I'm with @seanmcginnis and generally loathe all contests like this. There was one recently where we discovered an agency gaming the voting system by back channeling their friends and offering +K "rewards" and other "social stroking" in exchange for votes. That was not likeable. Heh. And while I'm not suggesting this contest is the same, I am suggesting that most of us genuinely hate things like this. It is a huge circle jerk and when you have to constantly pimp your friends asking for votes, it's really kind of lame. Not to mention massively intrusive and annoying. And all for the sake of bragging rights. About something that nobody really cares about. Kudos to David for trying to do make his efforts worthwhile but in the big scheme of things and IMO it would be better for him to do what he's good at on a day to day basis and not partake. However, if there's something to be learned from the process (per your comments above, David), that could, I suppose be valuable. Maybe there's a future blog post in that. Oh, and yeah, I blog all the time.

Jim Terrific thoughts, as usual. I'm not sure why people have their panties in such a wad over the concept of sponsored tweets. Lance Armstrong accepts money from sponsors, but we still root him on. So does Tiger Woods. Does anyone say they are selling their souls to the devil because they capitalize on their "celebrity" to help fund their personal brands? I think not. In fact, our society is built exactly upon this premise. My only complaint, ever, is when someone is dishonest about a paid sponsorship. I tweet about products I like all day long. BUT if I ever tweet about something on behalf of a client, I say "my client's promotion" and if I tweet about something that is sponsored, I disclose that as well. Transparency equals honesty - and what's bad about that? Thanks, as always, for inspiring thought. Your friend, @shellykramer