16 Comments
Sure, you can do it in your pyjamas, but running a blog is still work—and right now, Bwog is one daily editor short. Each of our staff of six Bwoggers is on call for one 24-hour period per week (or the whole weekend), QuickSpecking, making posts out of tips that come into bwgossip@columbia.edu…and bantering via e-mail about nothing in particular.
Interested? Here’s the application:
1. Five (5) QuickSpec headlines for the November 17, 2006 paper.
2. One (1) previous Bwog post you liked and why.
3. One (1) previous Bwog post you didn’t like and why.
4. A paragraph about how Bwog could improve, not to exceed three hundred (300) words.
5. A mock Bwog post on a topic of your choice, not to exceed four hundred (400) words.
E-mail what you come up with to bwog@columbia.edu no later than NEXT FRIDAY, JANUARY 19 at midnight. And feel free to contact us in the meantime with questions. Also! We’ll be having an open meeting soon for anyone interested in writing features, doing interviews, taking pictures, covering Columbia, and generally being very distracted all the time.
Loading …
16 Comments
@Anonymous I’LL HAVE YOU SPELL MY NAME CORRECTLY
@wondering can you apply anonymously to bwog?
@ask mr. manly cottingshire
@old school BRING BACK THE BUBBLY LOGO!!!
@at least in shit like this, your vote matters. in a presidential election, you only have a worthwhile vote living in ohio or florida.
@what!? “ask yourself if you would ever want to conduct a vote for anything in a manner unbefitting true Presidential elections.”
Uh, yeah? Like less important things?
@well said, sir You’re so right. I’d much rather wait for three hours and chuck my vote into an electronically vulnerable touchscreen machine, the results of which will be thrown out in the recount on specious reasoning designed solely to eliminate the votes from my district.
Now THAT’S how you vote.
@DHI Yo man let me tell you something.
This award is so illegitimate anyway because you can vote for it a whole bunch of times if you try.
Ask yourself this question:
Here is the question…
“Is this how you would vote for President, online and however many times you want, or do you think that this is a poor system that would be unlikely to result in fair Presidential elections?”
And then ask yourself if you would ever want to conduct a vote for anything in a manner unbefitting true Presidential elections.
@wrong you can only vote once. see the previous few comments. and ivygate.
@sure about that? I’ve been voting for the last half hour and Bwog’s number hasn’t risen from 23%, which means one of two things:
1) there actually IS a limit as to how many times you can vote, or
2) “Wesleying” (bah) is so far ahead that no amount of voting can bring us up to the lead.
One of the reasons I’ve been sort of turned-off from voting is the ambiguity as to how many times we can vote. Maybe if Bwog cleared this up for its readers, voting would increase.
Well?
@hmm according to ivygate, you can only vote once, actually.
luckily, we have a whole library system full of computers with different IP addresses. and after that, infinite laptop ports to confuse their system. let wesleyan’s limited liberal arts college in the middle of nowhere internet access/power cords supplant that mighty tide of resources!
in other words, vote when you’re at a public terminal. vote wherever you move your ibook in butler. vote against them on the beaches, in the valleys, in the mountains…
@that's quite some bwog dedication there
@VOTE! there’s no limit to the number of times you can!
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/tools/papertrail/070109/best_alternative_media_outlet.htm#more
@ewwww please keep reminding people to vote! wesleyan is kicking our asses!!!!
@Sprinkles lol, British spelling of pajamas.
@edkjdfkj i’d love to join the bwog team, but those application requirements are far too onerous.