Voting rigged by non reviewers?

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 11:59 am

Hi

Here is a new listing (Joomla Tags):
http://extensions.joomla.org/component/ ... Itemid,35/

It has 13 anonymous votes - giving it 3stars out of 5

It has 5 (great) reviews all 5 star ratings.

Should the JED allow anonymous voting?! I dont believe so - I (any visitor) could quite happily vote down ANY extension on the JED without reason.

Maybe the votes should be linked to the reviews and not anonymous clicks? At least with good and bad reviews you can understand the reason for the current number of stars.

Surely a component such as our Joomla Tags, which has received 5 positive, 5 star reviews from real people (with joomla accounts - easily identified and traced if needed) should not have a 3star rating swayed by faaceless anonymous people, who may or maynot even used the component !?!?!?!?

This is not a commercial rant - but it can happen on any free component listing too.

Why allow the faceless to sway the rating?

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 12:04 pm

Infact, would the moderators of the forum please publically show me the voting record for this extension (I'm not interested in personal info/ip addresses - just the vote).

It would be very interesting if the voting was:

1 (faceless - anonymous)
1 (faceless - anonymous)
2 (faceless - anonymous)
1 (faceless - anonymous)
1 (faceless - anonymous)
2 (faceless - anonymous)
1 (faceless - anonymous)
1 (faceless - anonymous)
5 (From valid reviewer)
5 (From valid reviewer)
5 (From valid reviewer)
5 (From valid reviewer)
5 (From valid reviewer)

or similar....

Alejo · Post by **Alejo** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:01 pm

I agree with Phil that a person should be required to provide a comment together with a vote. Anonymous voting does not add value to the JED.

Post by **ianmac** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:02 pm

I assume you at least can't vote for an extension twice. I logged out and was unable to rate the extension.

Ian

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:05 pm

ianmac wrote:I assume you at least can't vote for an extension twice. I logged out and was unable to rate the extension.

Thats is true - you need to be logged in to vote (it still is faceless/anonymous as that data is not published) - the JED Editors could probably tell you who voted but the public/owner has no way of knowing. - Hence I call them faceless.

If you have a reason to vote a component 1 star you should at the very minimum be forced to justify why - else anyone can rate any component as bad without adding value to the whole extension directory.

GabyZ · Post by **GabyZ** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:07 pm

I gave a 5 stars vote, this component is very good as I posted in my review and also support is great , there were a few "bugs" (conflicts with 3d part components) and Phil solved them in a few days.
So people that voted 1,2 etc probably didn't really try the component, those votes can be rating of other webmasters of the competition. As Phil said the votes that must be considered is in reviews because in a review you explain why did you vote 5 stars or why 1 or 2...

Post by **ot2sen** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:14 pm

Let me share a secret with you Phil.
On top of our (our = Editorial Team) Wishlist is combined Vote/Review.

During the last 14 months JED has improved in lots of areas, and there has been a continued work against eventually having a system that provide combined voting/reviewing. Not there yet, but when it happens we will be just as happy as the end users and the developers.

Lets get back to this particular issue then.
Indeed there are some lower votes provided by faceless voters. Agree, this wouldn´t happen with a combined system.
Most often we can see a pattern in such anonomous votes and one or more 'manipulaters' end up getting banned.

Worse is that we too often reveal other developers in doing fault play, even if its clearly stated in the simple rules what will happen if this is done. Looks like at least one did go beyond the rules here, and we will do a follow up on this.
Perhaps developers should not be able to Vote/Review at all?

We will use our special tools and take a closer look at this matter.

To summ up: We hope to get rid of the faceless voters too

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:24 pm

Thank you for restoring my faith in the "system" - the news about a combined system is indeed a good step forward - for the future, it does nothing to hep now though :-) :-)

I am assuming from your reply you checked the voting on this particular extension and found vote fraud by "other developer"/"faceless voters" - which indeed proves my point and the reason behind this thread. :-) :-)

To further prove the point -(or mearly highlight it) could you post the votes here please for these 13? without information about the user.

Vimes · Post by **Vimes** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:27 pm

"for the future, it does nothing to hep now though"

Oh, you have no idea how much we're itching to get this working too. Like everybody else tho, we have to be patient. (not my strong point, I can assure you)

Post by **LorenzoG** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:36 pm

I also want to add that people relate different when they vote. Some people really try to weigh their votes with the pros and cons an extension have and trying to give an extension a fair vote. Others see (unfortunately it's very common) the voting more in black and white - for example either giving it 1 (if they found something they don't like) or 5 (even if it isn't perfect - but they like the extension) and the scales between don't exist for them.

In my opnion, the reviews are a much better tool to form an opinion about an extension since you can determinate for yourself how much signification you want to give an individual review .. for example you valuate an indeep review with both the pro and cons higher than just a short review saying the extension is wonderful.

It's my believe that most people valuate the review system higher than a grade when they determinate which extensions they should take a look at.

jcracknell · Post by **jcracknell** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:38 pm

Hi

It does make a mockery of those of us who will review components and give them the grade we feel is worthwhile. It is someone having a go at Phil's products. A company I have to add which is totally open about the code it uses unlike many other products encoded with ioncube (against the Joomla license).

With some of the other comments I think people look at the voting and not the reviews first. Does the voting have anything to do about where the product is featured on the site?

I hope you will review the feedback with regard to these anonymous votes. I don't like this land of the anonymous either - if something is poor and the developer not helping within his/her/their remit then it should be told.

regards

J.

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:44 pm

Vimes wrote:"for the future, it does nothing to hep now though"

Oh, you have no idea how much we're itching to get this working too. Like everybody else tho, we have to be patient. (not my strong point, I can assure you)

Who is working on this ?

What is the current status ?

What is the delay ?

Is there anything anyone else (us, 3PD, the community) do to speed things up?

Is it a case of waiting for the commercial mosets Tree component to be updated?

Post by **AmyStephen** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:50 pm

Phil -

You made your point and the volunteers running the resource have indicated it's also their #1 priority. Why is that never enough for you?

Your insensitivity to the time we find ourselves in is unbelievable! What I *loathe* more than anything is seeing SOME of our commercial extension providers - like YOU - LEANING ON Joomla! with such demanding pressure to make certain their products are not subject to any "appearances" that they believe are unfair or unappealing.

Allow this change to work in the time frame that the volunteers can make available - or - for all I care - take your commercial products off of the community freely provided extensions directory.

Amy

Vimes · Post by **Vimes** » Fri May 18, 2007 1:54 pm

Amy,

Phil has asked some very reasonable questions and he has been supplied with answers. His behaviour has been exemplary and you have absolutely no right to attack him.

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 2:03 pm

Amy

Gobsmacked by your reply!

AmyStephen wrote:Phil -

You made your point and the volunteers running the resource have indicated it's also their #1 priority. Why is that never enough for you?

er? They never said it was their number 1 priority - I would assume it is not

The answers provided ARE enough for me - infact I can be quoted as saying the restore my faith in the system!

Where on earth are you getting all this hostility from?

Your insensitivity to the time we find ourselves in is unbelievable! What I *loathe* more than anything is seeing SOME of our commercial extension providers - like YOU - LEANING ON Joomla! with such demanding pressure to make certain their products are not subject to any "appearances" that they believe are unfair or unappealing.

No one is "LEANING ON" at all - In fact I was OFFERING TO HELP - OFFERING TO GIVE BACK ! - man you have got this thread all wrong and its exactly PEOPLE LIKE YOU that make PEOPLE LIKE ME not want to CONTRIBUTE !

Allow this change to work in the time frame that the volunteers can make available - or - for all I care - take your commercial products off of the community freely provided extensions directory.

Why allow something/someone to struggle in their time frame when I have developers in my company that can assist FOR FREE and speed things up for the benefit of THE COMMUNITY you are so vocal in supporting???

This whole thread was about raising the question - which was answered well by the JED Editors well - the personal abuse from you is totally unfounded, unwanted and exactly the reason commercial developers get a bad time ! WHY ALWAYS ASSUME COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS ARE EVIL!?!?!?!?

As it happens I have Two developers sat here waiting to help - and now they probably never will BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU! AMY!

I'm sorry if my last post was too short for you, without the plesentaries or the long winded off topic ramblings you require, however when read in the light and spirit of all the posts in this thread they were meant as encouragements to find the answers so that we (3rd party developer FREE and commercial) could provide assistance.

The truth is probably this. Until mosets Tree is updated nothing can be done - or one man has this on his plate and doesnt have time to finish it - with COMMUNITY (INCLUDING AND NOT ALIENATING commercial dev's) resources this "small" feature of mosets Tree can be added in less than a day - probably a few hours tops.

I'm sorry if you, Amy, are not satisfied by my CONTRIBUTION - Its exactly reasons like your posts that I dont like to frequent this forum as often as I used to. Its EXACTLY this appreciation of developers that turns me away.

When I asked the top of the Joomla team how best I and my company of developers could CONTRIBUTE to Joomla I was told "Visit the forums more often and donate hard money" - right, like I am about to do either when the appreciation shown is exactly like this.

... here ends my rant - Amy get off my back!

jcracknell · Post by **jcracknell** » Fri May 18, 2007 2:06 pm

AmyStephen wrote:Your insensitivity to the time we find ourselves in is unbelievable! What I *loathe* more than anything is seeing SOME of our commercial extension providers - like YOU - LEANING ON Joomla! with such demanding pressure to make certain their products are not subject to any "appearances" that they believe are unfair or unappealing.

Amy

If you read he is offering to assist. The guy is offering his support and help. He is being victimised by other commercial entities IMHO. I think his points are fair and valid. I know some people don't like others making money from Joomla! but you have to think that many of these commercial companies have done a great deal to support the growth of Joomla. It's a bit like Moodle having "Moodle Partners". I don't think what you have said is fair to him. It's very emotive and it seems like another issue is driving your opinions.

What is this "time we find ourselves in"? British Summer Time? Mountain Time? Time while we wait for Bush to appoint another croney to take charge of the World Bank? Time after Time by Cindi Lauper? :laugh:

Think I'll sit back and watch the flames fly :pop

twoten · Post by **twoten** » Fri May 18, 2007 2:15 pm

I think the voting system is flawed.

First of all if the voter and comments can remain anonymous the system can be open to abuse by a disgruntled user of in the event of a commercial component a competitor.

Secondly when viewing the comments if you are only able to see the positive reviews this gives an very unbalanced view. The review system can be very useful but if you can only see half the information you don't get a balanced picture.

Thirdly a review will reflect a version of an extension being used at the time, as extensions are continually updated the reviews can become dated very quickly, this being the case would render the review system inaccurate.

I think all reviews should be shown, keep users anonymous if you like although I think if someone feels strongly enough to right a bad review they should be prepared to have their name against the review.
Version numbers should go against a review so the viewer can determine the relevance of the review against the component they're assessing.
Reviews should be displayed in date order which would indicate if the component is improving or deteriorating.

Post by **AmyStephen** » Fri May 18, 2007 2:29 pm

Phil -

This is hardly the first time you have exerted this type of pressure. This thread was fine until your post where you wanted explanation of the "delay." For crying out loud, Phil. You just raised the issue this morning! What delay? How quickly do the volunteers need to respond to you?

You "volunteering" to change the software of some other (as you so clearly point out) commercial vendor so that your commercial products appear better more quickly may or may NOT be considered a "contribution" from a consumer advocate standpoint. Bug fixes, contributed core code, documentation, forum assistance - that'd be dandy. Volunteering to help change the system to make Phil's products look better. Hmm....

Come in. Make your point. Be mindful of the current debate. Be careful of appearances. Patience. Appreciation. Sensitivity. Then, let the system work, Phil.

Amy

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 2:45 pm

Amy - you have abused and made you point now move on...

This is hardly the first time you have exerted this type of pressure.

Please, Someone, show me where I exerted "pressure" on anyone? I simply asked "What is the delay ?"

Maybe I should have worded it different - unfortunatly today I dont have a lot of time so I was short and to the point - here is my longer - more Amy proof - post:

=======

Who is working on this ?,
Has someone been assigned to the new feature, if so thats great cause it means its out of planning stage into action/code mode. Is it currently with Lee, the developer of mosets tree? or is it being handled by a team within Joomla (Although Lee is part of a team) is there a team on this or a single person? Is there room for assistance in developing this or is that already sown up and sorted?

What is the current status ?
Is the current status that it has been talked about or have the decisions already been made or is it at the point where code has already been written, or just waiting for already developed code to be pushed live? is there a political situation regarding this, or a technical stumbling block.

What is the delay ?
Is it a lack of time situation for a developer, or team of developers? Are you having to wait for new features to be added to the COMMERCIAL COMPONENT that runs the extensions site. Is it mealy a political delay? Are there pre-requisites that are currently unfulfilled? Is there any way the COMMUNITY can assist in brining this any closer?

Is there anything anyone else (us, 3PD, the community) do to speed things up?
So that ALL are benefited !!

Is it a case of waiting for the commercial mosets Tree component to be updated?
If so then I guess there is nothing any one can do.

I DON'T expect answers, if they are forthcoming it would be nice for me and others to understand the current situation.

Joomla Teams currently have a transparency issue (See thread on donations and accountability for that) and I was just enquireing, not demanding, for a little more info.

Those that have read the whole thread should understand that at no time was this a personal thing for me, although I agree this "feature" makes our components look worse.

Amy - your conduct is totally inappropriate and will be reported. again.

Post by **ot2sen** » Fri May 18, 2007 3:00 pm

Interesting how things get out of hands while you go to the back office a while to clean up things.

@Amy, no need for further hijacking comments. Thanks.

@Phil, No can´t give you more specific info for now. This is not just about one days work. Its ready when its ready

PS. One 1-star vote removed and recalculated for your entry issue. Further checks will be done to see if other false votes were given, like we do in general.

Post by **AmyStephen** » Fri May 18, 2007 3:02 pm

I'm am going to focus on your statement "Maybe I should have worded it different." And, I'll give you the same thing in return, Phil. I should have worded it differently, as well. You can be pushy, Phil. Right now in particular, that is not helpful to our community. IMO.

I will move on having rather inelegantly made my point.
Amy

Ot2sen - delete this if desired. I finished before you posted.

PhilTaylor-Prazgod · Post by **PhilTaylor-Prazgod** » Fri May 18, 2007 3:06 pm

ot2sen wrote:Interesting how things get out of hands while you go to the back office a while to clean up things.

Sorry dude!

ot2sen wrote:@Phil, No can´t give you more specific info for now. This is not just about one days work. Its ready when its ready

Thats fine, thanks for taking the time to reply. That satisfies me and yet gives hope for the future. I'm sorry if _you_ felt I had demanded or put pressure on you - I was simply trying to understand the current position.

ot2sen wrote:PS. One 1-star vote removed and recalculated for your entry issue. Further checks will be done to see if other false votes were given, like we do in general.

Thanks again but this was not a personal thread - rather one that benefits FREE and COMMERCIAL CMTs in the directory, but it was just easier to point out this situation on a new extension (like ours which is just over a week old and we keep an eye on) than on the others in the directory (free and commercial) that suffer the same fate that you had already identified (One assumes that's the reason you are taking action with the joint vote/review facility)

Thanks you all for your support - 15% of all leads to our website are generated from the JED - we appreciate you!

brian · Post by **brian** » Fri May 18, 2007 5:09 pm

I thought it would be helpful to share a conversation I had today.

It went like this. We've got this rating system on our site and its really cool. Look at all the wonderful things it does etc etc Its all done automaticaly and we never have to touch it.

Ah,i said dont you oversee it an check how its used.

No there is no need it is just so clever it does everything

Ah, I said so why are your competitors products all rated higher than your own etc

They are???? But they are rubbush and we outsell them 100:1

Thats because your "intelligant system" is open to abuse. Just watch me get your products back to the top.

OOh I never knew that could happen.

The lesson they learnt that no matter how clever and intlligent a system is there is no subsitute for human moderation

jcracknell · Post by **jcracknell** » Fri May 18, 2007 6:58 pm

AmyStephen wrote:You "volunteering" to change the software of some other....

Heck that is a libellous statement that you made in that paragraph. Sorry moderators.

Post by **AmyStephen** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:17 pm

AmyStephen wrote:You "volunteering" to change the software of some other (as you so clearly point out) commercial vendor so that your commercial products appear better more quickly may or may NOT be considered a "contribution" from a consumer advocate standpoint.

What if I believe ALL votes help to provide the consumer with the big picture? Then, from a consumer advocate standpoint perhaps changing the software to remove the votes that feature lower on this product might not be a good idea.

Please be careful with such serious accusations.

Amy

jcracknell · Post by **jcracknell** » Fri May 18, 2007 8:00 pm

How many times?

No. What was suggested was non-anonymous voting. It has been a case, several times documented on this forum of other commercial vendors ridiculing both other commercial vendor products and free products in order to make their own product look better.

What has been stated is there is an aggrieved party who hasn't been partaking in the negative behaviour performed by others. In fact the aggrieved party is freely volunteering their time and assistance to help Joomla perform the modifications that they too have deemed necessary and a priority (though not necessarily their only priority!). However it seems your attitude is putting off their support.

We (as in the Royal We) have never said remove voting, but to provide consumers/customers with an even bigger picture and a more honest picture. For consumers/customers to have faith in any such picture there needs to be full transparency.

We all know about the JED Mock-up site that promotes their own products and claims to look official and the fact their account(s) have been removed.

This will benefit everyone, make Joomla even more transparent and more trusted. It will raise Joomla's profile amongst the community. I thought the open source community was all about being honest, open and transparent.

Post by **AmyStephen** » Fri May 18, 2007 8:04 pm

jcracknell wrote:However it seems your attitude is putting off their support.

My attitude is putting off who's support?

brian · Post by **brian** » Fri May 18, 2007 8:14 pm

Please note that this "votw rigging" applies to ALL etensions and not just commercial ones. In fact there are several Free/GPL extensions which regularly see themselves having their rating artificially lowered/raised by vote rigging.

Fortunatley the JED team do as much as they possibly can to prevent this.

Post by **aravot** » Fri May 18, 2007 8:17 pm

Please don't attack me. :'(

I have noticed whenever Phil Taylor posts something someone attack him, is there a past history the we should know.

* I like gossip

brian · Post by **brian** » Fri May 18, 2007 8:21 pm

The only "past history" is that Phil was the first "full time" developer of Mambo and then Joomla extensions and I guess some people just dont like that.

The Joomla! Forum™

Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?

Re: Voting rigged by non reviewers?