High 7 Abuse

[WJT]

While perusing the Favorite Photographers pages of some PhotoNet

members, I came across a couple of accounts that seemed to be abusive

(to me). We all know that an account that exclusively low rates

photographs with a 1/1 will be deleted as abusive, but what about the

high-end abuser? The following illustrate my question and are taken

from two such accounts:<p>

 

<center> <b>Ratings Given</b><p>

1 2 3 4 5 6 7<p>

<i>O</i> 0 0 0 0 0 0 <b>172</b><p>

<i>A</i> 0 0 0 0 0 1 <b>171</b><p>

 

 

 

<b>Ratings Given</b><p>

1 2 3 4 5 6 7<p>

<i>O</i> 0 0 0 0 2 15 <b>118</b><p>

<i>A</i> 0 0 0 0 1 14 <b>120</b><p>

</center><p>

Furthermore, 90% or more of those high 7's in boldface have been given

to the same single member.

[Jeremy Stein]

If you would like a more official determination, communicate the member names and numbers for these two (and any others for which you have the same concerns) to abuse@photo.net. If these members are deemed to be abusers, no doubt some action will be taken and you will have an answer to your question.

[afs760bf]

Yes, definitely report it to abuse. What you might find is that they are all really the same person. Surely no-one would do that, would they?

[wilsontsoi]

I don't suppose we ever get official answers to the 3 similarly concentrated and targeted 7/7 rating members that Astekerof Paul asked about twice couple weeks ago, but got deleted (due to mentioning of names)? Not the same high 7 abusers? Or were they really conincidental like some had suggested?

[gerald_widen]

And the rest of the mate raters.

[mottershead]

If your point is that there is abuse: Yes. In this particular example, we have software that automatically scans for cases like this and automatically notifies the administrators and deletes the ratings. We don't run it every day, but it is run periodically.

 

If you are impatient to have these ratings removed, or you think it has been missed by our analysis software, please report it to the abuse mailbox, and we will investigate it manually. Contrary to what you may think, an isolated case like this will not get the beneficiary banned unless there is some further evidence that the sock-puppet account was created by the recipient. If we assumed otherwise, then we would be handing people an easy get-your-enemies-banned tool. Just create a few sock-puppet accounts and give your enemy dozens of 7's.

 

By the way, the implication of these kind of reports in the forums is always "The administrators are so negligent/stupid/uncaring that they won't deal with obvious abuse". This is exasperating for the administrators. Things are not as simple as they seem, and most of the time the only thing that we can do is delete the bogus ratings and watch for further evidence that is more conclusive.

 

 

 

Please don't report abuse in the forums.

[WJT]

Brian, I do think that this has been missed by your software. I will email the account names to Mr Stein. It was not my intention to deprecate your efforts or those of Mr Stein. Regards.

[andris]

There is the only way to avoid mate raters. Every rate weight should depend of ratings received. This mean the better photographer you are you get more rights to rate/criticise/abuse other peoples work. But if you have no photos at all and you rate others extremely low - sorry, thats don't mean nothing.<br>

Ok,Ok, I heard that PN is place to learn not competition, the ratings mean nothing at all etc. But if the ratings exist at PN then let's play the fair play at least.<br> Andris

[krash]

Reporting abuse in either direction has done nothing for me so far, there ae far too many users here that abuse the system in both directions.