The SXSW Interactive Web Awards finalists are up...
January 21, 2002 3:56 PM   Subscribe

The SXSW Interactive Web Awards finalists are up... and the site I submitted isn't mentioned. Am I bitter? No.. no.. OK. YES. Anyway, the sites listed are the best of the best of 2001. Worth a look.
posted by crunchland (17 comments total)
I don't know about being in the best weblog category. I thought it was more of a service or something. I guess Blogdex would also fall into that, but it's a great resource.

I kinda like the nominees, I've only heard of a handful of them, so it looks like a nice way to highlight 30-40 sites even a grizzled old web surfer like me hasn't seen.
posted by mathowie at 4:14 PM on January 21, 2002

Weird. In the humor category, there's a website for a tv show. (

I don't think I've heard of more than one or two, time to do some clicking.
posted by sauril at 4:19 PM on January 21, 2002

Me, too -- only heard of/been to one for sure, maybe two. Oh well, that's easily remedied...
posted by verdezza at 4:29 PM on January 21, 2002

Congrats to the handful of MeFi members whose work has been nominated.
posted by anildash at 5:27 PM on January 21, 2002

Feh. Four of the five nominees for Developer's Resource are Flash resource sites.
posted by nikzhowz at 5:40 PM on January 21, 2002

guess what self-promoting weblogger we all know and love has been nominated for an award at SxSW? none other than adnan (at -- he won't get any direct traffic from anything i write). how lame.
posted by moz at 5:46 PM on January 21, 2002

how is blogdex a weblog?
posted by rebeccablood at 7:19 PM on January 21, 2002

Well, there's technically a weblog at Blogdex, but I'm doubting that's what the nomination is honoring.

Mis-classifications are always a bummer.
posted by anildash at 8:27 PM on January 21, 2002

It's a relatively unusual list, but that's nothing new for SXSW. Some categories are confusing (Grrl web site? What is that?) And I like Jish.vox, but that site isn't a streaming audio site? I guess this is a way to highlight alternative sites, but I'm not sure about the criteria used to choose them (design? content? interactivity?).
posted by timothompson at 8:34 PM on January 21, 2002

I think it's important to note that SXSW is a competition that one has to enter for consideration -- these are finalists, not nominees. Also, the category in which each site is considered is chosen by the entrant, not by the judges.
posted by jjg at 8:36 PM on January 21, 2002

Yeah for (which is hilarious).

Boo to which is such derivitive crap. Compared to personal blogs like dooce and Mighty Girl, Ms. Whiteman doesn't hold a candle.
posted by rev- at 10:00 PM on January 21, 2002

You guys still give a shit about this stuff?

Shouldn't you be busy trying to find non existant web jobs?
posted by internetgeniuses at 10:11 PM on January 21, 2002

a grrl category containing simply female-written web-logs, but no specifically male boy boi category?
posted by grabbingsand at 2:00 PM on January 22, 2002

Yeah, the "grrl" category is a bit out of date.

That, and I'm still bitter, so I won't comment on the quality of the sites that made the grade, when mine didn't... grrr.
posted by crunchland at 3:29 PM on January 22, 2002

Wow, quick to sink to calling people's personal sites "crap" over a web award. I just love the communal and caring spirit of the internet. Such a utopia.

Speaking of crap, I can't believe that dirty whore Bertie got in for that slut-show survivorcam. Oh you knew you were thinking it, I said it for you, now don't bother.

Now quick: rehash other awards discussions. Yah.
posted by RJ Reynolds at 9:51 PM on January 22, 2002

*sobs uncontrollably* thank you, choire. .[and all the little people as well.] you are beautiful

who's going to sxsw? is sxswbaby going to be up this year? if it is already up, what is the url?
posted by survivorcam at 10:16 PM on January 22, 2002

« Older MTV Canada plays too many videos, says rival   |   "Kill duck before cooking" Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments