So, it's finals time in BUGB-land, and unlike Eurovision, it is safe to say the being ".co.uk" does not guarantee nurl points.

It has been interesting to compare and contrast the sites - a few of which seem more like blogs to me - and then to vote for the one that I liked best.

What makes a good website?  I tried to imagine that I was looking for a church to go to, and the questions I'd want to find answers to.  So, for me, the number of clicks needed to get to service times, location, contact details and activities were more important than how many whizzy widgets were employed.  Colour schemes, font size/style, language, photos probably came next.  I was clear I wasn't looking for 'a church I'd like' rather than 'does the website help me to decide if this might be a church I'd like.'

My vote went to Minehead because their front page ticked all the boxes for me - a map, service times, quick links to the main activities, good colour scheme, uncluttered layout and suitable use of pictures.  The site is not perfect - a few links are circular - but for me it does what a church website needs to do, and it does it well.

On Sunday I'll find out what everyone else thought...