You never know about stuff you receive by email. That’s why I was a bit skeptical when I got an email saying that I was receiving a award for hunterlandowner, my blog.
I wrote back to Amy Wilkes at Online University, and here’s the response.
Hey Rich,
No problem. Actually 2 ideas went into your award.
1. The nominations. There were almost 4900 nominations overall, we took the top 1-2% and gave those to our judges. The nominations came in from your reader base, those who read about hunting blogs and are very educated and avid about it.
2. The judges. After the judges received the top 1-2%, they take their criteria. Some of the attributes of the criteria were: content, affiliations (relevancy to the actual blog itself), posts (also pertaining to the relevancy of the subject of the blog), just to name a few.
2. The judges. After the judges received the top 1-2%, they take their criteria. Some of the attributes of the criteria were: content, affiliations (relevancy to the actual blog itself), posts (also pertaining to the relevancy of the subject of the blog), just to name a few.
Along with that, we’re simply just trying to award blogs for what they’re truly meant for, blogging. That’s all.
Your writing content is great, true, simply and very helpful to be made a resource.
Your writing content is great, true, simply and very helpful to be made a resource.
Hope to see your badge soon! Congrats again, Rich.
8-30-2010 Update: After receiving a couple comments and some thought, I now understand how this award “scam” works. It seems like a small issue, but if you believe in the legitimacy of search engines and the value they have for information sharing, setting up artificial hits on a website is a bit disturbing. So, as much as it hurts, I took down my award. Bummer.
If anybody has an opinion on this award, it might be interesting to hear it.
