Vote for Laelaps!

Voting for the new 3quarksdaily contest has recently opened up, and now you can vote for your favorite blog posts. I was glad to see that Laelaps is represented by four entries, although admittedly it was difficult for me to choose which one to vote for! If you want to give me a hand head over to this page and cast your vote. The entries that receive the most votes will then go on to a final round on June 8, 2009 when Steven Pinker will hand-pick the best of the best.

More like this

The folks at 3quarksdaily have just announced that they are going to award three prizes (called, appropriately enough, quarks) to some of the best examples of science blogging on the web. All you have to do is pick out your favorite blog post written sometime between May 24, 2008 and now and submit…
The First Award for Best Science Blogging Judged by Steven Pinker Celebrating the best of blog-writing on the web, 3 Quarks Daily will award four annual prizes in the respective areas of Science, Arts & Literature, Politics, and Philosophy for the best blog post in those fields. This year, the…
Actually, the awards will include other sorts of blogging, too, but it's the awards for science blogging that have a fast-approaching nomination deadline. 3 Quarks Daily Announces The Quarks: The First Award for Best Science Blogging Judged by Steven Pinker Celebrating the best of blog-writing on…
"Art has never been a popularity contest." -James Levine Sometimes, you might feel like you've heard it all, seen it all, and that nothing's original anymore. But I beg to differ. Just because great things have come before doesn't mean that there aren't great things happening right now. While it…

Good luck!

I must admit that when I heard Steven Pinker would be the final judge, I thought about quickly putting together an essay to punch his particular buttons. You know, a little bashing of evolutionary psychology, or taking the opposite stand to his in some linguistic matter, or a scholarly snarking over his defence of Larry Summers — the field's pretty much wide open. But then a paper on which I had done some of the preliminary data analysis came back from peer review (at a comparatively influential journal which shall not here be named), and I found I had the chance to use some of the software toys I'd developed since to address the reviewers' remarks, so I had to switch my time from snark back to science.

Pity, though. I wonder who'll be in charge next year. . . .

Although Hovind's reasoning isn't exactly the same as my friend, and my friend isn't a religious fanatic like Hovind is.

Though it's amazing the similarities in "reasoning" among these fringe groups.

Blake; Thanksw3! I actually don't expect to make it to the final round, but I am glad that a few people (yourself included) liked some of my posts enough to nominate them.

I actually had the same inclination when I heard Pinker was going to be the judge. I just didn't have the time to whip something up before the deadline. I will be curious to see what he has to say about the winners, though.