I've been on the net for a long while and I am always appreciative of original ideas in concept and design. A boring site is one that has had little thought and creativity invested in them, and I always close the browser window very quickly. Sites that give me something be excited about, or piques my curiosity are the ones who will win.

The site must have a central theme. No smattering of loose odds and ends all placed in one page. The site must adhere to the Content Guidelines as required by Geocities. This means there cannot be commercially oriented nor should there be any pornography and other distasteful elements within.

Though content will always remain my number one consideration in giving awards, the layout and style of the site will be nearly as important. Graphics should ideally be mostly original, and the layout be distinctly unique. However, I don't ask for stunning graphics, just as long as it promotes the reading of the text and stays unobtrusively in the background, it's fine.

Sites that are heavily under construction will not be considered for the award. All good sites are constantly under construction, and if you have to warn visitors about the extent of the site reconstruction, you shouldn't apply for this award yet.

Quality is the harmonic combination of all the elements that set apart average sites from superior sites. Clear navigation, clarity of writing, distinctive graphics, original ideas, and volume of content all contribute to this characteristic.

This is the one factor that you cannot control. I look for evidence of good work in the makeup of a site's design and content, and this award will reflect that. However, even someone as eclectic as I with regards to this genre of websites have my own likes and dislikes. The final decision about what to award the applicant, if any, will rest solely on whether I liked it or not.