Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

If you look at this question, you will notice that every answer except the 'best-answer' got a downvote from this guy. And his comments are particularly annoying - he makes it clear this was deliberate and had nothing to do with the validity of the answers.

What really troubles me is that the 'best-answer' is COMPLETELY WRONG AND DANGEROUS and somehow got some upvotes.

I seriously think that both The Rook and Longpoke deserve a suspension.

Update: Okay, I need to clarify a few things. First off, I was a little too hasty to accuse The Rook and Longpoke of being trolls. At first I thought they were intentionally trying to create trouble - I didn't think they were actually serious. In light of this, I think downvoting instead of a suspension is in order.

However, having said that - anyone who posts the following comment:

-1 to every answer except this

...and proceeds to downvote the other answers without explanation - is a red flag.

share|improve this question
Ah, thanks @Jon. Wasn't sure what tags to put on this question. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 3:02
Thank you everyone who downvoted what is clearly a dangerously wrong answer. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 3:12
He disagrees and goes off to downvote other answers. What's the red flag for ? – Sathya May 16 '10 at 6:24
@Ess: The red flag is because he doesn't explain why he's downvoting. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 6:33
@George - if you take out the red flag for any unexplained downvote you get, you might need time extensions. – Gnoupi May 16 '10 at 8:20
By the way, Evan Carroll is not a troll; he said so himself. – alex May 16 '10 at 9:27
Actually the comment "-1 to every answer except this" IS an explanation. He is CLEARLY stating that this answer is correct and all the other answers are wrong (in his opinion). Which he is perfectly allowed to do on this site. That is not trolling behaviour. – devinb May 16 '10 at 16:16
I think TheRook is certainly one of the more controversial characters. He certainly carries an ego and his actions are sometimes very questionable, such as here: – PaulG May 16 '10 at 16:53
up vote 8 down vote accepted

While I find the behavior of these two users immature and exceptionally arrogant, it is plain wrong of you to say it was done "without explanation". The user downvoted an answer he thought was wrong, explained his opinion in many comments, and added his own answer.
This is more than you expect from the average downvoter.

share|improve this answer
That is true now... but you didn't see the post before all of this debate took place :) – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 6:34

I see no suspension-worthy behavior in that question. Obviously there is some difference of opinion as to what is safe -- and if Longpoke believes almost all the answers are dangerously wrong, it is his duty to downvote them.

If your answer is correct and The Rook's is wrong, I think you would be much better off fleshing out your answer and explaining the truth instead of telling people that they are "on the brink of getting in trouble" and posting on Meta about it.

(If being wrong were grounds for suspension, I'm afraid I wouldn't be here today.)

share|improve this answer
Yes, but this looks very intentional. It seems like the user is trying to mislead everyone. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 3:05
@George This is how the system works. Fortunately, the valid-voters largely out-number the odd-voters who try to make a mess of things. The good answers will naturally rise to the top in the end. – Sampson May 16 '10 at 3:08
@Jonathan: Yes, you are right. The wrong answer is sinking down - but it's still the 'best answer'. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 3:11
It's not the "best answer" it's simply the "accepted" answer. How many questions have you seen with the "accepted answer" having only a few votes and other much better answers having significantly more? Besides, he's wrong and anyone who develops for the web should know better. – Josh K May 16 '10 at 3:21
@Josh: Agreed. I put 'best answer' in quotes because it really isn't. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 3:27
yeah, I agree. Maybe you're not understanding the question the user asked? Perhaps, the phrasing didn't make sense to you? The question seems legit. Why did you think it was a troll question? – mkelley33 May 16 '10 at 4:23
@mke: Anytime a user announces that he's downvoting all other answers without explanation... methinks a red light goes off. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 4:38
@George False downvotes are indeed detrimental to the system, but how is claiming responsibility for the votes a red light that they are false? Why would someone who announces he is downvoting all answers raise more flags than someone who does it without announcing it? What aspect of this act is so dangerous? – Grace Note May 17 '10 at 11:43

The answer is not wrong.

You may not agree with it, but it is not wrong.

I think before you're so quick to paint with the troll brush you should take a quick look in the mirror at your own behavior.

share|improve this answer
Yes, I admit I jumped on him... only because I didn't think he was actually serious with his answer. I thought he was just gaming the site. I still say he's wrong, though. The number of upvotes I got should back up that claim... – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 16 '10 at 6:14
@George It's sunday morning and I'm not entirely on top of this but I think The Rook is right. That he's showing off a vulnerability issue that he fixed and the department of homeand security... well. But I think the essence of his answer is correct, because CSRF involve "hijacking" another user's session and privileges. For a header to be forged, the user would have to be using a maliciously altered browser - and if that is the case, all is lost anyway, and the attacker won't need CSRF to get hold of anything they want. – Pëkka May 16 '10 at 7:51
@questions it's an interesting question, because the actual risk of using referer (ugh, misspelled forever) is that some proxies strip it! You can't always get it, which means you have to be OK with blocking access to these folks along with your CSRF fix. Using a nonce or key does not have this weakness. – Jeff Atwood May 16 '10 at 10:47
@Jeff yeah, using a one-time token or a flag in the user's session is definitely the way to go for this if you're serving a broad audience. I just meant in the context of the heated discussion, other than I too thought initially, Rook and Longpoke are indeed right: This is one rare occasion where you can trust incoming data to fend off an attack. Anyway, it's a really, really interesting topic, great this question came up! – Pëkka May 16 '10 at 10:57
@George: "The number of upvotes I got should back up that claim..." Do you want me to send you an email every time I see a provably incorrect answer with a lot of upvotes? (Occasionally it's one of my own...) In this case there aren't even that many upvotes - 7, along with 5 downvotes. If you think that "backs up your claim" in any significant way, I've got a bridge to sell you... – Jon Skeet May 16 '10 at 17:20
@Jon: There was only one downvote when I wrote that - and I'm beginning to think that the question was misunderstood and needs rewording. – uɐɯsO uɐɥʇɐN May 17 '10 at 16:44
@George: Even without any downvotes, 7 people agreeing with you is hardly overwhelming evidence that you're right. I've seen plenty of incorrect answers with 7 or more upvotes. – Jon Skeet May 17 '10 at 21:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .