bots?

http://www.photo.net/photo/6552835

 

 

Finally, of the ratings listed, 8 are from new members. As a measure against

abuse, ratings from very recently registered members are not counted in the

overall averages and totals until the moderators have had an opportunity to

review them.

Hi, I, too, have received the eact same ratings inc. the 8 new members on my last photo posted (Liz Taylor's Eyes...). I have never gotten this many, or high ratings on anything else. Something's up for sure. If you can tell me how or where the photo ID # is, I'd happily give it to you to check. Josh...you guys listening?

I think I found it...please try photo.net/photodb/photos?photo_ID=6543036

<i>"Josh...you guys listening?"</i>

<P>

You rang? It is I, your 24 hour a day 7 days a week photo.net customer service genie! I shall look into my crystal ball and search for the offending ratings.<P>

Seriously though, it is important to remember that while I am "at work" during odd hours, it is unfair to expect me to be "here" every minute. But since I happen to be sitting in front of my computer working on photo.net email, I'm happy to check into it.

Thanks, Oh, Mighty Genie!

Not sure if Josh got some of them, but I just removed several new bots.

 

As far as I can tell there are no no bots operating and ratings given by the removed bots are no longer in the database. It may be a short while before you see this reflected in your data on an image.

Yeah, I took out a pile of them as well.

Thank you, gentleman...great work, as always. Much appreciate all you do for us and the site.

The question remains...would an image of a bot be Documetary or Environmental Portraiture! ...Where's my web lens?

I think we'd have to classify it as obscene material

It amazes me that so many people expend so much energy trying inject rating bots into the system. Are they:

(1) trying to elevate their own photos in the ratings?

(2) trying torpedo the ratings of others?

(3) entered by shadowy figures from other photo sites who want create problems for PN?

(4) people with personal grudges toward PN personnel?

(5) all of the above.

(6) Other____________________________________________

 

Also, if bots all come from new registrants, it seems they would have no influence on ratings because new ratings are supposedly not counted. However, bot rates appear to be counted at least some of the time. Thus, they must be coming from established accounts that have previously established their ratings credibility. Or, are botscum able to hijack legitimate existing accounts somehow and submit rating via hijacked accounts. Something isn't computing here. I'll appreciate comments from those who have knowledge of the motivations and mechanics of botscum. Are botscum able to enter bots that attack specific members, say for instance, members who refer to them as botscum?

I think mostly #4 with a bit of #2.

42! Correct again Josh...but don't forget the towel!

It's almost certainly #4. Some people really don't have much of a life.

 

In the grand scheme of things they are a minor annoyance. They're easy to deal with (one mouse click and they are gone, along with all their ratings) and their efforts are negated within a few hours (or a most a few days) of showing up. They annoy users but don't really cause much additional admin work and they have no long term effect on ratings.

 

We'd obviously all be better off without them and, in due course, we will be.

 

One of the reaons that bot removal isn't automatic and instant is that we want to be 100% (rather than 99%) certain that accounts which are removed are in fact bogus. That requires a real human to look at the suspect data and click the mouse if he/she agrees the account should be deleted.

Thanks for the clarifications Josh & Bob.

Actually - it might be not a bad idea to introduce "waiting period" - something like at least a month or so, for the newly registered - before they can rate anything. And - they should have their own images posted. And...And...And...(leave it up to one's creativity)

There are already some limitations like that. But they don't seem to be solving the problem.

 

However, we have some stuff in the works that should deal with it.