Timeline for Serial upvoting reversed
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2014 at 4:46 | comment | added | The Unhandled Exception | Exactly @hitesh. The system is preventing users from voting on too many of a specific user's questions/answers, either up or down. It's an abuse prevention mechanism designed to protect a malicious user from downvoting all your questions, and to prevent someone artificially boosting your rep by upvoting all your content. Always vote for the post, not the author | |
| May 23, 2014 at 4:41 | comment | added | Hitesh | @The The Unhandled Exception : what do you mean either direction, does that mean even if someone tries to down vote all my question with 60 seconds it, points will be restored ? | |
| May 23, 2014 at 4:38 | comment | added | The Unhandled Exception | @hitesh: you're not a victim, the votes were fraudulent and were corrected. Too many votes in either direction is not allowed. | |
| May 23, 2014 at 4:35 | comment | added | Hitesh | I also became victim of this :( | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 14:25 | comment | added | The Unhandled Exception |
@casperOne sorry if I led others to believe you could. Voting details are anonymous. I am a mod on Cog Sci and so I know what the suspicious vote patterns tool shows. Specifically when I said "I am not a mod on SO so I can't see the details" what I meant by "details" was "were all these votes from the same user. Which if they were it would have triggered a notification in the suspicious vote patterns tool... right? (Not sure because the only thing suspicious about the votes on CogSci is how few we have :-p )
|
|
| Mar 2, 2012 at 14:11 | comment | added | casperOne Mod | @TheUnhandledException Yes, but note the statement was about "details", the suspicious vote patterns tool shows very high-level information. We can't see information on the individual vote level. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 14:10 | comment | added | The Unhandled Exception | @casper but you can see the suspicious vote patterns tool | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:52 | comment | added | casperOne Mod | I'm a mod and I can't see the details either. Moderators don't have access to vote data. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:48 | comment | added | seanbreeden | How is it being punished? I'm glad Stack has these safeguards in place to make sure that someone can't serial up or downvote. It improves the honesty and quality of the system. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:42 | comment | added | CodesInChaos | @rcs20 The system invalidated some upvotes you received because it thinks they are fraudulent. It doesn't really matter if you just have a big fan, or if was real fraud. The votes are invalid in either case. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:30 | comment | added | rcs20 |
well -70 is good then? come on people who likes to get negative "adjustments" because the system say "no" ... am i missing something here?
|
|
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:29 | vote | accept | rcs20 | ||
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:29 | comment | added | CodesInChaos | Looks like the system didn't work well. IMO the 5 upvotes on questions should have been reversed too. And your Feb 6, Feb 20 and Feb 21 votes look strange too. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:28 | comment | added | The Unhandled Exception | No @rcs20, you didn't get punished at all. Someone else tried to abuse the system and the system said "no" | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:28 | comment | added | Martin Smith | @rcs20 - You don't get punished. It just undoes the dubious votes. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:27 | comment | added | rcs20 | well then, it's worse .. how am I supose to control what/how people votes? I get punish because people UP vote me? | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:26 | history | edited | The Unhandled Exception | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 57 characters in body
|
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:23 | comment | added | Bart | This is not about you voting up various answers. This is about you receiving upvotes. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:22 | comment | added | rcs20 | who gives a **** if I want to vote up, I can ... so if I open 5 pages (tabs) read them then vote for them at the same time that does not count? this is crap | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:21 | comment | added | Bart | ...nevermind the question upvotes above it. In fact, looking through previous days, there seems to be a lot of serial upvoting going on unless the times are inaccurate... | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:20 | comment | added | Martin Smith | Looks like the 5 votes above that should have been included as well so the OP is lucky it is not 95. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 13:17 | history | answered | The Unhandled Exception | CC BY-SA 3.0 |