5

I have given the SO engine a year and half worth of my opinion. Upvotes, downvotes, it's become so banal.

I'm tired of expressing my opinion. I feel like those old guys in the balcony of the muppet show saying the same thing over and over again.

Can't SO just infer the way I would vote on a question/answer and do it for me?

|improve this question
  • Is it Friday already? – Gnome Jun 11 '10 at 0:58
  • 3
    My Recent Activity says it is. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 0:59
  • 1
    Nah, we don't need auto-voting. Just voting that's more entertaining. – Aarobot Jun 11 '10 at 1:38
  • @Aar: make sure you try out the greasemonkey script. CKFTW! – perbert Jun 11 '10 at 2:04
  • This had a chance as a Friday post, but suit yourself. – Jon Seigel Jun 11 '10 at 17:15
  • @Jon I didn't know Friday posts were special around here. Would it make me cool or something? I want to be cool! Tag re-added. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 17:49
9

Just because I'm so nice, I've written a greasemonkey script for you... It features an incredibly advanced prediction engine that not only uses your previous voting history, posting history and viewing history, but also taps into things like your current mood (based off mouse movement tracking and keyboard use), room temperature, global political situations, ever-changing meta-memes and current bladder status. It also has a genetic algorithm that ensures that it continually gets more accurate the more you use it. So what are you waiting for? Install it & start browsing!

The code:

(function() {
    function GM_wait() {
        if (typeof unsafeWindow.jQuery == 'undefined') { 
            window.setTimeout(GM_wait,100); 
        } else { 
            $ = unsafeWindow.jQuery; letsJQuery(); 
        }
    }
    GM_wait();
    function letsJQuery() {
        $(function() { $(".answer, #question").filter(":has(.user-details > a:contains('Alconja'))").find(".vote-up-off:not(.vote-up-on)").click(); });
    }
})();

Make sure you install it against http://meta.stackoverflow.com/* and http://stackoverflow.com/*.

|improve this answer
  • Hey, it works! lol – Jon Seigel Jun 11 '10 at 2:14
  • 1
    Excellent... looks like someone's already installed it. :) – Alconja Jun 11 '10 at 2:15
  • 2
    Perfect way to trigger the fraud script and get all past and future upvotes for you nullified. – Gnome Jun 11 '10 at 2:49
  • 1
    @Gnome: Doesn't that only happen if all the votes come from the same user? You'd have to post in a lot of questions to trigger the vote fraud detection... – Aarobot Jun 11 '10 at 3:21
  • 1
    @Gnome - I do realise that... I was assuming it was pretty obvious that this was a joke & that no one would actually try & use it. – Alconja Jun 11 '10 at 3:30
  • @Aarobot - That's actually a good point. I'd assumed it would definitely create fraudy behaviour, but given that I've only made ~150 posts across SO & Meta, its pretty unlikely that someone would see enough of them in a short enough period to trigger the fraud detection. So long as they weren't explicitly browsing my history and especially if they continued voting normally in the mean time. – Alconja Jun 11 '10 at 3:37
  • -1 the line is too long to read on the iPad. Joke lost. And I stopped using Netscape Navigator in the 90s. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 15:46
  • Now that I can scroll the line, I have to agree that this is funny. +2. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 17:54
4

No. There are so many factors that it would be impossible to write an all-encompassing algorithm. Here are just a few of them

Besides, it's not a lot of work, and it's how you can give back to the community. It requires very little from you, and means a lot to those who receive it.

|improve this answer
  • 2
    oh you made my day with that bullet point joke. i even voted you up using my own finger. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 0:50
2

That'd be nice, but we should probably go all the way. Why do I need to type in answers manually when SO can just extrapolate what I would've written?

|improve this answer
  • Flack Overstow will make answers based on your previous answers... but I wouldn't hold my breath on getting any upvotes from them :) – Mark Rushakoff Jun 11 '10 at 1:08
  • Well, you know, I was just being realistic and all. An upvote/novote/downvote decision could be done with a Bayesian inference engine if you captured the right/enough dimensions. That said, I think most answers on SO take the form of "Dup of XXX" these days. So I guess that's an easy answer to autogen and could also be done with the inference engine. – Frank A. Krueger Jun 11 '10 at 1:12
  • Some days when I'm busy/lazy I just rerun the "best of Aaronaught" - so far nobody's noticed. – Aarobot Jun 11 '10 at 3:22
2

No, the algorithm is simple.

Search for all high ranking posts that haven't been shut down and converted to community wiki yet.

Upvote the question.

Upvote the top answer.

Search the the top 5 answers and x-ref a database of funny/witty/pun phrases for matches, if found add a comment quoting it - for guaranteed 10+ upvoted comment.

Then select and upvote one of top ranking comments from each of the the first 5 answers.

I call it the RepWhoreBot

|improve this answer
  • And... this was more of a joke. If you look at a lot of the top-ranking questions, you'll start to see a pattern. – Evan Plaice Jun 11 '10 at 5:08
0

Only if you can't pass the Turing test.

Now, I have my suspicions about a few users, but...

|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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