Vote NOW for the December .mobi of the month!

[Dave]

It's time to vote for the December 2009 .mobi of the Month -- give one of our members a nice Christmas present this year!

Please choose the .mobi site you consider the most deserving of the honor from among those that were nominated.

The nominees are:

B2B.mobi -- 4/5
BuckleUp.mobi -- 4/5
ExchangeRates.mobi -- 5/5
Waist.mobi -- 5/5

Congratulations to the nominees!

The poll will be open for 6 days, closing at 8:56 p.m. PST on November 30. Get your votes in ASAP!

[morse]

B2B.mobi coming up from the owner of dir.mobi , should have been something supercool , its not something bad but lacks a bit of lustre. Innovative in a way, at least for the Indian mobile market it is.

Buckleup.mobi is a really nice site with a really nice social message. Its never a waste of time to browse through that site.

ExchangeRates.mobi (voted) uses the same php class which i was ready to sell at http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?t=38467 , but its more than what I offered. mod_rewrite has been done really well. The only negative part is that the currency data is sourced from third party and that third party is not the most reliable one. At this moment exchangerates.mobi is a really cool tool/site.

Waist.mobi is a nice site, maybe even god sent down for the couch potatoes which most of the internet developers are (just kidding).

Anyways nice list for mobi of the month

[Andres Kello]

ExchangeRates.mobi (voted) uses the same php class which i was ready to sell at http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?t=38467 , but its more than what I offered. mod_rewrite has been done really well. The only negative part is that the currency data is sourced from third party and that third party is not the most reliable one. At this moment exchangerates.mobi is a really cool tool/site.

Thanks for the vote, but just to correct you, ExchangeRates.mobi doesn't use any external script or class and is 100% coded by myself. Getting the exchange rates from the supplier was actually the easy part (less than 10 lines of code), the hard part was displaying them dynamically based on the URL. In fact, every single page on ExchangeRates.mobi is dynamically generated, with the full name, symbol, and flag of each of the 173 different currencies. Compiling all of that information accurately in a fully dynamic and hyperlinked environment based only off of the URL while still scoring a 5/5 is unique to my site and my site only (e.g. no script, class, or other site does this). Also, I've had no problems with my rate supplier and have found it to be very reliable and only about 15 minutes delayed as compared to the real-time quotes on XE.com, which is standard and more than good enough for any non-day-trading use.

I don't like to interfere with the voting, but I had to correct you because you were stating incorrect assumptions as fact. Thanks for the vote and feedback, nonetheless.

[morse]

Of course Andres I wouldn't know the actual supplier unless and until you made it public , and yes i have mentioned that you have used mod_rewrite in the possibly best way Okie i wont take this off topic.
Bottom line - ExchangeRates.mobi is cool and that matters most

[Tom]

Get your votes in now before it's too late!

[newdomainer]

I really like exchangerates.mobi as an 'on the move' tool..... Andres has done a great job with it - it's very simple and works brilliantly,

Buckleup.mobi is certainly the more altruistic development though; especially around this time of year when drink-driving tends to be on a seasonal 'up' trend....

I think they should both be joint MOTM for december!

[Dave]

Last call for votes!

[Tom]

And we have a tie!

What now?

[Dave]

As current administrator of the .mobi of the Month process, I think that instead of having a runoff, which would rely too much on the chance of who happens to stop in and see the vote or not in the day or two it could be run, we need to go to a secondary criteria.

And in this case, since both sites were also in last month's voting, it would seem to make the most sense to add up their total votes to decide the victor...

So going by that, BuckleUp.mobi wins with 21 votes, just one more than ExchangeRates.mobi's 20 votes...

If anyone has any reasonable arguments as to why that's not a fair way to do it, speak up now!

[Tom]

I say we split the month in half.

But if that's too complicated, a coin toss will do ;-)

[Mobitunist]

I would say a differentiating factor would be the READY SCORE ... a 4/5 vs a 5/5

That would be fair and a "no-brainer" to give to ExchangeRates.mobi then.

Or one could ask the reigning ".mobi of the month" owner's opinion

[Tom]

Of course using that method, some Wordpress blog with no content would beat, say, BofA.mobi.

Not all of us see much (or any) difference between a 4/5 and a 5/5

[Andres Kello]

What a tight race.

I think we need to be consistent and have a quick 24-hour run-off vote as we've done in the past: http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?t=27302

Also, members whose sites are up for vote should not solicit votes, directly or indirectly, or otherwise be involved in the voting process (except to vote, of course).

Good luck, Tom!

[Dave]

What a tight race.

I think we need to be consistent and have a quick 24-hour run-off vote as we've done in the past: http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?t=27302

Also, members whose sites are up for vote should not solicit votes, directly or indirectly, or otherwise be involved in the voting process (except to vote, of course).

Good luck, Tom!

Okay, that's what we'll do...I forgot we'd had this come up before...

And I agree that in this and future votes, there should be no posting in the voting thread by nominees, other than to potentially respond to something posted by someone else...and I would also discourage drumming up votes in other threads. I think voting should purely be on the merits of the respective sites...

Anyway, I'll attach a link here for the new voting thread in a moment...

[Tom]

Also, members whose sites are up for vote should not solicit votes, directly or indirectly, or otherwise be involved in the voting process (except to vote, of course).

And I agree that in this and future votes, there should be no posting in the voting thread by nominees, other than to potentially respond to something posted by someone else...and I would also discourage drumming up votes in other threads. I think voting should purely be on the merits of the respective sites...

For the record, I don't appreciate the insinuation that I've somehow been given an advantage here. If anything, this whole .mobi of the Month thing needs more enthusiasm...

July votes: 20
August votes: 14
September votes: 14
October votes: 27
November votes: 36
December votes: 22

The highest number of votes we've recently had was 36, and multiple times the total vote count was just 14. This from the alleged "#1 mobile web forum". Ha! Clearly, very few people care about this contest...

Again, I don't think you should be discouraging ENTHUSIASM here. If I were going around PM'ing everyone to vote for my site, that's a different story. But I'm not doing that, all I've "done" is bump my own existing thread a couple times reminding people to get their votes in (regardless of who they vote for, I'd just like to see more than 22 votes in such a contest). There are a good number of members here who may only visit Mobility once or twice during the voting period, and it's pretty damn easy to miss a single thread.

Guess people really do hate enthusiasm around here....

[Andres Kello]

This:

But I'm not doing that, all I've "done" is bump my own existing thread a couple times reminding people to get their votes in (regardless of who they vote for

Is inconsistent with this:

It's that time of the month again.... yep, you guessed it! Time to vote for BuckleUp.mobi as December's .mobi of the Month!

http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?t=44791

Only down by one vote so far!

http://mobility.mobi/showthread.php?p=135844

Voting ends tonight -- BuckleUp is currently TIED for first place! Let's break that tie folks!

The point is, can you imagine if every MotM nominee bumped their site's thread multiple times every month soliciting votes for their site, either directly or indirectly?

I fully agree with you that there is a lack of enthusiasm for the MotM, but that isn't the way to resolve it.

I know this sounds a bit off coming from me considering one of my sites was nominated, but forget about me for a moment and consider the other 2 members who were nominated. This is also the first time I notice this happening, but I didn't want to say anything until after the vote as I did not want to interfere with the voting.

The point is, I don't think nominees should interfere with the voting in any way - directly or indirectly.

For the record, I don't think you had an unfair advantage. BuckleUp.mobi is a great and worthy site that can stand on its own merits.

At the end of the day, there's no harm done. Keep up that enthusiasm and I'll try and think of something to drum up some interest, perhaps releasing a site-wide notice to remind members to vote each month.

If anyone has any other ideas on how we can increase interest in the MotM, I'm all ears...

[Dave]

I wasn't insinuating you had any sort of advantage...I'm just trying to keep this from becoming a matter of who posts around the forum most about voting for their site. And I don't actually think you went too far past any unspoken boundaries in that regard this month -- posting in a pre-existing thread about the nominated site is fine. I just want to keep it from going beyond that and lay some groundwork for future votes, since it's never really been stated before.

You both had a chance to post in this thread, and that's fine...if I felt either post was really out of order, I would have deleted it.

I'm all for enthusiasm for any of the nominated sites! My apologies if you took it the wrong way -- your site is certainly deserves to be in this runoff completely on its own merits...

For the record, I don't appreciate the insinuation that I've somehow been given an advantage here. If anything, this whole .mobi of the Month thing needs more enthusiasm...

July votes: 20
August votes: 14
September votes: 14
October votes: 27
November votes: 36
December votes: 22

The highest number of votes we've recently had was 36, and multiple times the total vote count was just 14. This from the alleged "#1 mobile web forum". Ha! Clearly, very few people care about this contest...

Again, I don't think you should be discouraging ENTHUSIASM here. If I were going around PM'ing everyone to vote for my site, that's a different story. But I'm not doing that, all I've "done" is bump my own existing thread a couple times reminding people to get their votes in (regardless of who they vote for, I'd just like to see more than 22 votes in such a contest). There are a good number of members here who may only visit Mobility once or twice during the voting period, and it's pretty damn easy to miss a single thread.

Guess people really do hate enthusiasm around here....

[Tom]

Well of course in a thread about BuckleUp.mobi I'm going to update the members about the site's status in the voting. If anything, I think it would be a good idea for those involved to be able to provide further information about their nominated site, be it in the voting thread or a separate thread. You provided further info in the voting thread about your site and I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. And I see nothing wrong with giving people further info about my site in my own thread.

Everyone has equal opportunity to do such

[Andres Kello]

Well of course in a thread about BuckleUp.mobi I'm going to update the members about the site's status in the voting. If anything, I think it would be a good idea for those involved to be able to provide further information about their nominated site, be it in the voting thread or a separate thread.

I disagree, nominees should not interfere with the voting in any way, otherwise the MotM will become a circus every month, with nominees repeatedly bumping their threads, spamming the chat, and soliciting votes left, right, and center just to call more attention to their site than the competition.

Again, I don't remember this happening before, so I want to stop it now before it "catches on" and becomes the norm.

You provided further info in the voting thread about your site and I see absolutely nothing wrong with that.
...
Everyone has equal opportunity to do such

Correcting false facts about a nominated site made in the voting thread is very different to directly soliciting votes for your site. I hope you see the difference.

If somebody had posted false information about BuckleUp.mobi in the voting thread (or any other thread), then you would have every right to correct that misinformation, as would anyone. But that's reactive, not pro-active like soliciting votes. In other words, I didn't ask morse to post that information, but I wasn't going to let false information about my site just sit there, and I don't think anyone would because silence in such a situation can be misconstrued as acceptance.

I'm not sure why you're getting so worked up about this, though. No one is accusing you of seeking unfair advantage. We just wanted to stop this before it gets out of hand and we tried to state it as delicately as possible.

[Tom]

Well I guess we just disagree on what should be allowed then. I agree with what Dave said: "posting in a pre-existing thread about the nominated site is fine." I don't see how doing that gives anyone an unfair advantage... but apparently you disagree.

What we both agree on of course is that we so need rules of some sort. Spamming the chat or buying votes or offering rep for votes or PMing everyone telling them to vote for your site... sure, those things should all be off limits...

FYI I'm not "worked up" about this... it was however "suggested" that I was being unfair and of course I'm going to defend myself.

[Dave]

Well I guess we just disagree on what should be allowed then. I agree with what Dave said: "posting in a pre-existing thread about the nominated site is fine." I don't see how doing that gives anyone an unfair advantage... but apparently you disagree.

What we both agree on of course is that we so need rules of some sort. Spamming the chat or buying votes or offering rep for votes or PMing everyone telling them to vote for your site... sure, those things should all be off limits...

FYI I'm not "worked up" about this... it was however "suggested" that I was being unfair and of course I'm going to defend myself.

Actually, you were never mentioned specifically, and no one ever said anything about this vote having been unfair.

As far as what I said about "posting in a pre-existing thread," I did mean "within reason" as well -- a post announcing that the site has been nominated, but not bumping it on a daily basis, for example.

[gogo]

I know this sounds a bit off coming from me considering one of my sites was nominated, but forget about me for a moment and consider the other 2 members who were nominated. This is also the first time I notice this happening, but I didn't want to say anything until after the vote as I did not want to interfere with the voting.

The point is, I don't think nominees should interfere with the voting in any way - directly or indirectly.

As someone who has had sites nominated, I'd like to say that I've not been entirely comfortable with people discussing the sites in the voting thread but I didn't feel I could say so at the time. On one occasion I felt I had to respond on a factual point, and I see this month that Andres had a similar experience. People discussing and critiqueing the nominated sites is good and if you don't want that then don't accept the nomination, but maybe some guidance is needed on where to do it - maybe a separate thread from the voting so people can vote without being influenced.


Also it would be worth formalising how you break a tie - always a runoff vote? Give someone a tie breaking vote? Taking ready score into consideration is a good idea, but if both sites have the same ready score you need something else too.

[Tom]

Holding a vote without letting involved parties share further info about their nominated sites seems a little silly. For example, Andres' post earlier in this thread gave some great additional info about the hard work he put into his site. Without his post, I would not have realized how unique his site was, and hence probably would've just blown it off as another simple script.

Maybe allowing each nominee the chance to write up a quick paragraph detailing their site in the poll thread would work... or providing links to existing external threads about the nominated sites... or SOMETHING... because as it stands now, I don't believe that many voters actually know much about the sites they are voting on.

So, in my opinion, sharing additional details (one way or another) should be allowed encouraged. But, obviously it's not my call..

As current administrator of the .mobi of the Month process, I think that instead of having a runoff, which would rely too much on the chance of who happens to stop in and see the vote or not in the day or two it could be run, we need to go to a secondary criteria.

Obviously it's too late now, but in the future I think we should think of an alternative solution for breaking ties, for the reason that Dave mentioned. The chosen method clearly doesn't work well.

This:

But I'm not doing that, all I've "done" is bump my own existing thread a couple times reminding people to get their votes in (regardless of who they vote for

Is inconsistent with this:

On a side note, the above "quote" should read: (regardless of who they vote for, I'd just like to see more than 22 votes in such a contest). Perhaps I could have worded that better, but regardless, my quote was cut off at the wrong place. I just wanted to clear that up, since the above "quotes" make me out as being a little dishonest... which just isn't true.

[Scandiman]

Bribing votes with rep and spamming PM's is certainly uncalled for but if someone wants to reasonably draw attention to their entry (and the poll in general) then why the heck not? Seems a little hypocritical to want to dissuade someone from drumming up enthusiasm to garner votes for their project, especially considering how many times people here have enthusiastically encouraged others to vote at off-site polls regarding the .mobi TLD. In the end it is still a count of legitimate votes cast by forum members for whatever reasons guide them.

[Andres Kello]

Based on this:

As someone who has had sites nominated, I'd like to say that I've not been entirely comfortable with people discussing the sites in the voting thread but I didn't feel I could say so at the time. On one occasion I felt I had to respond on a factual point, and I see this month that Andres had a similar experience. People discussing and critiqueing the nominated sites is good and if you don't want that then don't accept the nomination, but maybe some guidance is needed on where to do it - maybe a separate thread from the voting so people can vote without being influenced.

And this (which I think is a good idea):

Maybe allowing each nominee the chance to write up a quick paragraph detailing their site in the poll thread would work... or providing links to existing external threads about the nominated sites... or SOMETHING... because as it stands now, I don't believe that many voters actually know much about the sites they are voting on.

So, in my opinion, sharing additional details (one way or another) should be allowed encouraged. But, obviously it's not my call.

I'm inclined to lock the voting thread and ONLY allow members who have had a site nominated to make one post detailing their site. At the end of the day, there is no need for a discussion in a poll, it's just that vBulletin doesn't allow you to do a poll outside of a thread.

Also it would be worth formalising how you break a tie - always a runoff vote? Give someone a tie breaking vote? Taking ready score into consideration is a good idea, but if both sites have the same ready score you need something else too.

A quick runoff vote is the only one that makes sense to me. We haven't had too many ties, but we've been consistent about handling them with run off votes. It's the only democratic solution to a tie.

Bribing votes with rep and spamming PM's is certainly uncalled for but if someone wants to reasonably draw attention to their entry (and the poll in general) then why the heck not?

Mainly because I don't want Mobility to be littered with "Campaigning" every month. As we continue to grow and expand beyond .mobi and open the MotM for all mobile sites, not just .mobi, we could conceivably have well over 10 sites nominated a month. If all of them are posting "drumming up enthusiasm to garner votes for their project" every month, then Mobility will become a spammy mess and I don't want that because the costs to the community outweigh the individual benefits. I'm not making this rule up out of thin air, either, several democracies around the world prohibit Campaigning in the final days of a vote anyway. Since our poll only last a few days, it's to the same effect.

At the end of the day, sites should be voted/judged based on merits and merits alone, not whether the owner is the Admin, or whether the user is asking people to vote for their site, or whether the user has never won an MotM, or whether they're "nice", or whether they've done a better job "campaigning", or anything other than the quality of their site as judged by voters. I know it's generally impossible to vote that "coldly", but I want to ensure that as much as possible, and this is an easy way to help that.

So in order to level the playing field, particularly amongst members like vcool who had a site nominated but rarely visit Mobility, not allowing "Campaigning" helps to ensure the vote focuses more on merits rather than anything else, and I think that's a good thing.

Seems a little hypocritical to want to dissuade someone from drumming up enthusiasm to garner votes for their project, especially considering how many times people here have enthusiastically encouraged others to vote at off-site polls regarding the .mobi TLD.

Unfortunately, that comparison isn't valid. Off-site polls (particularly about .mobi) benefit the entire community. Campaigning to drum up enthusiasm for a particular MotM-nominated site only has the possibility of benefiting the single site owner. Apples and oranges, so not hypocritical at all.