WE WON PF has been nominated for physics.org award

[drizzle]

From what I understand of the rules, you can only vote once for a particular site (though you can put in votes for more than one site in a category). My best guess is that repeat votes for a site are ignored (only the first vote counts) - second guessing is not allowed.

Soooo, what if I vote for other sites and give'm a rank of ONE star! Would that increase their chances of having more stars or decrease their current ranks?

 

[drizzle]

One vote per site per person.

You mean one vote per site per user name!... [use your other e-mails people! ]

To be honest I haven't done that, but it's possible I guess.

 

[lisab]

The two results were due to a redundancy in PHYSICS.ORG's own 'links database'. Their database contains two links to PF, one titled 'Physics Forums' and the second titled 'Physics Forum'. Presumably different people independently submitted links to PF with different descriptions and slightly different titles. This is unrelated to the present competition.

Good thing no one submitted 'Physics Fora' - that would just add to the confusion.

 

[Borek]

You mean one vote per site per user name!... [use your other e-mails people! ]

Other emails? What for, system doesn't send a confirmation email when you register, so probably you can just enter anything that LOOKS like an email and vote.

 

[Evo]

Now now, we want to be beyond reproach.

 

[drizzle]

Other emails? What for, system doesn't send a confirmation email when you register, so probably you can just enter anything that LOOKS like an email and vote.

They don't send a confirmation email because, I think, they want to ease the voting system, I personally, hate the many steps I have to go through to get whatever I want from any site, it's just way frustrating, and people probably won't vote for this long reason.

 

[Gokul43201]

They don't send a confirmation email because, I think, they want to ease the voting system, I personally, hate the many steps I have to go through to get whatever I want from any site, it's just way frustrating, and people probably won't vote for this long reason.

I think it's a good idea to make the process a little more than trivial, so that people that really give a damn are likely to be the ones that vote.

And please (to everyone that wants this to be meaningful), let's not offer any ideas for cheating ... even as a joke.

 

[drizzle]

I think it's a good idea to make the process a little more than trivial, so that people that really give a damn are likely to be the ones that vote.

And please (to everyone that wants this to be meaningful), let's not offer any ideas for cheating ... even as a joke.

Those were my evil moments, couldn't resist.

But I'm sure PF will take the lead without any cheats, it's a great site.

 

[marcus]

Okay, so, did I understand this correctly? We click the link, click on the PF thumbnail, which then brings us back to PF and we click on the five orange stars to give it five stars?

I hope that's how it works.

Me too. After I gave PF 5 stars I didn't see any "enter" button. There seems to be nothing else to do, so you just go away. Psychologically this is not good. It leaves you wondering if you actually voted or have overlooked some step.

PF is a beehive of interactive science journalism and tutoring. It is well designed to promote that, and obviously merits some kind of recognition, but the community itself is the primary reward.

 

[GeorginaS]

So, so, so? How's this going? Did PF win yet?

 

[GeorginaS]

The two results were due to a redundancy in PHYSICS.ORG's own 'links database'. Their database contains two links to PF, one titled 'Physics Forums' and the second titled 'Physics Forum'. Presumably different people independently submitted links to PF with different descriptions and slightly different titles. This is unrelated to the present competition.

I forgot to respond to this comment when I really, really meant to.

Thank you, Gokul!

 

[Born2bwire]

Hey, cool. Physics Van is on there too. I was with them for a year or two back at UIUC.

 

[Char. Limit]

If PF doesn't win, I will be very disappointed.

 

[The legend]

If PF doesn't win, I will be very disappointed.

Same here. PF is best among all of the 5 shortlisted.

 

[Borek]

So far others don't stand a chance.

 

[Gokul43201]

So far others don't stand a chance.

That's only in the popular choice award. We don't know how PF will fare with the judges.

 

[Char. Limit]

I'd say... excellently.

Everyone be at top form!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

That's only in the popular choice award. We don't know how PF will fare with the judges.

Send in the Sisterhood!

 

[Math Is Hard]

Send in the Sisterhood!

We can be very ...

persuasive.

 

[turbo]

We can be very ...

persuasive.

Ooh, the CA spokes-model shows up for the cause!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Only three more days!

 

[turbo]

Only three more days!

And then PF turns back into a pumpkin? O Noes!

 

[Borek]

Nothing yet.

 

[cristo]

Nothing yet.

Winners will be announced on 15th November.

 

[Borek]

Yeah, they posted the information somewhere between my post and yours.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Boo on waiting

 

[Borek]

Perhaps they are trying to contact you so that you can collect a fat check.

 

[GeorginaS]

Yarrrrg I hate waiting!

 

[turbo]

Perhaps they are trying to contact you so that you can collect a fat check.

Or hold his feet to the fire to drive PF business to physics.org. Greg has a LOT of traffic!

 

[GeorginaS]

Quote from physics.org

The winners will be announced on Monday 15th November.

http://www.physics.org/featuredetail.asp?id=52"

Acck! Seriously, seriously, seriously dislike waiting.

Edit: Oh, sorry, I missed reading Cristo's post.

Edited again: I *still* don't like it.