Fraud Detection System

[ElectricBlue]

Well - it didn't take long - The count is now 101 and the rating 4.79.

Probably because you brought it here and painted a target on its back. Don't draw attention to your sensitivity on this and the trolls won't shoot.

On the other hand, if the one-bomb was fraudulent and doesn't pass "Go", the next sweep will detect it and strip it out, and life goes on.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Probably because you brought it here and painted a target on its back. Don't draw attention to your sensitivity on this and the trolls won't shoot.

On the other hand, if the one-bomb was fraudulent and doesn't pass "Go", the next sweep will detect it and strip it out, and life goes on.

The Daily Downvoter has long ago stopped to use "One-bombs" He's just delivering one 4-Star-Vote per day. So long until the story is out of the top 10.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The Daily Downvoter has long ago stopped to use "One-bombs" He's just delivering one 4-Star-Vote per day. So long until the story is out of the top 10.

Anybody could leave a four. It happens all the time. How is that malicious?

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Anybody could leave a four. It happens all the time. How is that malicious?

Read above. It's done on a rather precise schedule once per 24 hours. And it stops as soon as the Rating reaches 4.64 (It was 4.54 in the previous wave).

How do I see that: I have around 70 stories. Pre-Downvoter, 60 of them covered a wide range between 4.55 and 4.85. Afterward ALL stories were down on EXACTLY 4.54. No exemption.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Well - it didn't take long - The count is now 101 and the rating 4.79.

The count is now 106 and the rating 4.70. Each day one vote.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

The count is now 106 and the rating 4.70. Each day one vote.

Correction: Yesterday's count was 105.

Today's count is 106 and the rating 4.68.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Correction: Yesterday's count was 105.

Today's count is 106 and the rating 4.68.

Today's count is 107 and the rating 4.65.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Today's count is 107 and the rating 4.65.

The story got another vote today and is now at 108/4.62. I expect the downvoting to stop now.

 

[wheres_the_beef]

The story got another vote today and is now at 108/4.62. I expect the downvoting to stop now.

That is inconsistent with your hypothesis that the troll is using 4 ratings to avoid being cleaned up by the system. An additional 4 rating would have only lowered the overall score to 4.64. To drop to a 4.62 with one vote would have taken a 1 or 2 rating.

Either your hypothesis is wrong or you have managed to goad the troll into behaving differently.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

That is inconsistent with your hypothesis that the troll is using 4 ratings to avoid being cleaned up by the system. An additional 4 rating would have only lowered the overall score to 4.64. To drop to a 4.62 with one vote would have taken a 1 or 2 rating.

Either your hypothesis is wrong or you have managed to goad the troll into behaving differently.

Perhaps I have aggravated someone who gave me a low rating. It was the second rating within one day, so it anyway doesn't fit into the schedule.

 

[PhiroEpsilon]

Perhaps I have aggravated someone who gave me a low rating. It was the second rating within one day, so it anyway doesn't fit into the schedule.

I wanted to wait some time. There was another low vote immediately after this post but afterward the voting stopped. Exactly as I predicted.

 

[Smuttyandfun]

Just curious, has any other author had their scores restored since the new fraud detection system went in in late March? 103 of my 136 stories have had their scores dropped, and only 1 has been restored. It's like a leaky tap, and the scores just keeping drop, drop dropping every week. If my stories stay up long enough, they'll probably go below zero.
Not very encouraging, with no end in sight, and no rhyme or reason for why it's happening.
I was told by one author to be patient and not to take it personally. If everyone's scores are also dropping, then I guess I have to wonder what kind of mechanism is in place that removes the readers votes, especially on well-liked stories.
Sure doesn't make me feel like submitting when the scores don't mean a thing.

 

[CeVin_ChienElle]

I wonder if IP masking technologies might have an effect.

It seems to me that one method of fraud detection would be checking for many votes from the same IP number. Readers using TOR or a plain VPN might duplicate IP addresses quite a bit, causing a lot of legit votes to look like duplicates, especially from anonymous readers. An automated sweep that checked for duplicate IPs could potentially remove a lot of legit votes unintentionally and without any malice from the people who let us publish stuff on a site that is clearly a lot of work to keep going.

 

[KeithD]

It seems to me that one method of fraud detection would be checking for many votes from the same IP number. Readers using TOR or a plain VPN might duplicate IP addresses quite a bit, causing a lot of legit votes to look like duplicates, especially from anonymous readers. An automated sweep that checked for duplicate IPs could potentially remove a lot of legit votes unintentionally and without any malice from the people who let us publish stuff on a site that is clearly a lot of work to keep going.

Some years ago there was discussion that voting by more than one person in a household probably wouldn't hold, even if they had separate accounts), but there was no confirming or authoritative denying of this that I could see, and it just eventually dropped as a topic, there being no response to asking about it.