ALERT: HELP WDTPRS!

We are making up some lost ground.  I do mean "lost". 

I logged on this morning to find that well over 100 votes had been substracted by the people who run the site.  I don’t know why and no explanation has yet been offered. 

So…let’s keep WDTPRS in the running! 

Click the image and vote!

My site was nominated for Best Religion Blog!

 

WDTPRS get’s pretty high traffic right now.  If more of you took a moment to vote, you could make a big difference.

Click and consider the field.

ALERT: HELP WDTPRS!
0 votes, 0.00 avg. rating (0% score)
FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to ALERT: HELP WDTPRS!

  1. Vincenzo says:

    Done. Best. Blog. Ever.

  2. Vincenzo: Thanks!

    We need a solid Catholic presence in these “award” run-offs.

    And the more this blog can point to certain benchmarks, the harder it will be for some people to try to shut it down.

  3. Michael Fudge says:

    I voted for WDTPRS.

    As Fr. Z said, it is important for this blog to be in the run-offs. It does not take a lot of time to register and vote.

  4. Paul Murnane says:

    Since I’d already voted, I was only able to add a comment.

    If you haven’t yet voted, get right on it! Fr. Z keeps throwing scoreless innings, he needs some run support!

  5. Anthony says:

    Already voted Father. Everyone should go and vote. Father puts a lot of effort and workd into this blog, the least we can do is vote.

    Also, if there is still time don’t forget to vote at the Weblog “Best religious blog” awards that Fater had posted the other day. It looks like WDTPRS is doing well and would be a shame to lose by a few votes. Especially considering how many people visit and benefit from Father’s blog.

  6. David says:

    The majority of top blogs, I noticed, are by Catholics. Either Catholics have a l lot to say, or we waste too much time on the internet.

  7. I looked at some of the comments you readers posted over at that award site. I am grateful for your kind words.

    Thanks!

  8. William Hunter says:

    Signing up and voting were easy, Father. Voting for you is a privilege. God bless you.

  9. Anthony says:

    Tomorrow is the last day of voting and an Anglican blog is in the top 3 right now. Lets bring this home for the Church and Father Z. VOTE!

  10. Bailey Walker says:

    Dear Father Z: Gladly done! Oremus pro invicem.

  11. Ruthy Lapeyre says:

    I registered and voted. Love ya Fr. Z

  12. Matthew M says:

    I’m from Chicago. Can I vote twice? haha

  13. I am checking in from the airport in Detroit.

    We’re still down folks! Go get ‘em!

  14. Anthony says:

    Please vote. If only 1/4 of the people who visit this blog vote, WDTPRS will win by a long shot. Its sad to see that only a small percent of people who benifit from this blod actual take the time to vote. Father works hard to keep this blog going. It matters. Please, people VOTE!!!!!

    Anthony

  15. How strange. “Open Book” closed in early August and it’s still
    in the running? Used to like it.

    Is Sister Mary Martha real?

  16. Jon K. says:

    Well, perhaps a certain longing for humility and anything liturgical older than 1962 is what caught up with you, dear, beloved and most slavishly trusted Father.

  17. Robin says:

    Dear Father:

    I have never voted in these things because I never wanted to create a Blogger account. However, for you . . . anything!

    I have opened an account and will vote for you as soon as I’m “confirmed.” Thank you so much for this blog – it is a wonderful resource!

  18. amy says:

    Fr. Thompson:

    I didn’t nominate myself, and I’ve written to the people who run the awards twice asking them to take my old blog off of the list, but have received no reply.

    Good luck, Fr. Z!

    Amy Welborn
    http://amywelborn.wordpress.com

  19. Jon K: It is important to consider a couple things. First, there is a huge difference between what laypeople can do with blogs and with what clergy can do. Priests are far more exposed to attack by ecclesiastical authority and lay people, who have far more freedom to speak their minds.

    I speak my mind pretty openly.

    By providing this blog with some easily recognizable benchmarks (such as awards, comments on other blogs, mentions in articles, etc.) this blog becomes much harder to shut down by some who would rather not have it exist at all.

    Do you get my drift?

    So, frankly, I will continue to do what I do as long as I can one way or another. The awards are not so important to me as a person, though they are nice to get. They are going to help this blog by a cleric survive.

  20. Amy: How wonderful to see you around! I am quite happy that you are on that award list.

    First, it is a tribute to the excellence and the impact your blog made in new sphere of communication.

    Second, it is great to see Catholic blogs well represented in the top ranks. I think that is important.

    If in the time alloted to it WDTPRS does half the good your project did, it will be a success.

  21. Piers-the-Ploughman says:

    Here’s another vote for wdtprs. Thank you Fr Z for this site.

  22. Piers: You are welcome and thanks in return.

  23. Scott, Carmel, IN says:

    Father Z:

    Has blogger’s choice provided an explanation?

  24. Brian Day says:

    I logged in and found that I had already voted, along with several other blogs! Hmmm…

    It seems that all of my votes from last year are still active. You would think that after last year’s results that all accounts would be reset. Evidently that is not the case. Perhaps it is a bug in the code. Could it be related to your losing votes?

    I’m sending a message to Blogger. Hopefully I’ll get a positive answer.

  25. Hicardo says:

    Some folks just like a rigged game, know what I mean?

  26. Marc says:

    Perhaps more people would vote, if one did not need to register. I do not like to spread my personal data throughout the world.

  27. Athanasius says:

    I noticed when I went to over those who kindly voted for me, that some voted for more than one blog in the best religion category. Sure enough, you can vote for more than one blog.

    So if you have already voted for a great Catholic blog (such as mine, forgive the shameless plug) you can also go and vote for the best blog, such as Fr. Z’s. Likewise, if you have already voted for the best blog (which again is Fr. Z’s) you might also boost me up by a few votes. :D

  28. I dropped a note to the people who run the site, but they haven’t graced me with an explanation yet.

  29. Kathy says:

    Check again Father. Your number one for the moment

  30. Kathy: I think they rotate the position of the top three. However, I am very glad to be back in the top three, which is my immediate goal. Everyone has done this blog a great service.

    It is important to have a strong showing of Catholic blogs in these awards.

  31. I just got this in my e-mail:

    According to the ‘learn more’ link, “The voting for Blogger’s Choice Awards 2007 will end at 11:55pm on October 19.” However, it appears that new votes are still being recorded. That, along with the missing votes, indicates that something is very messed up over there.

    http://www.bloggerschoiceawards.com/main/about

  32. anonymous in Michigan says:

    Count another vote for you Father!

  33. MikeL says:

    I voted, or at least, I think I did. That is one confusing web page.

  34. To give Blogger’s Choice Awards credit, they have been pretty good about making sure the voting does not contain monkey business. Often if votes are clearly coming from the same source, they will not count those votes. I have seen one Philippino cult bounce to the top of the religion category, only to be banned from the site for having multiple votes cast by the same people (twice). So be careful about trying to get any illicit votes for a site. It will probably be subracted anyway or might get that blog banned.

    Not to say that is what happened to Fr. Z.’s disappearing votes, but it could be the reason.

  35. Henry Edwards says:

    That, along with the missing votes, indicates that something is very messed up over there.

    An hour or two ago, WDTPRS was in 1st place and the 4th place entry had 388 votes. Right now, WDTPRS is down to 4th place and has 376 votes. One does not have to be a mathematician to smell a rat here.

  36. and another thing says:

    If you voted a while back, you can check your vote by getting into your “account”. You might be surprised to see that all your other votes appear to be registered but your vote for WDTPRS is missing.
    How can something like this happen?
    I could see how ALL your votes might somehow be gone but not how just the vote for a site would not be there anymore.

  37. Francis Brennan says:

    Fr. Z.,

    I voted for you and many thanks for all your excellent work. And for standing up for what it important, in spite of opposition.

    You are in our prayers.

  38. and another thing says:

    Roman Sacristan:

    You can vote in as many categories (sports, humor, podcasting, religion, etc.) as you want and you can vote once for as many sites within a category (WPTPRS, Happy Catholic, Holy Whapping, etc.) as you want.
    In order to vote, you create an account. If they are cleaning out duplicate accounts, which you suggest, it doesn’t explain how people who voted are now checking accounts and discovering all is in order except that the vote for WDTPRS is missing.
    When they deleted all the votes for that Asian site that swept from no where to the first page last week, could they have somehow accidentally deleted some votes for WDTPRS?
    I think everyone who has already voted should check his/her account. When you log in with your name and passcode (if you wrote it down!), your voting record will come up on the screen. Check your votes. For a big number, apparently, WDTPRS won’t be there but your other votes will be registered.

  39. Rose says:

    I took the time to register and vote just as a thank you-it must take an awful lot of work to keep the blog going.

  40. Jon K. says:

    Father Z: Free minds speaking openly are fine with me. I too speak my mind rather (too) openly, at times. And I most certainly enjoy clerics who can actually behave and react as if they were not trying to make a carrier in a modern political party. What I mind, therefore, is something utterly different.

    I mind a certain lack of humility in debating debatable matters (I shall not mention your 62 dogmatism again, but I might have). Also, I find posts like “Father, for you I´d do anything” rather disturbing.

    Did I get your drift? I´d say one usually gets your drifts rather easily.

    With my best wishes,

    ———
    ———

    “Jon K: It is important to consider a couple things. First, there is a huge difference between what laypeople can do with blogs and with what clergy can do. Priests are far more exposed to attack by ecclesiastical authority and lay people, who have far more freedom to speak their minds.

    I speak my mind pretty openly.

    By providing this blog with some easily recognizable benchmarks (such as awards, comments on other blogs, mentions in articles, etc.) this blog becomes much harder to shut down by some who would rather not have it exist at all.

    Do you get my drift?

    So, frankly, I will continue to do what I do as long as I can one way or another. The awards are not so important to me as a person, though they are nice to get. They are going to help this blog by a cleric survive.
    Comment by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf — 21 October 2007 @ 9:42 am”

  41. pattif says:

    I’ve voted but, having read these comments, I’ll now go back and check whether it was recorded.

  42. Iustus ut Palma says:

    Just logged in from Emmitsburg MD to vote!

  43. Brian says:

    Jon K. writes:

    Well, perhaps a certain longing for humility and anything liturgical older than 1962 is what caught up with you, dear, beloved and most slavishly trusted Father.

    Um… Jon… with all due respect, that really came across as snide; your second response especially came across with a passive-aggressive-flavoured lack of humility, which can’t help but tarnish your own pleas for humility from others, I think.

    Criticize if you must, but perhaps you could restrict yourself to tact and logic, rather than sardonicism?

    In Christ,
    Brian

  44. ALL: I think I better close the combox. Also, I think the voting is over. It looks like everything was zeroed out over at that award site.

    Thanks to everyone for all you did! I am grateful.