Perhaps. Although with that said nearly 1000 people have voted today - compared to between 100-200 on the previous days (excepting the 29th, first day, which had about 600-800). So it's a case of; is the risk worth the reward?
Tom On 10 June 2011 22:19, Sarah <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 14:38, Shane Simmons <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Well, the SecurePoll extension has multiple measures built-in that allow > for > > easy sock detection. It captures some data in addition to the username > that > > would help eliminate those votes. > > > > On a side note: would a simple check for duplicate emails be possible? I > > received an email for my main and my alt account, which are registered > with > > the exact same email address. I'm not sure how the system would decide > which > > account gets the email (Perhaps highest edit count?), but I'm sure > someone > > could figure out something. :-) > > > I've received two invitations to vote -- also both at the same e-mail > address -- so all I'd have to do now (if it were a user name that > didn't make it obvious it was mine) is go somewhere else to vote. And > given how low the voting requirements are the software must be sending > out multiple invitations to quite a few people. > > I can't see how it benefits the project to have multiple accounts > voting that only need to have made 300 edits and 20 recent ones, and a > kind bot that reminds them of all the eligible account names. We're > shooting ourselves in the foot with this, surely. > > Sarah > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
