary. Out of curiosity I was able to cheat using a simple 4 step script in Explorer.

    1. Vote
    2. Go Back
    3. Delete browsing history
    4. Delete ‘All’
    Repeat. Works every time.

    There was no IP checking going on. I was able to place about 1 vote every two seconds this way. So easy even a MonkeyBoy could do it!

    By the way, congratulations Christie.

  167. Kenny Says:

    This wasn’t about the most deserving blogger winning,this was about who had the most influential sponsorship and who could use social networking most effectively to their advantage. I had absolutely no horse in this race, and I could not care less who won, but having an easily-manipulated online poll to award a scholarship is a travesty. This whole thing was a joke – an exercise in gaming online polls. 8 of the 10 nominees have to feel pretty ripped off right now, and I wouldn’t blame them if they did. Botting or no botting, this travesty of a contest stinks to high heaven. I cannot believe CollegeScholarshsips set the contest up this way. Dumb beyond belief.

  168. Mike Lisieski Says:

    I think it’s interesting that a few people who are interested in beauty and make up have expressed that they feel as if they are being called unintelligent by people who claim that Christie’s blog is more “worthwhile.”

    I don’t think that’s the case at all; people can be complex. For example, I have gotten really into the game Roller Coaster Tycoon lately (which is a very simple game that takes little in the way of cognitive skills to play and have fun with.) I also play the game Magic: the Gathering (which, to be fair, is very intellectually challenging.) I read a lot about these games on the internet, but I also blog and read science blogs. Science blogging is much more important, and much more valid as a putative “contribution” to society than is blogging about some leisure activity that makes little constructive change in the world, regardless of what that activity is.

    Nobody has called you unintelligent – they’ve just called your hobby (relatively) unimportant. In the face of discussions of endeavors like science, medicine, social activism, and law (something Christine could surely write much cogent and interesting material on,) rating makeup just doesn’t merit serious consideration as a “constructive” use of a blog.

  169. AR Says:

    Jerry,

    Um… Okay, so you’ve demonstrated that you are the sort of person who is willing and able to tamper with an online poll. Congratulations, you should be very proud. You have not demonstrated that the votes for Christie Wilcox came about by such a fashion. The margin by which she won is low enough that it suggests that a bot was not used. Occam’s Razor: if it can be explained without invoking a bunch of devious twerps with few scruples sitting at a computer voting repeatedly (or writing a bot to do so), then it should be. There’s no evidence to suggest otherwise so… Useless and idle speculation which, moreoever, is leading you to say rude, spiteful, meanspirited things about a young scholar/scientist who is deserving of none of these sorts of remarks.

    Even if there were failures of the checks this site has in place, these aren’t Christie’s fault. She needn’t be hauled through the ringer by some anonymous twit for the failures of the chosen (not by her) medium for this contest. Besides which, if there are such failures, all candidates would have had equal opportunity to take advantage of them. This rather erases the “unfair advantage” you think Christie Wilcox had.

    You also haven’t addressed the other part of my answer to you, which I think is far more damning of the poition you’ve taken on this matter: other contestants have actively encouraged their readers to vote more than once. Their readers have posted comments on the blogs in question to the effect that they have done so or have plans to do so. Christie never asked her readers to vote more than once. In fact, on a recent post, she asked her readers to vote not for her, but for the candidate they thought deserving. Her readers, and Pharyngula’s, have actively encouraged one another not to vote more than once.

    You are not at all justified in making the claims you’ve been making — on any level! Basically, your whinging amounts to: “Nanny, nanny, boo, boo… The one I want to win didn’t. Her votes can’t be real!” If it makes you feel better to think that that’s what happened, then think it. I don’t much care. But don’t try to make other people feel badly because you do. Let Christie and her supporters celebrate her win. ‘Cause guess what? She won. End of story.

  170. JohnP Says:

    Jerry, Ironic really. You are the one claiming all along that people have cheated and yet you are the one admitting to have done so. I see now why you accuse others, it is because you project on to others how you act. Not a very ethical person are you Jerry :)

  171. Blogging Scholarship | thank you | thoughts | cheating Says:

    […] The site did not even list any rules for voting either. The final voting totals can be seen at Vote for the Winner of the 2010 Blogging Scholarship. I placed a solid third although significantly behind first and second. In the comment section you […]