User Pillum got the Publicist badge on this question with only 27 views... say what?!?!
Screenshots to prove that it was < 1000 at the time this post is made:
-
Great... right when I finish making this question, I find this possible duplicate: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/127574/… However, here you have a factor of almost 50x. I don't think the counter is that conservative.– MysticialCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 16:55
-
7Hmm. Since I always assume the worst in people, my money is on plain abuse. Question views are only counted with JavaScript enabled, so he probably got a couple bots to fetch his referral link.– a catCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 16:57
-
13Got to remember to have javascript turned on when I use my bot net so its not so obvious– Some Helpful CommenterCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 17:09
-
2Don't know if you've noticed but there's something seriously wrong with the background colour of your text boxes... ;P– yannisCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 17:21
-
I changed the color (intentionally) in Windows. :P– MysticialCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 17:25
-
@Mysticial rose goes well with manga?– seheCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:30
-
Yeah, I had a pinkish Anime background for a while. So the pink in the windows/text-boxes was to match it. Then I changed the background to a night-sky picture, so it's black - but I left the pink in the windows.– MysticialCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:33
-
1Irony? This post in meta has doubled the post in question's views. :D– Sam DeHaanCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:36
-
1@SamDeHaan No, the irony would be if someone managed to get the Publicist badge on this question before it hit 1000 views. Alright everyone, turn your bots on! (and keep JavaScript disabled)– MysticialCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:39
-
Very carefully.– Thomas EdingCommented Apr 24, 2012 at 0:41
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
If you look at their activity, you see that the badges were also awarded in quick succession (with the order depending on which script ran first).
This means that the views would've had to come in rapidly in large volumes that it managed to beat the scripts and bucked the natural pattern of Announcer being awarded first, Booster a few hours/days later and finally the Publicist badge.
This is not normal viewing behaviour where someone chances upon a link and then maybe clicks it and moreover, the question isn't that interesting/catchy to have such a large volume of views. If the devs look at the kurtosis of the data points (time viewed), I'll bet they'll find a very high kurtosis for this case.
My guess is that the strict view counter™ also takes into account the velocity of views, which explains the low views displayed (closer to the actual number), whereas the link tracking script merely looks at unique IPs, making it easy to farm badges if you have the means and knowhow to write a script to do that.
answered Apr 18, 2012 at 17:49
-
-
Is it really farming? The user is meeting the requirement of that badge after all...– HoganCommented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:03
-
3@Hogan: How would it be any different than a user making 500 bogus edits to posts, or a user creating duplicate accounts to upvote their own posts? It's not appropriate behavior and shouldn't go unpunished. Commented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:06
-
-
@animuson Yeah, badges being out of order by itself isn't convincing (I've gotten vox-populi before suffrage in a similar vein), but your example is a question that I can easily believe would've quickly gotten the views if posted at the right time and place; not the one mentioned in the OP :) Commented Apr 18, 2012 at 18:09
-
5
-
I think your answer is correct. But I'll wait for official confirmation before I accept it. (assuming it does turn out to be abuse) Commented Apr 19, 2012 at 18:22
This user got the badge fraudulently, and we removed it accordingly.
answered Apr 23, 2012 at 19:17
-
7
-
Is there going to be any change in the algorithm that counts views? Or is it safe to assume that this is rare enough to handle case-by-case when they happen? Commented Apr 23, 2012 at 19:22
-
1@Mysticial - the question wasn't viewed 1,000 times, so the error wasn't in the view count, it was in the badge...and we're looking at possible changes there.– Nick Craver ModCommented Apr 23, 2012 at 19:25
-
*I meant the view/ip counter for the badge. But yeah, I get your point. :) Commented Apr 23, 2012 at 19:27
-
1Am I the only one shocked that someone would spend this much time to (fraudulently) get a badge? Commented Apr 23, 2012 at 19:27
-
4@AdamRackis You don't know how much time he spent, though. If he already had a 1000-strong botnet handy, all he would have had to do is deploy a payload to fetch a single URL. Hell, maybe I'm on an entirely wrong level of maliciousness and he just put the link into his signature as an image somewhere. That'd take just about a couple seconds.– a catCommented Apr 23, 2012 at 19:32
-
3
-
Here's another one: stackoverflow.com/questions/5578845/… Publicist with 314 views. Commented Apr 24, 2012 at 16:00
-
And another one from the same person. Publicist with 202 views. Commented May 1, 2012 at 5:11
-
And yet another from the same person. Publicist with 80 views. Commented May 2, 2012 at 0:49
-
@Mysticial we're aware, and will be changing how this works. Don't worry, ill-begotten badges will not stick around (definitely feel free to keep reporting them here though).– Nick Craver ModCommented May 2, 2012 at 1:50
-
The first one here stackoverflow.com/badges/262/publicist?userid=47322 Commented May 20, 2012 at 2:22