On 8 Apr , at 10:53:58, Harry Metcalfe wrote: > Well spotted :) > > That is distinctly possible. There is a strange set of votes which are > (very probably) all from the same person: > > +--------+---------------+ > | rating | count(rating) | > +--------+---------------+ > | 1 | 2523 | > | 2 | 2061 | > | 3 | 765 | > | 4 | 315 | > | 5 | 124 | > | 6 | 42 | > | 7 | 27 | > | 8 | 11 | > +--------+---------------+ > > I figure this is either an very keen player or a bot -- but if it is a > bot, I don't know what its strategy or purpose is. What would it > achieve > by spamming the system with low ratings? > > The IP originates in Yorkshire and these votes occurred over a > period of > several days, so there's nothing instantly suspicious about them other > than their volume.
are the low-voted target locations in Lancashire? stef > > > Harry > > > On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 11:26 +0200, Michael Bimmler wrote: >> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Tom Steinberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> We're approaching 10,000 votes, which is nice because a) it's less >>> than 24 hours and b) I've intentionally held back from pushing it >>> until it has various things that make Harry and the rest of us >>> happier. >>> >>> One thing that concerned me up front was that the data might be not >>> very useful. I've asked Harry for a dump of the votes, so we can >>> look >>> together: >> >> Question: Would you mind sending us an updated vote count (of all the >> votes, not only for the 3-times-rated pictures)? >> >> I have the (not so empirically founded) suspicion, that someone is >> trying to game the system by submitting as many "1" votes as >> possible: >> The last 15 pictures I rated (some of which showed quite decent >> places) had a ridiculously low average. As many of them had only two >> votes, I could deduce a lot of "1" ratings, e.g. in pictures where I >> submitted a "6" mark and the average after 2 votes was 3.5 >> >> I wouldn't raise this here, had it not occured for quite some >> pictures >> in a row whereas when I last played the game, the averages seemed >> much >> more sensible to me. Would be interesting to find out whether I am >> just paranoid or whether there has indeed been a significant increase >> in "1" / "2" ratings. >> >> Thanks, >> Michael >> >> > -- > FYI: > > I no longer use [email protected]. It will still work for the time > being > but my new address is: > > [email protected] > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public -- /* Stefan Magdalinski +447769 666528 (phone) smagdali (IM/twitter/flickr/dopplr/skype/etc) */ _______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
