Editing Polls - Deleting Votes?

Discussion in 'Site Feedback and News' started by undeadcow, Feb 19, 2013.

  1. undeadcow

    undeadcow Well-Known Member

    Dec 4, 2010
    9,493
    2
    36
    Houston, TX
    Is it possible for a poll creator to delete specific user votes from a forum poll?

    This week there are a number of shill votes in the Game of the Week poll from users with accounts created within 3 days that have 0 posts significantly impacting the standings. I am aware there are some ethical considerations with deleting votes (as in GOTY 2012 poll) so am also seeking any advice from the community about how to best mediate suspect fake votes if not deletion.
     
  2. Eli

    Eli ᕕ┌◕ᗜ◕┐ᕗ
    Staff Member Patreon Silver Patreon Gold

    What's tricky about dealing with these kind of issues is where do you draw the line on what is and isn't a valid vote? I mean, if it's a TA forums user poll, shouldn't people who just lurk be allowed to vote on their favorite games just like people who incessantly post would? We ran into this issue with the game of the year stuff in that there wasn't any clear definition on who can and can't vote. How do you know for sure these are shill votes? I mean, if you don't want to do an open poll that's cool but a thread with an actual poll in it is probably the wrong format if you only want to allow certain people to vote.
     
  3. undeadcow

    undeadcow Well-Known Member

    Dec 4, 2010
    9,493
    2
    36
    Houston, TX
    #3 undeadcow, Feb 19, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2013
    Academically I understand this debate; but practically if there is to be any fair polling there should be a guideline/ettiquette. I infer (from "...a thread with an actual poll in it is probably the wrong format...") that you suspect polls should not be utilized at all or that there is a a better format; do you (or anyone else) have a suggestion?
    That is an insightful response. There's no clear answer and I would not presume to know the solution so I am hoping for some feedback from other TA users before voiding any votes. I would like to udnerstand the community consensus.

    On one hand we could allow open polls be lead by whatever tactics anyone employs to vote for a game. This would allow innocent lurkers a voice or feverish fanboys to create an account to elevate their favorite game. However, on the other hand it would be unfortunate if an unpopular developer resorted to a questionable tactic of creating fake accounts resulting in dethroning an otherwise worthy worthy game.
    GOTW rules, published in the first post (originated by EchoSeven, the GOTW guru), specifically state developers can not vote for their own game or rally external votes. My concern is that the landslide of votes that occurred within one day may have been corrected directly to that developer; granted there is no definitive proof.
    There's not way to know for sure if these are shill votes, but if a game launches from no votes to within hours having the majority of votes there is a suspicious due to atypical pattern of activity. Other imperfect indicators might be users who created a new account just during that time and have 0 posts. I can say there appears to be a concensus these votes were fraudulent; for exaple (from GOTW thread):
     
  4. Eli

    Eli ᕕ┌◕ᗜ◕┐ᕗ
    Staff Member Patreon Silver Patreon Gold

    I guess in the future you could tally the votes manually in the first post and require people to post the game they want to vote for (and why) similar to the GOTY nomination stuff? You might get lower participation, and it might be a bit more work, but the thread could also be a decent read as people post their reasoning for their preference. As is, these GOTW threads are largely just a popularity contest, or at least, that's kind of how they seem to outsiders.

    That'd completely negate "shill" votes, as it'd be totally obvious if you had someone with one post dropping a response like, "I vote for ______ because it's the greatest game ever!" Most shills, in TouchArcade forum history, have been very low-effort affairs. This could also allow for a greater level of transparency so everyone can see who was voting for what and why without needing to dig through the poll results and looking at user profiles to see who does and doesn't "count."

    Maybe?
     
  5. undeadcow

    undeadcow Well-Known Member

    Dec 4, 2010
    9,493
    2
    36
    Houston, TX
    That is a fair suggestion although it would require more work. EchoSeven does the GOTW polls so might ultimately be the one to decide which format is best in successive polls. Another "lower maintenance" possibility might be to require users have at least X number of posts before voting in a specific poll (but that would be to assume "invalid" votes can be manually deleted and require work in itself).
    With the exception of last year's GOTY poll there hasn't seemed to be a lot of controversy surrounding this issue save for this week's GOTW. It's true the GOTW polls can be popularity contests because they are entirely subjective but although not definitive it would seem spiteful if a developer were to tamper with GOTW as a "bad sportsman."

    I'll be curious to hear more opinions and will give it some thought but am leaning towards suggesting Redneck Revenge be disqualified altogether from GOTW. In this case it has only 1 vote from an active member originating before this week so is not a contended aside from suspect votes. Future polls should benefit from having better safe guards and clearer rules.
     
  6. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    This is a tricky issue isn't? On one hand, like Eli mentioned, some of the votes may be completely legit, made by "lurkers" who thoroughly enjoyed a game and made an account and voted for it.

    On the other hand, TA GotW and GotY gongs to a certain game is extremely prestigious. There's no stopping a developer creating multiple accounts and voting for their one game to get their votes up.

    Eli's suggestion for people to post their preferences does make sense. It allows for greater transparency between the legit and the "shill" votes. In addition, posts can distinguish the legit posts from the invalid ones. As Eli mentioned, many of the "shill" posts have been made with very poor efforts.
    [I am reminded by those posts made in game threads, where the developer appears to have a conversation with him/her self :p]

    Perhaps another suggestion would be for such votes to be only counted as a half vote? Clearly, it's not the ideal option, as the line between whether a vote is a full vote or half vote would have to be clearly distinguished. But factors such as join date, and post count would have to clearly come in to consideration.

    Undeadcow, I'm in favour of you that RR should be removed. I think that the lesson that should be learnt from this, is to encourage regular members to vote for their favourite game, so that this issue never becomes a problem.
     
  7. sink_or_swim

    sink_or_swim Well-Known Member

    Feb 4, 2012
    3,504
    5
    38
    Germany
    Votes should only be allowed for people with more then, let's say 50 posts and/or people who are member in the forum for more then 6 months.
    All the 0posters on RR should not be counted. I think it's not the first time something like this happens with a bulkypix game.
     
  8. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    I'd like to conclude by saying that I support Eli's option and believe that the best way to handle this is for votes to be tallied up via the number of posts made in favour of a particular game.

    Although this may diminish the number of votes made towards a particular game, if one feels strongly towards it, then posting your vote (with a little added reason why) should be a non-issue.

    I see why this may require more work. So perhaps this option should only be left for the GOTY award? Otherwise, I'm more than happy to help in any way possible to make this achievable.
     
  9. Eli

    Eli ᕕ┌◕ᗜ◕┐ᕗ
    Staff Member Patreon Silver Patreon Gold

    The reason I don't like just looking at people's post count or registration date is because neither of those two values mean you're a good or contributing member of the community. It's easy to be like, "Well just only allow people with over 50 posts vote!" but in actuality someone with 5 really solid well thought out posts is way more valuable than someone with 50 "wow looks good can't wait" and other similar zero content posts.

    Anyway, just something to think about. I sort of think this only further sways things into it making more sense to just have people post in the thread. If you're willing to argue for your game, that seems way above the effort threshold of your average poll sabotaging shill. :)
     
  10. I personally think it should just be open to members or higher. Then we would have almost no problems with shill accounts or developers influencing who wins with tweets. Why can't we just exclude jr members? If it is a rule, no one would question it.

    Anyway, my 2 cents worth...
     
  11. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    I have to disagree. Clearly, someone with 0 posts can enjoy a game just as much as someone with 1000 posts. The fact that they don't post much here shouldn't mean they're not entitled to their vote.
     
  12. KevinS

    KevinS Well-Known Member

    Apr 15, 2012
    545
    0
    16
    I think it should be open to people who have a minimum of 10 posts. That way a developer or one person would have a very difficult time making many multiple accounts and have them all eligible for voting. It wouldn't matter if they person had made ten 1000 word posts, or ten awful post in near gibberish. What would matter is that they have taken 20 minutes to demonstrate that they care about iOS gaming and that they deserve there vote to be heard. :) It would be a lot of work for all the votes to be manually counted, and I think it would end up creating more problems then it would solve.
     
  13. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    Just because you don't post in TA doesn't mean you don't care about iOS gaming. Heck, I know heaps of friends who are just as passionate as I am, but have never even heard of TA before I mentioned it to them.

    With regards to creating a lot more work to do, unless there's hundreds of posts, I don't see it being much of a problem. I would happily volunteer to count up all the posts/votes myself.
     
  14. Since you are shooting us all down, what is your proposal? Specifics please.
     
  15. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    I mentioned that on the first page. You can only post your vote. That way, those people who just recently join have a chance to express their enjoyment towards a specific game. It also makes it easier to differentiate between the legit and shill posts.

    If it's too much work, perhaps make it only for GOTY votes. Otherwise, I'm happy to count each post as they come.
     
  16. #16 Connector, Feb 22, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2013
    So one post is your idea? Don't count people with zero posts?

    1>0?

    Not going to help much. Developers and pro developers will just post one short post. Easy to make a shill account. Will not help.

    Plus more work to count votes.

    No poll for us to see...

    Pain for us to post.

    Posts are mixed with offtopic stuff and some people will multipost or vote multiple apps, etc...

    I dunno don't see how this is any better than to say members or higher only (post count > 100). No shill accounts, less work, able to see polls, and less headaches for everyone.

    Your counter please.
     
  17. undeadcow

    undeadcow Well-Known Member

    Dec 4, 2010
    9,493
    2
    36
    Houston, TX
    Another possibility is to just let the polls run laissez faire; without restriction or oversight. Routine polls would hypothetically run consistently but if a developer or outside influence wanted to distort the polls by creating dummy accounts then so be it (if they don't win by player quantity they'd win by polling effort/"passion"). As is unmonitored polling would require no work, ensure the results are clear, and allow everyone to have a voice (or two, or three...). There's really no incentive tied to most poll results other than "bragging rights" anyway. Since poll interference seems to be the exception not the rule it's isolated enough we may not need a poll police mentality (and could revisit if each poll resulted in blatant influence from shill accounts).

    My biggest concern would just being sure if rules exist they are clear and faithfully enforced; which is problematic in the typical set-up anyway. Last week's GOTW poll was obvious but ballot stuffing probably happens in smaller amounts all the time and just be less obvious.
     
  18. Laissez faire might be ok, but I fear that since it really doesn't mean anything and developers can just stack the results, it would just become a joke, and most of the people using it now just would stop voting.

    But I am fine with any decision even though, my preference is that it is only open to members or higher (100 posts I think) so that the vote at least has some value and prestige with it. Or we can use Echoseven's style, where he just goes with the flow until there is a problem, and does his best to resolve it.
     
  19. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    OK, I'm starting to see where you are getting at.

    In that case I recommend a compromise as follows:

    - People with more than 'X' number of posts have their votes counted in a poll
    - People with less than 'X' number of posts will not be counted
    - People with less than 'X' number of posts will have to post their suggestion in order for their vote to be counted.

    Now to respond to your points regarding this new method.

    I think that handles this issue.

    Less votes need to be counted since majority of us will just vote. However, like I said before, I'm more than happy to count the votes at the end of the voting period if I have to.

    That could be a good thing. "Shill" voters may be discouraged to post if they're just voting for their own game.

    I think it's quite easy to ignore the off topic stuff, don't you?

    I'm sure if we give them instructions, they will follow. Or, we could just count their first post/vote and ignore the others.

    This is probably the hardest to counter with the posting idea. Perhaps we could require them to explain why they like a certain game? As mentioned previously, some "shill" posts can be easily distinguished from the legit ones - particularly those one-sentence ones with poor language and grammar. Also, requiring them to post may discourage some of the "shill" voters.

    Although this may not seem perfect, I still do believe it's better than ruling out those with less than 'X' posts all together. Many may be lurkers (there are hundreds of guests online daily), or just newbies who really want to show their appreciation for a certain game. Giving them the opportunity to post allows them an avenue to demonstrate this.

    I'm happy to read about anyone's thoughts on this...
     
  20. KennyK

    KennyK Well-Known Member

    I agree. If developers were to create multiple accounts and vote for their one single game with such ferocity and passion, it would mean many of the communities votes will be rendered useless. As a result, members may be discouraged to vote in the future.

    GOTW and GOTY polls are very prestigious among the iOS community. How often do we see in an app's description:
    "TA Game of the Week"
    Clearly, this demonstrates that the TA polls mean something, and are held in such high regards that developers believe it may help influence a person's decision whether or not the buy a game.

    Now, although this does not occur regularly. In instances such as GOTY polls, I think an alternative method should be used. I proposed my suggestion in my previous post.
     

Share This Page