3 ms·
Hm, interesting. I asked the Webby Awards to investigate before the voting was over, and this was written around that time - I've just been sitting on it, waiti
by ericd 15y ago
Hm, interesting. I asked the Webby Awards to investigate before the voting was over, and this was written around that time - I've just been sitting on it, waiting for more info.
I sort of doubt that that explanation is legitimate, since they didn't publicly ask people to do that on any of their voting campaigns and I think the voting volumes were high enough that a secret campaign using friends of friends wouldn't have been able to cause this kind of swing. The Webby Awards admins would likely have the original voting times, though, and if that's actually what it was, I'd say it was a neat hack.
- savrajsingh 15y agoWell that's interesting. You imply some collusion between AL and the Webby awards. I wonder what the official Webby awards folks will say. Maybe the whole thing was 'fixed' -- and they went dark to just set it to the outcome they wanted? Sounds like the simplest explanation. Anyway, good detective work. Will be interesting to hear how things pan out.
- ericd 15y agoOh no, I'm not implying collusion. I was just saying that only the Webby Awards have the original voting time data, and that if AL's explanation was truthful, I would be impressed that they pulled that off successfully. Sorry if those two things got mashed together.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]