I think it's just a 'how many categories can you think of' contest...

"thousands of sites submitted" times $120 entry fee ...

i understand that they want to include sites that people actually use on occasion, but i don't really think that friendster, with its hour load times, deserves to be nominated.

What? No kottke.org? It's a sham!!!!

They're not too bad on the whole. The personal category is just dreck though. Of the ones that would load for me, they were mostly just bad flash experiments with jumpy menus and almost no content. The baby site was just a jumpy nav plus badly photoshoped images. I know there are plenty of non-blog personal sites worth considering in this category, I wonder if no one entered.

For the longest time, I've wanted to win a Webby. In the last two years or so, I've realized that the Webby is nothing more than a footnote on someone's resume, and a paper weight.

Oh well. At least it's a creative looking paper weight.

Meetup.com is a political site, eh?

It's like browsing through someone's old list of bookmarks. I wonder if they're making much money?

I'd say they are less relevant, to be sure.

I quit giving the webby awards any importance for a while now, they just keep getting worse and more irrelevant.

I'm still waiting for www.the-dreamers.com to load.
Oh wait it's just loaded...hmmm... flash animation.
How can a webpage that takes 30 seconds to load, be considered for a webby award ?

You mean the Webby's were once relevant?

Irrelevant = not the sites I would have chosen.

Ooh snap, Jason.