This is the dumbest way to present a poll I have ever seen! There are 44 choices but you can either vote for "Miley Cyrus vs Jimmy Fallon" or click next 34 times and vote for Edward Snowden.
I'll give you a hint since the servers seem to be overloaded and right now I can't even vote for Snowden:
where persons-name is the name of the person you wanted to vote for. You need to prove your identity with Twitter or Facebook. I have no idea if this is new or if it's how the poll has always been run, but the voting is open 'til Dec 4.
I'm afraid if I direct link, they're just going to see it as a voting ring and disqualify all of your votes. If you can even get the page to load. I am currently still waiting.
Holy crap ! I clicked the link and for a moment thought I'd been click-jacked to rate my camel toe. That should have an NSFW on it for anyone sensitive or with work colleagues around.
PSA everyone: TIME Magazine's POY online technology has always been a POS, and TIME Magazine, not doing quite so well in the financials as the years go on, has likely done little to correct that.
Reading about the Time POY poll a little bit, it's supposed to be the person who has influenced the media the most. Adolf Hitler won the top slot once.
It's pretty saddening that some random programmer is going to let his own ego kill the chance to make a statement (yes, I know you personally know POY means nothing. The masses don't, move on.) about privacy and surveillance, all "for the lulz".
Wish they went for something else that wouldn't be easily mistaken for a genuine result. It could even encourage another pop singer next year to do a similar stunt or make this bizarre dancing look cool for young people.
- Yesterday AM you could auth in with Twitter or Facebook and vote without posting.
- Yesterday PM Twitter was no longer an option.
- Today AM Twitter is an option but not for auth, now it opens up an "intent" page with a pre-filled tweet.
My guess is that a) it didn't go viral enough without forcing a tweet, b) Twitter was easier to fake or c) the Twitter app got blacklisted for a high number of "revokes"
A non-binding online poll to help pick who will be on the cover of a dying news magazine. Notable recent winners include Vladimir Putin and, uh, "you" as well as "A Protestor".
Actually I think there's a chance they do pick Snowden, but I don't care because it's really of very little consequence. I'm sure Time cares much more about selling magazines than maintaining the political status quo.
The audience of the (dying) magazine industry doesn't come close to the audience of snowden's message. your comment kind of proves that snowden doesn't have a chance, because choosing him won't increase sales.
I think there's actually a very good chance. These are journalists doing the picking after all although their selection will likely have pretty much zero to do with the results of an Internet poll. (The chances of it being Miley Cyrus on the other hand are about as close to zero as you can get.)
Depends on what you mean by "impact", as Stalin and Mao were both responsible for more famine, torture, and death than even Hitler. On the other hand Hitler's "impact" was probably more relevant to Time's audience (in the USA and Great Britain).
Don't forget, Awesome Award based on internet votes will be spammed all over Wikipedia, providing free advertising that points to Time Magazine, and wikipedia editors believe any award is some authoritative measure of success.
In a way, hacker news could make up an award based on internet votes and vote Miley Cyrus as the Greatest Creative Mind of the last 100 years. Wikipedia editors will be all over that.
I know that Miley Cyrus is definitely not person of the year. But if she were to win, that would be hilarious. I can't imagine a single person taking it seriously or respecting the result.
To be fair, a large number of Americans would be of the type to have strong negative opinions of Miley Cyrus's latest antics. It's just they are also not the type to vote in online polls.
I love how people who don't have Facebook are excluded from voting. Not that I care, but there's no way Edward Snowden should suffer the indignity of appearing in the same list as Miley Cyrus for anything... and to especially lose to her?
Once you delete your account and leave it alone for 90 days, its gone. It will never be linked to you again. Thanks, Irish Data Protection Commissioner!
And I'm not the only person on the Internet to know that what Snowden released has been 'known' to the internet community for 20+ years. A release of documents does not consititute proof of what one already knows, because we all knew this type of surveilance was being done on a regular basis BECAUSE IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN DONE[1]. Just because we use wires and bits over pen and paper doesn't mean the governments and people in control don't want to have as much information about who they are 'controlling' as they can:
Don't try to tell me that some power can corrupt a person
You haven't had enough to know what its like[2]
Read some (good) history sometimes too see more startling revelations of the 'unthinkable' things your governments and controllers might be doing[3][4].
Is this some sort of cruel nightmare? This is everything that's wrong with the world.
Miley Cyrus essentially wore not very much on live TV and everyone went partially insane for 6 months. Snowden revealed a tyrannical regime to the world, risking his own freedom, so that we could take action and make the world a better place... yet here we are.
The latter is regarded as less important, less of a standpoint in human history than some meaningless celebs rear end.
75 comments
[ 1.9 ms ] story [ 138 ms ] threadI'll give you a hint since the servers seem to be overloaded and right now I can't even vote for Snowden:
http://poy.time.com/2013/11/25/vote-now-who-should-be-times-...
where persons-name is the name of the person you wanted to vote for. You need to prove your identity with Twitter or Facebook. I have no idea if this is new or if it's how the poll has always been run, but the voting is open 'til Dec 4.
I'm afraid if I direct link, they're just going to see it as a voting ring and disqualify all of your votes. If you can even get the page to load. I am currently still waiting.
Someone should conduct a real, independent poll an award a POY award from the Internets.
http://www.eonline.com/news/485526/miley-cyrus-leads-time-s-...
From last year: How 4Chan Made Kim Jong Un Time Readers' Person of the Year http://gizmodo.com/5968230/how-4chan-made-kim-jong-un-time-r...
Time for a overused saying: Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to incompetence.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but __don't rule out malice__"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor#Similar_quotatio...
Fixing the places of the top 21 people seems like an exploitable poll. I don't know how much has improved since then.
Ballot stuffing can be done by anyone with motivation.
Vote Rigging (e.g. - deleting votes) can only be done by the people running the system.
http://www.dailydot.com/news/time-person-of-the-year-miley-c...
- Yesterday PM Twitter was no longer an option.
- Today AM Twitter is an option but not for auth, now it opens up an "intent" page with a pre-filled tweet.
My guess is that a) it didn't go viral enough without forcing a tweet, b) Twitter was easier to fake or c) the Twitter app got blacklisted for a high number of "revokes"
A non-binding online poll to help pick who will be on the cover of a dying news magazine. Notable recent winners include Vladimir Putin and, uh, "you" as well as "A Protestor".
Don't forget Hitler!
And G.Bush Jr, twice.
And Obama, twice.
(In fact, you'd be pressed to fill more than one hand counting the pleasant people on the list)
They claim it's the "most influential person, for better or worse", but don't admit that's as long as the person did not really upset the status quo.
The idea that Snowden might be Time POY is laughable. The "trolls" know this, which is why they make a mockery of the poll each year.
In a way, hacker news could make up an award based on internet votes and vote Miley Cyrus as the Greatest Creative Mind of the last 100 years. Wikipedia editors will be all over that.
2. If you want a real conspiracy, it looks like the major banks were conspiring with the FBI to assassinate Occupy Wall St leader via sniper. http://www.justiceonline.org/commentary/fbi-files-ows.html
3. Time still matters. The old and ignorant still turn to it for "news".
4. If you ever thought Snowden would beat Miley Cyrus, you obviously don't know much about America.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_room for an example.
[2] http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/nineinchnails/capitalg.html
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_People%27s_History_of_the_Uni...
[4] http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/subjects/search/?query=histo...
Miley Cyrus essentially wore not very much on live TV and everyone went partially insane for 6 months. Snowden revealed a tyrannical regime to the world, risking his own freedom, so that we could take action and make the world a better place... yet here we are.
The latter is regarded as less important, less of a standpoint in human history than some meaningless celebs rear end.