56

I'm sure this is not really brightening anyone's day. You're not doing that person any favors. Someone might look at that and think this person is guilty of vote fraud. Please stop voting this way, it's more annoying than anything else.


39

Our guidance here is to do exactly what you did, wait for the script to run and if the votes aren't reversed, it means: It wasn't the same person. You'd be surprised how often that is actually the case The votes did not trip the algorithm(s), which are designed to err on the side of caution. What this prescribes is shrugging it off entirely, and possibly ...


32

Don't target users with votes. It's as simple as that. By all means feel free to vote for content you happen upon, but anything that looks like you targeting a user with votes (up or down) can land both you and the user you target in hot water. Don't do it. You'll cause more trouble than it's worth. Even if you mean well, and the votes are deserved, there is ...


32

Yes, they do. They go into a queue for the community managers to look at. But they didn't always, and there's a reason it's taking so long right now. Some history Back in 2015, JNat and I joined the team as support specialists, taking over the ZenDesk support queue where all community tickets landed. Part of that responsibility eventually included a queue ...


29

First off, any system that considered a fixed number of downvotes as clear evidence of abuse would be crazy. Folks would be triggering it accidentally all the time. The system would break. And it would be trivially easy to game. So, we don't do that. Here's my advice: Don't worry about the voting-fraud script. Unless you want to be fraudulent with your ...


29

A couple of things here. We're re-doing the automatic vote reversal system. As in completely. It was great for the problem we solved when we created it, but it doesn't work at scale. Way too much human time goes into doing what smarter algorithms could be doing. We're about 2/3 of the way there. Soon, mods won't need to go looking for this sort of stuff ...


27

This certainly falls under serial voting. The votes are un-upvotes, but they are voting behavior non the less. And they are targeted at specific users, not the content. As such this goes against the rules - it is not allowed in any shape or form. The reversal script doesn't handle this specific kind of case at the moment, but we may very well add it.


27

When the serial upvote is reversed, your reputation is recalculated as if the serial votes were never applied. This means that a reputation cap will be recalculated too, you will still get your legitimately earned reputation from normal upvotes. So, if you received 15 serial votes, and 10 regular votes, on the day itself you'll be reputation capped and ...


27

This's happening probably due to the script conflict - both reversal and roomba scripts run 3:00 AM UTC as it was stated somewhere, but I've seen several times that Community removes a question at 3:01 (despite the site being very low-traffic; on the high traffic sites I think it can take 10+ mins for the script to check all the questions), i.e. sometimes a ...


26

Just to be clear, community moderators can't see specific votes, only patterns in aggregate. In most cases, you likely aren't being serially downvoted, and if you are, we have systems in place to reverse those votes automatically. But if you're sure there's a broader problem that's not getting addressed and want an employee to take a look, contact us.


24

TL;DR: This is bad. Perhaps someone should stop it, but if so, we should be very careful when doing so. The behavior is problematic Upvoting every single question is problematic and undesirable behavior. It has some negative consequences: Votes serve multiple purposes, including giving posters honest feedback on the quality of their question, deciding ...


23

A fix for this is going out today. The weekly job culling questions runs at midnight and the fraud reversal happens at 3AM (both UTC). Now, the weekly job will only consider questions which have a non-deleted down vote more than 2 days old. This will give any fraud reversals a run before the votes are considered.


22

I saw a flag someone had raised on this, and tracked the source. You were indeed being targeted by a user and his two sock puppet accounts. I destroyed these sock puppets, which looks to have eliminated all of the targeted downvotes here. Given that these sock puppets were being used to vote for their own posts, and this is not the first time they've done ...


22

That does indeed look very suspicious and may evade the serial-voting script. If, after 24 hours, the downvotes have not been reverted, flag one of the posts for moderator attention. Use the "other" option and explain, and a moderator will investigate. If there are sockpuppet accounts involved they have the tools to detect these and clean up.


22

Judging by the quality of your downvoted answers, the downvotes certainly weren't deserved on technical merit. But people can vote however they want (including me; I enjoyed your answer on bit-shifting and upvoted it). Yes, downvotes can be reversed, though as @Knights points out, 2 votes isn't much, and probably not enough to trigger a reversal. To be ...


22

There is no need for any general solution to this, the existing tools and procedures are sufficient to deal with such cases. Such cases are pretty rare, they require a lot of persistence and patience which most revenge serial-voters lack. Such cases are also complicated enough that I would not trust an automated system to distinguish them accurately from ...


22

I've removed the specific comments about your suspension for a variety of reasons but mostly because they're unnecessary and making assumptions that aren't based in reality. I'll say another thing... and this isn't about tone policing but "vote bombing" is a very charged term. The general term we use for this is "targeted voting" and it ...


21

I don't really know what to attribute this to, but while you have been getting a few down-votes recently, they're not coming from the same user(s) and there doesn't appear to be any connection between the voters apart from their involvement in ios - which, of course, is to be expected considering your involvement in that tag. Occam's razor sez they're ...


21

The only solution in this specific case: flag, and explain. Now that this Meta post is here, refer to it in your flag. The moderators will clean up, and already warned the user at least once, after cleaning up some comments: Edits can be rolled back, any downvotes might be there to say, but who cares. As for the (bad) reason: I'm sure at some point in time,...


21

Whether or not you were personally involved in the improper voting simply does not matter. All that matters is that improper votes were cast, and that they needed to be invdalidated. Regardless of how good your intentions were or whether you contribute positively otherwise, improper votes are improper votes and will be reversed. Our "algorithm" that detects ...


21

Based on the comment trail, your account was deleted because it was violating the rules surrounding voting, and your daughter's account was suspended because it was seen as the base account for sockpuppeting. Let's go over this: Vote on the content, and the content alone. Not who posts it. Not because you think it deserved an upvote. Not because you ...


19

We can't easily hide these entirely; it would break the accounting for the reputation history in ways that would make it more difficult audit, which is sorta the whole point of having it public in the first place. That said, we can make it less of a public wagged finger: ...which links to this page in the help center, which documents the various reasons ...


19

What complicates cases like yours is noise. When you get above 10k or so on Stack Overflow, odds are you have a lot of questions and answers out there. Those questions and answers will be voted on by many people. Due to overlap in the tags you frequent, some people will tend to vote for a significant number of your posts (up or down) just by pure chance. If ...


18

The day you got serially upvoted (yesterday - 28-06-2013), your reputation was 232; 200 from regular upvotes, 2 accepted answers and 2 reputation from accepting an answer. You hit the daily rep cap. After this happened, somebody started serially upvoting you; so, you didn't earn a single reputation point from those upvotes. The automated script, having ...


17

This was a reversal of what was determined to be votes specifically targeted at you. 16 votes that you received from a single user were invalidated. I can't give the specifics of precisely what is considered, but the pattern looked basically identical to someone using multiple accounts to artificially inflate their reputation. You didn't do anything wrong ...


17

I'm posting and accepting an answer containing the Stack Overflow Moderator @BradLarson's comment to his own answer: OK, a community team member looked into this and discerned a pattern in the votes. The offending ones have now been invalidated and the users behind them warned. This should hopefully not recur. – Brad Larson Apr 2 '14 at 17:10 Then the ...


17

For regular users This is a problem for the mods to handle. Flag either account (the suspected serial voting account or the suspected target account) for the site moderators' attention. Serial downvoting is 100% not okay and, though there are automatic tools to handle most cases, persistent serial downvoters need personal attention from the mods. To flag a ...


17

I'd say in a "soft" way, like arguing strongly together for a field of interest like a tag somewhere on a site, yes. That could certainly happen here. But in the more problematic ways you could imagine, like coordinating R/A / Spam flags to nuke undesirable posts quickly and without consensus, or sockpuppet voting to inflate member's scores, those get ...


17

My first assumption is that it's gatekeeping and rank farming. The system is build on the premises of gamification, so there is an aspect of farming, no doubt. It is all fun. Do employers take SO ranking in to consideration? For sure there are HR departments that take these fake internet points very seriously. I don't expect they will retain much of ...


16

The same thing has happened a few times on the Arduino proposal. Moderator investigation was requested and carried out, this was the response: I looked at the actual voting data on the example questions and there is one person who cast a large number of downvotes. It looks like there's a user who doesn't think the proposal should go through or that the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible