wily_old_vet
Well-Known Member
mr_roboto said:
Cheryl-Can you give us an explanation as to what happened with the poll as the numbers changed rather drastically? Can't have conspiracy theories like Roboto's running rampant.
Poll: Nuke the Suze?
- Thread starter my2cents
- Start date
Cheryl-Can you give us an explanation as to what happened with the poll as the numbers changed rather drastically? Can't have conspiracy theories like Roboto's running rampant.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
Wily, it was ballot stuffing as I said (the un-American was joke reference to over's comment earlier).
It is easily done by anyone with just a tad of computer knowledge due to the naive security parameters the poll system here uses.
First, it lets non-registered people vote which by itself devalues any accuracy to a poll here.
Second, it uses a simple cookie to decide whether you have voted or not which is easily removed.
I confirmed this after reading your request to Cheryl by logging off, deleting the site specific cookie involved and revoting four times in a row.
More sophisticated internet polls use IP address as one of the recognition ways to prevent ballot stuffing.
So I guess we have one dedicated, moral-free, unAmerican who dislikes suzie on this forum.
I believe tie noticed this almost immediately after the ballot stuffing results.
Ummmm, good catch, very alert tie.
It is easily done by anyone with just a tad of computer knowledge due to the naive security parameters the poll system here uses.
First, it lets non-registered people vote which by itself devalues any accuracy to a poll here.
Second, it uses a simple cookie to decide whether you have voted or not which is easily removed.
I confirmed this after reading your request to Cheryl by logging off, deleting the site specific cookie involved and revoting four times in a row.
More sophisticated internet polls use IP address as one of the recognition ways to prevent ballot stuffing.
So I guess we have one dedicated, moral-free, unAmerican who dislikes suzie on this forum.
I believe tie noticed this almost immediately after the ballot stuffing results.
Ummmm, good catch, very alert tie.
dannyboy
From the promised LAND
Now what would not liking susie have to do with being un-American? I fail to see the point you are trying to make.
I would guess susie would then be un-American because she does not like Morlucky?
What is your point?
And what, Voting four mroe times for susie makes you a really good American?
Here it is you vote 5 times and you have the gall to point fingers at others about ballot stuffing?
How hillarious!
d
I would guess susie would then be un-American because she does not like Morlucky?
What is your point?
And what, Voting four mroe times for susie makes you a really good American?
Here it is you vote 5 times and you have the gall to point fingers at others about ballot stuffing?
How hillarious!
d
Last edited:
ok2bclever
I Re Member
danny,
I post an informative post and you have decided to attempt to ridicule me personally regarding it.
I thought we had agreed to restrain such negativism.
That is disappointing.
My point was the poll was ballot stuffed and of no worth, regardless of results.
Heck, for all we know only one person voted from the beginning and just couldn't make up their mind.
If you truly did not get the unAmerican point it was about banning, not liking which it was my understanding we were in agreement about (banning that is).
I post an informative post and you have decided to attempt to ridicule me personally regarding it.
I thought we had agreed to restrain such negativism.
That is disappointing.
My point was the poll was ballot stuffed and of no worth, regardless of results.
Heck, for all we know only one person voted from the beginning and just couldn't make up their mind.
If you truly did not get the unAmerican point it was about banning, not liking which it was my understanding we were in agreement about (banning that is).
dannyboy
From the promised LAND
I am not ridiculing you at all. Your point was that the ballot box can be stuffed, you did it yourself at least five times. As to un American or not, stuffing the ballot boxes is as American as Apple Pie.
My 2 Cents is as American as they come, and he started the thread.
What we do agree on is that to ban someone over opinion is wrong. To ban someone because they have no manors or seek nothing but to start fights is totally different.
To send a child to the office because the child bows their head before an exam would be applauded by some on this board, but yet a child that is cursing the teacher and interrupting a class just needs to be accepted as normal, and you can be sued if you send them to the office? Which one is unAmerican?
What Susie has displayed is a totally negative personality, only seeming to take joy at the misfortune or demise of those that disagree with her or her viewpoints. Her profile states she is happily married to a UPS man. Well that would be good, as it would seem be the only happiness she has, because she shows none here.
The whole point is that with her total negative personality, her persistence at hounding other board members, getting to where she can push buttons if allowed, is not what this board has been used to and has enjoyed.
Unfortunate.
I have also seen posters with the same MO begin on other boards to cause a fight on those boards to cause people to either leave or to be banned. Usually this is the beginning of the end of the board, as sides get taken, and feelings get trampled. For the board moderator, it is a losing proposition all the way around. Many times this type of poster is an owner/Mod/ or has a vested interest in a competing board or site.
One of the most successful ways to combat this type of invasion is to restrict the subject matter to not allow politics or religion to be discussed on the board. That, at least on two boards has worked without running people off. I would hate to see that here, but that might be the way it has to go.
After all, this is a UPS board, not a board for political agenda pushing.
Most posters to this site over the years have shown self moderation and respect for rules and the owner of this site. Those that have not, have left within a short time after making a total ass of themselves. There have even been some fun flame wars that lasted a week or so, and then died down to the regular programing. Even some of the worst enemies ended up finding common ground and sharing a virtual drink or two. (Tie and I are a prime example)
What is lacking with Susie, as you yourself have stated, she intends to piss people off while trying to get them to see her views. Very wrong way to go about changing peoples thoughts.
When others on this board realize that ignoring Susie is the worst thing you could do to her, as she seeks attention just like UPS girl, and will do what ever she deems necessary to stay in the fray, then she will either go away or change her posting skills.
Shame too about the delivery, some of her messages, after you pull away the BS, had some merit.
d
My 2 Cents is as American as they come, and he started the thread.
What we do agree on is that to ban someone over opinion is wrong. To ban someone because they have no manors or seek nothing but to start fights is totally different.
To send a child to the office because the child bows their head before an exam would be applauded by some on this board, but yet a child that is cursing the teacher and interrupting a class just needs to be accepted as normal, and you can be sued if you send them to the office? Which one is unAmerican?
What Susie has displayed is a totally negative personality, only seeming to take joy at the misfortune or demise of those that disagree with her or her viewpoints. Her profile states she is happily married to a UPS man. Well that would be good, as it would seem be the only happiness she has, because she shows none here.
The whole point is that with her total negative personality, her persistence at hounding other board members, getting to where she can push buttons if allowed, is not what this board has been used to and has enjoyed.
Unfortunate.
I have also seen posters with the same MO begin on other boards to cause a fight on those boards to cause people to either leave or to be banned. Usually this is the beginning of the end of the board, as sides get taken, and feelings get trampled. For the board moderator, it is a losing proposition all the way around. Many times this type of poster is an owner/Mod/ or has a vested interest in a competing board or site.
One of the most successful ways to combat this type of invasion is to restrict the subject matter to not allow politics or religion to be discussed on the board. That, at least on two boards has worked without running people off. I would hate to see that here, but that might be the way it has to go.
After all, this is a UPS board, not a board for political agenda pushing.
Most posters to this site over the years have shown self moderation and respect for rules and the owner of this site. Those that have not, have left within a short time after making a total ass of themselves. There have even been some fun flame wars that lasted a week or so, and then died down to the regular programing. Even some of the worst enemies ended up finding common ground and sharing a virtual drink or two. (Tie and I are a prime example)
What is lacking with Susie, as you yourself have stated, she intends to piss people off while trying to get them to see her views. Very wrong way to go about changing peoples thoughts.
When others on this board realize that ignoring Susie is the worst thing you could do to her, as she seeks attention just like UPS girl, and will do what ever she deems necessary to stay in the fray, then she will either go away or change her posting skills.
Shame too about the delivery, some of her messages, after you pull away the BS, had some merit.
d
Last edited:
tieguy
Banned
ok2bclever said:danny,
I post an informative post and you have decided to attempt to ridicule me personally regarding it.
I thought we had agreed to restrain such negativism.
That is disappointing.
My point was the poll was ballot stuffed and of no worth, regardless of results.
Yes and your subtle jab at me about being the culprit was also noted. Perhaps you were able to determine the time the votes were made and match it to the time I posted "thus the tie caught it immediately comment"
You reek of arrogance and think your self so clever. If you had simply stated that you ran an experiment and found out how it was done I'm sure Danny would not have jumped on your post. However the extra verbage included in which you try to act so cute is what earned you the response. You then have the gall to try to play innocent and cry because you feel negativism was employed? Perhaps you could learn to shake the arrogance and try to speak in human terms. The folks you serve as steward must look at you often and say to theirselves "wtf did the arrogant prick just say?"
ok2bclever
I Re Member
tie, in point of fact I do believe you were the ballot stuffer, but there is no proof.
And it changes nothing about the poll's lack of validity on who actually did it, nor my opinion of you.
Your opinion of me I already knew as you rarely pass a chance to heap as much denegration on me as you are capable of in any post where you bring up my name.
I have absolutely zero respect for you or your kind of manager, so your pathetic opinions don't really matter either.
Never the less, in respect for the rest of the board I am trying to restrict my personal thoughts about you.
You continually make that hard.
That my posts don't meet your approval standings matters not to me in the least as I don't post to meet your expectations.
And it changes nothing about the poll's lack of validity on who actually did it, nor my opinion of you.
Your opinion of me I already knew as you rarely pass a chance to heap as much denegration on me as you are capable of in any post where you bring up my name.
I have absolutely zero respect for you or your kind of manager, so your pathetic opinions don't really matter either.
Never the less, in respect for the rest of the board I am trying to restrict my personal thoughts about you.
You continually make that hard.
That my posts don't meet your approval standings matters not to me in the least as I don't post to meet your expectations.
Last edited:
dannyboy
From the promised LAND
Ok Please! Accusing him when you admitted it? You're better than that.
As for Tie doing it, you have to be really blinded by hatred to believe that. Tie has enough sense that if he were the one, and he wanted to skew the poll, he would have been "clever" enough to have done it over a few days to where it would not have been obvious.
Besides, he, I, and many others that voted not to ban susie think that there needs to be something done, but banning is not the answer as we have posted. And there is more than one reason, not the least of which the fall out to the board itself. And I believe that he and I both respect and care more for the board and it's owner than the posting rights of Susie. Unfortunately they are both intertwined
d
Do Over
The poll system settings have been changed so that only registered users can vote. I've also deleted the entire poll so it's officially a "do over"...
Know what wily, I really had never given that any thought until these issues came up... You guys figured out the cookie based security system way before I did. I wasn't aware that the system was set to allow unregistered users to vote either. I even checked the other day to see if anyone was registering a whole bunch of new usernames to vote multiple times...wily_old_vet said:Cheryl-Can you give us an explanation as to what happened with the poll as the numbers changed rather drastically? Can't have conspiracy theories like Roboto's running rampant.
The poll system settings have been changed so that only registered users can vote. I've also deleted the entire poll so it's officially a "do over"...
ok2bclever
I Re Member
Well, that was the one point that gave me pause, but then as you have posted as unregistered often enough it wouldn't be much of a stretch.tieguy said:
Heck, it could be stumbled on by accident by having a high paranoid setting in IE or you could have someone show you how, like I did about enhanced posting.
danny, I know you are smart enough to know the difference between doing it as an announced admitted test and doing it on the sly.
I believe tie did it, you don't and you are entitled to that opinion.
In the end it truly doesn't matter or change anything.
Hatred is too strong a word regarding tie and you have never heard me utter such.
I despise his style of posting, but hatred, no.
Last edited:
ok2bclever
I Re Member
I've always been good at solving problems tie, I doubt you would understand that type of thing.
Clever, I am, but what you suggest would only come from a devious mind.
Not surprised in the least that you thought of such an idea though.
Clever, I am, but what you suggest would only come from a devious mind.
Not surprised in the least that you thought of such an idea though.
tieguy
Banned
ok2bclever said:
Not sure just what you think anymore. First you give me credit for figuring out how to overcome the progamming aspect of this poll on this site to sway the vote. You then in this post somehow try to supplant that intellectualy ability with the trait of being devious. The more you keep pushing this issue the more you show your interest in this subject to be above the norm and thus the perpetrator of this corruption.
ok2bclever
I Re Member
If I have you confused I'm satisfied.
